The location of Persepolis remained lost for about eighteen centuries. During the 17th century CE, the attitude of European travellers towards the monumental complex and its inscriptions changed. António de Gouveia visits Persepolis in 1602 CE and published his travel account in 1611. His account describes in detail the architectural features, mentions the cuneiform inscriptions. Supporting his interpretations upon classical and biblical sources, Gouveia's account distinguishes itself from previous ones and provides the pattern for following travel reports. The present paper compares Gouveia's description with other accounts of the 17th century, and clarifies its influence on later travel accounts on Persepolis.
Destruída em 330 BCE, Persépolis esteve perdida cerca de dezoito séculos. No séc. XVII, dá-se uma alteração na relação dos viajantes europeus com o complexo e as suas inscrições. António de Gouveia visita Persépolis em 1602. Publicado em 1611, o seu...
Show moreThe location of Persepolis remained lost for about eighteen centuries. During the 17th century CE, the attitude of European travellers towards the monumental complex and its inscriptions changed. António de Gouveia visits Persepolis in 1602 CE and published his travel account in 1611. His account describes in detail the architectural features, mentions the cuneiform inscriptions. Supporting his interpretations upon classical and biblical sources, Gouveia's account distinguishes itself from previous ones and provides the pattern for following travel reports. The present paper compares Gouveia's description with other accounts of the 17th century, and clarifies its influence on later travel accounts on Persepolis.
Destruída em 330 BCE, Persépolis esteve perdida cerca de dezoito séculos. No séc. XVII, dá-se uma alteração na relação dos viajantes europeus com o complexo e as suas inscrições. António de Gouveia visita Persépolis em 1602. Publicado em 1611, o seu relato descreve as estruturas arquitetónicas e menciona inscrições cuneiformes, suportando as interpretações em fontes clássicas e bíblicas. O relato de Gouveia distingue-se dos anteriores e inaugura o padrão dos relatos sucessores. Esta artigo compara a descrição de Gouveia com outros relatos do século XVII (Silva e Figueroa (1619), Valle (1621), Chardain (1666), Struys (1672)) e analisando o teor, o contexto e o impacto de cada relato, procura clarificar a influência de António de Gouveia nos relatos posteriores.
Show less
