@article { author = {Mohamadian-Mansoor, Saheb and Hatami-Majd, Faeze}, title = {Investigation of the Hypothesis of Similarity and Incorporation of Mythological Varjamkard with Adobe Structures Discovered in Hegmataneh Tepe}, journal = {pazhoheshha-ye Bastan shenasi Iran}, volume = {12}, number = {32}, pages = {249-275}, year = {2022}, publisher = {Bu Ali Sina University}, issn = {2345-5225}, eissn = {2345-5500}, doi = {10.22084/nb.2021.24292.2334}, abstract = {Until the middle of the Pahlavi period, Hegmataneh Tepe was called Shah Darab castle and the neighborhood around it was also called Sar Qaleh neighborhood, but in the Pahlavi period Hegmataneh Tepe became official adopted. Based on the scientific archeological excavations that started in this area in 1983, structures related to the Parthian period were discovered, but the hypothesis of the existence of a historical hegmataneh below it and buildings from the Achaemenid period around it are still valid. The main issue of this study is to investigate the possible relationship between brick structures in Hegmataneh Tepe with the mythical city of “Varjamkard” and the main question of this research is what the similarities are between Vandidad’s descriptions of Varjamkard and the ancient city excavated in Hegmataneh hill.  This research is of deductive type in terms of research approach and historical in terms of research strategy, and the sources used include written historical notes and archaeological reports. All the collected information is classified by coding method and finally the data is analyzed. The conclusion is that of the thirteen characteristics (codes) identified in Vandidad, seven characteristics: having a map, Mazdaism in the houses, recurring order, having a porch, self-illumination from within, the existence of waterways and the brick structure are very similar to archeological findings. About two characteristics: the name of the city and the reason for building the city, there are similarities in historical sources but there are no archaeological findings. Regarding the four characteristics, being four-cornered, the dimensions of the city, the number of passages and being two-story, the issue of similarity cannot be fully accepted at present, but the similarity is quite possible. Finally, the conclusion of this study is that due to the great similarity between this area explored and Vandidad’s descriptions of Varjamkard, the hypothesis of similarity and mythological Varjmkard with the city relics found in Hegmataneh Tepe is quite possible. Introduction The first historical reference to Hegmataneh dates back to the inscription of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, in 550 AH.  The next reference to this city is related to the inscription of Biston and around the year 520 BC (Mulazadeh, Taheri Dehkordi, 2011: 7). The Greek historian Polybius also wrote in the second century BC: “Hegmataneh was at the beginning the capital of the Medes kings ...” (Jackson, 1973: 176). In the Islamic period, the construction of Hamedan was attributed to Jamshid, Bahman and Dara son of Dara (Ibn Shadi, 2010: 521). Among the people of Hamedan, the Tepe called Hegmataneh Tepe today was referred to as Shah Darab Castle neighborhood (Mostafavi, 2002: 55-63). It seems that it was Mostafavi who first introduced the Tepe as Hegmataneh.  However, in the scientific archeological excavations carried out from 1983 to 2020 and in 22 seasons, structures from the Parthian period were discovered in this Tepe and the issue of the real nature of this area became more complicated. According to Azarnoosh, the possibility of the existence of remnants of the architecture of the Median and Achaemenid periods in Hamedan and this area is not far from the mind However, this cannot violate the attribution of the architectural model of this area to the Parthian period (Azarnoosh et al., 2016: 135). What is the subject of this research is to scrutinize   the hints made by Azkayi and Sarraf regarding the relationship between Hegmataneh and Varjamkard. From the point of view of historical studies, Azkayi considers the story of “Saro Jam Kard” as another narration of the Avestan story of “Varjamkard” (Azkayi, 2001: 28) (Sarraf, 1998: 102) but no further study has been done in this regard. The main issue of this research is to deal with the hypothesis of similarity and embodiment of myth with the brick structures discovered in Hegmataneh Tepe and it is possible that mythical Varjamkar is the foundation of the ancient city of Hegmataneh.   Discussion To make a comparison between descriptions of Varjamkard in Vandidad and archaeological findings and historical texts about Hegmataneh, because the main basis of comparison in this study is the text of Avesta, first the second chapter of Vandidad has been coded. Vandidad is one of the sections of the Zoroastrian book, “Avesta”, which includes 22 verses (chapters). Fargard or the second part is the story of Jam and the castle that Jamshid built by order of Ahura Mazda to protect the creatures of Ormazd from a deadly winter. After carefully examining the text of second chapter of Vandidad, all the existing concepts were first identified, then in a reciprocal process, these codes were increased and decreased several times, and finally 13 codes were established. These codes were then sorted and compressed based on content and form dimensions, and each code was arranged in its own category with the abbreviation V, which stands for Vandidad. In the continuation of the studies, the 13 codes classified by Fargard II Vandidad were first searched in written historical sources and the found codes were named with the abbreviation H (the first letter of the word Historical) and then the 13 codes of Vandidad were searched in the sources of archaeological excavations and the codes found are labelled with the abbreviation A (the first letter of the word Archaeological). The results of this process for each of the 13 Vandidad codes are discussed below. Finally, in the conclusion of this research, for each of the 13 codes of Vandidad, first the codes related to historical sources and then the codes related to archeological excavations have been included. Thus, the final results of the study of historical texts and archaeological excavations have been summarized.   Conclusion About codes V1 and V2 (“name of the city” and “reason for building the city”), as it is clear in the summary, all the similarities are historical and there are no archeological findings in this regard. About code V3 (having a plan) archaeological reports confirm the existence of a plan in the city of Hegmataneh. There is no archeological finding on code V4 (Mazdaism in Varjamkard houses) to confirm such a thing in the reports, but there is a great similarity between the discovered architecture and the principles governing the architecture of Zoroastrian houses. About code V5 (recurring order), the issue is fully confirmed with the archaeological findings. About code V6 (The roof coming from the building), it has been confirmed in archeological reports. No definite archeological findings have been reported on code V7 (Upper building and Surrounding Upper building), but such a possibility has been confirmed by Remy Bushalar. Archaeological reports confirm the V8 code (the door and self-illumination from within). Archaeological reports confirm code V11 (waterways for a haser). Regarding the codes V9, V10 and V12 (being four-cornered, each side is one Aspris (Unit of length), and 18 passes) it is not possible to fully accept the issue of similarity at the moment, but the possibility of similarity cannot be ignored. Regarding the code V13, there are many similarities between the concepts of vandidad and archaeological findings. Finally, the conclusion is that there are many similarities between the brick structures found in Hegmataneh Tepe and Vandidad’s descriptions of Varjamkard, and it seems that the hypothesis of similarity of mythical Varamjkard with the Parthian city reics found in Hegmataneh is quite probable.}, keywords = {Hegmataneh Tepe,Varjamkard,saro jamkard,Mythical city,Jamshid}, title_fa = {بررسی فرضیه تشابه ورجمکرد اسطوره‌ای با ساختارهای خشتی مکشوف در محوطه هگمتانه}, abstract_fa = {تپۀ هگمتانه تا اواسط دورۀ پهلوی، «قلعۀ شاه‌داراب» و محلۀ پیرامون آن نیز «محلۀ سرقلعه» نامیده می‌شده است، اما در دورۀ پهلوی به‌نام «تپۀ هگمتانه» نام‌گذاری شد. براساس کاوش‌های باستان‌شناسی علمی که از سال 1362 ه‍.ش. در این محوطه آغازشده است، ساختارهایی مربوط به دورۀ اشکانی شناسایی شد، اما فرضیۀ وجود هگمتانۀ تاریخی در زیر آن و ساختمان‌هایی از دورۀ هخامنشی در حوالی آن نیز هم‌چنان مطرح است. مسأله اصلی این پژوهش بررسی و تحقیق دربارۀ وجود رابطۀ احتمالی بین ساختارهای خشتی در تپۀ هگمتانه با شهر اسطوره‌ای «ورجمکرد» است و پرسش اصلی این پژوهش این است که: چه تشابهاتی بین توصیفات وندیداد از ورجمکرد و شهر باستانی کاوش‌شده در تپۀ هگمتانه وجود دارد؟ این تحقیق ازنظر رویکرد پژوهش، یک تحقیق قیاسی و ازنظر راهبرد پژوهش، یک تحقیق تاریخی محسوب می‌شود و منابع مورداستفاده شامل منابع مکتوب تاریخی و گزارش‌های باستان‌شناسی است. کلیۀ اطلاعات گردآوری‌شده به‌روش کدگذاری طبقه‌بندی و درنهایت به تحلیل داده‌ها پرداخته‌شده است. جمع‌بندی حاصل از انجام مطالعات این است که: از 13 شاخصۀ (کد) شناسایی‌شده در وندیداد، هفت شاخصه: داشتن نقشه، دین مزداپرستی در خانه‌ها، نظم تکرارشونده، داشتن ایوان، خود روشن از درون، وجود آبراهه‌ها و ساختار خشتی، تشابه بسیار زیادی با یافته‌های باستان‌شناسی دارند. دربارۀ دو شاخصه: نام شهر و علت ساخت شهر، مشابهت‌هایی در منابع تاریخی وجود دارد، اما یافتۀ باستان‌شناسی وجود ندارد. دربارۀ چهار شاخصه: چهاربر بودن، ابعاد شهر، تعداد گذرگاه‌ها و دوطبقه بودن، نمی‌توان درحال‌حاضر موضوع تشابه را به‌طور کامل پذیرفت؛ اما امکان تشابه کاملاً محتمل است. درنهایت، نتیجه‌گیری حاصل از این پژوهش این است که، با توجه به شباهت بسیار زیاد بین این محوطۀ کاوش‌شده و توصیفات وندیداد از ورجمکرد، فرضیۀ تشابه ورجمکرد اسطوره‌ای با آثار شهر یافت‌شده در تپۀ هگمتانه کاملاً محتمل است.}, keywords_fa = {تپۀ هگمتانه,ورجمکرد,ساروجمکرد,شهر اسطورهای,جمشید}, url = {https://nbsh.basu.ac.ir/article_4691.html}, eprint = {https://nbsh.basu.ac.ir/article_4691_ecd6b7543c4f3d12ecd14ccf803f01b2.pdf} }