i68 History of Art in Antiquity. affirm that it belongs to the same school and the same progressive period of Oriental art When the time comes for giving a name to the school and determining the period in question, we shall turn now to the one, now to the other of these edifices as objects of our remarks. Though diflferences are observable between Sar- vistan and FerQs-Abad, they are sufficiently alike to admit of the two cases — to use a legal expression — being joined together. To these, incidentally as it were, may be added another monument with cupola arrangement, situated in the valley of Ferash-Abad, three stages in a western direction from FerOr. It is built like the latter, of broken stone, and i(s small size and ruinous state would not arrest our attention, but for its dome, which is intact and upheld by four pillars roofed over by extra-dosed (outre- passies) arches (Figs. 8i, 82).* The pas- sage from a square to a circular form was ob- tained here by one of those transitory combinations, the forerunners of dispositions fmally adopted for suspendinjjf a cupola over pedentives. A cursory glance at the map of the district in which I^'eruz-Abad is situated will show in what peculiar fashion the monuments were distributed.^ Thus the palace we have described is five kilometres from a group of ruins that rise in the middle of the plain. Of these, one structure at least was built of larc^c stones, and has all the appearance of dating from the Achatmenid period ; it is hard by, however, to Sassanid bas-reliefs carved in the flanks of the gorge which it seems to guard. The fact that structure and bas-reliefs are found in close proximity with each other is not by itself sufiicient to prove that they are coeval. At Behistun and Naksh-i-Rustem, the suc- ' DiEULAFOV, L' Art antique, iv. pp. 77, 78, Plate XVIII. " Flandin and Coste, Perse ancuntie, Plate XXXIV. Digitized by Google Kiu. 81.— hcrash-Abad. I'bn. Dikulakov, Z'^r/ MftjpMr, torn. itr. Fig. 56^
