Askari_Nasrin_The Medieval Reception of Firdausis Shahnama_The Ardashir Cycle as a Mirror for Princes_2013_Phd_Thesis.pdf

The Medieval Reception of Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma:

The Ardashīr Cycle as a Mirror for Princes

by

Nasrin Askari

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations

University of Toronto

© Copyright by Nasrin Askari 2013

ii

The Medieval Reception of Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma:

The Ardashīr Cycle as a Mirror for Princes

Nasrin Askari

Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations

University of Toronto

2013

Abstract

Based on a broad survey of the reception of Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma in medieval times, this

dissertation argues that Firdausī‘s oeuvre was primarily perceived as a book of wisdom and

advice for kings and courtly élites. The medieval reception of the Shāhnāma is clearly

manifested in the comments of medieval authors about Firdausī and his work, and in their use of

the Shāhnāma in the composition of their own works. The production of ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāmas

(selections from the Shāhnāma) in medieval times and the remarkable attention of the authors of

mirrors for princes to Firdausī‘s opus are particularly illuminating in this regard.

The survey is complemented by a close textual reading of the Ardashīr cycle in the

Shāhnāma in comparison with other medieval historical accounts about Ardashīr, in order to

illustrate how history in the Shāhnāma is reduced to only a framework for the presentation of

ideas and ideals of kingship. Based on ancient Persian beliefs regarding the ideal state of the

world, I argue that Ardashīr in the Shāhnāma is represented as a Saviour of the world. Within

this context, I offer new interpretations of the symbolic tale of Ardashīr‘s fight against a giant

worm, and explain why the idea of the union of kingship and religion, a major topic in almost all

medieval Persian mirrors for princes, has often been attributed to Ardashīr. Finally, I compare

iii

the Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma with nine medieval Persian mirrors for princes to

demonstrate that the ethico-political concepts contained in them, as well as the portrayal of

Ardashīr, remain more or less the same in all these works.

Study of the Shāhnāma as a mirror for princes, as this study shows, not only reveals the

meaning of its symbolic tales, but also sheds light on the pre-Islamic roots of some of the ethico-

political concepts presented in the medieval Perso-Islamic literature of wisdom and advice for

kings and courtiers.

iv

دستم بگرفت و پا به پا برد

*تا شیوۀ راه رفتن آموخت She held my hand and walked me step by step

Until she taught me how to walk.

To my thesis supervisor, Professor Maria Eva Subtelny, who patiently taught

me how to take steps in the world of academic research. To her, I am forever

grateful.

* From Iraj Mirza‘s poem ―Mādar‖ (Mother).

v

Acknowledgements

It is my great pleasure to acknowledge and thank those who supported me throughout the

completion of this dissertation. My heartfelt thanks go to my thesis supervisor, Professor Maria

E. Subtelny. Had it not been for her tremendous support and encouragement, I would not have

pursued doctoral studies. She patiently read my barely understandable drafts, carefully corrected

my writing, and spent hours with me in her office to help me clarify my thoughts. She let me use

her rich library as if it were my own, and always informed me of new publications in my field of

study. I thank her for her unfailingly sage advices and for being a constant source of inspiration

and confidence throughout the years that I worked on my dissertation. I also wish to thank the

members of my thesis advisory committee, Professors Rivanne Sandler and Enrico G. Raffaelli,

who generously afforded me their time and insights. I am grateful to Professor Sandler for

carefully reading my drafts and providing thoughtful comments and suggestions. I am indebted

to Professor Raffaelli for introducing me to the world of ancient Iranian studies. He showed great

interest in my research, identified my erroneous interpretations of Zoroastrian concepts, and

directed me to sources that I would not have known otherwise. I would like to gratefully

acknowledge Professors Paul-Alain Beaulieu and Azita Taleghani for their participation in my

thesis defence as externals to the discipline and for their insightful comments and questions,

which broadened my perspective. I owe a great debt of gratitude to Professor Charles P. Melville

of the University of Cambridge, who kindly accepted to be the external examiner of my thesis. I

extend my sincere thanks to him for his thorough reading of my work and for providing

invaluable comments.

My doctoral research was supported by generous funding from the Social Sciences and

Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC Canada Graduate Scholarship), the Ontario

vi

Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities (Ontario Graduate Scholarship), and the

University of Toronto (University of Toronto Fellowship and University of Toronto Doctoral

Completion Award). I acknowledge with thanks their generous support, which enabled me to

focus on my research.

I was fortunate to conduct my graduate studies in the Department of Near and Middle

Eastern Civilizations at the University of Toronto, where I benefited from the insights of a

number of great scholars. Particularly, I would like to thank Professors Karin Rührdanz,

Sebastian Günther (now at Georg-August-Universität Göttingen), Mohammad Tavakoli-Targhi,

Amir Hassanpour, Marta Simidchieva, Lisa V. Golombek, Todd Lawson, Linda S. Northrup,

Walid Saleh, and Amir Harrak for their contributions to my intellectual growth.

I am indebted to a wonderful group of peers in the Department of Near and Middle

Eastern Civilizations, who made my graduate studies an enjoyable experience. It was a great

pleasure to work and study with former NMC graduate students Drs. Mohammed Rustom, Chad

Lingwood, Christina Geisen, Anne Clement, Mina Yazdani, Omid Ghaemmaghami, and Maryam

Moazzen. It was also delightful to work and study with Maryna Kravets, Golbarg Rekabtalaei,

Ida Meftahi, Hamid Rezaeiyazdi, Parisa Zahiremami, Adam Ali, Mustafa Banister, Amar Baaj,

and Mohammadreza Ardehali. My special thanks are due to Dr. Joo-Yup Lee and his very kind

family for their great friendship.

I would like to acknowledge and appreciate the exceptional, behind-the-scene assistance

of the wonderful administrative staff in the Department of Near and Middle Eastern

Civilizations, Mrs. Anna Sousa, Graduate Administrator, Mrs. Maria Leonor Vivona, Business

Officer, and Ms. Jennie Jones, Undergraduate Administrator and Assistant to the Chair. The time

and care they put into everything, from administrative details to arranging social and academic

events, provided peace of mind for everyone and made the department a pleasant place to work

vii

at. I am especially grateful to Mrs. Anna Sousa, who constantly ensured that all administrative

requirements for the School of Graduate Studies were met in due time.

I owe a great debt of thankfulness to my good old friends, most of whom are now

scattered around the globe. To attempt to name them all here would be like attempting to count

all the stars in the sky. I therefore thank them collectively for their lovely cards, letters, e-mails,

telephone conversations, flowers, and gifts, which brightened my days and nourished my soul.

The company of the few friends who live nearby has been most precious to me.

My greatest debt of gratitude is to Mrs. Caroline and Dr. Joe Hillaby of Bristol University

and Dr. Colin P. Mitchell of Dalhousie University, who strongly encouraged and supported me

when I first considered pursuing graduate studies. Their friendship, guidance, and

encouragement throughout the years have been invaluable to me.

Last, but certainly not least, I am grateful to my family. My loving parents, Shirin and

Manouchehr, and my dear brothers, Babak and Mehdi, believed in me when I did not believe in

myself. I thank them for their unwavering affection and enduring support. Words cannot express

how much I love and appreciate them. They are always in my heart despite the far distance that

keeps us apart.

viii

Contents

Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... ii

Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... v

Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... viii

Note on Transliteration, Style, and Translation ....................................................................... xi

List of Appendices ....................................................................................................................... xii

Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1

Chapter One: The Reception of Firdausī’s Shāhnāma ........................................................... 16

The Reception of the Shāhnāma on the Part of Sultan Maḥmūd .................................................. 17

Fact vs. Fiction ......................................................................................................................... 17

Ni mī ‗Arū ī‘s Anecdote ....................................................................................................... 22

Ni mī Ganjavī‘s Allusions ...................................................................................................... 23

‗Aṭṭ r‘s Allusions ..................................................................................................................... 24

Sa‗d al-Dīn Var vīnī‘s Allusion ............................................................................................... 25

The Silence of Sultan Maḥmūd‘s Court Poets about Firdausī ................................................. 26

The Reception of the Shāhnāma on the Part of the ‗Abd al-Razz qiy n Family ......................... 28

The Reception of the Shāhnāma on the Part of Medieval Writers ............................................... 31

Biographies of Poets................................................................................................................. 32

Comments of the Copyists of the Shāhnāma ........................................................................... 35

Works on the Science of Rhetoric ............................................................................................ 37

Post-Shāhnāma Epics and Verse Chronicles ........................................................................... 41

Heroic epics ......................................................................................................................... 41

Religious epics ..................................................................................................................... 44

Historical epics .................................................................................................................... 46

Compilations of Selected Verses from the Shāhnāma ............................................................. 50

Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma of ‗Alī b. Aḥmad ............................................................................ 51

Mu‘nis al-a rār f daqā‘iq al-ash‗ār ................................................................................... 53

Medieval Prose Works Containing Verses from the Shāhnāma .............................................. 54

a) Literature of Wisdom and Advice ................................................................................... 56

Rā at al- ud r va āyat al-sur r .................................................................................... 56

Khirad-nāma. ................................................................................................................ 60

Farā‘id al-sul k f fażā‘il al-mul k ............................................................................... 61

Marzbān-nāma .............................................................................................................. 65

Sindbād-nāma ............................................................................................................... 73

Aghrāż al-siyāsa f a‗rāż al-riyāsa ............................................................................... 74

Mir ād al-‗ibād min al-mabda‘ ilā al-ma‗ād. ............................................................... 75

b) Historical Writing ............................................................................................................ 78

Tār kh-i jahāngushāy .................................................................................................... 78

Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh ........................................................................................................... 80

Mujmal al-tavār kh va al-qi a ..................................................................................... 82

ix

Tār kh-i abaristān ....................................................................................................... 84

Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n ............................................................................................ 85

Chapter Two: The Portrayal of Ardashīr in the Shāhnāma ................................................. 127

The Structure of the Ardashīr Cycle in the Shāhnāma ..................................................................... 137

Part I – Ardashīr‘s Eligibility for Kingship ................................................................................... 138

Noble Lineage and Protection of Religion ........................................................................ 138

Divine Election .................................................................................................................. 140

Divine Support of Ardashīr ............................................................................................... 143

The Support of the Military and the Priesthood ................................................................ 151

Ardashīr‘s Battles: The Stages of Founding a New Empire .............................................. 152

Battles nos. 1 and 2 ..................................................................................................... 153

Battle no. 3. ................................................................................................................. 155

Battle no. 4. ................................................................................................................. 156

The Motif of the Worm. ...................................................................................... 159

The Theme of Greed ........................................................................................... 160

The Motif of Molten Metal ................................................................................. 161

The Motif of Two Friendly Hosts ....................................................................... 162

The Motif of Seven Helpers ................................................................................ 163

The Theme of Replacing Idol-Temples by Fire Temples ................................... 163

Part II –Ardashīr‘s Successful Kingship ....................................................................................... 165

A Wise and Conscientious Minister .................................................................................. 166

A Rightful Heir to the Crown ............................................................................................ 167

Noble lineage .............................................................................................................. 168

Kingly aura and courage ............................................................................................. 169

Education .................................................................................................................... 169

Reconciliation with Former Enemies ................................................................................ 170

Chapter Three: The Wisdom of Ardashīr and His Advices in the Shāhnāma .................... 202

Ardashīr‘s Custom and Practice (āy n) ....................................................................................... 203

The Army ........................................................................................................................................... 206

The Scribal Class .............................................................................................................................. 206

Local Governors ............................................................................................................................... 207

The War ............................................................................................................................................. 207

Foreign Delegates ............................................................................................................................. 209

Construction of New Cities ............................................................................................................. 210

Bankrupted Individuals .................................................................................................................... 210

Addressing Grievances .................................................................................................................... 211

Taxes .................................................................................................................................................. 211

Ardashīr‘s Throne Speech (andarz) ............................................................................................ 214

Ardashīr‘s Testament (‗ahd) ....................................................................................................... 223

The Concept of Justice ..................................................................................................................... 228

x

The Idea of the Union of Kingship and Religion ......................................................................... 229

Threats to Kingship .......................................................................................................................... 233

Commonalities and Differences...................................................................................................... 235

Ardashīr‘s Prediction........................................................................................................................ 237

Ardashīr‘s Cities ............................................................................................................................... 238

Chapter Four: The Ardashīr Cycle and Medieval Persian Mirrors for Princes ................ 257

Pand-nāma of Sebüktegin .................................................................................................................... 259

Ādāb-i salṭanat va vizārat ..................................................................................................................... 263

Qāb s-nāma ........................................................................................................................................... 267

Siyar al-mul k of Ni m al-Mulk ........................................................................................................ 271

Na at al-mul k of Ghaz lī ................................................................................................................. 276

Aghrāż al-siyāsa f a‗rāż al-riyāsa ...................................................................................................... 289

Jāmi‗ al-‗ul m of Fakhr al-Dīn R zī ................................................................................................... 292

Marzbān-nāma ....................................................................................................................................... 295

Ᾱdāb al- arb va al-shujā‗a................................................................................................................... 303

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 333

Bibliography .............................................................................................................................. 340

Primary Sources ...................................................................................................................... 340

Secondary Sources .................................................................................................................. 355

xi

Note on Transliteration, Style, and Translation

In the transliteration of Arabic and Persian words, I have adopted the system of the International

Journal of Middle East Studies for each language. The names of authors and titles of works

written in Persian, as well as citations from Persian works, regardless of whether or not they

include Arabic words, have been transliterated according to the system of the International

Journal of Middle East Studies for the Persian language, and the names of authors and titles of

works written in Arabic, as well as citations from Arabic works, have been transliterated

according to the system of the International Journal of Middle East Studies for the Arabic

language. For Pahlavi and Avestan terms and names, the standard systems established by D. N.

Mackenzie and Karl Hoffman has been followed, but occasionally slight modifications have been

made in order to make these terms easy to read by non-specialists (for example, Verethraghna

instead of Vərəθraγna). Terms that are commonly used in the English language, such as

Ahriman, Sufi, sultan, etc., have not been italicized. In the bibliography, the notes, and in general

matters of style, the 16th edition of The Chicago Manual of Style has been followed. Unless

otherwise noted, all translations are my own.

xii

Appendices

A (1): Shāhnāma verses cited in R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r va āyat al-sur r (in the order in

which they appear in Rā at al- ud r) ............................................................................. 391

A (2): Shāhnāma verses cited in R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r va āyat al-sur r (in the order in

which they appear in the Shāhnāma) .............................................................................. 414

B: Comparing ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma with R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r (first

passage)……………………………………………………………………………………...437

C: Comparing ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma with R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r (second

passage) .................................................................................................................................. 439

D: Shāhnāma verses cited in Farā‘id al-sul k ........................................................................... 441

E: Shāhnāma verses cited in Var vīnī‘s Marzbān-nāma ........................................................... 445

F: Shāhnāma verses cited in Ẓahīrī Samarqandī‘s Sindbād-nāma ............................................. 447

G: Shāhnāma verses cited in Ẓahīrī Samarqandī‘s Aghrāż al-siyāsa f a‗rāż al-riyāsa ............. 449

H: Shāhnāma verses cited in Najm-i R zī‘s Mir ād al-‗ibād ..................................................... 450

I: Shāhnāma verses cited in Juvaynī‘s Tār kh-i jahāngushāy .................................................... 451

J: Shāhnāma verses cited in Rashīd al-Dīn Fa lull h‘s Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh ............................... 455

K: Shāhnāma verses cited in Mujmal al-tavār kh va al-qi as .................................................... 457

L: Shāhnāma verses cited in Ibn Isfandiy r‘s Tār kh-i abaristān ............................................ 458

1

Introduction

In the paradoxical statement of Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, the eminent scholar and editor of the

Shāhnāma, Firdausī‘s opus is the most celebrated Persian literary work, which remains

unknown.1 Indeed, study of the Shāhnāma in the modern era reminds one of the ancient tale of

the elephant in the dark. According to Rūmī‘s version of this tale, the Indians brought an

elephant to a small town, the people of which had never seen an elephant in their lives. The night

before the show, a group of men who could not wait to see the elephant, decided to sneak into the

room where it was being kept. The room was very dark, and they could not see the animal, but

they managed to put their hands on the elephant and tried to guess what it looked like through

their sense of touch. Depending on what part of the animal they touched, each of the men had a

different opinion about it. The one who had touched the ear said it looked like a fan, the one who

had touched the leg argued that it looked like a column, and so on.2 Similarly, the sheer volume

of the Shāhnāma, with its roots in ancient Iranian traditions and its particular representation of

the poet‘s own world, along with its unique characteristics, has made it extremely difficult for a

single scholar to understand it in all its complexity. Ironically, this monumental work has made it

possible for scholars of various backgrounds and interests to approach it from extremely diverse

points of view. The work has been the subject of study by a wide range of scholars, from

historians and linguists to philosophers and mystics and even European medievalists and

classicists. We all approach the work from our own discipline, each of us being limited in our

own way. Indeed, we would seem to be a long way from being able to grasp the work in its

entirety.

In one of his lectures on the Shāhnāma (1990), Kh liqī Muṭlaq enumerated nine major

areas of research that could not only enhance our understanding of this multi-faceted masterpiece

2

of Persian classical literature but also shed light on various aspects of its significance.3 One of his

proposed areas of research concerned ancient Persian custom and practice particularly in relation

to kinship and statecraft.4 The present study aims to explore this aspect of the Shāhnāma by

highlighting its characteristics as a book of ethico-political wisdom and advice for kings and

courtly élites. The term ethico-political is used here to point out that the Shāhnāma does not just

provide political advice for kings and courtiers, but also teaches them how to comport

themselves based on moral principles of good and bad behaviour. As we shall see, proper

conduct is as important as the efficient administration of the state for the maintenance of

kingship–sometimes, it is even more important. As often stated in the medieval Persian literature

of wisdom and advice for rulers, the proper conduct of the ruler affects the behaviour of his high-

ranking officials, whose conduct will in turn affect the behaviour of people. Thus, the society‘s

adherence to the principles of proper conduct was seen as the result of the ruler‘s adherence to

these principles. As such, this study considers the moral standards promoted in the Shāhnāma to

be part and parcel of the political advice provided in it for kings and courtiers.

In modern scholarship, the medieval literature of wisdom and advice for kings and

courtiers is generally known to belong to the literary genre of ―Fürstenspiegel‖ or ―mirrors for

princes,‖ but the definition and scope of this genre of literature widely differs across the board.5

For example, whereas most scholars consider the Siyar al-mul k of Ni m al-Mulk as a mirror

for princes, A. K. S. Lambton disagrees, because in her opinion, the author is concerned ―not

with the theory of government or justification of power, but with the practice of government by

the sultan.‖6 In the present study, ―mirrors for princes‖ refers to any form of writing that provides

ethico-political advice to kings and courtiers on how to comport themselves and organize the

state in order to maintain their power.

3

In one of his articles published in 1976, Charles-Henri de Fouchécour states that

―Ferdowsi est un poète, épique et lyrique pour la forme, moraliste et politique pour la fond‖

(Firdausī is a poet, epic and lyric in form, moralistic and political in depth).7 In order to

demonstrate to what extent literature and its dominant motifs have recast and submerged history

in the Shāhnāma, and in order to show that the entire opus is marked by the intention of an

educator of princes, de Fouchécour provides an outline of the Shāhnāma to reveal the ―logique

du récit‖ that informs the work.8 But, he does not provide an analysis of his outline and leaves it

to the reader to find the logic of the narratives. Later, in his seminal study of moral concepts in

Persian literature of the ninth to the thirteenth centuries, Moralia (1986), he opines that above all

else, and with regard to its general intent, the Shāhnāma should be considered as a mirror for

princes.9 Yet, despite his frequent references to the Shāhnāma in the first chapter of the work, on

the ancient Persian collections of advice, he does not include in his study the Shāhnāma as a

mirror for princes in its own right. Once again, in an article published in a special issue of Īrān-

nāma (1991), devoted to Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma, de Fouchécour asserts that the Shāhnāma is a

mirror for princes which shows kings their ideal and real portrayals.10

Despite de Fouchécour‘s calls for attention to this important aspect of the Shāhnāma,

little has been done to examine its message to rulers. In that special issue of Irān-nāma, two

more articles draw attention to the moral and political concepts presented in the Shāhnāma:

Hurmuz Mīl niy n‘s article suggests that anyone looking into the notion of Iranian ethics should

first and foremost refer to the Shāhnāma.11

He provides a very general outline of Firdausī‘s

worldview and moral values, as reflected in the Shāhnāma, and briefly reviews the portrayals of

Īraj, Siy vakhsh, and Kay-Khusrau as three moral/political figures in the Shāhnāma.12

And B qir

Parh m‘s article suggests that the Shāhnāma was written to teach the ways of ordering the affairs

of the world by way of examples from past rulers. He examines the concept of kingship in the

4

Shāhnāma and the roles of kings and heroes in the protection and maintenance of kingship.13

Both these articles provide insights into an important and less-studied aspect of the Shāhnāma,

but they both are confined to generalities and focus on the earlier parts of the work, the parts that

are commonly known as ―mythical,‖ ―heroic,‖ and ―legendary.‖ Focus on the earlier parts of the

Shāhnāma is in fact a very common feature of modern scholarship on the work, perhaps because

it is generally assumed that the ―historical‖ part, that is, the Sasanian portion of the Shāhnāma

(and sometimes the exploits of Alexander too) consists mostly of historical narratives and

didactic material, and therefore not of much literary value. But, as shown by Michael Wickens in

his literary analysis of the early Sasanian period in the Shāhnāma, this part of the work too

contains ―features of genuine literary significance.‖14

With its focus on the Ardashīr cycle in the

Shāhnāma, which is about the rise to power and reign of Ardashīr, the founder of the Sasanian

dynasty, the present study partly fills this gap in the Shāhnāma scholarship. Further reasons for

choosing this part of the work for the current study will be explained shortly.

In a 1995 revised edition of the aforementioned special issue of Īrān-nāma, published as

Tan-i pahlavān va ravān-i khiradmand (The body of the hero and the soul of the sage), Sh hrukh

Miskūb, the editor of the new edition, made a further contribution to the collection, which

concerned the topic of ethics in the Shāhnāma.15

Situating the ethico-political concepts reflected

in the Shāhnāma in the context of the ancient Iranian worldview, Miskūb argues that Iranian

myths, and consequently the Shāhnāma, are epic and ethical in essence, because they reflect the

ancient Iranian worldview, which was based on the notion of the constant struggle between Good

and Evil.16

According to Miskūb, the idea that life in this world reflects the cosmic battle

between Good and Evil makes Iranian myths epic, and the concept that people are free to choose

between Good and Evil makes Iranian myths ethical. To illustrate his point, Miskūb examines a

few key concepts in ancient Iranian traditions, such as asha (truth, order, justice, righteousness),

5

dur j (falsehood), and āz (greed), and draws attention to their parallels in the Shāhnāma.17

In

another more comprehensive study, Miskūb analyses five major concepts in the Shāhnāma,

namely, time (zamān), creation (āfar nish), history (tār kh), kingship (jahāndār ), and speech

(sukhan) in the context of ancient Iranian traditions.18

In his discussion about the concept of

kingship, he draws parallels between Ohrmazd and the ideal king in the Shāhnāma, and argues

that the ideal king of Iran, according to the Shāhnāma, should organize his realm in the same

way that Ohrmazd orders the affairs of the world.19

Miskūb further maintains that the ideal of

kingship portrayed in the Sasanian section of the Shāhnāma was influenced by the interference

of Zoroastrian priests in the affairs of kingship and their introduction of the notion of the union

of kingship and religion.20

But, as Yarshater noted, the Zoroastrian political ideas permeate the

entire Shāhnāma not just the Sasanian section.21

And, as shall be argued in the present study, the

notion of the union of kingship and religion, as reflected in the Shāhnāma and the Zoroastrian

literature, does not advocate a greater power for religious leaders. On the contrary, it promotes

the idea that the leadership of both secular and religious worlds should be conjoined and

manifested in the person of the king. Miskūb also compares two wise ministers from the ―heroic‖

and ―historical‖ parts of the Shāhnāma, namely, Afr siy b‘s minister, Pīr n, and Anūshīrv n‘s

minister, Buzurgmihr, and asserts that the ―heroic‖ part of the Shāhnāma depicts a wise man

through his actions, while the ―historical‖ part of the Shāhnāma portrays a similar figure through

his words.22

As we shall see, at least in the account about Ardashīr, both actions and words are

employed in the ―historical‖ part to portray an ideal figure.

Another scholar who has examined the political paradigms in the Shāhnāma is Abbas

Amanat, who suggests that the work should be read ―as a political discourse on the use and abuse

of power.‖ In his view, the Shāhnāma, particularly its ―legendary‖ part, can shed light on such

significant issues as ―legitimacy and territorial sovereignty, tension over dynastic succession, the

6

dynamics of centre and periphery, and the state‘s adoption and enforcement of an official

religious creed,‖ which have deeply influenced Iranian political culture in the course of history. 23

In order to demonstrate how the political paradigms preserved in ancient Iranian myths may help

to ―define what may be called an Iranian political ethos,‖ Amanat analyses the Farīdūn cycle in

the Shāhnāma, pointing to three major parts that constitute this cycle: First, the restoration of

power after the fall of a tyrannical rule; second, the political conflict emerging among Farīdūn‘s

three sons and leading to the murder of the youngest son; and third, the inception of vengeance,

which will grow into a major problem in the subsequent cycles of the Shāhnāma. Based on his

analysis of the Farīdūn cycle, Amanat proposes that the Shāhnāma should be understood ―as a

political myth far more complex than the familiar genre of ‗mirrors‘ (andarznama), conveying a

more effective message to a larger audience among the elite and the ordinary people.‖24

According to Ehsan Yarshater, however, the promotion of the ―national and moral ideals

of the state‖ was a characteristic feature of Iranian national history, that is, ―the history of Iran as

conceived by the Iranians themselves and embedded in Iranian historical tradition.‖25

But, since

no historical book from pre-Islamic Iran has survived, Yarshater‘s description of the

characteristic features of Iranian national history is mainly based on later medieval sources. Two

of the most important sources that Yarshater used for his study were Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma and

Ṭabarī‘s Ta‘r kh al-rusul wa al-mul k, because they provide the most detailed accounts about the

pre-Islamic history of Iran. But, in his review of the sources, Yarshater notes that ―as a historian,

however, Firdausī lacks the relative precision of Ṭabarī‖ and ―often confuses the scenes of events

and is particularly lax concerning names and numbers.‖26

He also states that ―as a poet,‖ Firdausī

―was interested in literary effect rather than accuracy.‖27

Yarshater further opines that Firdausī

followed a Sasanian model in writing history, in which ―the theme was historical but the method

largely literary.‖28

7

Like Yarshater, Julie Scott Meisami considers the Shāhnāma as history and includes it in

her survey of early medieval Persian historiography. Meisami, too, notes that the Shāhnāma does

not conform to the mode and style of the historical writing of the period. But, unlike Yarshater,

who maintains Firdausī turned Iranian history into a ―literary masterpiece,‖ 29

Meisami argues

that Firdausī‘s use of an archaic language and style and his focus on the outmoded topic of the

ancient history of Iran turned his work into ―something of an anomaly: not quite literature and

not quite history.‖30

Despite their different views about the outcome of Firdausī‘s work,

however, both scholars make a point about the marked difference between the Shāhnāma and

other historical writings they compare it to.

Considering Firdausī‘s little emphasis on historical facts and his greater attention to the

didactic aspect of his work, the present study proposes that we may better understand the

Shāhnāma if we do not classify it as history. But, to view the Shāhnāma simply as a literary

work, merely intended to gain financial reward and a good name for its author, as Mahmoud

Omidsalar suggests,31

would not explain the amount of time the poet put into it (about thirty

years) and the political involvements of its sponsor.32

Without discounting its historical and

literary value, the present study seeks to demonstrate that the Shāhnāma can be viewed as a

mirror for princes and that a great deal can be revealed about the meaning of its tales if it is

examined as a book of wisdom and advice for kings and courtiers. It is my contention that the

myths and legends of the Shāhnāma, which are found throughout the entire work and not just in

the early parts, were not intended to be understood merely as history. The most obvious evidence

for this contention is the poet‘s own words, where he repeatedly asks his reader to find the

meaning of his tales by way of symbols. Had he intended for his work to be perceived as history,

he would not have acknowledged that some of his tales appear as lies and legends (dur gh va

8

fisāna).33

This stands in sharp contrast to most medieval historians, who stress the truthfulness of

their reports and make a point about their effort to stay away from legends and fabulous stories.34

In order to see how the Shāhnāma was perceived in medieval times, Chapter One of this

study examines the reception of the Shāhnāma as reflected in the works of medieval authors who

wrote about Firdausī and his work, or who used the Shāhnāma in writing their own prose or

verse compositions. I endeavour to demonstrate that most medieval writers were in awe of

Firdausī‘s eloquence in his composition of a work that was both entertaining and educational. In

all the many ways that they made use of the Shāhnāma, the medieval authors‘ attention to the

ethico-political dimension of the work manifests itself. Whether they emulated the Shāhnāma in

composing new works, or borrowed verses from it to incorporate into their own texts, they

evince their appreciation of the wisdom contained in its verses. The most compelling evidence in

support of my thesis is the creation and continued production in medieval times of a particular

type of literature known as ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma (selections from the Shāhnāma), which clearly

points to the compilers‘ understanding of the Shāhnāma as a book of wisdom and advice on

kingship. The predominant type of verses selected from the Shāhnāma to be incorporated into

medieval prose works further reinforces the argument that medieval writers understood the

Shāhnāma primarily as a repository of wisdom and advice for kings and courtly élites. For easy

reference, I have extracted these verses from the relevant works and provided them in

Appendices A to L, with references to their locations in the most recent edition of the Shāhnāma.

Chapter One also demonstrates that, contrary to the common assumption, the Shāhnāma was a

popular work in the eleventh and twelfth-centuries, that is, before the earliest extant manuscript

of the Shāhnāma, which is dated 1217.

9

Based on my observations in the first chapter, in Chapter Two I focus on the Shāhnāma

itself in an attempt to read the work through the prism of medieval writers who appeared to me to

understand it as a mirror for princes. Obviously, it would not be practical to examine the entire

work thoroughly in one study. Therefore, I selected the Ardashīr cycle from the Shāhnāma for

my purpose. Several reasons justify this selection: First, since the Ardashīr cycle is from the so-

called historical part of the Shāhnāma, it would serve the purpose of demonstrating how history

fades into the background in the Shāhnāma by a series of interconnected, meaningful, and

entertaining symbolic tales that aim to convey lessons on kingship. Based on a comparative study

of the Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma and the available medieval accounts about Ardashīr, I

endeavour to demonstrate how Firdausī‘s representation of Ardashīr differs from that of other

medieval historians, and how little historical information can be gleaned from the ―history‖ of

Ardashīr in the Shāhnāma. The second reason for choosing the Ardashīr cycle is that it contains

both heroic and mythical materials, and this makes it comparable to the earlier cycles of the

Shāhnāma, which are commonly known as ―heroic‖ or ―mythical.‖ Sharing common features

with the ―mythical,‖ ―heroic,‖ and ―historical‖ parts of the Shāhnāma, the Ardashīr cycle would

seem to be a relatively good representative from the work. Thirdly, as is often the case, the

founders of new dynasties are usually turned into great heroes and idealized figures by later

political propagandists of that dynasty, who seek to promote their ideas and ideals of kingship by

attributing them to the revered founder of the dynasty. Knowing that the Shāhnāma has its roots

in Sasanian court literature, one would expect to see a reflection of Sasanian political ideologies

in its portrayal of both ideal and flawed rulers. The portrayal of the founder of the Sasanian

dynasty, as depicted in the Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma, would therefore seem to be a good

starting point for an examination of the ethico-political ideas promoted in Sasanian political

literature and ultimately in the Shāhnāma.

10

The Ardashīr cycle also includes a section on the customs and practices that were

supposedly introduced by Ardashīr, namely, his āy n, his advice (andarz) to the high-ranking

officials, also known as his throne speech (khuṭba), and his testament (‗ahd) to his son. The

contents of these political treatises will be discussed and analysed in Chapter Three. By

comparing Firdausī‘s form of presentation of Ardashīr‘s āy n, andarz, and ‗ahd to that of the few

medieval authors who included these materials in their works, I will draw attention to Firdausī‘s

effort to make these didactic texts as interesting as possible, and argue that he intended to

entertain and educate, and not to record historical documents.

In Chapter Four, I compare nine medieval Persian mirrors for princes with the Ardashīr

cycle in the Shāhnāma in order to reveal the similarities and differences between them and to

demonstrate that, although different in form, later medieval Persian mirrors for princes present

the criteria for an ideal kingship based, more or less, on the same principles that we find in the

Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma. The mirrors selected for this study were written by authors of

different social and professional backgrounds and were composed in different cultural contexts

and geographical locations. Also, they were written in different styles and with different

intentions. The similarity of the concepts presented in these different works point to the common

roots of the ideas expressed in them. In my discussions, I draw attention to the Zoroastrian roots

of some of the major concepts presented in these works, and point to their reappearance in

Islamic garb in later works. In all these later works, Ardashīr continues to be represented as a

sage-king, as he is portrayed in the Shāhnāma.

The conclusions that may be drawn from this study are that in the medieval period, the

Shāhnāma was primarily understood as a mirror for princes, and that studying it in this context

sheds considerable light on the meaning of its tales and the purport of its author. Also, as a

repository of ancient Persian wisdom and advice on kingship, the Shāhnāma enhances our

11

understanding of the process of the development of major concepts related to kingship and

statecraft in later Perso-Islamic literature of wisdom and advice for rulers.

12

1 Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Ahammiyat-i Shāhnāma-i Firdausī‖ (paper presented at the Shāhnāma

Conference, London, 1369/1990), in Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, Sukhan-hā-yi d r na: S guftār

darbāra-i Firdaus va Shāhnāma, ed. ‗Alī Dihb shī (Tehran: Afk r, 1381/2002), 108:

.رؽیي آبقذ نببه ههؼرؽیي اثؽاظثی كبؼقی ظؼػیي زبل بنبضز

2 Jal l al-Dīn Muḥammad b. al-Ḥusayn al-Balkhī al-Rūmī, Masnav -i ma‗nav , ed. Reynold A.

Nicholson, 8 vols. (London: Luzac, 1925–40), 3:72, lines 1259–68.

3 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Ahammiyat-i Shāhnāma-i Firdausī,‖ 97–110.

4 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Ahammiyat-i Shāhnāma-i Firdausī,‖ 102.

5 On the use of the phrase ―mirror for princes‖ by modern scholars of Arabic and Persian

advisory literatures, see Louise Marlow, ―Surveying Recent Literature on the Arabic and Persian

Mirrors for Princes Genre,‖ History Compass 7, no. 2 (2009): 523–28.

6 On this work and different opinions about it, see below, p. 271 and p. 316n58.

7 Charles-Henri de Fouchécour, ―Une lecture du Livre des Rois de Ferdowsi,‖ Studia Iranica 5

(1976), 171.

8 de Fouchécour, ―Une lecture du Livre des Rois,‖ 172–202.

9 Charles-Henri de Fouchécour, Moralia: Les notions morales dans la littérature persane du

3e/9e au 7e/13e siècle (Paris: Éditions Recherches sur les Civilisations, 1986), 53.

10 Charles-Henri de Fouchécour, ―Akhl q-i pahlav nī va akhl q-i rasmī dar Shāhnāma-i

Firdausī,‖ trans. B. N dirz d, in ―Shāhnāma-i Firdausī,‖ ed. Sh hrukh Miskūb, special issue,

Īrān-nāma 10, no.1 (1370/1991): 8–13, repr. ed., in Tan-i pahlavān va ravān-i khiradmand:

Pazh hish-hā-y tāza dar Shāhnāma, ed. Sh hrukh Miskūb, 2nd ed. (Tehran: Ṭarḥ-i nau, 2002),

10–16.

13

11

Hurmuz Mīl niy n, ―Bīnish-i falsafī va akhl qī-i Firdausī,‖ in Miskūb, ―Shāhnāma-i Firdausī,‖

84, repr. ed., in Miskūb, Tan-i pahlavān, 103.

12 Mīl niy n, ―Bīnish-i falsafī va akhl qī-i Firdausī,‖ 91–95, repr. ed., in Miskūb, Tan-i

pahlavān, 112–15.

13 B qir Parh m, ―Mab nī va k rkird-h -yi Shahriy rī dar Shāhnāma va ahammiyat-i nh dar

sanjish-i khirad-i siy sī dar Īr n,‖ in Miskūb, ―Shāhnāma-i Firdausī,‖ 98–121, repr. ed., in

Miskūb, Tan-i pahlavān, 120–48.

14 G. M. Wickens, ―The Imperial Epic of Iran: A Literary Approach,‖ in Commémoration Cyrus:

Actes du congrès de Shiraz 1971 et autre études rédigées à l‘occasion du 2500e

anniversaire de

la fondation de l‘empire perse (Tehran: Bibliothèque Pahlavi, 1974), 261–75.

15 Sh hrukh Miskūb, ―Ta‘ammulī dar akhl q: Az Avest bi Shāhnāma,‖ in Tan-i pahlavān, 225–

44.

16 Miskūb, ―Ta‘ammulī dar akhl q,‖ 228.

17 Miskūb, ―Ta‘ammulī dar akhl q,‖ 230–37.

18 Sh hrukh Miskūb, Armaghān-i m r: Justār dar Shāhnāma (Tehran: Nashr-i nay, 1384/2005).

19 Miskūb, Armaghān-i m r, 165–86. An earlier version of this chapter on kingship was

published in Sh hrukh Miskūb, ―Jah nd rī va p dsh hī dar Shāhnāma,‖ Irān-nāma 21, no. 3

(1382/2003): 217–50.

20 Miskūb, Armaghān-i m r, 189–97; also see Miskūb, ―Ta‘ammulī dar akhl q,‖ 243–44.

21 Ehsan Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ in The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 3, The

Seleucid, Parthian, and Sasanian Periods, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1983), pt. 1, 366.

22 Miskūb, Armaghān-i m r, 201–3.

14

23

Abbas Amanat, ―Divided Patrimony, Tree of Royal Power, and Fruit of Vengeance: Political

Paradigms and Iranian Self-Image in the Story of Faridun in the Shahnama,‖ in Shahnama

Studies I, ed. Charles Melville (Cambridge: The Centre of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies,

University of Cambridge, 2006), 49.

24 Amanat, ―Divided Patrimony,‖ 49.

25 Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ 369, 359.

26 Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ 361.

27 Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ 361.

28 Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ 369.

29 Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ 369.

30 Julie Scott Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present: Two Views of History in Medieval

Persia,‖ Poetics Today 14, no. 2 (1993): 262–65; and Julie Scott Meisami, Persian

Historiography to the End of the Twelfth Century (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,

1999), 52–53.

31 Mahmoud Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics of Iran‘s National Epic, the Sh hn meh (New

York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), 73–75.

32 On Firdausī‘s original patron, see below, pp. 28–30.

33 Abū al-Q sim Firdausī, Shāhnāma, ed. Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, 8 vols. (New York: Bibliotheca

Persica, 1987–2008), repr. ed. (Tehran: Markaz-i d ‘irat al-ma‘ rif-i buzurg-i isl mī,

1386/2007), 1:12, line 113. The paginations is the same in both editions. All subsequent

references are to Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition of the Shāhnāma unless otherwise noted.

34 For example, see Abū ‗Alī Miskūya (Miskawayh) al-R zī. Tajārib al-umam, ed. Abū al-Q sim

Im mī, 8 vols. (Tehran: Surūsh, 1987–2001), vols. 1–3, 2nd ed. (Tehran: Surūsh, 2001), 1:48–49

(References are to the second edition); Ibn Isfandiy r (Bah ‘ al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Ḥasan b.

15

Isfandiy r), Tār kh-i abaristān, ed. ‗Abb s Iqb l Āshtiy nī (Tehran: Kh var, 1320/1941), 1:83;

Ibn Isfandiy r, An Abridged Translation of the History of abaristán, trans. Edward G. Browne

(Leiden: Brill, 1905), 36. Also see Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present,‖ 264–65;

Charles Melville, ed., Persian Historiography (London: I. B. Taurus, 2012), li–lv; and Charles

Melville, ―The Historian at Work,‖ in Melville, Persian Historiography, 66–67.

16

Chapter One

The Reception of Firdausī’s Shāhnāma

Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma has generally been studied as an epic, and a few scholars have approached

it as history.1 But, although the work shares many commonalities with both epic and history, it

does not quite fit either one of these two genres.2 Charles-Henri de Fouchécour, on the other

hand, suggests that the Shāhnāma should be understood as a mirror for princes, that is, as a book

of advice for rulers. He also maintains, however, that the traditional morals and wisdom

promoted in the Shāhnāma were not taken up by later authors of medieval Persian mirrors for

princes.3 In order to decide more accurately what genre the Shāhnāma belongs to, we must

determine how the work was understood by its contemporary and near-contemporary audience.

In this chapter, a number of works by medieval authors who used the Shāhnāma as a source or

commented on Firdausī and his work will be reviewed and analysed in order to see how the

Shāhnāma was used and perceived by medieval writers. This analysis will demonstrate that

medieval Persian authors understood the Shāhnāma primarily as a book of wisdom and advice on

kingship and frequently cited verses from it that contained ethico-political wisdom and advice.

When it comes to the topic of the reception of the Shāhnāma, the first thing that comes to

mind is the Ghaznavid ruler, sultan Maḥmūd‘s (r. 388/998–421/1030) ungratefulness to Firdausī.

Modern scholars are still debating the reasons for Maḥmūd‘s unenthusiastic reception of

Firdausī‘s work. Various explanations, such as Maḥmūd‘s Turkish background, Firdausī‘s praise

of Zoroastrianism, the jealousy of Maḥmūd‘s court poets, the poet‘s religious beliefs, change of

political situation, and the supposedly outmoded style, language, and content of the Shāhnāma

have been given as possible reasons.4 But, although the text of the Shāhnāma informs us that the

17

poet was not rewarded for his work, we do not have any concrete evidence to support the idea

that Maḥmūd was displeased with Firdausī‘s work. In other words, Firdausī‘s not having

received any reward from Maḥmūd does not prove that Maḥmūd was displeased with his work.

A review of the sources that contain references to Maḥmūd‘s ingratitude to Firdausī will help to

contextualize the anecdotal reports about this incident and to separate fact from fiction.

The Reception of the Shāhnāma on the Part of Sultan Maḥmūd

Fact vs. Fiction

The Tār kh-i S stān (History of Sīst n, ca. 445/1054) contains a short paragraph referring

to the story of sultan Maḥmūd‘s ungratefulness to Firdausī, but this paragraph, as convincingly

argued by Omidsalar, is a later interpolation.5 If we accept Omidsalar‘s argument, then the

earliest source that provides an account about sultan Maḥmūd‘s niggardliness toward Firdausī is

Ni mī ‗Arū ī‘s Chahār maqāla (Four discourses), written in ca. 550/1155.6 According to an

anecdote related in this work, Firdausī composed a satire (hajv-nāma) on sultan Maḥmūd after

having felt insulted by the paltry reward he gave him for the composition of the Shāhnāma. The

ruler of Ṭabarist n gave Firdausī the sum of one hundred thousand dirhams to convince him to

eliminate the one-hundred-verse satire he had composed on Maḥmūd. Thus, all verses of the

satire were destroyed except for the following six verses that are quoted by Ni mī:

ع کآى پؽ قطيهؽا ؿوؿ کؽظ ثوؽ جی ػلی نع کي

اگؽ هؽنبى هي زکبیذ کن چ هسوظ ؼا يع زوبیذ کن

پؽقزبؼؾاظ یبیع ثکبؼ گؽ چع ثبنع پعؼ نؽیبؼ

اؾ ایي ظؼ قطي چع ؼان وی چ ظؼیب کؽا عان وی

ثیکی جع نب ؼا ظقزگب گؽ هؽا ثؽ هبعی ثگب

ثؿؼگی جظ چ اعؼ رجبؼل عاكذ بم ثؿؼگبى نظ

18

They vilified me, saying that loquacious [man],

Grew old in the love of the Prophet and ‗Alī.

If I talk about [my] love for them,

I support a man like Maḥmūd a hundred times.

A descendant of a slave is of no use,

Even though his father has been a ruler.

How much shall I talk about this?

It is like a sea, the shores of which I do not know.

The king could not appreciate good [work];

Otherwise, he would have seated me on the throne.

Since he had no noble background,

He could not tolerate hearing the names of the nobles. 7

What may be deduced from the above verses is that certain people at the court of

Maḥmūd vilified the poet on account of his Shi‗ite beliefs, and that sultan Maḥmūd could not

tolerate hearing accounts about noble men because he was not from a noble background himself.

Firdausī‘s praise of Shi‗ism and the problem of Maḥmūd‘s low-born background are two main

themes that later scribes/redactors of the Shāhnāma elaborated. In the process, the number of

verses of the satire was, in some manuscripts, increased to 160.8 Whereas some scholars have

basically questioned the authenticity of the satire, others maintain that Firdausī himself

composed it, partly because the language and style of some of its verses are comparable to

Firdausī‘s work and partly because of the reference made by later poets and writers to Firdausī‘s

dissatisfaction with Maḥmūd.9

19

On the basis of the text of the Shāhnāma itself, what may be concluded is that Maḥmūd

did not pay any attention to the poems that Firdausī had sent/presented to him:

ب گب کؽظ اعؼیي ظاقزبى

زكع کؽظ ثعگی ظؼ کبؼ هي

ؾ ثعگی ثطذ ثع آهع گب

رج نع ثؽ نب ثبؾاؼ هي

He (Maḥmūd) did not pay attention to these [epic] tales;

It was the fault of vilifiers and bad luck.

The vilifier was envious of my work,

So, my standing fell in the King‘s eyes. 10

In the verses following these, Firdausī states that if the sultan‘s commander-in-chief (that

is, Maḥmūd‘s brother Naṣr) read his work, he would not only reward him, but would also bring it

to the attention of the sultan, who would then reward him.11

As noted by Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq,

the occurrence of the above-mentioned verses more than half-way through the Shāhnāma in the

story about Khusrau Parvīz indicates that Firdausī had been sending his work to sultan Maḥmūd

piecemeal and had received nothing for it.12

These verses, adds Kh liqī Muṭlaq, demonstrate that

the poet still hoped to receive something from the sultan before he completed his work. At the

end of the Shāhnāma, Firdausī appreciates the generosity of Ḥuyayy-i Qutayba (the tax

functionary of Ṭūs who exempted the poet from paying taxes) and includes a few verses in praise

of Maḥmūd, but does not refer to any remuneration.13

As pointed out by Kh liqī Muṭlaq, had the

poet received any reward from Maḥmūd, he would have acknowledged it as he did with Ḥuyayy-

i Qutayba‘s remuneration.14

So, the Shāhnāma informs us that by the time the work was

completed (400/1010), Firdausī had not received any recompense from Maḥmūd; nevertheless,

he kept praising him to the end of his work.

20

It must also be noted that Firdausi had already completed the first edition of the

Shāhnāma in 384/994, three years before Maḥmūd rose to power, but he kept adding more tales

to his work and revising it until he finished its final edition in 400/1010.15

The eulogies to

Maḥmūd were added in later revisions of the work as the poet witnessed Maḥmūd‘s victorious

conquests and his rise to power. As stated in the Shāhnāma, Firdausī kept his work for twenty

years in order to dedicate it to a ruler who truly deserved it.16

Having found the qualities of that

ruler in Maḥmūd, he decided to dedicate his opus to him.17

But, as we understand from the

Shāhnāma, Maḥmūd did not pay any attention to Firdausī‘s work. The reason for this lack of

attention remains unknown, even though both medieval and modern scholars have tried to

explain it in different ways. Other than Firdausī‘s own words about Maḥmūd‘s disregard for his

work (nakard andar n dāstān-hā nigāh), we do not have any reliable source which would

determine whether Firdausī‘s oeuvre was ever presented or read to Maḥmūd. The anecdotal

reports of medieval authors about Firdausī‘s travel to Ghazna in order to present his work to

Maḥmūd in person and the sultan‘s paltry reward for it cannot be verified. Considering the poet‘s

high hopes in Maḥmūd and his subsequent disappointment in him, we may speculate that

Firdausi did compose a lampoon against him because he was neglectful of his masterpiece, his

eulogies, and his polite requests ( usn-i ṭalab) for reward.

It is also noteworthy that when Ni mī ‗Arū ī wrote his anecdote about Firdausī and

sultan Maḥmūd, other different anecdotes about them were current as well. These anecdotes are

found in the prose prefaces to the Shāhnāma manuscripts dated 614/1217 and 675/1276–77.18

As

suggested by Kh liqī Muṭlaq, the part of the manuscript dated 614/1217 which includes the

preface might be from an earlier period, and as argued by Muḥammad Amīn Riy ḥī, the accounts

given in the manuscript dated 675/1276–77 are from the late fifth/eleventh to early sixth/twelfth

centuries.19

Thus, the accounts given in these prefaces were almost contemporaneous with

21

Ni mī ‗Arū ī‘s mid-twelfth-century anecdote in his Chahār maqāla. A major difference

between the accounts related in the above-mentioned prefaces and the account reported by

Ni mī ‗Arū ī is that the accounts given in the prefaces represent Maḥmūd as being enthusiastic

about the Shāhnāma and imply that it was Maḥmūd‘s idea to put the history of the ancient kings

of Persia into verse.20

Also, according to the accounts related in these prefaces, after Firdausī‘s

exceptional poetic talent was discovered and the task of composing the Shāhnāma was assigned

to him, he stayed at the royal court in Ghazna to work on the Shāhnāma.21

But, according to

Chahār maqāla, Firdausī composed the Shāhnāma on his own and in his hometown, and when

he completed his work, he decided to present it to Maḥmūd in the hopes of securing the financial

means for purchasing a dowry for his only daughter.22

The fact that different accounts about

Firdausī‘s unrewarded work were reported in contemporary or near-contemporary sources

suggests that the story was well known in the twelfth century, but the inconsistent information

provided in these accounts points to the anecdotal nature of them. In other words, everyone knew

that Firdausi was not rewarded for his work, but the reasons for, and details about, this

unfortunate event reported in later works seem to be the product of the creative imagination of

later authors.

More elaborate accounts are found in later prose prefaces to the Shāhnāma, biographies

of poets, and historical writings.23

But, these later accounts seem to be conflations of various

earlier stories. As opined by Riy ḥī, the author(s) of the prose preface to the B ysunghurī

Shāhnāma, completed in 833/1430, put together various available anecdotes about Firdausi‘s

composition of the Shāhnāma and his eventual disappointment in Maḥmūd, and later post-

Timurid authors used this preface as their source when writing their own works.24

In addition to the above-mentioned accounts related in the earlier prefaces to the

Shāhnāma manuscripts, three other authors, who were near contemporary of Ni mī ‗Arū ī,

22

referred to Firdausī‘s unrewarded work without discussing the details of the story. These authors

are ‗Aṭṭ r (d. ca. 618/1221), Ni mī Ganjavī (d. ca. 613/1217), and Sa‗d al-Dīn Var vīnī (fl.

607/1210 to 622/1225).25

Also, ‗Usm n Mukht rī, who dedicated his Shahriyār-nāma to ‗Al al-

Daula Mas‗ūd Ghaznavī (r. 492/1098–99 to 508/1114–15), seems to have made a subtle allusion

to Firdausi‘s satire about Maḥmūd, where he mentions that he would not compose a satire

against his patron if he did not reward him.26

As will be shown below, the allusions of these

authors as well as Ni mī ‗Arū ī‘s anecdote served them as an effective tool to convey their own

message. This means that these writers were not as much concerned with the historical accuracy

of what they related as they were with how it served their own purposes.

m rū s necdote (ḥikāyat)

In his introduction to the Chahār maqāla, Ni mī explains that his intention in writing

the work is to demonstrate to the king the true meaning of kingship ( پبظنبی ضظ چیكذ پبظنب

.(کیكذ27

He advises the king to pay due attention to four professional groups at court, namely, the

scribes, the poets, the astrologers, and the physicians.28

On this basis, he divides his work into

four discourses, each devoted to one of the four professions, and adds that he will illustrate each

discourse with novel anecdotes ( ikāyāt-i ṭurfa), so the king might realize that these professions

are not to be taken lightly.29

In his discussion of the role of poets, he explains that nothing

remains of all the glory and grandeur of kings except for their names, which the poets

immortalize.30

As clearly stated by Ni mī ‗Arū ī in his introduction, and as is evident from the

context of the story, the author does not intend to report an historical event. Rather, by narrating

an exemplary anecdote, he aims to caution the ruler about the consequences of being inattentive

and ungrateful to those who are capable of immortalizing his name. In other words, Ni mī is

more concerned with the effectiveness of his story than with its historical accuracy. Furthermore,

23

Ni mī ‗Arū ī‘s accounts in the Chahār maqāla contains many erroneous historical references,

which makes him an unreliable source of information on any historical matter.31

m n v s Allusions

Ni mī Ganjavī seems to relate to the story of Maḥmūd‘s ingratitude toward Firdausī

from a personal perspective as a result of his not being rewarded by his own patron for his work

Khusrau va Sh r n, composed sometime between 571/1176 and 582/1186. In the introduction to

his work, Ni mī states that his patron asked him to versify a fine tale and told him that if he

decided not to reward him for it, just as sultan Maḥmūd did not reward Firdausī, he would still

give him enough to buy a drink.32

The allusion is to Firdausī‘s spending Maḥmūd‘s small reward

on drinks for himself and two other men, as explained by Ni mī ‗Arū ī.33 Ni mī Ganjavī thus

not only reminds his patron that he would like a reward for his work, but also suggests that he

would be content with any amount he was given. In a subtle way, he also cautions his patron

about the consequences of niggardliness. But later, almost half way through his work, where he

talks about the generosity of the Sasanian ruler Khusrau Parvīz to his court musician, Ni mī

suddenly recalls his own patron who did not show him any generosity:

ثطهیعم ث نبیک چعیي گح ؾ آى ضؽهي دكزن ثؽگ کبی

ث ثی ثؽگی قطي ؼا ؼاقذ کؽظم ا ظاظ هي ظؼضاقذ کؽظم

I offered several treasures (that is, versified tales) to a king,

But did not gain a single blade of straw from that harvest.

In poverty, I versified words (or, I materialized the promise [of versifying a fine tale])

Neither did he give [me] anything, nor did I ask for anything. 34

Ni mī‘s resentment against his patron could explain his preoccupation with the story of

Firdausī and Maḥmūd, as he refers to it again in his later works. In his Iqbāl-nāma—a part of

24

Iskandar-nāma, which was completed in 590/1194—Ni mī states sarcastically that, as a poet,

he inherited his talent from Firdausī, and that as a ruler, his patron inherited his generosity from

sultan Maḥmūd. Therefore, he feels justified in asking for sultan Maḥmūd‘s debt to Firdausī to

be repaid to him by his own patron.35

In his Haft Paykar (completed 593/1197), Ni mī writes

about the munificence of his patron and mentions his expectation of compensation; however, at

the end, he posits that Maḥmūd‘s ingratitude was due to back luck, so if he is not rewarded, he

will blame it on luck, and not on his patron.36 Ni mī employs the rhetorical device of usn-i

ṭalab (polite request) by alluding to the story about Firdausī and Maḥmūd. Skilful poets used this

literary technique to impress their patrons when asking to be rewarded for their work, and

Ni mī chose allusions to the story of Firdausī and sultan Maḥmūd in order to secure a reward

for himself. Similarly, ‗Usm n Mukht rī‘s statement, mentioned above, whether we take it as a

subtle allusion to Firdausī‘s satire or not, functioned as a polite request for reward.

ṭṭ r s Allusions

The great mystic poet ‗Aṭṭ r too alluded to the story of Firdausī and sultan Maḥmūd, but

he did so in order to convey a moral teaching. In his Ilāh -nāma, he refers to Firdausī‘s rejection

of Maḥmūd‘s small reward in a discussion about the importance of maintaining one‘s dignity.37

In his Mu bat-nāma, ‗Aṭṭ r boasts of his own poetic talent and asserts that he does not compose

poems for money; rather, his poetry flows naturally and intrinsically. He then alludes to

Firdausī‘s spending Maḥmūd‘s reward on drinks in order to demonstrate that he would do the

same, because he is a spiritually contented man.38

In his Asrār-nāma, ‗Aṭṭ r‘s referencing

Firdausī illustrates that God forgives sinful men on account of the one good deed they do in their

lifetime. According to Ni mī ‗Arū ī, when Firdausī passed away, a Sunni cleric of Ṭūs did not

allow his body to be buried in the Muslim cemetery on account of his alleged Shi‗ism.39

‗Aṭṭ r

expands on this part of the story and relates that Firdausī appeared to the cleric in a dream and

25

told him that God sent him to heaven because of one verse he had composed on God‘s oneness.40

This part of the story is not mentioned by Ni mī ‗Arū ī in his account. ‗Aṭṭ r, who expresses

regret for having spent his life composing poetry, hopes that God will forgive him in the same

way that He had mercy on Firdausī.41

Both Ni mī Ganjavī and ‗Aṭṭ r make allusions to the story of Firdausī and Maḥmūd in

order to convey their own messages in clever and effective ways. These poets are concerned with

how the story serves their purpose, and not how accurate or authentic it is. Therefore, their poetic

allusions cannot be taken as proof of the authenticity of the encounter between Firdausī and

Maḥmūd.

S d l-D n V r v n s Allusion

In the introduction to his Marzbān-nāma, Var vīnī talks about the works that he read

before writing his own book.42

Among these works he refers to Jurf diq nī‘s Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i

Yam n (603/1206–7), which is a Persian translation/reworking of Abū Naṣr ‗Utbī‘s Arabic

Ta‘r kh al-Yam n (composed during 350/961–427/1036 or 431/1040) on the history of the

Ghaznavids.43

Var vīnī admires Jurf diq nī‘s eloquent style of writing and states that although

Jurf diq nī was not rewarded for his endeavours, and like Firdausī, regretted the composition

and dedication of his work, the world now sings his praises.44

Var vīnī‘s use of the term

Firdaus -vār (like Firdausī) in describing Jurf diq nī‘s regret indicates that, by the early

thirteenth century, just mentioning the name of Firdausī was sufficient to evoke the bitterness of

unrewarded efforts. Var vīnī‘s use of this term clearly shows that the story of Firdausī and sultan

Maḥmūd was not related as an historical event. Rather, it was used as a well-known anecdote to

illustrate a similar type of relationship to one‘s patron.

26

The Silence of Sultan Maḥmūd s Court Poets bout F rd us

Significantly, none of the contemporary poets at the court of Maḥmūd, such as Farrukhī

Sīst nī (d. 429/1039), ‗Unṣurī (d. 431/1041), and Manūchihrī D mgh nī (d. 432/1041), ever

mentioned the name of Firdausī in their works. While both Farrukhī and ‗Unṣurī refer to the

Shāhnāma when stating that the lies and legends of the Shāhnāma about the great heroes of the

past have become worthless in the presence of real heroes like sultan Maḥmūd and his

courageous men, neither Farrukhī nor ‗Unṣurī mentions Firdausī‘s name in this connection.45

The statements of these poets, nevertheless, have been interpreted by modern scholars as

attempts on the part of Maḥmūd‘s court poets to disparage Firdausī‘s work in the eyes of

Maḥmūd.46

Since the above-mentioned poets do not refer to Firdausī by name, and since other

shāhnāmas were available at the time, we cannot conclude that these poets aimed to denigrate

Firdausī‘s work per se.47

Moreover, when Firdausī talks about envious men and their criticisms

of his work, he refers to the stylistic quality of his work, not to its historical/legendary content:

وبب ک کن ثبنع اؾ پبع اگؽ ثبؾخیی ظؼ ثیذ ثع

If you look for bad verses in it (Shāhnāma),

Verily, they will be less than five hundred. 48

The silence of the Ghanzanvid court poets about Firdausī and his work makes any

judgement about the reception of the Shāhnāma by sultan Maḥmūd difficult and mainly a matter

of speculation. As mentioned above, although the text of the Shāhnāma itself indicates that

Maḥmūd had not rewarded the poet, it remains unclear why Firdausī‘s opus did not receive the

attention it deserved at the royal court.

27

The earliest court poet who named Firdausī and criticized him for composing fanciful

stories is Mu‗izzī (d. ca. 518/1125–521/1127), the famous panegyrist at the court of the

Saljūqs.49

As mentioned in the Chahār maqāla, it was Mu‗izzī who told Ni mī ‗Arū ī the story

about Maḥmūd‘s regret at a later time for not having rewarded Firdausī, and about his order of

sending sixty thousand gold coins to him. Relating from Mu‗izzī, Ni mī ‗Arū ī states that

Maḥmūd was impressed by a single verse that his minister cited from the Shāhnāma at the right

time, and when the minister reminded Maḥmūd of the poet who had composed that verse,

Maḥmūd issued the order for sending the gold coins along with his apologies to Firdausī.50

Mu‗izzī‘s report, which Ni mī ‗Arū ī supposedly heard from him in person in Nīsh būr in

514/1120–21, that is, near the end of Mu‗izzī‘s life, seems to reflect his regret about what he

(Mu‗izzī) had said earlier in his life about Firdausī.

Mu‗izzī‘s report contains a piece of interesting information, which points to the high

regard of a particular family of Khur s n for Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma. According to Ni mī ‗Arū ī,

Mu‗izzī had heard his story in Ṭūs from a member of the ‗Abd al-Razz qiy n family, who, as we

shall see below, had originally commissioned the composition of the Shāhnāma. The fact that

Ni mī ‗Arū ī gives the year and place of his encounter with Mu‗izzī makes it very likely that he

did actually hear the story from him. What is noteworthy in Mu‗izzī‘s statement is that he refers

to his informant by the title am r or ―governor.‖ The only governor of Ṭūs from the ‗Abd al-

Razz qiy n family that we know of is Abū Manṣūr Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Razz q, who was

killed in 350/962, that is, more than a century before Mu‗izzī encountered Ni mī ‗Arū ī.

Mu‗izzī is obviously referring to a different member of the ‗Abd al-Razz qiy n family, and this

points to the high social status of the ‗Abd al-Razz qiy n family in Ṭūs even a century after the

death of Abū Manṣūr. The attribution of the story of Maḥmūd‘s eventual appreciation of the

Shāhnāma by hearing just one verse from it to this family also reveals that more than a century

28

after the completion of the Shāhnāma, Firdausī‘s work was held in high regard by members of

the family who had originally commissioned its composition.

The Reception of the Shāhnāma on the Part of the Abd al-R zz q y n Family

If the fate of the Shāhnāma at the time of its completion is surrounded by halo of

legends, we have clearer information about its inception, which sheds light on how the work was

perceived at the time of its composition. As demonstrated by Kh liqī Muṭlaq, Firdausī‘s patron

must have been Manṣūr the son of Abū Manṣūr Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Razz q of Ṭūs, the

sipahsālār (―commander-in-chief‖) of Khur s n in 349/960.51

As we gather from the reports of

medieval historians, Abū Manṣūr had high political ambitions and possibly aimed to challenge

Samanid rule and create an independent state for himself, but he was killed in 350/962 before his

dreams could materialize.52

Abū Manṣūr is also known for commissioning the compilation of a

prose Shāhnāma (completed in 346/957), known as the Abū Manṣūrī Shāhnāma, which was later

used by Firdausī as his source.

Although no more than an introduction to this prose Shāhnāma has survived, its content

is enough to suggest that Abū Manṣūr‘s cultural endeavour was part and parcel of his political

aspirations. It provides a lengthy genealogy for Abū Manṣūr, tracing his roots back to an

important dynastic family of Parthian ancestry during the reign of the Sasanian kings, and

ultimately to the Persian mythical king Manūchihr. As argued by Parvaneh Pourshariati, aside

from its mythical section, the genealogy of Abū Manṣūr given in the introduction to the Abū

Manṣūrī Shāhnāma is historically sound and valid, as he was indeed a descendant of the

powerful Parthian dynastic family of Kan rangiy n, who were the marzbāns (protectors of

frontiers) of Ṭūs in the late Sasanian period and ruled over Khur s n since the time of Yazdgird I

(r. 399–420). Pourshariati further points out that the Kan rangiy n‘s right to rule in the east was

hereditary (―by law and tradition‖) during the Sasanian period.53

In view of this historical

29

background, Abū Manṣūr‘s endeavour to assume power in Khur s n would only make sense, as

he seems to have been trying to reclaim his family‘s hereditary right to rule over the region.

Also, as noted in the introduction to the Abū Manṣūrī Shāhnāma, Ṭūs always belonged to the

Kan rangiy n family until the time of Ḥumayd (b. Qaḥṭaba) al-Ṭ ‘ī (between 152/769–159/775),

the Abbasid governor of Khur s n, when the family lost control of Ṭūs. It was under Abū

Manṣūr b. ‗Abd al-Razz q that the family regained its power in Ṭūs, as claimed in the

introduction to the Abū Manṣūrī Shāhnāma.54

As shown by Pourshariati, independent historical

sources confirm the validity of this claim.55

Furthermore, Abū Manṣūr is introduced in the

introduction as a virtuous (bā-hunar) man with farr (divine glory/right to rule) and lofty thoughts

(and sha-i buland), who was of noble origin (nizhād buzurg), and who possessed the full

apparatus of kingship (ba dastgāh tamām az pādshāh ).56

Abū Manṣūr‘s motivation for having

commissioned the compilation of the prose Shāhnāma, according to the introduction, was that he

wished to leave a good name behind in the same way that the great rulers of the past, such as the

Sasanian king Anūshīrv n (r. 531–579), the Abbasid caliph Ma‘mūn (r. 198/813–218/833), and

the Samanid am r Naṣr b. Aḥmad (r. 301–31/914–43), had immortalized their names by

commissioning the translations and versification of Kal la va Dimna.57

Thus, the introduction to

the Shāhnāma commissioned by Abū Manṣūr represents him as a man on a par with Anūshīrv n,

Ma‘mūn, and Naṣr b. Aḥmad. Abū Manṣūr‘s genealogy, his great achievement of regaining his

family‘s hereditary right to rule over Ṭūs, and his motivation in compiling the prose Shāhnāma,

as described in the introduction to the work, all served to establish his legitimacy should he

manage to create an independent state for himself. But, as mentioned above, he was not given the

chance to take full advantage of his cultural project, as he was killed five years after the

completion of the prose Shāhnāma.

30

About twenty years after Abū Manṣūr‘s murder in 350/962, his son Manṣūr provided the

funding for Firdausī‘s versification of that prose Shāhnāma. Although he did not hold a high

office like his father, Manṣūr too was politically active. According to the histories of the period,

Manṣūr and his brother ‗Abdull h, who had participated in a riot in Nīsh būr against the newly

appointed governor of Khur s n by the Samanid ruler Nūḥ b. Manṣūr (r. 365/976–387/997),

were arrested in 377/987 and sent to Bukhara, where they were shamed and defamed in public.

The two brothers were then imprisoned in Quhandiz castle and no one knows what happened to

them afterward.58

Although Manṣūr was only able to support Firdausī in the first few years of his

composition of the Shāhnāma (Firdausī started his work sometime between 365/976 and

370/980), it is noteworthy that the father and son both challenged Samanid authority and both

sponsored the writing of Shāhnāmas, one in prose and the other in verse. The information

available on the political endeavours of the ‗Abd al-Razz qiy n family is scanty, yet it is not

difficult to see a link between their political and cultural activities. By their sponsorship of the

history of ancient Persian kings, the father and son aimed to establish their legitimacy as

prospective rulers of the region, and, more importantly, to communicate their cultural values and

political ideology as reflected in the tales of the Shāhnāma.

The introduction to the Abū Manṣūrī Shāhnāma provides detailed information about what

can be learned from it. As clearly stated in the introduction, the accounts about the reigns of the

first to the last king of the Persians, along with the accounts about ―the justice and injustice, the

revolts, the wars, and the custom and practice of these kings were put together and called the

Shāhnāma (Book of kings), so that men of knowledge would look into it and learn all about the

education (farhang) of kings, noblemen (mihtarān), and sages (farzānigān), and the task of

kingship (kār va sāz-i pādshāh ), the disposition (nihād) and conduct (raftār) of kings, the good

customs (āy nhā-yi n k ), the justice (dād), the judgement (dāvar ), the administration (rāndan-i

31

kār), the arrangement of troops (sipāh ārāstan), the fighting (razm kardan), the conquest (shahr

gushādan), the vengeance (k n khvāstan), and the night raiding (shab kh n kardan), as well as

keeping respect (āzarm dāshtan) and making requests (khvāstār kardan).‖

59 Thus, the prose

Shāhnāma was compiled to educate its readers on all matters related to statecraft and kingship.

The benefit of reading the work, according to the introduction, was twofold: first, to learn about

the conduct and custom of kings (raftār va āy n-i shāhān), in order to learn how to get along

(sākhtan) with everyone; and second, to be entertained by its pleasant tales, which contain useful

information about everything such as reward and retribution for good and bad deeds, rudeness

and gentleness (durusht va āhistig ), anger and contentment (khishm va khushn d ), advice and

admonishment (pand va andarz), and so on.60

The introduction to the Abū Manṣūrī Shāhnāma,

therefore clarifies that the book was intended to both educate and entertain. As we shall see,

education and entertainment seem to have also been Firdausī‘s intent in the composition of his

work.

The Reception of the Shāhnāma on the Part of Medieval Writers

Despite the lack of information on the fate of Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma after its completion,

later sources are replete with references to it. Medieval writers‘ imitations of and borrowings

from the Shāhnāma and their commentaries on the work reveal a great deal about the reception

of Firdausi‘s opus in medieval times. In general, references to Firdausī and his work are found in

the biographies of poets (tazkira), comments made by copyists of the Shāhnāma, works on the

science of rhetoric (‗ilm-i balāgha), epics composed on the model of the Shāhnāma, anthologies

or selections from the Shāhnāma (ikhtiyārāt), mirrors for princes, and historical writing. By

examining these various types of works, the following discussion will demonstrate the view

medieval writers had of Firdausī and his work.

32

Biographies of Poets (tazkiras)

Among the extant medieval Persian biographies of poets, six works include information

on Firdausī and his poetry.61

Two of these works are specifically written as biographies of poets

and the other four only contain chapters on the life and works of poets. The earliest Persian

biography of poets to comment on Firdausī‘s work is the above-mentioned Chahār maqāla of

Ni mī ‗Arū ī. Ni mī ‗Arū ī‘s discourse on the profession of poet provides biographical

information on several poets, including Firdausī. Ni mī ‗Arū ī praises Firdausī‘s eloquence by

stating that he ―elevated the [status of] speech to the highest level of heaven‖ ( قطي ؼا ث آقوبى ػلییي

ظؼ ػػثذ ثوبء هؼیي ) and compares the flow and clarity of Firdausī‘s words to that of water ,(ثؽظ

.(ؼقبیع62 Ni mī ‗Arū ī states that he has never seen such eloquence either among Persians or

among many Arabs ( ی ثعیي كبزذ وی ثین ظؼ ثكیبؼی ػؽة نهي ظؼ ػدن قط ).63

Similar commendation for Firdausī and his work is expressed by Muḥammad ‗Aufī in his

Lubāb al-albāb (The select of the select), written during 617/1220 to 625/1228.64

Lubāb al-

albāb, which is the earliest extant biography of poets in Persian, provides a tantalizing piece of

information that is not recorded anywhere else. It refers to a selection of verses (ikhtiyārāt) from

the Shāhnāma that had been made by the poet Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d-i Salm n (d. 515/1121–22) and

notes that whoever studies it will recognize Firdausī‘s eminence.65

Since there is no evidence of

the existence of Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d‘s compilation, modern scholars have been suspicious of the

veracity of ‗Aufī‘s statement.66

But, whether ‗Aufī‘s attribution of such a work to Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d

is accurate or not, his statement indicates that by ‗Aufī‘s time, the practice of extracting verses

from the Shāhnāma and compiling them in separate works—perhaps with the title ikhtiyārāt

(selected verses)—was already evident.67

‗Aufī also mentions that Firdausī composed other poems, which are not as popular as the

Shāhnāma. He provides two examples of these, both of which are in the form of qiṭ‗a (fragment),

33

meaning an extract from a ghazal or qa da having end-rhyme. The first example consists of two

verses in praise of Maḥmūd, and the other is five verses expressing the poet‘s regret for his

youth.68 Similarly, Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, whose Tār kh-i guz da (Select history, completed

730/1330) includes a chapter on the biographies of poets, states that Firdausī wrote other good

poems, but they were not popular.69

Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s example from Firdausī‘s other poems

is a five-verse fragment on longing for the beloved. Both ‗Aufī‘s and Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s

statements demonstrate that, during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the popularity and

prominence of the Shāhnāma overshadowed the poet‘s other works, and that verses from the

Shāhnāma were so well-known that literary biographers did not even need to quote any examples

from it.

In his Mujmal-i Fa (ca. 836/1432–33), which is in fact an historical writing, but

provides detailed biographical information on poets whose dates of deaths coincides with the

dates of events reported in the work, Faṣīḥ Khv fī relates an anecdote that points to the fame and

popularity of Firdausī at the time. In this anecdote, which also appears in the prose preface to the

B ysunghurī Shāhnāma (completed in 833/1430),70

Faṣīḥ Khv fī relates that when Firdausī was

born, his father dreamed that his son went on top of a roof and uttered a loud cry toward Mecca.

In response, he heard a voice back. Firdausī did the same in three other directions, and heard

back from every one. In the morning, when Firdausī‘s father asked a dream interpreter named

Najīb al-Dīn about the dream, he was told that it meant his son would become an orator whose

fame would reach the four corners of the world, that his words would be well received all over

the world, and that he would be exceptional in his era (nādira-i ‗a r) and a prodigy of the time

(u‗j ba-i dahr). Faṣīḥ Khv fī adds that all poets who have composed Persian poetry have looked

up to Firdausī and admired him.71

To demonstrate other poets‘ admiration for Firdausī, Faṣīḥ

Khv fī quotes from six poets who praised Firdausī‘s work.

72

34

Tazkirat al-shu‗arā (892/1487) by the biographer Daulatsh h Samarqandī and Bahāristān

(892/1487) by the mystic poet J mī, also confirm the high status of Firdausī‘s work in the

medieval Persian literary sphere. Tazkirat al-shu‗arā was specifically written as a biography of

poets, but J mī‘s Bahāristān is a book on adab (ethics and proper conduct), one chapter of which

contains brief accounts of thirty nine poets, from Rūdakī (d. 329/940–41) to ‗Alī-Shīr Nav ‘ī (d.

906/1501). Daulatsh h refers to Firdausī as the Saḥb n of the Persians, a reference to a pre-

Islamic Arab poet and rhetorician who was celebrated for his eloquence.73

He states that all men

of high literary stature are in agreement Firdausī had no equal during the Islamic era, and that the

Shāhnāma is a good reason for this consensus since no poet or rhetorician has ever been able to

compose anything comparable to it in the past five hundred years.74

Daulatsh h opines that

Firdausī was divinely guided and quotes a few verses by other poets to demonstrate their

admiration for Firdausī‘s poetical skill.75

J mī‘s statement in his Bahāristān about Firdausī and

his Shāhnāma confirms Daulatsh h‘s assertion concerning the consensus among literary scholars

regarding the prominence of Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma. J mī states that Firdausī‘s excellence and

perfection are apparent and that someone with a book of poetry like the Shāhnāma does not need

the praise of others.76

This statement verifies that Firdausī‘s eminence was so evident and widely

acknowledged in the Persian literary milieu that J mī thought it would be superfluous to write

about it.

The encomiastic statements of medieval poets and biographers about Firdausī and his

work are evidence that medieval writers did not consider the language and style of the Shāhnāma

to be archaic or outdated.77

As will be discussed below, Firdausī‘s oeuvre even inspired other

poets to produce similar works; although, none of those poems is marked by the high literary

quality of the Shāhnāma. The hyperbolic statements of later poets and writers about Firdausī and

his work may be considered by modern scholars as simply a trope, part of the style of medieval

35

prose-writing. But, it must also be noted that not all poets and writers enjoyed such universal

veneration and esteem.

Comments of the Copyists of the Shāhnāma

In his study of the epithets and titles that the copyists of the Shāhnāma manuscripts

applied to Firdausī, Angelo Michele Piemontese noted that such titles as ak m (sage), malik al-

shu‗arā (king of poets), afżal al-shu‗arā (the best of poets), af a al-shu‗arā (the most eloquent

of poets), and af a al-mutakallim n (the most eloquent of orators) were repeatedly used in

referring to Firdausī himself, and such titles as ustād (master), afkham (superior), isnād (proof),

and qudva (leader) were used for him as a poet, and that he was also known as amla al-bulaghā

(most fluent of the eloquent), afżal al-mu aqqiq n (supreme scholar), malik al-fużalā (king of the

literati) and ustād al-kalām (master of speech).78

Medieval scribes did not apply honorific titles to all poets and authors whose works they

copied. As remarked by Piemontese, the only other poet who was praised by copyists of his

works was Ni mī Ganjavī.79 But, the copyists‘ commendation of Ni mī in manuscripts of his

works start to appear only in the sixteenth century, whereas the earliest manuscript of the

Shāhnāma that includes a poem composed by the scribe in honour of Firdausī dates from

803/1400.80

Piemontese asserts that the use of honorific titles and epithets for Firdausī by later

copyists of the Shāhnāma continues a tradition that must have started earlier. He argues that even

if the titles and epithets for Firdausī are exaggerated and reflect the style of writing of the period,

their application cannot be baseless.81

In his view, the fact that the title ― amāsa sarā‖

(composer of epic), or any other title which reflects this concept, was never applied to Firdausī,

and that the most commonly used epithet for the poet was ak m (sage), demonstrates that he

was always regarded primarily as a sage.82

It must also be noted that the term ― amāsa,‖ and

36

― amāsa-sarā‖ are only modern renditions of the terms ―epic‖ and ―composer of epic‖

respectively, which are taken from Western literary criticism. The term amāsa is actually

borrowed from Arabic literature, where it refers to a collection of poems composed in praise of

bravery and heroism of Arab tribes. Persian medieval writers and literary critics classified

Persian literary works based on their form not their subject. They did, however, refer to poets by

using epithets that reflected the subject matter of their works. So, other Persian poets whose

works contained wisdom and moral advice were also known by the epithet ak m. For example,

Asadī Ṭūsī (d. 465/1072–73) and Ir nsh n b. Abī al-Khayr (d. ca. 511/1117–18), who composed

heroic epics in imitation of the Shāhnāma and whose works contain similar advice and wisdom,

as well as ‗Umar Khayy m (d. 527/1132–33), who was known as a philosopher, astrologer,

mathematician, physician and poet, and the mystic poet San ‘ī (d. 545/1150–51), whose works

contain philosophical ideas, moral advice and homilies, are all referred to by the epithet ak m.

The epithet ak m was never applied to Firdausī‘s contemporaries such as the poets Farrukhī (d.

429/1037–38) and Manūchihrī (d. 432/ 1040–41), probably because they mostly composed

panegyrics.

It may also be added that Firdausī was never called a ―historian‖ (mu‘arrikh, rāv , and so

on) either. Obviously, it was his eloquence and wisdom demonstrated throughout his work that

impressed his medieval readers the most, not the historical information contained in his work.

Even Anvarī‘s (d. 583/1187–88) negative comment about Firdausi‘s Shāhnāma appears

as a back-handed compliment. In one of his poems, where he admonishes himself against

composing poetry to please the commoners (bahr-i qab l-i ‗āmma), he asks himself to look at

the perfection (kamāl) of Avicenna in order to see the imperfection (nuq ān) of Firdausī. He

further states that when there is a work like Avicenna‘s Shifā, one should not compose poetry

like the Shāhnāma.83

Anvarī‘s example of the Shāhnāma as a work that pleases common people

37

points to the popularity of the Shāhnāma at the time. And, his comparing of Firdausī‘s

imperfection to Avicenna‘s perfection indicates that Firdausī‘s work was considered to be a book

of wisdom like that of Avicenna; although, it lacked the philosophical approach of Avicenna‘s

work.

The universal praise of Firdausī and his work by medieval writers, poets, and copyists of

the Shāhnāma demonstrates that they did not consider the Shāhnāma to be an outmoded

collection of ancient tales composed in an archaic language. Rather, they perceived the work as a

book of wisdom and admired the poet‘s eloquence in presenting the wisdom and advice it

contained.

Works on the Science of Rhetoric (‘ilm-i balāgha)

In his al-Mathal al-sā‘ir f adab al-kātib wa al-shā‗ir, the Arab literary critic Ḍiy ‘ al-

Dīn ibn al-Athīr (d. 637/1239)—brother of the famous historian Ibn al-Athīr—refers to

Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma as the ―Qur‘an of the [Persian] people‖ (Qur‘ān al-qaum), and mentions

that such eloquence cannot be found in Arabic poetry.84

Since the Shāhnāma was so highly

admired for its rhetorical qualities, one would expect it to have been used as a major source in

medieval Persian treatises on rhetoric. Unfortunately, despite the fact that quite a number of

works on the technical requirements of poetry were produced during the Ghaznavid period

(366/977–583/1187), only a few such works have survived.85

Nevertheless, two such works

provide important insights into the reception of the Shāhnāma during medieval times.

The earliest extant Persian treatise on rhetoric is Tarjumān al-balāgha (The interpretation

of eloquence) composed by Muḥammad b. ‗Umar al-R dūy nī in 507/1113–14. Modern scholars

have always assumed that he does not make any reference to the Shāhnāma.86

This assumption,

however, was based on an incomplete manuscript of the Tarjumān al-balāgha that was edited by

Ahmed Ateş (1949), and which was believed to be unique.87

Another copy of this work was

38

edited by ‗Alī Qavīm (1960) based on a different manuscript, which he owned.88

As confirmed

by the list of contents of the two copies of Tarjumān al-balāgha, ‗Alī Qavīm‘s manuscript

contains the two pages that are missing in the manuscript edited by Ateş.89

R dūy nī‘s quotation

from Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma appears in this part of the work that is missing from Ateş‘s

manuscript. In Qavīm‘s edition, R dūy nī quotes a verse from Firdausī to illustrate the technique

of the application of ―homilies, aphorisms, and complaints‖ (al-mau‗i a va al- ikma va al-

shakvā) in poetry.90

The verse reads:

ک ثؽ ر ظؼاؾ اقذ ظقذ ؾهبى ثوؽظی جبیع نعى ظؼ گوبى

In manliness, there should be no room for doubt;

For the hand of Fate reaches you [anyway]. 91

R dūy nī‘s quotation from the Shāhnāma to illustrate this specific technique suggests that

Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma was considered as a model for citing advice and aphorisms in poetry.

In addition to the above-mentioned verse, the Tarjumān al-balāgha contains two other

verses that the author attributes to Firdausī.92

These two verses are not from the Shāhnāma, but

they appear with four additional verses in ‗Aufī‘s Lubāb al-albāb as an example of Firdausī‘s

other poetry.93

The fact that R dūy nī refers to Firdausī two times in his treatise indicates that

not only was he known in the early twelfth century, but also that his opus was recognized as a

fine example of the use of Persian rhetorical devices.

The other work on the rhetorical sciences is al-Mu‗jam f ma‗āy r ash‗ār al-‗ajam (The

lexicon of the standards of Persian poetry) by Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Qays al-R zī

(Shams-i Qays), composed in the early thirteenth century. This work contains discussions of the

three major sciences of ‗ar ż (prosody), qāfiya (rhyme), and ma āsin-i shi‗r (rhetorical devices

and the forms of poetry). The quotations from the Shāhnāma are limited to the chapters on metre

39

and poetic forms. The author‘s citations from the Shāhnāma are nevertheless illuminating.94

In

his explanation of the various types of mutaqārib metre, Shams-i Qays quotes two verses from

the Shāhnāma.95

He also quotes five verses from the Shāhnāma to illustrate muzdavaj or masnav

as a form of poetry and demonstrates how the end rhyme of each verse is different, adding that

this form is suitable for stories and long tales. The five verses that Shams-i Qays quotes from the

Shāhnāma, however, are not consecutive. Rather, they are taken from two different stories, and

even the verses from the same story are not consecutive: 96

خبى ؼا جبیع قپؽظى ثجع کوبى ثػ ؼقعکم ثی ک ثؽ ثع

One should not spend time doing bad [deeds]

As the evil-doer will no doubt be requited with evil. 97

چیي اقذ ثبغاكؽ ظاغگؽ کم ؼا ثػ آیع ثكؽ کی هؽ ثػ

The punishment of the Judge is like this

That the evil-doer will himself face evil. 98

کكی ک ثظ ثبک یؿظاى پؽقذ یبؼظ ثکؽظاؼ ثػ یح ظقذ

کی ؽ خع ثػ کؽظى آقبى ثغ ثلؽخبم اؾ خبى ؽاقبى ثغ

The one who is pure and faithful

Never tends toward bad deeds

Because, although it is easy to do bad,

The soul is fearful of the consequences on the Day of Judgement. 99

خ ثی ؼح ثبنی پبکیؿ ؼای اؾ آى ثؽ یبثی ثؽ ظ قؽای

If you are free from hurt and have pure thoughts

You will benefit from that in both worlds. 100

40

The second verse of the quotation above belongs to a different story, and verses have

been omitted between the verses quoted from the same story. The omitted verses between the

first and third verses of the quotation are part of the narrative and contain the names of characters

in the story. Therefore, only the verses referring to the moral lesson of the story have been

selected. Since Shams-i Qays is talking about using this form of poetry for story-telling, there

was no reason for him to omit the verses that formed part of the narrative. Even if he deliberately

omitted those verses, it is odd to insert a verse from another part of the Shāhnāma into the

middle of these verses. It may be hypothesized that Shams-i Qays was quoting from a work of

selections from the Shāhnāma—compiled either by himself or by someone else—because all the

verses cited are on the same theme of evil-doing.

In point of fact, all of the above-mentioned verses appear in a selection of verses from the

Shāhnāma entitled Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma (Selections from the Shāhnāma) compiled by ‗Alī b.

Aḥmad in 474/1081–82.101

But, although they are all on the same theme, the order of the above-

mentioned verses is different, and they are interspersed with other verses,. The different order of

the verses indicates that Shams-i Qays did not copy from the Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma. The

practice of compiling selections from the Shāhnāma was already mentioned with reference to

‗Aufī‘s statement regarding Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d‘s selections from the Shāhnāma. ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s

Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma and Shams-i Qays‘s quotation from Firdausī‘s work provide further

evidence for the independent existence of this type of compilation. As will be discussed in detail

later in this chapter, most verses that were selected for these compilations contained wisdom and

moral advice. It may thus be posited that medieval writers referred to Firdausī‘s work as a

reservoir of aphorisms, wisdom, and advice. Both R dūy nī‘s use of the Shāhnāma and Shams-i

Qays‘s particular citation from Firdausī‘s work attest to this fact.

41

Post-Shāhnāma Epics and Verse Chronicles

Heroic epics. We know of at least sixteen heroic/mythical epics that were composed in

imitation of the Shāhnāma with respect to their form, metre, language, and style in the period

between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries.102

All these epics relate the adventures of Persian

mythical heroes to whom Firdausī did not devote more than a few verses in his work. The

continued production of works in imitation of the Shāhnāma demonstrates that the mythico-

historical content of Firdausī‘s work was quite popular for centuries after its completion. Asadī

Ṭūsī‘s acknowledgement of Firdausī‘s work as the impetus for writing the Garshāsb-nāma (or

Karshāsp-nāma, completed in 458/1066) is evidence that Firdausī‘s versification of ancient

Persian tales affected his contemporary audience. In the introduction to his work, Asadī Ṭūsī

states that two noble men (the king‘s minister and his brother) at the court of Būdulaf, the ruler

of Arr n (Nakhjav n), encouraged him to versify a tale (dāstān) from an ancient book (nāma-i

bāstān) and leave his good name behind in the same way that Firdausī did with his Shāhnāma.103

Firdausī‘s recognition by members of contemporary courtly élites in north-western Iran points to

the attention accorded to the Shāhnāma outside the poet‘s local area shortly after its completion.

A careful investigation of the post-Shāhnāma epics would not only enhance our

knowledge of the Persian epic tradition, but would also further our understanding of the

reception of Firdausī‘s work by medieval poets. Unfortunately, very few of these epics have been

edited or thoroughly studied.104

Nevertheless, the few surveys that have been done indicate that

these post-Shāhnāma epics often have an ethico-political dimension. For example, Marijan Molé

noted that despite all the descriptions of battle scenes and heroic adventures in the K sh-nāma

(composed between 501/1108–504/1111 by Īr nsh n b. Abī al-Khayr), which are characteristic

features of all heroic poems, the central theme of the work is royal succession and legitimate

kingship.105

Jal l Matīnī points out that, according to the narrative of the K sh-nāma, Jamshīd

42

left behind three books of advice for his descendents—referred to as ―andarz-i Jamsh d,‖

―guftār-i Jamsh d,‖ and ―andarz-nāma‖—so they could consult them in solving their

problems.106

In addition to leaving books of advice for his descendents, Jamshīd also appeared to

them in their dreams to give them guidance.107

Matīnī also draws attention to eight effective

military tactics described in the K sh-nāma.108

Military tactics and arrangement of troops in the

battlefield are topics that are usually dealt with in the books of advice for rulers.109

The

observations of Molé and Matīnī indicate that K sh-nāma, like its model, the Shāhnāma,

conveys lessons on kingship through its narration of heroic tales. As we shall see in the

following chapters of this study, the issue of royal legitimacy and succession, the significance of

the advice of exemplary rulers of the past, and effective military tactics are all matters discussed

in the Shāhnāma and later books of advice for rulers.

Moreover, as noted by Matīnī, a section of the K sh-nāma, consisting of 103 verses,

closely corresponds to one hundred paragraphs of Ayādgār-i Wuzurgmihr (Memorial of

Buzurgmihr), a Middle Persian text on moral advice and wisdom attributed to Buzurgmihr, the

famous wise minister of the Sasanian king Anūshīrv n (r. 531–79).110

Significantly, almost half

of the content of this text also appears in the Shāhnāma.111

As may be inferred from Matīnī‘s

comparison of the texts of the Ayādgār-i Wuzurgmihr, the Shāhnāma, and the K sh-nāma, the

author of the K sh-nāma did not copy this part of his work from the Shāhnāma; rather, he seems

to have worked directly from the Middle Persian text or its translation.112

The use of a Middle

Persian text on wisdom and advice on kingship points to the attention of the composers of these

epics to the ethico-political dimension of Persian heroic tales.

In the introduction to K sh-nāma, Īr nsh n mentions that he had already composed

another epic entitled Bahman-nāma.113

This work, which deals with the adventures of

Isfandiy r‘s son Bahman, is another Persian epic composed in imitation of the Shāhnāma.114

Its

43

central theme is Bahman‘s revenge on Rustam‘s family for Rustam‘s killing of his father,

Isfandiy r. In the introduction to Bahman-nāma, Īr nsh n states that the constant battles and

wars of his patron, the Saljūq sultan Muḥammad b. Maliksh h (r. 498/1105–511/1118), reminded

him of the endless battles of Bahman against Rustam‘s family. This statement indicates that the

socio-political turmoil of the time inspired the poet to compose a poem through which he could

offer his advice for solving contemporary problems. As in his K sh-nāma, Īr nsh n describes

different military tactics and the effective arrangement of troops on the battlefield. He also

includes in his work the topics of wisdom, manly virtue, generosity, patience, hospitality, and so

on, which are common themes of the medieval literature of wisdom and advice.115

Asadī Ṭūsī‘s Garshāsb-nāma, already mentioned above, is another example of a Persian

heroic epic, composed on the model of the Shāhnāma, which includes advice for rulers and

courtiers. Almost one third of Asadī‘s work is devoted to wisdom and moral values.116

Kh liqī

Muṭlaq‘s study of this work demonstrates how closely the moral and political concepts presented

in it correspond to those in the Shāhnāma. By comparing the Garshāsb-nāma to Middle Persian

wisdom texts, such as M n -yi Khirad and Andarz-i Ᾱzarbād Mahraspandān; to New Persian

advice literature, such as Abū Shakūr Balkhī‘s poems (tenth century) and ‗Unṣur al-ma‗ lī‘s

Qāb s-nāma (475/1082); and to Arabic works translated from Middle Persian texts, such as Ibn

al-Muqaffa‗s Adab al-kab r, Kh liqī Muṭlaq has shown how faithfully Asadī Ṭūsī put the ancient

Persian wisdom literature to verse.117

Farāmarz-nāma is another post-Shāhnāma epic, which recounts the adventures of

Far marz, son of Rustam.118

Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s study of a manuscript of this work provides

important insights into the nature of this epic.119

To begin with, the anonymous poet of the

Farāmarz-nāma introduces himself as ―a slave of the pure heart of Firdausī,‖ a statement which

indicates that the poet looked to Firdausī‘s opus in composing his own work.120

According to the

44

tale, the king of India sought help from the king of Iran to bring peace to his people, who were

suffering from five major problems.121

Four of the five problems concerned the activities of

harmful animals and fabulous creatures, which had made the region unsafe and insecure, and one

problem concerned extortionate taxes imposed by a local ruler. Far marz volunteers to go to

India to help, and several other heroes follow suit. The general theme of this epic, thus, is the

role of kings and heroes (read military men) in providing peace and security for people. The

king‘s duty to provide peace and security for people and his punishment of local rulers for

extortionate taxations are among the chief topics of almost all medieval Persian mirrors for

princes.

Like other Persian epics, such as Garshāsb-nāma, Farāmarz-nāma contains an episode in

which the hero discovers the treasury of a deceased king, where his book of advice is kept.

Farāmarz-nāma also includes episodes that depict the hero receiving guidance from a deceased

king.122

Kh liqī Muṭlaq interprets such episodes as symbolic confirmations of the status of the

hero as jahān pahlavān ―the hero of the world.‖ This interpretation points to the importance of

the wisdom of previous kings in Persian heroic tales. These episodes also point to the

prominence of the ethico-political dimensions of such narratives.

This cursory survey of post-Shāhnāma epics demonstrates that later poets paid attention

to the ethico-political dimension of Firdausī‘s opus and made sure to include it in their own

works.

Religious epics. The epics composed in imitation of the Shāhnāma were not limited to the

adventures of Persian mythical heroes. Some poets followed the model of the Shāhnāma in form,

metre, style, and language, but replaced the Persian mythical heroes with Muslim heroes. As

early as 482/1090, a poet with the pen-name Rabī‗ composed an epic in imitation of the

Shāhnāma, entitled ‗Al -nāma, which portrayed the heroic acts of ‗Alī b. Abī Ṭ lib, the cousin

45

and son-in-law of the prophet Muḥammad, the fourth Orthodox caliph, and the first Imam of the

Shi‗ites, in the battles of Jamal and Ṣiffīn.123

The poet of the ‗Al -nāma states that the reason the Shāhnāma is so pleasant (dilkash,

naghz, khvush) is that it is composed of pure lies (zi maghz-i dur gh ast).

124 He also claims that

Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma was sponsored by the Karramites—a sect of Islam founded in eastern Iran

in the ninth century, which was known for its asceticism and rejection of Sunni formalism and

Shi‗ite immoderation—in their attempt to inhibit the reading of true stories about the prophet

Muḥammad and his family.125

Rabī‗, who uses the Shāhnāma as a model and even borrows

poetic imagery and ideas from it, stresses that wise men would read the ‗Al -nāma not the

Shāhnāma.126

Despite his accusations against Firdausī and his work, Rabī‗‘s recognition of the

Shāhnāma as a pleasant work, as well as his call to not read it, indicate that Firdausī‘s work was

very popular in the late eleventh century.

Khāvarān-nāma (830/1426–27) by Ibn Ḥus m Khūsfī is another Persian epic with an

Islamic theme, which narrates the extraordinary deeds of ‗Alī b. Abī Ṭ lib in khāvar (east),

recounting his battles against demons (d vs), dragons, and Persian mythical kings.127

Ibn Ḥūs m

demonstrates his deep admiration for Firdausī in his description of a dream he had about him. In

his dream, Ibn Ḥūs m saw Firdausī clad in a beautiful Sufi robe wandering in a beautiful garden.

He describes that he paid his respect to Firdausī, marvelled at his work, and tightly embraced

him. As he was embracing Firdausī, Ibn Ḥus m asked him to share with him his wisdom and

knowledge. When he woke up, Ibn Ḥus m could not remember Firdausī‘s words, but his chest

had become a treasure-house of secrets (makhzan-i ganj-i asrār) and the sleeping head of his

wisdom was awakened (khirad rā sar-i khufta b dār gasht).128

Ibn Ḥus m maintains that it was

through this spiritual connection with Firdausī that he gained the knowledge and wisdom to

compose his own work.129

46

The production of these types of epics, which are usually classified as religious/Shi‗ite

epics, reached its peak during the Safavid period (1501–1722) and has continued to the modern

era.130

An examination of these works in order to determine whether or not their composers

remained faithful to the wisdom and advice component of Persian heroic tales might provide

further confirmation, but that would take us too far afield from our topic.131

Historical epics. Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma also inspired later poets to compose epics and

romances that related the extraordinary deeds of historical figures. The poets of historical epics,

too, carefully emulated their model by including the wisdom and advice components in their

works. Ni mī Ganjavī‘s Iskandar-nāma (ca. 590/1194), which is clearly a book of advice for

rulers, is an excellent example. Ni mī, who is usually regarded as the initiator of Persian

historical epics, versified the accounts of Alexander as a warrior and hero in the first part of his

work, and as a philosopher, ideal king, and prophet in the second part.132

The two parts of

Ni mī‘s work are generally known by the titles Sharaf-nāma (Book of nobility) and Iqbāl-nāma

(Book of good fortune) interchangeably. The title Khirad-nāma (Book of wisdom) has also been

applied to the second part of the work.133

These titles suggest that Ni mī‘s Iskandar-nāma was

primarily understood as a book of wisdom on kingship, and not so much as an historical account

of Alexander‘s exploits. Throughout his work, Ni mī holds up the model of Alexander to his

patron as an ideal king and gives him advice on how to rule.

In the introduction to his Iskandar-nāma, Ni mī states that if the wise man of Ṭūs, i.e.

Firdausī, were to give all the details of the accounts that he related, his story would have become

too long. Therefore, he undertook to provide the reader with the details that Firdausī left

untold.134

Ni mī also mentions that another reason why Firdausī did not say everything was that

he wished to leave something for others to say, as it is not appropriate to eat all the halvā

(sweets) by oneself.135

These statements indicate that Ni mī wanted his work to be considered

47

as a complement to the Shāhnāma and as valuable as Firdausī‘s oeuvre. Since Ni mī composed

his work as a mirror for princes in a mythico-historical framework, we may assume that he

understood Firdausī‘s work in the same way, that is, as a book of wisdom and advice for kings.

Even Ni mī‘s Khusrau va Sh r n and Haft Paykar, which are classified as historical

romances not epics, appear to follow the rules of conveying ethico-political lessons through

entertaining tales.136

In these two works, Ni mī depicts the image of flawed rulers in order to

give his patron admonishment and advice. Ni mī‘s acknowledgement of Firdausī in both of

these works is an indication that in both of them, he followed the model of the Shāhnāma in

using ancient tales as didactic vehicles to convey advice on kingship. In the introduction to

Khusrau va Sh r n, Ni mī states that the wise man who had already versified the story of

Khusrau and Shīrīn, that is, Firdausī, had reached the age of sixty, and thus, did not see the

benefits of writing about love affairs.137

Therefore, he decided to versify the parts of the story

that Firdausī had not included in his work.138

By this statement, Ni mī suggests that there are

lessons to be learned from love stories as well. In the introduction to his Haft Paykar, he refers to

Firdausī as a quick-minded (chābuk-and sha) poet, who perfectly versified a good selection of

the history of ancient kings.139

He compares Firdausī‘s work to a cut jewel, and the stories that

Firdausī did not put into verse to the little bits and pieces that were left behind from the cutting

of that jewel.140

Then, he mentions that everyone produced something from those small bits of

jewels, and that he (Ni mī), like an expert jeweller (gauhar-shinās)—metaphorically, someone

who knows about human essence—created a precious treasure from a small piece of jewel that

was left from the cutting of that large jewel (that is, Firdausī‘s work).141

All this

acknowledgement of Firdausī by a poet like Ni mī, who often compares his own poetry to licit

magic (si r-i alāl), reflects the high status in which Firdausī‘s opus was regarded by such poetic

masters as Ni mī. Ni mī‘s high regard for Firdausī and his oeuvre is further evidence that

48

medieval poets and writers did not see the stories of the Shāhnāma merely as a collection of

entertaining tales; rather, they perceived the wisdom contained in each tale and tried to emulate

the poet in their own works.

The most outstanding imitation of the Shāhnāma is Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s afar-nāma,

completed in 735/1335.142

This work, which is regarded as a sequel to the Shāhnāma, is a

versified chronicle relating Islamic history from the birth of the prophet Muḥammad up to the

Muslim conquest of Iran, and continuing with the history of Iran up to the time of the poet, that

is, the Ilkhanid era. In his introduction to afar-nāma, Ḥamdull h Mustaufī expresses his high

admiration for Firdausī and his work and mentions that the text of the Shāhnāma was corrupted

over time because of the mistakes and interpolations made by copyists. Therefore, he decided to

edit the Shāhnāma based on the available manuscripts. When he completed the edition of the

Shāhnāma, he undertook the task of versifying a history which would supplement Firdausī‘s

work, and in this, he asked Firdausī‘s spirit for guidance.143

In the introduction to his afar-nāma, Ḥamdull h Mustaufī explains the difference

between prose and verse chronicles.144

Considering Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s high regard for the

Shāhnāma and his intention to compose a versified history that would supplement the Shāhnāma,

his explanation of the difference between prose and versified histories would reveal his

understanding of the Shāhnāma.145

To explain the difference, Ḥamdull h Mustaufī states that

poetry is the form ( rat) of God‘s power (qudrat-i dāvar), and if a person is not endowed with

God‘s favour (fayż), he cannot produce versified anecdotes ( ikāyāt-i man m).146

In his view,

composing poetry is a divine job (ilāh buvad ma‗n -i kār-i na m).147

He also mentions that those

who intend to guide (har ānkas ki rāyash hidāyat buvad) can compose stories both in prose and

verse.148

Thus, in Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s view, the poet is favoured by God to guide and give

advice. Ḥamdull h Mustaufī also states that by versifying a prose text, the poet adds colour and

49

fragrance (rang va b ) to it and makes it more interesting for the audience.149

These statements

make it obvious that in versified histories, such as the Shāhnāma and afar-nāma, the historical

narrative is secondary to the entertaining and educational aspect of these works.

In point of fact, a great number of historical epics were produced under the profound

influence of the Shāhnāma during the Mongol period and beyond.150

Although very few of these

works have been edited and critically examined, recent studies on the few that have been

explored show that the authors of these epics not only emulated the metre, style, and, in some

cases, the language of the Shāhnāma (for example, the afar-nāma, which also contains verses

from the Shāhnāma inserted in its main text), but also followed the model of the Shāhnāma in

providing less historical information and attending more to the ideals of kingship based on

ancient Persian models.151

For example, in his study of the afar-nāma of Ḥamdull h Mustaufī

and the Shāhnāma-i Ching z of Shams al-Dīn K sh nī (ca. 705/1306), Charles Melville points to

the non-historical aspects of these verse chronicles and shows how these works present historical

information ―wrapped in a series of homiletic passages‖ that advise the kings and courtiers on

proper conduct and warn them on the punishment due for wrongdoings.152

He also draws

attention to a pand-nāma ―book of advice‖ in afar-nāma, the contents of which were delivered

to the Mongol ruler Gh z n Kh n (r. 694/1295–704/1304) by his minister Rashid al-Dīn—whom

Ḥamdull h Mustaufī refers to as m bad-i m badān, a title given to the chief Zoroastrian

priest/minister at the court of the Sasanian kings—in the course of twelve months, each devoted

to a specific theme.153

Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s reference to this pand-nāma as the ―pand-nāma-i

Rashīdī,‖ and his referring to Rashīd al-Dīn as m bad-i m badān are reminiscent of the ―pand-

nāma-i Buzurgmihr‖ in the Shāhnāma, which is delivered to the Sasanian king Anūshīrv n (r.

531–79) by his chief priest/minister (m bad-i m badān), Buzurgmihr.154

Also, the twelve

discourses (majlis) of Rashīd al-Dīn‘s pand-nāma echoes the seven sessions (majlis) of

50

Anūshīrv n‘s meeting with Buzurgmihr and other wise men at his court, through which the

advices of the sages are offered to the king.155

The topics of the twelve discourses of the pand-

nāma-i Rashīdī are: justice (‗adl va dād), good intention (niyyat-i pāk), compassion (shafaqat),

dignity and forbearance (vaqār va ta ammul), generosity (sakhāvat), delivering tasks to those

who know the job (kār bi-kārdān farm dan), forgiveness (‗afv), loyalty (vafādār ), drinking

wine (may khvurdan), coercive force (siyāsat), complete awareness of the state of affairs in the

world (vuq f-i kār-i jahān), and seeking the hereafter (ṭalab-i ākhirat).156

These are the main

topics of discussion in the medieval Persian mirrors for princes. In his study of another verse

chronicle of the Mongol period, namely, the Ghāzān-nāma, on the reign of Gh z n Kh n,

Melville notes the marked moralising tone and didactic aspect of the work.157

The inclusion of

didactic and instructional materials for kings and courtiers in verse chronicles modeled after

Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma, and the little emphasis placed on historical facts in these works, point to

their authors‘ perception of the Shāhnāma not as an historical source but as a book of advice and

wisdom for kings and courtiers, albeit composed in an historical framework.

Compilations of Selected Verses from the Shāhnāma (ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma)

The aphorisms and wisdom contained in the Shāhnāma attracted the attention of writers

who used them in their own works either with or without acknowledgement. As will be

demonstrated below, these writers were mainly the authors of wisdom and advice literature, who

incorporated verses from the Shāhnāma in their own prose texts not only for stylistic purposes,

but also for the wisdom contained in them.

To have easy access to suitable verses of the Shāhnāma, medieval writers selected verses

from it and organized them thematically. We know from R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r va āyat al-

sur r (The comfort of chests and the signs of joy), composed during 599/1202–3 to 603/1206–7,

that, in order to perfect their poetic skills, novice poets were recommended to select and

51

memorize two hundred verses from the wise sayings ( ikam) of the Shāhnāma—in addition to

memorizing verses from other great works.158

So, one may assume that many medieval novice

poets compiled their own selections from the Shāhnāma. As mentioned above, ‗Aufī‘s statement

about Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d‘s having composed a book of selected verses from the Shāhnāma, and

Shams-i Qays‘s quotation from the Shāhnāma, which was clearly taken from a compilation of

selected verses (ikhtiyārāt), provide evidence that selections from the Shāhnāma were available

to medieval authors as independent works.

Further evidence for the availability of selections from the Shāhnāma to medieval writers

is the Saf na-i Tabr z, a collection of approximately 210 treatises, letters, poems, and different

works on a variety of subjects, copied by Abū al-Majd Tabrīzī during 721–23/1321–23.159

This

work contains a selection from the Shāhnāma, which includes the tale of Rustam and Suhr b, the

tale of Rustam and Akv n Dīv, ten verses selected from the long tale of Rustam and Isfandiy r,

and eighteen verses that contain wisdom and advice selected from different parts of the

Shāhnāma.160

We cannot determine whether Abū al-Majd Tabrīzī selected these tales and verses

himself or used a compilation of selections from the Shāhnāma, but his work provides an

example of the common practice of compiling selections from Firdausī‘s opus in medieval times.

Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma of ‘Alī b. Aḥmad. A remarkable example of an anthology of

selected verses from the Shāhnāma is ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma (Selections from

the Shāhnāma), compiled in 474/1081–82.161

It contains more than 2,400 verses chosen from the

Shāhnāma and organized according to thirteen topics.162

The topics include: the oneness of God

(tau d), the praise of wisdom (sitāyish-i khirad), the creation of the world (āfar nish-i ‗ālam),

the praise of the prophet Muḥammad and his family (sitāyish-i payghāmbar va ahl-i bayt), praise

of kings (mad -i mul k), lyrics and the description of the beloved (ghazal va va f-i kh bān), the

description of feasts and spring (va f-i bazm va bahār), similes used for day and night (tashb h-i

52

r z va shab), proverbs and wisdom (amsāl va ikmat), the description of battles (va f-i jang),

rejecting the world (nik hish-i jahān), advice and homilies (pand va mau‗i a), the description of

old age (va f-i p r ), and the description of death (va f-i marg). According to the compiler, this

work was composed in 474/1081–82 for the Saljūq ruler Abu al-Fatḥ Malik-Sh h (r. 465/1072–to

485/1092):163

ؾدؽد ک پؽظضزن ایي اضزیبؼ ک نع چبؼ يع قبل لزبظ چبؼ

When I completed this anthology, 474 years had passed since the hijra. 164

If the verse containing the date of the work is reliable, it would indicate that the

compilation of selected verses from the Shāhnāma started soon after Firdausī‘s completion of his

work in 400/1010.165

Almost one fourth of all the verses in this compilation were taken from the story of

Anūshīrv n in the Shāhnāma, especially from the section containing the advices of Buzurgmihr

(andarz-i Buzurgmihr).166

At the end of his compilation, ‗Alī b. Aḥmad praises Firdausī for

composing the Shāhnāma and marvels at the ―flowers of the garden of advice (pand) and

wisdom ( ikmat) blooming in Firdausī‘s renowned (nāmvar) work.‖167

He considers his

compilation a book of wisdom (h ikmat), which contains the kernel (maghz) of the Shāhnāma,

and asks the reader to view his work with the ―eye of wisdom‖ (chashm-i khirad).168

‗Alī b.

Aḥmad‘s choice of verses and his comments about Firdausī‘s opus and his own work indicate

that he perceived the Shāhnāma as a book of wisdom and advice. Compiled only seventy years

after the completion of the Shāhnāma, the Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma is the earliest and most

convincing evidence pointing to the reception of the Shāhnāma as a book of wisdom. The

compiler‘s extraction of more than 2,400 verses from the Shāhnāma and his arrangement of them

53

into a separate thematically-organized work, illustrates how Firdausī‘s near contemporaries read

and understood his magnum opus.

Mu’nis al-aḥrār a ā’i al-ash‘ār. A work similar to ‗Ali b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i

Shāhnāma is a chapter in an anthology of poems entitled Mu‘nis al-a rār f daqā‘iq al-ash‗ār

(The companion of noblemen on the fine points of poetry).169

The work, written in 741/1341 by

Muḥammad b. Badr al-J jarmī, contains thirty chapters on the different forms of poetry and on

various literary techniques, illustrated with excerpts from great works of poetry. The chapter in

question is entitled ―F zikr-i ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma (On selections from the Shāhnāma) and

contains a sample of selections (ikhtiyārāt) from the Shāhnāma. The first part of the chapter,

however, is merely a copy of the introduction to the Shāhnāma from the beginning of the work

up to Firdausī‘s explanation of his purpose in writing it. The thematic selection of verses from

different parts of the Shāhnāma contains twenty eight verses on the theme of the greatness of

God, thirty one verses on reproaching the world, ninety five verses on advice and homilies,

twenty six verses on praise of kings, and fifteen verses on unjust kings. It is noteworthy that the

number of verses selected for the topic of advice and homilies almost equals the total number of

verses selected for the other four topics.

An analysis of J jarmī‘s sample of selections from the Shāhnāma reveals several points:

First, his allocation of one chapter to the selections from the Shāhnāma in an anthology of poetic

forms and literary techniques indicates that ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma were considered to be an

independent literary genre. Second, as an example of the genre of ikhtiyārāt, the chapter reflects

the themes most commonly chosen in such works. And third, the author‘s inclusion of the verses

on kingship and a large number of verses containing wisdom and advice suggests that the

medieval compilers of selections from the Shāhnāma perceived Firdausi‘s opus primarily as a

book of wisdom and advice for kings.

54

‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s and J jarmī‘s ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma are the only early works of this

type to have been edited and published by modern scholars. In the bio-bibliographical survey of

Persian literature, François de Blois lists twenty-one works, both in verse and prose, under

―extracts and abridgements‖ of the Shāhnāma. 170

Most of the works are from the seventeenth

century and later. However, some are identified by the date of the manuscript and not the date of

the composition of the work, and others are listed simply as ―unspecified.‖ Since the

extracts/abridgements of a work would normally represent the highlights of that work, a careful

examination and study of these manuscripts could provide further insight into the reception of

Firdausī‘s work at the time and place where these works were produced. Charles Melville‘s

study of the reception of the Shāhnāma in India based on one such abridgement—Tār kh-i

(dilgushā-yi) Shamsh r-khān (Shamshīr-kh n‘s delightful history), also known as Muntakhab-i

Shāhnāma (Selections from the Shāhnāma) and Khulā a-i Shāhnāma (The epitome of the

Shāhnāma), written by Tavakkul Beg in 1063/1652–53 for Shamshīr Beg, the ruler of Ghaznīn—

has demonstrated the importance of such works in reflecting the socio-political issues of

seventeenth-century India.171

A thorough examination and study of other abridgements and

extracts would not only further our knowledge of a type of work which evolved out of Firdausī‘s

opus, but would also shed light on the reception of the Shāhnāma at different periods of history

and in different geographical locations.

Medieval Prose Works Containing Verses from the Shāhnāma

Selected verses from the Shāhnāma are also found in medieval Persian prose works. Most

of these works belong to the literary genre of mirrors for princes but a few are historical writing.

The authors of these works used the verses of the Shāhnāma for two main purposes: to convey

ethico-political advice and to describe specific scenes using Firdausī‘s poetic tropes. As will be

demonstrated below, the attention accorded to the Shāhnāma by the authors of mirrors for

55

princes and the marked preference of these authors for verses containing moral advice and

wisdom indicate that the Shāhnāma was primarily used as a source for maxims, aphorisms, and

moral advice.

To select the verses from the Shāhnāma that would best serve their purposes, medieval

writers either worked directly from Firdausī‘s work, or used one of the thematically organized

ikhtiyārāts already in existence. It is also possible that some of these authors, especially those

who do not quote more than a few verses from the Shāhnāma, cited it from memory. Whether

these authors selected the verses from the Shāhnāma itself, or used the thematically organized

ikhtiyārāts, or even cited the verses from memory, their quotations from Firdausī‘s work reflect

their reception of the work.

Before reviewing the medieval prose works that cite verses from the Shāhnāma, it is

essential to address the issue of the authenticity of the verses cited in them. As is well known, the

text of the Shāhnāma had always been subject to interpolations by later copyists. With more than

one thousand manuscripts (complete and incomplete) available today—none of them essentially

more reliable than another—it is virtually impossible to produce an edition of the work that

would represent Firdausī‘s original work.172

Several editions of the Shāhnāma are available

today, but no two editions are identical because verses considered to be interpolations by one

editor are deemed to be authentic by another. This poses a problem in identifying the Shāhnāma

verses cited in medieval prose works. Also, when a medieval author attributes a verse to Firdausī

and that verse does not appear in the modern editions of the Shāhnāma, it is not easy to

determine whether the author attributed that particular verse to Firdausī in order to add

credibility to his own statements, or whether he took that verse from one of the medieval copies

of the Shāhnāma. More often than not, however, medieval authors cite verses from the

Shāhnāma without acknowledgement. When medieval authors do not acknowledge the source of

56

their citations, and the verses that they cite are in the form, metre, language, and style of the

Shāhnāma, and yet those verses cannot be found in the modern editions of the work, the question

arises of who composed them. It is, of course, possible that these authors composed those verses

themselves, but that cannot be determined with any certainty. It is also possible that these verses

were taken from other Persian epics composed in imitation of the Shāhnāma.173

Thus, for the purpose of this study, in order to be consistent with the identification of the

Shāhnāma verses cited in the medieval prose works, Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition of the

Shāhnāma has been used. For easy reference, the Shāhnāma verses cited in the works discussed

here have been listed in Appendices A to K. For verses that do not appear in exactly the same

way that they appear in Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition, Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition of the verse is

provided under the cited verse. The verses Kh liqī Muṭlaq considered to be interpolations and

included only in footnotes have been marked accordingly. The verses that are in the form, metre,

language, and style of the Shāhnāma but could not be located in Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition are left

unidentified. In general, however, very few verses have been left unidentified.

a) Literature of Wisdom and Advice

āḥat al- u r va āyat al-sur r. The most remarkable example of medieval Persian

prose works that contains citations from the Shāhnāma is Rā at al- ud r va āyat al-sur r (The

comfort of chests and the signs of joy), written during 599/1202–3 to 603/1206–7, by

Muḥammad ibn ‗Alī ibn Sulaym n al-R vandī and ultimately dedicated to the Saljūq ruler Abū

al-Fatḥ Kay-Khusrau b. Qilij Arsl n. This work, which deals with the history of the Saljūqs, was

written primarily as a mirror for princes by drawing upon the experiences of past Saljūq rulers.174

Muḥammad Iqb l collated R vandī‘s citations from the Shāhnāma with Turner Macan‘s edition

(1829) and managed to identify 526 verses out of a total of 676 verses that he considered to have

been taken from the Shāhnāma.175

Iqb l did not mention how he determined that the remaining

57

150 verses were from the Shāhnāma, nor did he identify them. As shown in Appendices A (1)

and A (2), I was able to locate 645 verses cited from the Shāhnāma in the Rā at al- ud r, using

Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition of the Shāhnāma.176

Since the verses cited by R vandī are often taken from different parts of the Shāhnāma,

Iqb l speculated that the author must have worked from a compilation of selected verses.177

In

her study of R vandī‘s citations from the Shāhnāma, Julie Scott Meisami refers to ‗Alī b.

Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma as the possible ―intermediary text‖ that R vandī used.178

An

edition of ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s work was not available at the time of Meisami‘s research, and she

states that she was not able to consult the manuscript.179

But now that an edition of the work is

available, it is possible to confirm that R vandī did not take the verses from ‗Ali b. Aḥmad‘s

Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma.

R vandī‘s choice of verses from the Shāhnāma demonstrates that he paid close attention

to the original context of the verses he chose. A good example is where he praises the ruler Abū

al-Fatḥ Kay Khusrau b. Qilij Arsl n. He refers to him as the ―fruit of the tree of the Saljūqs; a

tree whose root is supporting and promoting the religion, and whose fruit is the construction of

charitable buildings, such as madrasas, khānqāhs, mosques, ribāt s, and bridges.‖180

The author

continues his praise of Kay Khusrau with twelve verses chosen from three different stories in the

Shāhnāma. The first verse is from the story of Gusht sp, where the king boasts of the miraculous

tree he planted:

ظؼضزی ثکهزن ثطؽم ثهذ کچبى ظؼضذ آكؽیػى کهذ

I planted such a tree in blissful paradise,

That not [even] Farīdūn planted anything like it. 181

58

According to the Shāhnāma, when Gusht sp accepted Zoroaster‘s invitation to accept the

Good Religion (d n-i bih ) and converted to Zoroastrianism, he planted a cypress tree in the

region of Kashmar, and inscribed on its trunk that he had accepted the new faith.182

The cypress

tree grew miraculously large, and later, Gusht sp built a magnificent palace next to it.183

Gusht sp considered the tree to be a gift from heaven and referred to it as proof of his

righteousness.184

He sent his troops to all corners of the world to tell people about his heavenly

gift and to promote the new religion.185

Thus, Gusht sp‘s cypress tree became the symbol of his

faith and his promotion of Zoroastrian religion.186

R vandī‘s use of this verse after his praise of Kay-Khusrau as ―the fruit of the tree of the

Saljūqs,‖ suggests that he was comparing ―the tree of the Saljūqs‖ to Gusht sp‘s heavenly tree,

the symbol of righteousness and faith. This verse would not have been chosen for a compilation

of verses from the Shāhnāma because it requires a specific context in order to be meaningful.

Not surprisingly, it does not appear in ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, and this may be

taken as proof that R vandī did not take his citations from ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s work.

The above-mentioned verse cited in Rā at al- ud r is followed by ten verses taken from

the story of Kay-Khusrau in the Shāhnāma.187

It is noteworthy that R vandī‘s selection of verses

in praise of the Saljūq Kay-Khusrau‘s farr (royal glory), noble lineage, virtues, and wisdom are

taken from the story of his namesake, Kay-Khusrau, the ancient Iranian king who is portrayed in

the Shāhnāma as an ideal ruler. These ten verses are included in ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i

Shāhnāma.188

But, as shown in Appendices B and C, the difference in the sequence of verses and

the variants in the corresponding verses again demonstrate that R vandī did not use ‗Alī b.

Aḥmad‘s work as his source. For example, one of the verses in the passage in question reads:

چ ایي چبؼ ري ثب یکزي آیػ ثن ثؽآقبیػ اؾ آؾ ؾ ؼح ؿن

When these four [virtues] come together in one person,

59

That [person] will be free from greed, suffering, and sorrow. 189

The corresponding verse in the Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma reads:

چ ایي چبؼ ثب یک ري آهع پعیع ثؽآقبیع اؾ ؼح گلذ نیع

When these four [virtues] appear in one person,

That [person] will be free from suffering and arguments. 190

R vandī concludes his praise of Kay-Khusrau with a verse from the story of Hurmazd in

the Shāhnāma, stating that when God favours a man and makes him king, virtuous people will

boast about him.191

By citing this verse, R vandī implies that the Saljūq ruler Kay-Khusrau was

chosen by God. In the Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, this verse does not appear with the other ten verses

of the above-mentioned passage.192

R vandī‘s selection of verses from three different parts of the Shāhnāma to create a

single cohesive passage, and his attention to the original context of the verses he chose indicates

that he was very familiar with the Shāhnāma, and that he either cited it directly or used his own

compilation of verses (ikhtiyārāt). In the introduction to his Rā at al- ud r, R vandī praises

Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma by referring to it as shāh-i nāma-hā (the king of books) and sar-daftar-i

kitābhā (the most prominent of books).193

Considering his deep admiration for Firdausī‘s oeuvre,

it is unlikely that R vandī would have used an intermediary source for his citations from the

Shāhnāma.

R vandī‘s intention in composing his work was to impart lessons that could be learned

from the recurring events of history.194

The author‘s carefully selected verses from the Shāhnāma

and his attention to the original context of the selected verses indicate that he perceived the

60

Shāhnāma as a source of ethico-political wisdom and advice and as a suitable model for his own

work, which aimed to teach the Saljūq sultans how to rule.

R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r is exceptional among medieval prose works that cite the

Shāhnāma. With more than six hundred verses cited from Firdausi‘s opus, R vandī‘s work

contains the largest number of citations from the Shāhnāma in a medieval prose text. In other

medieval Persian prose works, the number of verses cited from the Shāhnāma is, on the average,

fewer than one hundred. R vandī‘s citations also differ from others in that he seems to have

mainly used verses that contain moral advice and wisdom. Other medieval writers cited verses

from the Shāhnāma both for their aphorisms and for poetical tropes.

R vandī also cited numerous verses from other Persian and Arab poets.195

The second

most-cited Persian poet after Firdausī in Rā at al- ud r is Mujīr Baylaq nī (d. 577/1181–2 or

586/1190), a contemporaneous panegyrist, whose verses (348 according to Iqb l) were used by

R vandī either to praise the rulers whose reigns he covers, or to praise his own patron. Ni mī

Ganjavī is the third most-cited Persian poet (249 according to Iqb l) whose verses served the

same purpose as those of Firdausī in R vandī‘s Rā at al- d r.196

R vandī‘s citations from

Ni mī Ganjavī, which appear in continuous passages as in the original works, are mostly from

his Khusrau va Sh r n, which is clearly a mirror for princes.197

Khirad-nāma. Another medieval Persian work comparable to R vandī‘s in terms of the

number and type of verses cited from the Shāhnāma is Khirad-nāma (Book of wisdom) by Abū

al-Fa l Yūsuf b. ‗Alī Mustaufī, composed in the early twelfth century.198

In the introduction to

his work, Yūsuf b. ‗Alī states that since it is through eloquent words (sukhan-i kh b), especially

spoken at the right time (bar sar-i vaqt), that wise men can attain the proximity (qurbat va

munādimat) to kings and notables, he compiled his Khirad-nāma and beautified it by the

aphorisms of ‗Alī b. Abī Ṭ lib and verses from the Shāhnāma, so that it might ―enlighten the

61

souls of those who contemplate it.‖199

Yūsuf b. ‗Alī‘s work is a manual on proper conduct for

kings and courtiers on one-hundred topics, including 252 verses from the Shāhnāma. The

compiler introduces each topic with a short paragraph in Persian prose that often contains an

aphorism by a wise man, such as a king or a sage, followed by an Arabic maxim, which he

attributes to ‗Alī b. Abī Ṭ lib. Finally, a few verses from the Shāhnāma complete the discussion

on each topic. Muḥammad Dabīrsiy qī has already identified the location of all these verses in

Shāhnāma, except for eighteen that seem to contain variants that make finding their location in

the Shāhnāma difficult.200

Like R vandī, the verses Yūsuf b. ‗Alī cited from the Shāhnāma

contain ethico-political advice. This indicates that, like R vandī, Yūsuf b. ‗Alī viewed the

Shāhnāma as a source of wisdom and advice on kingship. Although the author‘s intended

audience, according to his introduction, were those who sought the proximity to kings, the

aphorisms and advices contained in the work would ultimately benefit kings, as kings‘ boon

companions were supposed to offer advice to their masters.

Farā’id al-sul k f fażā’il al-mul k. Completed in 610/1213 by an author who introduces

himself with the pen-name Shams,201

Farā‘id al-sul k f fażā‘il al-mul k (The pearls of proper

conduct on the virtues of kings) is a mirror for princes composed in the style of the Kal la va

Dimna, that is, it conveys lessons on kingship through a series of long narratives that contain

anecdotes and animal fables.202

De Fouchécour, however, does not recognize this work as a

mirror for princes, presumably on the grounds that the addressee was an atābak (tutor of princes)

not a king.203

But, in addition to the fact that atābaks were not just tutors of princes but also

independent rulers, Shams‘s statements in the introduction to his work clearly indicate that he

considered his patron, Abū al-Mu affar Uzbak b. Muḥammad b. Īlduguz (r. 607/1210–11 to

622/1225), who was an atābak of Azerbaijan, to be a legitimate ruler, and that he dedicated his

work to him as a manual on proper conduct for kings. To assert the legitimacy of his patron and

62

his status as a king, Shams explains the concept of farr (royal glory/fortune), the divine right of

kings, and states that the farr of the ancient Persian mythical king Farīdūn was transferred to all

his just successors and finally reached Abū al-Mu affar, whom Shams refers to with such

epithets as pādshāh-i Islām (king of Islam) and shahanshāh-i Sulaymān-qadr (king of kings

whose status is as high as Solomon‘s).204

To explain the title of his work, Shams states that since

the virtues of ―intellect (‗aql), knowledge (‗ilm), justice (‗adl), generosity (j d), will (‗azm),

prudence ( azm), and the like, which are the requirements of kingly behaviour (sharā‘iṭ-i ādāb-i

mul k),‖ are discussed in his work, he entitled it Farā‘id al-sul k f fażā‘il al-mul k, that is, the

best qualities among the virtues of kings.205

He also mentions that he wished to emulate the

authors of Kal la va Dimna and Sindbād-nāma in composing an eloquent work that contains the

finest words (nutaf-i ‗ibārāt) and the most brilliant anecdotes (ṭuraf-i ikāyāt).206

This statement

indicates that the author considered his work to be a book of wisdom and advice on kingship in

the style of Kal la va Dimna and Sindbād-nāma, both of which convey ethico-political lessons

through entertaining animal fables and anecdotes.207

Further evidence for Shams‘s intention to write his Farā‘id al-sul k as a mirror for

princes may be found in the makhla (précis) of his work, the opening sentence of which reads:

―Now, we return to the précis of the book and talk about the noble virtues of kings (makārim va

ma āsin-i mul k).‖208

He adds that he will demonstrate what kind of king can rule the world and

enjoy an enduring kingship, and starts his discussion with the maxim ―religion and kingship are

twins‖ (al-d n wa al-mulk tau‘amān), which he attributes to the prophet Muḥammad.209

He

continues by stating that a Persian poet has beautifully put this prophetic Tradition ( ad th) into

verse and cites the verse—which is actually from Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma—without mentioning the

name of the poet:

چبى ظاى ک نبی پیـوجؽی ظ گؽ ثغ ثؽ یک اگهزؽی

63

Consider kingship and prophet-hood

As two gems in one ring.210

Shams explains that prophets and kings are two groups of people especially favoured by

God—the prophets by receiving va y (divine inspiration), and kings by receiving farr (divine

glory/fortune).211

He stresses that only the just and generous kings receive farr. To support this

statement, he quotes two verses from the Shāhnāma, this time with acknowledgement:

كؽیعى كؽش كؽنز جغ ؾ ههک ؾ ػجؽقؽنز جغ

یکئی ثعاغ ظم یبكذ آى ر ظاظ ظم کي كؽیػى رئی

The blissful Farīdūn was not an angel,

He was not created from musk and ambergris.

[It was with] justice and generosity that he gained that greatness,

Do justice and be generous, and you [too] will be [a] Farīdūn. 212

Shams‘s discussion of the divine right of kings (farr) and its transfer from Farīdūn all the

way to the dedicatee of his work, Abū al-Mu affar, constitutes the makhla , which provides a

background for his discussions in the following ten chapters of his work on the ten important

virtues of an ideal king. Without the makhla , the work could be a manual on personal virtues for

anybody. But, the author‘s explanations in the makhla establish that his addressee is a king, and

that the work was composed as a manual on royal virtues.

Shams‘s citations of seventy-one verses from the Shāhnāma and his acknowledgement of

Firdausī in his work point to his especial attention to the Shāhnāma when composing his Farā‘id

al-sul k.213

In fact, he begins and ends his work with citations from the Shāhnāma. In the

prologue (khuṭba) to his work, where he praises God and describes different levels of His

64

creation, he uses verses from the prologue to the Shāhnāma (some of which, he slightly modifies

to fit the context), and in the epilogue to his work, where he marvels at his own work, he cites

Firdausī‘s verses in praise of the Shāhnāma—as if he viewed his work as being on a par with the

Shāhnāma.214

In both these parts of his work, Shams acknowledges Firdausī as the poet of the

verses he cites.215

On one occasion, Shams cites a verse from the Shāhnāma and refers to the

poet only by the epithet ak m (the sage), without mentioning Firdausī‘s name.216

This would

indicate that he viewed Firdausī as a sage and referred to his work as a book of wisdom. Other

than the Shāhnāma verses and the panegyric pomes that he adds at the end of each chapter of his

work to extol his patron, Shams incorporated about 220 Persian and 350 Arabic verses into his

prose text, but he hardly ever acknowledges the sources of these verses.

Although, like Rā at al- ud r and Khirad-nāma, Farā‘id al-sul k contains numerous

citations from the Shāhnāma, unlike R vandī and Yūsuf b. ‗Alī, Shams did not limit himself to

the verses containing ethico-political advice and wisdom. To increase the dramatic effect of his

narratives, Shams also cited verses from the Shāhnāma that contain poetic tropes for beauty,

ugliness, valour, generosity, and so on. The scope of this study does not permit a thorough

analysis of Shams‘s use of all the Shāhnāma verses, but a cursory review of Appendix D

demonstrates the variety of verses that he selected for each chapter of his work. Shams‘s

citations from the Shāhnāma served not only to express the morals of the main narratives and the

anecdotes in an eloquent language, but also helped to increase the authority of the author‘s

statements, especially when Firdausī is acknowledged as a source. It must also be noted that

Shams‘s use of the Shāhnāma verses to dramatize his narratives seem to do more than that, as he

seems to have paid attention also to the context of the verses he cites. For example, when he

describes a demon-looking new-born baby of an unjust king, he borrows a verse from the story

of the birth of Z l in the Shāhnāma, who was referred to by his own father as the child of a

65

demon,217

and when he describes the amazing beauty of the new-born baby of a just king, he

borrows verses from the story of the birth of Rustam, the great mythical hero of ancient Persian

tales.218

Like Rustam, the beautiful child of the just king will eventually help his father to regain

his lost throne. By selecting specific verses for particular parts of his narratives, Shams makes

implicit associations between the characters of his narratives and the well-known characters of

the Shāhnāma and thereby increases the impact of his accounts.

In addition to his citations from the Shāhnāma, Shams quotes a verse from Asadī Ṭūsī‘s

Garshāsb-nāma.219

This verse, which contains advice for rulers to avoid excessive punishments,

also appears in two other medieval prose works that contain ethico-political advice for rulers.

This verse and another one preceding it in the Garshāsb-nāma are cited together in Tarjuma-i

Tār kh-i Yam n (603/1206–7), a history of the Ghaznavids.220

Najm-i R zī, the author of the

mystical work Mir ād al-‗ibād (618/1221 or 620/1223), too, cites this verse in the part of his

work that deals with the conduct of kings.221

Marzbān-nāma. Sa‗d al-Dīn Var vīnī‘s Marzbān-nāma (composed during 617/1220–21

to 622/1225–26), is another mirror for princes that contains excerpts from Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma.

This work was dedicated to Abū al-Q sīm Ḥ rūn Rabīb al-Dīn, the vizier to Uzbak b.

Muḥammad b. Īlduguz, the dedicatee of Farā‘id al-sul k.222

Interestingly, like the author of

Farā‘id al-sul k, Var vīnī wished to compose a work akin to Kal la va Dimna. In the

introduction to his work, Var vīnī states that like Kal la va Dimna, Marzbān-nāma was an

animal fable containing great wisdom, but the world of meaning of that great work was

expressed in a lowly language (lughat-i nāzil), namely, the language of Ṭabarist n (zabān-i

abaristān) and old Persian (Pārs -i qad m-i bāstān).223

This was why, adds Var vīnī, the work

did not receive the same attention that was accorded to Kal la va Dimna.224

Therefore, he

decided to reproduce this valuable work in a language fitting for its contents.

66

In the first chapter of his work, Var vīnī explains that the Marzbān-nāma was written by

Marzb n b. Sharvīn, a descendant of the brother of Anūshīrv n (the Sasanian king Khusrau I, r.

531–79).225

Sharvīn was the ruler of Ṭabarist n and had five sons. When Sharvīn died, his eldest

son succeeded him, but later, the other brothers claimed the throne. Marzb n, who was one of the

wisest sons and not interested in ruling, decides to leave the royal court for a faraway place so

that he would not be involved in his brothers‘ struggle for the throne. But, before he leaves, a

group of court notables, who learn about his decision, ask him to write a book that contains

wisdom and advice for them and the king to use as their guide. Marzb n agrees to do so pending

the king‘s permission, but the king‘s minister, who becomes suspicious of the true intention

behind the project, advises the king to punish Marzb n for attempting to disparage the king.

Thus, Marzb n will have to defend his good intention and the benefits of his work for the king

through a series of debates with the minister, held in the presence of the king. Marzb n

eventually acquires the king‘s approval and starts composing the work.226

To present ancient Persian wisdom in a language that was ―fitting for the content,‖

Var vīnī incorporated into his prose text a total of 286 Arabic and 182 Persian verses, of which

thirty-two verses are from Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma.227

Var vīnī‘s citations from the Shāhnāma, like

those in Farā‘id al-sul k, are of two types: verses that contain wisdom and advice, which

constitute the majority of the quotations from the Shāhnāma, and verses that are used for

descriptive purposes. Like Farā‘id al-sul k, Marzbān-nāma is divided into thematically

organized chapters, the central theme of each is presented through one long frame story, which

includes several short anecdotes and/or animal fables. What is remarkable about Marzbān-nāma

is that the major points of most of these chapters (nine in total) are encapsulated in the verses that

the author cites from the Shāhnāma, and some of these echo their original context. The following

discussion briefly reviews how Var vīnī employs the Shāhnāma verses in his work.

67

The main theme of the second chapter of Marzbān-nāma is friendship and the importance

of having wise and reliable friends. The following verse from the Shāhnāma is cited at the end of

the chapter as a highlight of its central message after several anecdotes have already been related

on the topic to illustrate its point:

چ ظاب رؽا ظنوي خبى ثظ ث اؾ ظقذ هؽظی ک بظاى ثظ

To have a wise enemy

Is better than having a foolish friend.228

The message of the third chapter of Marzbān-nāma, which promotes self-control and an

ascetic life style, is conveyed through a verse from the Shāhnāma. This verse is the only

occasion in the Marzbān-nāma, where a verse is cited from the Shāhnāma with proper

acknowledgement of Firdausī as the poet. According to Var vīnī, Muḥammad Ghaz lī stated in

his Favā‘id-i makt bāt that Firdausī said in one verse everything he tried himself to teach in

forty years:

ه کيپؽقزیعى ظاظؼ پی ؾ ؼؾ گػؼ کؽظى اعیه کي

Think of the day that you pass [away],

Make it your job to worship the Judge (i.e., God). 229

By including what Muḥammad Ghaz lī said about this single verse by Firdausī, Var vīnī

not only draws attention to it as an important verse that expressed the whole point of the

teachings of a great Sufi master, but also stresses the point of his own chapter.

The fourth chapter of Marzbān-nāma is about the importance of knowledge and wisdom.

This message is conveyed through the following verses from the Shāhnāma:230

ؽ آکف ک ظاؼظ ؼام ضؽظ قؽ هبیۀ کبؼب ثگؽظ

68

گهبی ؼضؽظ ؼوبی ضؽظ ضؽظ ظقذ گیؽظ ثؽ ظ قؽای

Any person whose soul possesses wisdom,

Looks through to the end of the tasks.

Wisdom is the guide and wisdom opens the way

Wisdom holds one‘s hand in both worlds.231

راب ثظ ؽک ظاب ثظ ؾ ظام ظل پیؽ ثؽب ثظ

He who is knowledgeable is powerful

The heart of the old becomes young on account of knowledge.232

In the fifth chapter of Marzbān-nāma, the narrator teaches lessons on proper conduct to

the kings‘ companions.233

He admonishes those who consider their own knowledge to be perfect,

and explains the detriments of loquacity and the benefits of silence. He also warns the kings‘

boon companions that, regardless of how knowledgeable and close to kings they might be, they

should never take their high position at court for granted, as they may lose it at any time for any

reason, just or unjust. This chapter of Marzbān-nāma displays very close connections with a

story in the Shāhnāma concerning the fall from grace of Buzurgmihr, the wisest and most

favourite advisor of the Sasanian king Khusrau Anūshīrv n.234

According to the main story of

this chapter in the Marzbān-nāma, a lion king, who was famous for his clemency, had as his

wisest and most favourite boon companions two jackals, who were named D dma and D st n.

One day, while the lion was asleep and the two jackals were sitting by his side talking to each

other, a bubble of wind was emitted from the lion‘s stomach. D dma could not control his

laughter, and the sound of his laughter woke up the lion, who did not open his eyes, pretending

to be asleep, so that he could listen to the conversation between the two jackals. D st n

reproached D dma for laughing at something that was natural and caused by someone who was

69

asleep and not in control of his behaviour. D st n further reminded D dma that kings are never

at fault, according to the rule of royal courts, and that those who are in service of royalty should

always remember this rule if they wish to keep their position. D dma responded that a

knowledgeable person would never fear the loss of position and status.235

To this statement of

D dma, D st n responds with two verses from Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma:

چ گئی ک ؽ ظام آهضزن ؾ ضظ ام ثی ظاهی رضزن

یکی ـؿ ثبؾی کع ؼؾگبؼ ک ثهبعد پیم آهؾگبؼ

[Just] when you say, ―I learned everything,‖

―[And] paid off my loan of being un-knowledgeable (that is, nothing is left to be taught to

me),‖

The Time will play a fine game

And seats you in front of a teacher.236

These verses are taken from the introduction to the story of Buzurgmihr‘s fall from grace.

The account about how Buzurgmihr loses his status shares several elements in common with the

story related in Marzbān-nāma, particularly in relation to the king‘s emission of wind; although,

in the story related in the Shāhnāma, Buzurgmihr is not at fault and the king accuses him based

on false assumptions. In the Marzbān-nāma, after a long discussion between the two jackals,

D dma eventually admits that he was wrong and therefore asks D st n not to tell anyone about

his misbehaviour, but, at this point, the lion gets up furiously and sends him to jail.237

Var vīnī‘s

citation of the above-mentioned two verses in his rewriting of this ancient story from Marzbān-

nāma suggests that he made associations between these two similar accounts, which convey the

same message. Var vīnī‘s citation of two more verses from the Shāhnāma, which are spoken by

Buzurgmihr, on the virtue of silence and speaking little, further points to Var vīnī‘s attention to

70

this particular figure in the Shāhnāma in this particular chapter of Marzbān-nāma. These two

verses in Marzbān-nāma are spoken by D st n, when he rebukes D dma for his uncalculated

words:

کكی ؼا ک هـؿل ثظ پؽ نزبة كؽااى قطي ثبنع ظیؽیبة

ؾ ظام چ خبى رؽا هبی یكذ ث اؾ ضبههی یچ پیؽای یكذ

A person whose brain is in haste

Is loquacious and slow in learning.

If your soul is not equipped with knowledge,

No adornment is better [for you] than silence. 238

In this chapter, Var vīnī also relates an anecdote about Buzurgmihr and his wisdom of

speaking at the right time.239

This anecdote too shares common features with the story of

Buzurgmihr‘s fall from grace narrated in the Shāhnāma, although the outcome of the two

accounts are quite different. This anecdote and the verses cited from the story of Buzurgmihr in

the Shāhnāma point to Var vīnī‘s preoccupations with the character of Buzurgmihr as the boon

companion par excellence in the Shāhnāma in his writing this particular chapter of Marzbān-

nāma, which concerns the precarious position of kings‘ boon companions. Var vīnī‘s use of the

Shāhnāma in this chapter demonstrates that he did not just cite a few verses from Firdausī‘s work

to beautify his prose text; but rather, he seems to have also intended to bring into his own text the

story of the most knowledgeable and revered companion of a king who lost his great status

through no fault of his own.

In the seventh chapter of Marzbān-nāma, a number of military tactics and war strategies

are taught, but the central theme of the narrative is the inevitable consequences of warmongering,

greed for more territories, and vengeance. According to the main narrative of this chapter, the

71

king of the elephants (shāh-i p lān), the mightiest elephant in India, hears about the abundance

and prosperity of a realm ruled by a lion. Confident about the might of his army, the elephant

king decides to conquer the realm of the lion to make it his own. When the elephant king shares

his plan with his two advisors, the wiser one endeavours to talk his master out of his disastrous

plan.240

In the course of his debate with the other advisor, who is supportive of the king‘s plan,

the wise advisor cites the following verse to stress that it would be unwise to invade another

territory out of greed:

پؽقزعۀ آؾ خیبی کیي ثگیزی ؾ کف هظ آكؽیي

The one who worships greed and seeks vengeance

Will not hear the praise of anyone in the world.241

This verse is taken from the preamble to the well-known tale of Razm-i yāzdah rukh (The

battle of eleven heroes) in the Shāhnāma.242

This tale recounts the story of the longest and most

destructive series of wars between Iran and Tūr n, which was initiated by Afr siy b, the king of

Tūr n, and was eventually turned into eleven one-on-one battles between the greatest heroes of

the two armies. The result of this devastating war was the loss of the eleven heroes of Tūr n, the

death of Afr siy b‘s minister, the decisive defeat of the army of Tūr n, and extreme bloodshed

on both sides. As is often the case with his preambles to the long and significant tales of his

work,243

Firdausī expresses the major point of this tale in its preamble by stating that, while it is

admirable to take risks in order to fulfill one‘s ambitions, one should remember that life is too

short, and that pursuing one‘s ambitions out of greed and vengeance is never praiseworthy.244

Thus, Firdausī prepares his reader to pay attention to the consequences of Afr siy b‘s

warmongering, greed, and vengeance. It is remarkable that Var vīnī selects a verse from the

preamble to this particular tale in the Shāhnāma for the introduction to a similar story in his

72

work. By doing so, Var vīnī seems to be drawing parallels between the two tales. The

occurrence of this verse in another contemporary Persian mirror for princes (Ẓahīrī Samarqandī‘s

Sindbād-nāma) suggests that it was not an unknown verse, and that it might have been used to

allude to the context in the Shāhnāma.245

When the lion king is informed of the intention of the elephant king, his advisors offer

their opinions about how to approach the issue. Finally, they decide to send their representative

along with a letter that would intimidate the elephant king and admonish him for his evil

plans.246

The letter contains the following three verses from the Shāhnāma:

هکي آک ؽگؿ کؽظقذ کف ثعیي ؼوى ر ظیقذ ثف

ثوؽظی ؾ ظل ظؼکي ضهن کیي خبى ؼا ثچهن خای هجیي

ای ک آاؾ ؼثب هیع ای ر چگبل نیؽاى کدب ظیع

Do not do what no one has ever done

In this [wrongdoing], a demon is guiding you.

Be a real man and remove anger and vengeance from your heart

Do not see the world with the eyes of a youth.

Where have you [ever] seen the claws of lions,

You, who have not [even] heard the howling of a fox. 247

Var vīnī selects these verses from the well-known tale of Rustam and Isfandiy r and

incorporates them, with some modifications, into his prose text.248

In the Shāhnāma, the above-

mentioned first two verses are spoken by Rustam, the greatest mythical Persian hero, as he tries

to convince Isfandiy r, the son of the Persian mythical king Gusht sp, that it would not be wise

to engage in a battle with him. The third verse is spoken by Isfandiy r, chastising his own son

Bahman for being intimidated by Rustam. These verses, like the previous citation from the

73

Shāhnāma, allude to a similar situation in a tale in the Shāhnāma, the verses of which were

probably known by many people by heart.

The topic of the eighth chapter of Marzbān-nāma is vilification at royal courts. Here, the

narrator discusses the characteristics of those who, out of jealousy, attempt to ruin the good

reputation of others. Var vīnī selects the following verse from the Shāhnāma for this part of his

work to assert that such people have no esteem in the eyes of wise men:

ؾثبى چؽة گیب ظل پؽظؼؽ گیؽظ ثؽ هؽظ ظاب كؽؽ

A flattering tongue with a heart full of lies

Has no glory for the wise man.249

Like the author of Farā‘id al-sul k, Var vīnī seem to have selected his verses from the

Shāhnāma with due attention to both their content and context. Despite his numerous citations of

Arabic and Persian verses, Var vīnī mentions in the prologue and epilogue to his work that,

except on rare occasions (illā ‗alā al-sab l al-nudra), he did not cite any proverbs or maxims,

either in Arabic or in Persian verse, that were found in the works of others. He states that he

avoided presenting ―flowers that were already sniffed and touched by too many hands,‖ and that

all the wisdom in his work comes from his own mind and memory.250

We find similar claims

made by the author of Farā‘id al-sul k at the end of his work, which nevertheless includes

copious citations from other works.251

Such claims should therefore be understood as literary

tropes and not taken at face value.

Sin bā -nāma. The authors of Farā‘id al-sul k and Marzbān-nāma also praise Sindbād-

nāma as a marvellous collection of advice and wisdom. This work was originally translated from

Middle Persian into New Persian during the Samanid period (r. 874–999). But in the twelfth

century, Ẓahīrī Samarqandī reproduced it in an elaborate prose style intermingled with Persian

74

and Arabic verses and proverbs, Qur‘anic verses, and prophetic Traditions. 252

Like Farā‘id al-

sul k and Marzbān-nāma, Sindbād-nāma belongs to the literary genre of mirrors for princes. The

work consists of a series of animal fables and anecdotes narrated within a frame story.253

Unlike

the other two mirrors, however, Ẓahīrī Samarqandī cites only nine verses from the Shāhnāma.254

The most-cited Persian poet in Sindbād-nāma is Anvarī (d. 583/1187–88), a prominent

panegyrist at the court of the Saljūq sultan Sanjar (r. 1118–57), from whose collection of poems

Ẓahīrī Samarqandī cites about thirty verses.255

But, except for four verses cited from Anvarī that

contain a wisdom, all the rest are panegyrics.256

In contrast to citations from Anvarī‘s poems,

except for two verses cited to describe the scene of a dark and silent night, all verses cited from

the Shāhnāma contain a wisdom. Altogether Sindbād-nāma contains 343 Arabic and 368 Persian

verses from a host of Arabic and Persian poets. Some of the verses, however, may have been

composed by the author himself, as we know from ‗Aufī‘s Lubāb al-albāb that Ẓahīrī

Samarqandī composed poetry as well.257

Aghrāż al-siyāsa f a‘rāż al-riyāsa. Ẓahīrī Samarqandī also cites the Shāhnāma in his

other book of advice for rulers, Aghrāż al-siyāsa f a‗rāż al-riyāsa (The aims of coercive force in

the exposition of authority).258

He wrote this work after 552/1157 (the death of sultan Sanjar) for

his patron, Abū al-Mu affar Qilij Ṭamgh j Kh q n b. Jal l al-Dīn (d. 600/1203–4), one of the

Qarakhanid rulers who controlled western Transoxania from 440/1048–49 to about 600/1203–

4.259

The form of presentation of the ethico-political lessons in this work is quite different from

other mirrors for princes reviewed here. The author provides the aphorisms of seventy-four

important figures, from kings and heroes to philosophers, prophets, and caliphs. 260

Each chapter

of the work is devoted to the aphorisms that he attributes to a particular figure. In the list of the

seventy-four men whose wise sayings are cited, the mythical Persian hero Rustam, the Greek

philosophers Ptolemy, Aristotle, and Socrates, and the rulers of the countries neighbouring

75

ancient Persia are also found. The gnomic sayings attributed to these figures are cited in Arabic,

followed by the author‘s translations and explanations in Persian, and sometimes one or more

anecdotes or animal fables to further illustrate their meaning. What is interesting about Aghrāż

al-siyāsa is that the author presents the aphorisms of his selected figures in a chronological order.

He starts with the ancient Persian mythical king Jamshīd, as the first king on earth, and follows

the historical sequence of kings, caliphs, emirs, and sultans who ruled Persia up to the time of his

own patron. This makes the work similar to a chronicle in which the author wished to

demonstrate what could be learned from every prominent figure in the history of Persia.

As in the Sindbād-nāma, Ẓahīrī Samarqandī employs numerous Persian and Arabic

verses (417 Persian and 508 Arabic verses) in Aghrāż al-siyāsa, nine of which are from the

Shāhnāma.261

In one of his citations, Ẓahīrī Samarqandī cites three consecutive verses taken

from two different parts of the Shāhnāma. This would seem to indicate that he used an

ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma in composing his work.262

Mir ā al-‘ibā min al-mab a’ ilā al-ma‘ā . Another book of advice that contains

citations from the Shāhnāma is Najm-i R zī‘s Mir ād al-‗ibād min al-mabda‘ ilā al-ma‗ād (The

path of God‘s bondsmen from origin to return), composed in 618/1221 or 620/1223. Mir ād al-

‗ibād is a mystical work which provides advice for those in quest of spiritual perfection. In it,

Najm-i R zī articulates his ideas concerning man‘s path to perfection in the three stages of

birth/origin, life, and death/return. In the part of the work that deals with the path to perfection

(sul k) of different classes of men including kings and ministers, Najm-i R zī gives advice on

how those in authority should treat their subjects.263

In addition to the verse cited from Asadī

Ṭūsī‘s Garshāsb-nāma, Najm-i R zī cites five more verses in the metre, style, and language of

the Shāhnāma. Four consecutive verses of these five verses are on the importance of entrusting

tasks to the wise, and the fifth verse is addressed to the artisans, reminding them that there is no

76

gain without pain.264

Kh liqī Muṭlaq states that the Mir ād al-‗ibād contains ten verses from the

Shāhnāma, but he does not identify them.265

Since there are no more than ten verses in this work

that can be attributed to the Shāhnāma—five of which are identified below— Kh liqī Muṭlaq

must have considered the above-mentioned five verses to be from Firdausī‘s work.

Of the other five verses, one is repeated twice:

كزی رییخبى ؼا ثلعی پكزی ریی عان ک ای ؽچ

You are both the height and the depth of the world;

I do not know who you are; you are all that exists. 266

In both cases of the occurrence of this verse in Mir ād al-‗ibād, Najm-i R zī uses it in

reference to Adam, but according to other medieval sources, Firdausī composed this verse on the

oneness of God and it was because of this verse that God forgave all his sins and sent him to

Heaven.267

This verse appears in the text of the earlier editions of the Shāhnāma, but in Bertel‘s

edition it is not included in the main text. In Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition, it appears neither in the

main text nor in the footnotes.268

It is interesting to note that Najm-i R zī used this verse to

address Adam instead of God. As we shall see below, he will use another verse from the

Shāhnāma to address God instead of Adam.

Of the three remaining verses, two are cited with their original context. Najm-i R zī cites

these two verses in his discussion of the creation of man, and in the Shāhnāma, too, these two

verses appear in the part of the work that is on the same subject. 269

The fifth verse Najm-i R zī

cites from the Shāhnāma is frequently cited in other medieval Persian works to warn people that

they are responsible for the consequences of their own deeds. In the Mir ād al-‗ibād, however,

this verse is used in a context that would hold God responsible for man‘s acts. Najm-i R zī

relates that God left Adam on his own for four hundred years after he committed a sin and lost

77

his exalted status in the heaven.270

All this time, Adam wept and sought God‘s mercy.271

He

confessed that he was frail and powerless, and asked God to forgive his sin, ―for He had planted

his seed, and He had moulded his clay.‖272

Following these words, Najm-i R zī cites a verse

from the Shāhnāma:

ظ ؼنز ایگؽ پؽیبى اقذ ض اگؽ ثبؼ ضبؼقذ ضظ کهز ای

If it is a load of thorns, you planted them yourself,

And if it is silk fabric, you spun it yourself. 273

Najm-i R zī‘s use of this verse in a different context shifts the responsibility that is normally

placed on man to God, for it was He who created man as a frail and powerless creature prone to

wrongdoing.

Najm-i R zī‘s four citations from the Shāhnāma, two of which are frequently found in

other medieval Persian works, suggest that he probably cited these verses from memory. The five

unidentified verses he cites, which are in the form, metre, and style of the Shāhnāma and appear

in the part of the work that deals with kingship, point to the connection between the Shāhnāma

style of poetry and aphorisms used for books of advice for rulers. Whether these verses were

taken from a medieval manuscript of the Shāhnāma or some other Persian epic cannot be

determined at this point, but there is already a connection between the style of verses in Persian

epics and the literature of advice for rulers.

Interestingly, in this part of his work, Najm-i R zī also includes a thirteen-verse poem on

the transient nature of this world, admonishing the king to take lessons from the past kings of

Iran and Tūr n, who left behind all the wealth they had amassed, and only their good or bad

names lived on. He further refers to the example of Alexander, who took the throne of D r and

lost it to someone else, to stress that kingship is not everlasting.274

Najm-i R zī‘s reference to the

78

kings of Iran and Tūr n and his example of Alexander and D r , which allude to the Shāhnāma,

point to his understanding of the Shāhnāma as a book of advice and admonishment for kings.

Altogether, in this part of his work, which deals with kings and courtiers, Najm-i R zī cites

twenty-seven Persian verses (including the Shāhnāma verses) and three Persian poems. No

Arabic verses are cited in this part of the work.

b) Historical Writing

Another group of medieval authors who cited Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma in their works were

historians. Interestingly, however, most of the citations from the Shāhnāma by medieval

historians were used more for the aphorisms and poetic tropes they contained than for their

historical information. As already noted above, R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r, an historical work

intended as a mirror for princes, provides a remarkable example of this particular use of the

Shāhnāma by medieval historians. Further examples, although with more focus on verses that

contain poetic tropes than aphorisms, can be seen in Tārikh-i jahāngushāy (composed in ca.

650/1252 to 658/1260) of ‗At Malik Juvaynī and Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh (composed in ca. 700/1300–

710/1310) of Rashīd al-Dīn Fa lull h Ḥamad nī. To my knowledge, the only early medieval

Persian historical works whose authors cited the Shāhnāma as a source of historical information

are Mujmal al-tavār kh va al-qi a (520/1126–27) and Tār kh-i abaristān (written in 603/1206–

7 to ca. 613/1216–17).275

But these authors too made a point about the eloquence and wisdom

displayed in Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma. The following review of the above-mentioned historical

works demonstrates how medieval historians generally used the Shāhnāma in the composition of

their own works.

Tār kh-i jahāngushāy. Aside from R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r, Juvaynī‘s Tār kh-i

jahāngushāy (History of the world conqueror), which is a history of Chingīz Kh n and his

descendants in Iran, seems to contain the largest number of citations from the Shāhnāma among

79

medieval Persian historical writings.276

In this work, Juvaynī cites eighty verses only nineteen of

which contain maxims and advice, that is, almost one fourth of all of Juvaynī‘s citations.277

Most

of the verses that Juvaynī cites from the Shāhnāma contain similes describing battlefields,

valour, feasts, day and night, and so on. Juvaynī‘s citations help him to depict the scenes that he

describes in his text more effectively. As we saw, the authors of mirrors for princes had a

preference for verses that contained maxims and wisdom. A total of fifty-eight verses, that is

three quarters of all the Shāhnāma verses that Juvaynī cites, are taken from the tales of Rustam

and Suhr b, and Rustam and Isfandiy r. Juvaynī‘s frequent citations from these two particular

tales indicate that he did not use a compilation of selections (ikhtiyārāt) from the Shāhnāma;

rather, he worked directly from it. Further evidence for Juvaynī‘s direct use of the Shāhnāma is

that the consecutive verses cited in Tār kh-i jahāngushāy are also consecutive in the Shāhnāma,

or are taken from the same part of the work.278

Juvaynī‘s particular attention to these two tales

reflects the interest of his Mongol patrons in wars and battles.

Juvaynī‘s citations from the Shāhnāma deserve a more thorough examination, but a

cursory review demonstrates that he was meticulous in selecting the right verses for the right

contexts. He carefully modified some of the verses that he selected from the Shāhnāma to better

convey his own ideas. For example, he borrowed a verse from the Shāhnāma, in which Z l

warns his son Rustam to be wary of Afr siy b, for ―that Turk is like a male-dragon at war.‖

Juvaynī used this verse to describe Chingīz Kh n‘s military prowess, but he replaced the term

―Turk‖ in the verse with ―shāh‖ (king) in reference to the Mongol conqueror.279

On another

occasion, in the description of the feelings of sultan Muḥammad Khv rzmsh h when he was

informed that his harem has been sacked by the Mongol army and his sons killed, Juvaynī selects

a verse from the Shāhnāma that describes Rustam‘s feelings of shock and distress when he

realizes that he has just killed his own son. In using this verse, Juvaynī replaced the name

80

―Rustam‖ with the title ―sulṭ n‖.280

These selections and slight modifications demonstrate how

well Juvaynī knew the Shāhnāma and how meticulously he used it in expressing his points. It

must also be noted that Juvayinī‘s use of the Shāhnāma was not limited to citing verses from it,

as in his narratives he also compares historical figures of to the heroes and kings of the

Shāhnāma.281

He also refers to the habit of reciting the Shāhnāma by the Saljūq sultan Ṭughril

(d. 529/1134), which points to the popularity of Firdausī‘s work at the court of the Saljūq

rulers.282

There is only one occasion in the entire work where Juvaynī cites the Shāhnāma to

confirm a piece of historical information, and that is where he talks about the prosperity and

greatness of the city of Balkh and quotes two verses from the Shāhnāma, which state that in the

olden days, Balkh had the same status as Mecca.283

For Juvaynī, Firdausī‘s depiction of great Iranian heroes was more useful, as he was more

concerned with his descriptions of the Mongols‘ formidable army. Nevertheless, he did not fail

to appreciate the ethico-political content of the Shāhnāma and made use of those verses as well if

they were relevant to his work.

Jāmi‘ al-tavār kh. Composed by Rashīd al-Din Fa lull h, the chief minister at the courts

of two Mongol rulers, Gh z n (r. 694/1295–704/1304) and Ulj ytū (r. 704/1304–716/1316),

Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh (Compendium of chronicles) has been recognized as the first universal history

on account of its covering the history of the Mongols, Turks, Persians, Arabs, Franks, Jews,

Chinese, and Indians, as well as the geography of the lands that were ruled by the Mongol

empire. The author divided his work into three volumes. The third volume, on the geography of

the Mongol empire, is not known to have survived, and the second volume has only been

partially edited. But the first volume, which is on the origin and history of the Turkic and

Mongolian peoples and the history of Chingīz Kh n and his successors, has been edited and

81

translated.284

In the first volume of Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh twenty-five verses from the Shāhnāma are

cited.285

But, as shown in Appendix J, almost half of these citations also appear in Tār kh-i

jahāngushāy, which was a major source for this volume of Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh. Obviously, most of

these verses entered Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh via Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, as they appear in the same

passages or contexts in both works.286

But, on two occasions, the Shāhnāma verses that are cited

in Tār kh-i jahāngushāy are cited in completely different contexts in the Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh.287

This would indicate that Rashīd al-Dīn did not just repeat what he found in Tār kh-i

jahāngushāy. Also, numerous other verses in the metre of the Shāhnāma, but not always in its

style and language, appear in Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh,288

sometimes along with verses from the

Shāhnāma that are not found in Tār kh-i jahāngushāy.289

Whether these verses were from

versions of the Shāhnāma that were available at the time, or were taken from other works that

were composed in imitation of the Shāhnāma cannot be determined at this point. But, Rashīd al-

Dīn‘s citations from the Shāhnāma that are not found in Tār kh-i jahāngushāy point to his own

use of Firdausī‘s work, or selections from it, for the same purpose that Juvaynī did, that is,

mostly for poetic tropes.

One would obviously have to look for Rashīd al-Dīn‘s use of the Shāhnāma as an

historical source in the second volume of Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, which includes a section on the

history of ancient Iran, but this part of the work has not yet been edited. As noted by Muḥammad

Raushan, Rashīd al-Dīn‘s main sources for the second volume of the work were the histories of

Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) and Ibn al-Athīr (d. 630/1233), and the Fārsnāma (ca. 498/1105–510/1116)

of Ibn al-Balkhī, and other sources like Mas‗ūdī‘s Mur j al-dhahab (336/947), commentaries on

the Qur‘an (tafs r), and the tales of prophets (qi a ).290

According to Charles Melville, Rashīd al-

Dīn mostly used Bay vī‘s Ni ām al-tavār kh (ca. 674/1275) for his accounts about ancient kings

of Iran, and this part of the work also contains citations from the Shāhnāma.291

An examination

82

of how the citations in this part of Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh compare to the verses cited in the first

volume of the work would shed more light on Rashīd al-Dīn use of Firdausī‘s work as a source.

It is noteworthy that, in the introduction to his work where he talks about the greatness of

God, Rashīd al-Dīn quotes a Prophetic Tradition ( ad th), immediately followed by a verse that

he attributes to Firdausī to elaborate on the meaning of the ad th he quotes.292

Referring to

Firdausī in the introduction to the work right next to Prophetic Traditions and Qur‘anic verses is

by itself an indication of the author‘s high regard for the poet as an eloquent sage.

Mujmal al-tavār kh va al- i a . Written by an anonymous author in 520/1126–27,

Mujmal al-tavār kh va al-qi a is a compendium of historical accounts and legends.293

The

author, who recognizes the Shāhnāma as one of his major sources, was from western Iran, most

probably from Hamad n or Asad b d.294

That the Shāhnāma was regarded as an authority in

historical writing in western Iran in the early twelfth century is noteworthy, as it points to the

extent of the popularity of the work outside the sphere of its immediate cultural influence in

north-eastern Iran.

In the introduction to his work, the author of Mujmal al-tavār kh acknowledges the

Shāhnāma as his primary (a l ) source and refers to other versified epics as derivatives (shu‗ba-

hā) of the Shāhnāma.295

He also acknowledges the prose Shāhnāma of Abu al-Mu‘ayyad Balkhī

as one of his sources, and seems to have quoted a few passages from it in his work without

acknowledgment.296

Despite frequent references to Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma, however, only six

verses are cited from it. But, as the author notes in his introduction, unless they served him as

evidence or contained a wisdom eloquently expressed, he did not intend to cite too many verses

in his work. Thus, only on three occasions in his work does he cite verses from the Shāhnāma in

Firdausī‘s exact words. For example, when he relates an account about the mythical Queen

Hum bearing a child from her father, he cites two verses from the Shāhnāma, which clearly

83

state that Hum became pregnant by her father.297

On the other two occasions, the author cites

verses from the Shāhnāma to clarify the meanings of ambiguous terms.298

Besides citing from

the Shāhnāma, the author of Mujmal al-tavār kh refers his readers to Firdausī‘s work for further

details on certain accounts.299

He also informs the reader if no account on a particular topic is

given in the Shāhnāma.300

It must also be noted, however, that the author did not blindly repeat

what he found in Firdausī‘s work. For example, he states that Firdausī recorded the length of

Bahr m‘s kingship to be four months, but that according to the Zoroastrian priest Bahr m (who

compiled a history of ancient Persian kings), he ruled for forty years. He then mentions that forty

years is correct and that he will explain why later.301

On another occasion, he relates an account

about Sh pūr, the son of Ardashīr, and states that in the Shāhnāma that account is given about

another Sh pūr, the one known as Z al-aktāf, not the son of Ardashīr.302

A further example is

where he states that Firdausī reversed the order of the two parts of the name Burz Farī and

changed it to Farīburz, so that it would fit the metre of the poem. He further mentions that

Firdausī did this many times.303

Clearly, despite his high regard for Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma, the

author of Mujmal al-tavār kh used the information he found in it judiciously.

The author of Mujmal al-tavār kh also cites two verses from the Shāhnāma for the

maxims that they contain. Both these verses appear in the introduction to the work. He cites a

verse from the Shāhnāma where he explains that he did his best to present a flawless work. The

verse conveys the idea that not doing a job is better than doing it improperly.304

And, where he

states that his work is not comparable to a work like the prose Shāhnāma of Abū al-Mu‘ayyad or

the verse compositions of Firdausī and Asadī (the author of Garshāsb-nāma), he cites a verse

from the Shāhnāma that indicates it would be irrational to compare a spring to a deep sea.305

In his introduction, the author of Mujmal al-tavār kh also states that, although he could

not produce a work like that of Firdausī, Asadī, or Abū al-Mu‘ayyad, he did not intend to

84

produce a work like theirs either, as his point was to compile reports (akhbār) and histories

(tavār kh) and to explain the symbols (ramz), which were employed in such works ( ثؼی قطب ک

اع نؽذ ظاظى ثؽ قجیل ؼهؿ گلز ).306

This statement demonstrates that medieval readers of the Shāhnāma

and its offshoots were aware of the symbolic language used in them and distinguished symbolic

narratives from historical accounts. It is also noteworthy that the author refers to the composers

of the Shāhnāma and its offshoots as ―sages‖ ( ukamā), but he does not apply the same title to

the authors of prose histories, such as Siyar al-mul k of Ibn al-Muqaffa‗ and the history of

Ḥamza Iṣfah nī.307

This would indicate that he viewed versified histories as books of wisdom,

and not simply as verse renditions of prose histories. As noted above, Ḥamdull h Mustaufī too

expresses the same view about versified histories, where he explains the difference between

versified and prose works. The author of Mujmal al-tavār kh, thus, did not fail to recognize the

Shāhnāma as a book of wisdom, even though he primarily used it for historical information.

Tār kh-i abaristān. Ibn Isfandiy r, the author of Tār kh-i abaristān (written during

603/1206–7 to ca. 613/1216–17), cites eight verses from Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma on three

occasions. The first time, he cites a verse from the Shāhnāma to confirm that the seat of the

ancient Persian mythical king Farīdūn was a place in Ṭabarist n called Tamīsha.308

Ibn

Isfandiy r‘s second citation from the Shāhnāma, without acknowledging his source, is two

verses that refer to the justice and generosity of Farīdūn.309

These two verses are also cited by the

author of Farā‘id al-sul k, already mentioned above, on the justice and generosity of Farīdūn.310

The third time, Ibn Isfandiy r cites five consecutive verses from the Shāhnāma on the fall of

Yazdgird, the last Sasanian king. He admires Firdausī‘s eloquent words on the fall of Yazdgird

and states that Firdausī‘s words on the topic are like miracles in speech.311

Thus, except for the

one verse about Tamīsha, Ibn Isfandiy r did not really use the Shāhnāma to extract historical

85

information from it. He does, however, refer the reader to the Shāhnāmas of Firdausī and Abū al-

Mu‘ayyad for details on the events and characters that he only mentions briefly.312

Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n . A few verses that can be attributed to the Shāhnāma are cited

in the Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n (ca. 603/1206–7). This work, which deals with the history of

the Ghaznavids, is a Persian translation of the Arabic al-Yam n written by Abū Naṣr ‗Utbī, from

350/961–62 to 427/1035–36 or 431/1039–40.313

As mentioned above, two verses cited in this

work are from Asadī Ṭūsī‘s Garshāsb-nāma and contain advice on forbearance and moderation

in punishment.314

The author cites two more verses containing poetic tropes that are in the same

form and metre as the Shāhnāma. Of these two verses, I could only locate one in Kh liqī

Muṭlaq‘s edition, but Kh liqī Muṭlaq considers it an interpolation and therefore does not include

it in the main text of his edition.315

It is remarkable that so few medieval historians cited the Shāhnāma in their works. One

would expect to find more citations from the Shāhnāma in works that covered the history of

ancient Iran. Ironically, it is the histories of the reigns of Turkic and Mongolians rulers of Iran

that contain numerous citations from the Shāhnāma. Later historians‘ use of the Shāhnāma,

which was not so much for the purpose of extracting historical information from it as for its

poetic tropes and maxims, indicates that medieval historians did not generally view the

Shāhnāma as an historical work.

* * * *

The reception of the Shāhnāma at the court of sultan Maḥmūd still remains an enigma.

No contemporaneous author mentions Firdausī by name when referring to the Shāhnāma. The

earliest reference to the reception of the work by its dedicatee, the Ghaznavid sultan Maḥmūd (r.

388/998 to 421/1030), is the anecdote related by Ni mī ‗Arū ī some 150 years after its

86

completion; hence, it may only be legendary. The inconsistent information reported in the earlier

prose prefaces to the Shāhnāma further point to the anecdotal nature of these accounts. So, we

cannot come to any certain conclusion about the reception of the Shāhnāma at the court of sultan

Maḥmūd. But, the political involvement of the original patron of Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma, Manṣūr,

who was killed before he could see the fruit of his cultural undertaking, as well as the political

aspirations of his father, Abū Manṣūr b. ‗Abd al-Razz q, who commissioned a prose shāhnāma,

which was later used by Firdausī as his source, are clear indications that the ancient Persian tales

of the Shāhnāma conveyed important political messages, which were understood by its sponsor

and the contemporary audience of the work. Moreover, the enormous popularity of the

Shāhnāma, which is attested by a wide range of literary genres produced in later periods—from

biographies of poets to treatises on Persian rhetoric, and from heroic, religious, and historical

epics to mirrors for princes and historical writing—provide ample material for the study of the

reception of the Shāhnāma in the decades and centuries after its completion.

To judge from the various medieval sources examined here, it is possible to conclude that

medieval writers perceived the Shāhnāma primarily as a book of ethico-political wisdom and

advice. The development of the literary genre of ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma (selections from the

Shāhnāma), the frequent citations from the Shāhnāma by medieval authors of Persian mirrors for

princes, the ethico-political dimension of later epics composed in imitation of the Shāhnāma, and

Firdausī‘s own epithets, which all point to his wisdom, provide ample evidence for the reception

of the Shāhnāma as a work containing ethico-political lessons for kings and courtiers.

The most illuminating source regarding the reception of Firdausi‘s opus in the decades

following its composition is ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma (474/1081–82), a

compilation of more than 2400 verses selected from the Shāhnāma. The compiler‘s reference to

his own work as the ―kernel‖ (maghz) of the Shāhnāma, his choice of verses, and his comparison

87

of Firdausī‘s work to a garden, the flowers of which are wisdom and advice, provide the most

compelling evidence for the reception of the work as a book of wisdom. We know that ‗Alī b.

Aḥmad was not the only medieval author who produced such a work. J jarmī‘s chapter on the

ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma in his Mu‘nis al-a rār (741/1341), a manual on poetry, indicates that the

author recognized ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma as a distinct genre and therefore provided a sample of it

as a model for those who wanted to compile similar works. What is noteworthy is that, like ‗Alī

b. Aḥmad‘s Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, the majority of verses in J jarmī‘s sample ikhtiyārāt-i

Shāhnāma contain ethico-political wisdom and advice. This would indicate that the content of

other ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāmas were similar to the work compiled by ‗Ali b. Aḥmad, and that other

medieval compilers of such works understood the Shāhnāma in the same way ‗Alī b. Aḥmad did.

Although ‗Alī b. Aḥmad‘s compilation appears to be the only surviving work in this

genre, references in medieval sources point to the existence of other similar works that have not

survived. For example, Aufī‘s high regard, in his Lubāb al-albāb (617/1220–21 to 625/1227–28),

for one such work, which he attributed to Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d-i Salm n (d. 515/1121–2), is testimony

to the existence of a fine ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma in the thirteenth century. R vandī‘s reference in

his Rā at al- ud r (599/1202–3 to 603/1206–7) to novice poets‘ selecting and memorizing

aphorisms from the Shāhnāma indicates that every poet/writer would have had his own

ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma. Further evidence for the existence of ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāmas in medieval

times is Shams-i Qays‘s (early thirteenth century) peculiar citation of five non-consecutive

verses from the Shāhnāma to illustrate the poetic form of masnav , which undoubtedly was taken

from an ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma.

Since the Shāhnāma is about the ethical and political conduct of kings and courtly élites

and the roles of these individuals in the success and failure of kingship, the advice and wisdom

contained in the Shāhnāma were meant to benefit kings and courtiers. This point must be kept in

88

mind when examining selections from the Shāhnāma, for they are often devoid of their original

context and may appear as general advice to anybody.

Another group of medieval works that provide insight into the reception of the Shāhnāma

are the Persian mirrors for princes that contain frequent citations from it. We find more citations

from the Shāhnāma in the medieval Persian mirrors for princes than in any other genre of

classical Persian literature. Although one would expect to find more citations from the Shāhnāma

in medieval Persian historical works that deal with the history of ancient Iran, it is remarkable

that so few medieval historians cited the Shāhnāma as a source of historical information. And,

those who did so usually evince their appreciation of Firdausī‘s eloquence and wisdom displayed

in his work. The Shāhnāma was thus the focus of attention of the authors of mirrors for princes.

Like the compilers of ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, the authors of medieval Persian mirrors for princes

selected from the Shāhnāma aphorisms, proverbs, wise sayings, and descriptions of various

scenes and states. This particular use of the Shāhnāma, however, should not be taken to mean

that the ancient Persian myths and history had lost their currency in medieval times. As

mentioned above with reference to R vandī‘s selections from the Shāhnāma, just one verse from

the account about Gusht sp‘s heavenly cypress tree was enough to evoke the context of that

verse. Furthermore, the anecdotes related in both Persian and Arabic medieval sources

demonstrate that the tales from the Shāhnāma were read to rulers not just to entertain them, but

mainly to educate them on matters related to kingship. One such anecdote is related by Sa‗dī (d.

691/1292) in a chapter of his Gulistān on the conduct of kings. Sa‗dī relates that the account

about the oppressive ruler Żaḥḥ k was read at court to a tyrannical ruler. When the story was

over, the minister asked the ruler if he could tell why Farīdūn, who had no military power,

prevailed over Żaḥḥ k, who was very powerful. The ruler responded that Farīdūn prevailed

because he had the support of the people. On hearing this, the minster sarcastically asked the

89

ruler why then he himself oppressed his own people, and whether he did not wish to stay in

power.316

In another anecdote related by the Arab historian Ibn al-Athīr (d. 630/1233), Maḥmūd

of Ghazna, the ultimate dedicatee of the Shāhnāma, who supposedly did not favour ancient

Persian tales, is reported to have asked his defeated opponent, the Buyid ruler Majd al-Daula (r.

387/997 to 420/1029), whether he had read the Shāhnāma. When Majd al-Daula responded in the

affirmative, Maḥmūd chastised him for not having learned how to behave in front of a

triumphant king.317

These anecdotes demonstrate that the ancient Persian tales were as important

as the wisdom and advice they contained, and that rulers and courtly élites were expected to

learn lessons from them. Sa‗dī clearly expresses this expectation in his panegyric to the Ilkhanid

governor of F rs, Amir Ankiy nū (r. 667/1268–69 to 670/1271–72) in which he states that the

stories about Rustam and Isfandiy r related in the shāhnāmas are meant for rulers

(khudāvandān-i mulk) to learn that they will eventually lose their power to someone else.318

Sa‗dī‘s use of plural shāhnāma-hā indicates that not only the ancient Persian tales related in

Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma but also those of other shāhnāmas were current and considered to be

meaningful in court circles in the thirteenth century.

Further evidence that indicates the entire Shāhnāma, and not just selected verses from it,

enjoyed perusal during medieval times, is Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s remarks in his afar-nāma

about the availability of many corrupted copies of the Shāhnāma in the fourteenth century.

Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s statement points to the fact that the Shāhnāma in its entirety was in high

demand; otherwise, it would not have been copied by so many hands.

The translation of the Shāhnāma into Arabic prose in the twelfth century by al-Fatḥ b.

‗Alī al-Bund rī further points to the popularity of the work not only among Persians, but also

among Arabs.319

It is noteworthy that in the introduction to his translation, Bund rī refers to

Firdausī by the title al-am r al- ak m (the wise leader), and refers to the Shāhnāma as a brilliant

90

(bāri‗) work that contains oceans of pearls of wisdom (mushtamil ‗alā bi ār laāl al- ikam) and

mines of gems of speech (ma‗ādin jawāhir al-kalim).320

These comments demonstrate that

Bund rī considered the Shāhnāma to be a book of wisdom and not a collection of ancient tales.

A thorough examination of medieval Persian epics, which were composed on the model

of the Shāhnāma, can shed considerable light on how their authors perceived Firdausī‘s work.

Many of these epics have not been edited or thoroughly studied, but as briefly shown here, the

authors of the post-Shāhnāma epics understood the ethico-political lessons conveyed through the

tales of the Shāhnāma and they emulated this aspect of the work in composing their own epic

tales.

In order to illustrate how Firdausī uses history and myths to convey ethico-political

lessons, the next chapter will examine the portrayal of Ardashīr, the founder of the Sasanian

dynasty, as an ideal king in the Shāhnāma.

91

1 On the Shāhnāma as epic poetry, see Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics, chaps. 8–11; William L.

Jr. Hanaway, ―The Iranian Epics,‖ in Heroic Epic and Saga: An Introduction to the World‘s

Great Folk Epics, ed. Felix J. Oinas (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1978), 79, 88;

William L. Hanaway, ―Epic Poetry,‖ in Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (Albany, NY:

Bibliotheca Persica, 1988), 102; François de Blois, Persian Literature: A Bio-bibliographical

Survey, vol. 5, Poetry of the Pre-Mongol Period, rev. ed. (London: Routledge Curzon in

association with the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 2004), 112–26; and Ève

Feuillebois-Pierunek, ―L‘épopée iranienne: le Livre des Rois de Ferdowsi,‖ in Épopées du

monde: Pour un panorama (presque) général, ed. Ève Feuillebois-Pierunek (Paris: Classiques

Garnier, 2011), 156–63. According to Jan Rypka, the ancients regarded the Shāhnāma as history

and we can see it that way if we ―strip it of every naïve interpretation that does not get to the real

root of the historical truth.‖ See Jan Rypka, History of Iranian Literature, in collaboration with

Otakar Klíma and others, trans. P. van Popta-Hope, ed. Karl Jahn (Dordrecht, Holland: D.

Reidel, 1968), 159; Ehsan Yarshater considers the Shāhnāma as a literary masterpiece of Persian

historiography. See his ―Iranian National History,‖ 369. Julie Scott Meisami includes the

Shāhnāma in her study of medieval Persian historiography, but, in her opinion, since Firdausī did

not follow the literary tradition of his time, his work is an anomaly in medieval Persian historical

writing. See her Persian Historiography, 37–45. Meisami has also written an article on the

reception of the Shāhnāma as a mirror for princes. In that article, she does not propose that the

Shāhnāma can or should be studied as a mirror for princes; but rather, she maintains her position

on the Shāhnāma as an historical work and argues that later reception of the Shāhnāma was

largely fragmentary, that is, it provided material for later authors of mirrors for princes, epic

romances, panegyrists, etc. She further argues that later authors were generally not interested in

92

the narrative structure of the Shāhnāma. To support her argument, Meisami discusses R vandī‘s

use of the Shāhnāma materials, which in her opinion, were ―extracted from their narrative

contexts and divested of historical significance to become exemplary in a broad ethical sense,

adab rather than history.‖ See her ―The Šâh-nâma as a Mirror for Princes: A Study in

Reception,‖ in Pand-o Sokhan: Mélanges offerts à Charles-Henri de Fouchécour, ed. Christophe

Balaÿ, Claire Kappler, and Ţiva Vesel, (Tehran: Institut français de recherche en Iran, 1995),

265–73. Charles Melville on the other hand views the Shāhnāma as history with literary

dimensions. See Melville, Persian Historiography, xlv. In her study of Sasanian history,

Parvaneh Pourshariati uses the Sasanian section of the Shāhnāma as one of her major sources.

See her Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the

Arab Conquest of Iran (London: I. B. Tauris in association with the Iran Heritage Foundation,

2008), 14 –15.

2 On the similarities and differences between the Shāhnāma and other world epics see Jal l

Kh liqī Muṭlaq, amāsa: Pad da-shinās -i taṭb q -i shi‗r-i pahlavāni (Tehran: Markaz-i d ‘irat

al-ma‗ rif-i buzurg-i isl mī, 1386/2007). On how the Shāhnāma differs from other medieval

Persian historical writings, see Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present,‖ 247–75. Also see

Chapter 2 of the present study.

3 de Fouchécour, Moralia, 51–53; de Fouchécour, ―Une lecture du Livre des Rois,‖ 171–202;

and de Fouchécour, ―Akhl q-i pahlav nī va akhl q-i rasmī,‖ 8–13.

4 For example, see Zabīḥull h Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar Īrān: Az qad mtar n ‗ahd-i tār kh tā

qarn-i chahārdahum-i hijr (Tehran: Amīr Kabīr, 1333/1954), 184–87; Hanaway, ―Iranian

Epics,‖ 92–93; Sayyid Muḥammad Dabīrsiy qī, Zindig nāma-i Firdaus va sarguzasht-i

Shāhnāma, 2nd ed. (Tehran: Qaṭra, 1383/2004), 327–49; Shapur Shahbazi, Ferdows : A Critical

Biography (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Center for Middle Eastern Studies, 1991), 89–

93

97; Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present,‖ 261–64; Rypka, History of Iranian Literature,

157; Mahmoud Omidsalar (Maḥmūd Umīds l r), ―Shāhnāma-i Firdausī va huviyat-i farhangī-i

Maḥmūd-i Ghaznavī,‖ Īrānshinās 11, no. 3 (1378/1999): 616–31, repr. ed., in Mahmoud

Omidsalar (Maḥmūd Umīds l r), Justārhā-yi Shāhnāma-shinās va mabāhis-i adab (Tehran:

Buny d-i mauqūf t-i duktur Maḥmūd Afsh r, 1381/2002), 243–60; and Mahmoud Omidsalar,

―Shāhnāma va ta‗aṣṣub-i dīnī-i Maḥmūd-i Ghaznavī,‖ Īrānshinās 12, no. 2 (1379/2000): 316–

23, repr. ed., in Omidsalar, Justārhā-yi Shāhnāma-shinās , 261–69. For a general review of

different opinions on the topic, see Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Ferdowsi, i. Life, Ferdowsī and

Sultan Maḥmūd.‖

5 Mahmoud Omidsalar, ―Nukta-ī dar Shāhnāma-shin sī va taṣḥīḥ-i matn-i Tār kh-i S stān,‖

Īrānshinās 10, no. 1 (1377/1998): 121–23, repr. ed., in Omidsalar, Justārhā-yi Shāhnāma-

shinās , 190–93. For the paragraph in Tār kh-i S stān, see Tār kh-i S stān, ed. Malik al-Shu‗ar ‘

Bah r (Tehran: Mu‘assisa-yi kh var, 1314/1935), 7–8.

6 Aḥmad b. ‗Umar b. ‗Alī Ni mī ‗Arū ī Samarqandī, Chahār maqāla, ed. Muḥammad Qazvīnī,

(Cairo: 1327/1948), ed. Muḥammad Mu‗īn (Tehran: Zavv r, 1333/1954), 75–83; Ni mī ‗Arū ī,

Revised Translation of Chahár Maqála (―Four Discourses‖) of Ni ámí-i-‗Arúḍí of Samarqand,

trans. Edward G. Browne (London: Luzac, 1921), 54–59.

7 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 81; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 57.

8 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Nig hī t za bi zindigī-n ma-i Firdausī,‖ Nāme-ye Irān-e Bāstān: The

International Journal of Ancient Iranian Studies 6, nos. 1–2 (1385/2006): 13–14. For a ninety-

one-line version of the satire see Firdausī, Le livre des rois, ed. and trans. Jules Mohl, 7 vols.

(Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1838–78), repr. ed. (Paris: Jean Maisonneuve, 1976), 1: lxxxviii–

xcii.

94

9 For a review of the controversy surrounding Firdausī‘s satire, see Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v.

―Ferdowsi, ii. Hajw-n ma.‖ Kh liqī Muṭlaq, Riy ḥī, Ṣaf , Taqīz da, and Nöldeke are among

scholars who maintain Firdausī did compose a satire in criticism of Maḥmūd. See Kh liqī

Muṭlaq, ―Nig hī t za bi zindigī-n ma-i Firdausī,‖ 13–15; Muḥammad Amīn Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-

hā-yi Firdaus -shinās : Majm ‗a-i nivishta-hā-yi kuhan darbāra-i Firdaus va Shāhnāma va

naqd-i ānhā (Tehran: Mu‘assisa-i muṭ li‗ t va taḥqīq t-i farhangī, 1372/1993), 84–97; Ṣaf ,

amāsa-sarāy dar Īrān, 190–191; Sayyid ḤasanTaqīz da, ―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ in

Firdaus va Shāhnāma-i : Shar -i āl-i Firdaus az ma‘khaz-i Shāhnāma; Muqaddama-i qad m-

i Shāhnāma; Ta q q darbāra-i Shāhnāma, ed. Ḥabīb Yaghm ‘ī (Tehran: Anjuman-i s r-i millī,

1349/1970 ), 230n1; and Theodor Nöldeke, Das iranische Nationalepos, 2nd ed. (Berlin:

Vereinigung Wissenschaftlicher Verleger, 1920), 29–31. For some of those who question the

authenticity of the satire, see Maḥmūd Kh n Shīr nī, Chahār maqāla bar Firdaus va Shāhnāma,

trans. ‗Abd al-Ḥay Ḥabībī (K bul, 1355/1977), 37–110; Shahbazi, Ferdows : A Critical

Biography, 97–103; Muḥammad Taqī Bah r, ―Firdausī: Sharḥ-i ḥ l-i Firdausī az rū-yi

Shāhnāma,‖ in Firdaus -nāma-i Malik al-Shu‗arā Bahār, ed. Muḥammad Gulbun (Tehran:

Sipihr, 1345/1966), 30–31; and Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics, 85–86.

10 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 8:259, lines 3393–94.

11 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 8:259–60, lines 3395–98.

12 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Nig hī t za bi zindigī-n ma-i Firdausī,‖ 9–10.

13 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 8:486–87, lines 884–92.

14 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Nig hī t za bi zindigī-n ma-i Firdausī,‖ 10.

15 For a discussion of Firdausī‘s revisions of the Shāhnāma and the dates of different editions of

the work, see Shahbazi, Ferdows : A Critical Biography, 71–94; and Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Nig hī

t za bi zindigī-n ma-i Firdausī,‖ 7–10. For the two different dates of 384/994 and 400/1010

95

given at the end of various manuscripts as the date of the completion of the Shāhnāma, see Jal l

Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Mu‗arrifī va arzy bī-i barkhī az dastnivīs-h -yi Shāhnāma,‖ pt. 1, Īrān-nāma 3,

no. 3 (1364/1985): 386–405; Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Mu‗arrifī va arzy bī-i barkhī az dastnivīs-h -yi

Shāhnāma,‖ pt. 2, Īrān-nāma 4, no. 1 (1364/1985): 18–31; and Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―T rīkh-i

rūz-i p y n-i Shāhnāma,‖ Īrānshināsi 12, no. 4 (1379/2000): 781–84.

16 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:177, line 1053.

17 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:177–78, lines 1054–62.

18 The preface to the manuscript dated 614/1217 (also known as the Florence Manuscript) has

missing folios, but another Shāhnāma manuscript, which is dated 903/1497–98, provides some

of the missing parts of this version of the account about Firdausī and Maḥmūd. For the text of the

preface, as it appears in the Florence manuscript, see Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Dastnivīs-i

Shāhnāma mu‘arrikh-i shishṣad va chah rdah-i hijrī-i qamarī: Dastnivīs-i Flaur ns,‖ Īrān-nāma

7, no. 1 (1367/1998): 89–93. For the complete text of this preface, edited based on two

manuscripts dated 614/1217 and 903/1497–98, see Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās ,

270–87. The manuscript dated 675/1276–77 also contains a second account about Firdausī and

sultan Maḥmūd. For the two accounts, see Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās , 193–206.

Note that the manuscript dated 675/1276–77 was not available to Riy ḥī at the time of his

research, so his edition of these two accounts are based on manuscripts dated 741/1340–41and

803/1400–1, which contain the same preface.

19 Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Ahammiyat va khaṭar-i ma khiz-i janbī dar taṣḥīḥ-i Shāhnāma,‖

Īrānshinās 7, no. 4 (1374/1995): 749n1; Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Chand tau īḥ darb ra-i

dastnivīs-i Flaur ns,‖ Kilk 10 (1369/1990): 227; and Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās ,

189–93.

20 Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās , 194–95, 204, and 272–80.

96

21

Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās , 195, 204–5, and 278–80.

22 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 75; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 54.

23 For a comprehensive study of various medieval sources containing the accounts about, or

references to, Firdausī‘s unrewarded work, see Jal l Matīnī, ―Firdausī dar h la-ī az afs na-h ,‖ in

Shāhnāma-shinās 1: Majm ‗a-i guftārhā-yi nukhust n majma‗-i ‗ilm -i ba s darbāra-i

Shāhnāma dar Ustān-i Hurmuzgān (23–27 Abān 1356) [Proceedings of the first Shāhnāma

congress in the Province of Hurmuzg n, November 14–18, 1978] (Tehran: Buny d-i Shāhnāma-i

Firdausī, 1357/1979), 120–51.

24 Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās , 351–52.

25 Ni mī ‗Ārū ī‘s version of the story also appears in Tār kh-i abaristān, but as shown by

Iqb l Āshtiy nī, it is a later interpolation. See Ibn Isfandiy r, Tār kh-i abaristān, 1:ṣ d, b ‘, jīm,

and 2:21–25.

26 Mukht rī, D vān-i ‗Usmān-i Mukhtār , ed. Jal l al-Dīn Hum ‘ī (Tehran: Bung h-i tarjuma va

nashr-i kit b, 1341/1963), 788n1 and 832, lines 10–14. Also see Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi

Firdaus -shinās , 219–20; and Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Nig hī t za bi zindigī-n ma-i Firdausī,‖ 15; and

Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Ahammiyat va khaṭar-i ma khiz-i janbī,‖ 732, and 749n5.

27 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 5; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 3.

28 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 18; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 12.

29 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 19; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 12.

30 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 44–46; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 29–31.

31 See Qazvīnī‘s comments in Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, xiv–xviii.

32 Ni mī Ganjavī, Khusrau va Sh r n: Niazām Ganja- 2, ed. Bihrūz Sirvatiy n (Tehran: Amīr

Kabīr, 1386/2007), 118, lines 21–22.

33 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 79–80; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 56.

97

34 Ni mī Ganjavī, Khusrau va Sh r n, 281–82, lines 41–42.

35 Ni mī Ganjavī, Iqbāl-nāma yā khirad-nāma, ed. Vaḥīd Dastgirdī (Tehran: Mu‘assisa-i

maṭbū‗ tī ilmī, 1317/1938), 35.

36 Ni mī Ganjavī, Haft Paykar, ed. Vaḥīd Dastgirdī (Tehran: Armagh n, 1315/1936), 19, lines

1–2.

37 Farīd al-Dīn ‗Aṭṭ r, Ilāh -nāma, ed. Fu‘ d Rūḥ nī (Tehran: Zavv r, 1339/1960), 286–87.

38 Farīd al-Dīn ‗Aṭṭ r, Mu bat-nāma, ed. Nūr nī Viṣ l (Tehran: Zavv r, 1338/1959), 366–68.

39 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 83; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 59.

40 Farīd al-Dīn ‗Aṭṭ r, Asrār-nāma, ed. Ṣ diq Gauharīn (Tehran: Sharq, 1338/1959), 188–90.

41 ‗Aṭṭ r, Asrār-nāma, 190.

42 Sa‗d al-Dīn Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, ed. Khalīl Khaṭīb Rahbar (Tehran: Intish r t-i

D nishg h-i Shahīd Bihishtī, 1363/1984), 6–17. For an abridged English translation of this work

see, Var vīnī, The Tales of Marzuban, trans. Reuben Levy (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University

Press, 1959). Var vīnī‘s introduction to the work is not included in the translation.

43 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 13.

44 Var vīnī‘s statement may be verified by Jurf diq nī‘s concluding verses at the end of his

translation, where he complains about his poverty and mentions that he was not rewarded for his

work. See Abū al-Sharaf N ṣiḥ b. Ẓafar Jurf diq nī, Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n , ed. Ja‗far Shi‗ r

(Tehran: Bung h-i tarjuma va nashr-i kit b, 1345/1966), 439.

45 For example, see Farrukhī Sīst nī, D vān-i ak m Farrukh S stān , ed. Muḥammad

Dabīrsiy qī (Tehran: Iqb l, 1335/1956), 66 and 174; and ‗Unṣurī Balkhī, Divān-i ustād ‗Un ur

Balkh , ed. Muḥammad Dabīrsiy qī (Tehran: San ‘ī, 1342/1963), 120, lines 1337–40, and p. 313,

line 2969.

98

46

Both Kh liqī Muṭlaq and Omidsalar maintain that Maḥmūd‘s court poets refer to other

shāhnāmas than Firdausī‘s work. See Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Az Shāhnāma t Khudāynāma: Just rī

darb ra-i ma khiz-i mustaqīm va ghayr-i mustaqīm-i Shāhnāma,‖ unpublished article, posted on

the internet in January 2009 at

http://www.noufe.com/persish/Khaleghi/pdf/azshahnametakhodayname.pdf (accessed September

20, 2009.), 16; and Omidsalar, ―Nukta-ī dar Shāhnāma-shin sī,‖ 123.

47 On other shāhnāmas, see below, pp. 132–34.

48 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 8:259, line 3391.

49 Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Malik Nish būrī Amīr Mu‗izzī, D vān-i Am r Mu‗izz , ed. ‗Abb s Iqb l

Ashtiy nī (Tehran: Kit bfurūshī-i isl miyya, 1318/1939), 268:

اؾ کدب آؼظ ثیظ چؽا گلذ آى قوؽ هي ػدت ظاؼم ؾ كؽظقی ک رب چعاى ظؼؽ

50 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 81–82; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 58.

51 Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Yikī mihtarī būd gardan-far z,‖ Majjalla-i dānishkada-i adabiyāt va

‗ul m-i insān -i Dānishgāh-i Firdaus 2 (2536/1977), repr. ed., in Kh liqī Muṭlaq, Sukhan-hā-yi

d r na, 59–73; and Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Jav n būd va az gauhar-i pahlav n,‖ in Nāmvāra-i

duktur Ma m d Afshār, 1364/1985, repr. ed., in Kh liqī Muṭlaq, Sukhan-hā-yi d r na, 75–92.

Also see Shahbazi, Ferdows : A Critical Biography, 71–75.

52 Abu al-Fa l Khaṭībī, ―Abū Manṣūr Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Razz q,‖ In Dā‘irat al-ma‗ārif-i

buzurg-i islām , 6:290–93; Encyclopaedia Iranica., s.v. ―Abū Manṣūr ‗Abd-al-Razz q;‖ V.

Minorsky, ―The Older Preface to the Shāh-nāma,‖ in Studi orientalistici in onore di Giorgio Levi

Della Vida, 2 vols. (Rome: Instituto per l‘Oriente: 1956), 2:162–166; and Parvaneh Pourshariati,

―The Parthians and the Production of the Canonical Sh hn mas: Of Pahlavī, Pahlav nī and the

Pahlav,‖ in Commutatio et contentio: Studies in the Late Roman, Sasanian, and Early Islamic

99

Near East; In Memory of Zeev Rubin, ed. Henning Börm and Josef Wiesehöfer (Dusseldorf:

Wellem Verlag, 2010), 358–60.

53 Pourshariati, ―Parthians and the Production of the Canonical Sh hn mas,‖ 362; and

Pourshariati, Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire, 263.

54 Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Vahh b Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm-i Shāhnāma,‖ in Qzvīnī,

Daura-i kāmil-i b st maqāla-i Qazv n , 2 vols. in 1, vol. 2, ed. ‗Abb s Iqb l, 2nd ed. (Tehran:

Ch pkh na-i sharq, 1332/1953), 89–90; Minorsky, ―Older Preface,‖ 179.

55 Pourshariati, ―Iranian Tradition in Ṭūs and the Arab Presence in Khur s n,‖ (PhD diss.,

Columbia University, 1995), 239–85. Also see Pourshariati, ―Parthians and the Production of the

Canonical Sh hn mas,‖ 364–67.

56 Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 33–34; Minorsky, ―Older Preface,‖ 168.

57 Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 30–36; Minorsky, ―Older Preface,‖ 167–69.

58 Abū Sa‗īd ‗Abd al-Ḥayy b. al-Żaḥḥ k b. Maḥmūd Gardīzī, Zayn al-akhbār, ed. ‗Abd al-Ḥayy

Ḥabībī (Tehran: Intish r t-i buny d-i farhang-i Īr n, 1347/1968), 167; Abū Sa‗īd ‗Abd al-Ḥayy

Gardīzī, The Ornament of Histories: A History of the Eastern Islamic Lands, AD 650–1041; The

Original Text of Ab Sa‗ d ‗Abd al- ayy Gard z , ed. and trans. Clifford Edmund Bosworth

(London: I. B. Tauris, 2011), 73; Abū al-Naṣr Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Jabb r al-‗Utbī, al-Yām n :

F shar akhbār al-sulṭān yam n al-daula wa am n al-milla Ma m d al-ghaznaw , ed. Iḥs n

Dhunūn al-Th mirī (Beirut: D r al-ṭalī‗a, 1424/2004), 76–87; and Jurf diq nī, Tarjuma-i Tār kh-

i Yam n , 71–75.

59 Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 35–37; Minorsky, ―Older Preface,‖ 169.

60 Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 39–40; Minorsky, ―Older Preface,‖ 171.

61 For a comprehensive annotated list of medieval Persian biographies, see Aḥmad Gulchīn-i

Ma‘ nī, Tār kh-i tazkira-hā-yi fārs , 2 vols. (Tehran: D nishg h-i Tihr n, 1348–50/1969–71).

100

62

Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 75–76; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 54.

63 Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 76; trans., Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 55.

64 For Aufī‘s words on the eminence of Firdausī and his work see Muḥammad ‗Aufī, Lubāb al-

albāb, ed. Edward Browne and Muḥammad ‗Qazvīnī, ed. Sa‗īd Nafīsī (Tehran: Ibn Sīna,

1335/1956), 269.

65 ‗Aufī, Lubāb al-albāb, 269.

ک ضاخ هكؼظ قؼع، ؼزو هللا، خوغ کؽظ اقذ هطبلؼ کع ظاع ک كؽظقی رب چ « اضزیبؼاد نببه»ؽ کف ک ...

....زع ثظ اقذ

66 Mahmoud Omidsalar, ―Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d-i Salm n va Shāhnāma-i Firdausī,‖ in Omidsalar,

Justārhā-yi Shāhnāma-shinās , 214–25; de Blois, Persian Literature, 5:132; and Sunil Sharma,

Persian Poetry at the Indian Frontier: Mas‗ûd-i Sa‗d-i Salmân of Lahore (Delhi: Permanent

Black, 2000), 129. Sharma considers Aufī‘s claim to be false, but he refers to the work that ‗Aufī

attributes to Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d as a ―prose rendering of the Shâhnâmah.‖ See Sharma, Persian

Poetry at the Indian Frontier, 129. Similarly, in his article in Encyclopaedia Iranica, Sharma

refers to the wok as ―an abridged prose Š h-n ma.‖ See Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Mas‗ūd-e

Sa‗d-e Salm n.‖ But, ‗Aufī clearly refers to a selection (ikhtiyārāt) compiled (jam‗ karda) from

the verses of the Shāhnāma, not a prose rendering of the poem as Sharma suggests.

67 See below for more on the selections from the Shāhnāma.

68 ‗Aufī, Lubāb al-albāb, 269–70.

69 Ḥamdull h b. Abī Bakr b. Aḥmad b. Naṣr Mustaufī Qazvīnī Tār kh-i guz da, ed. ‗Abd al-

Ḥusayn Nav ‘ī (Tehran: Amīr Kabīr, 1960), 743; Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Ta‘ríkh-i-Guzída or

Select History, trans. Edward Browne (London: Luzac, 1913). The translations of the Persian

verses are not provided though. Firdausī‘s other poems have been collected by H. Ethé. See H.

Ethé, ―Firdûsî als Lyriker,‖ pt. 1, Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-philologischen und

101

historicshen Classe der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München 2

(1872): 275–304; and H. Ethé, ―Firdûsî als Lyriker,‖ pt. 2, Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-

philologischen und historicshen Classe der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften

zu München 3 (1873): 623–659. Taqīz da rejects the attribution to Firdausī of some of the verses

cited in Ethé‘s articles. See Taqīz da, ―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 274–75.

70 For the account in the preface to the B ysunghurī Shāhnāma, see Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi

Firdaus -shinās , 375–76; and Dabīrsiy qī, Zindig nāma-i Firdaus , 164–65.

71 Faṣīḥ Aḥmad b. Jal l al-Dīn Muḥammad Kh

v fī, Mujmal-i Fa , ed. Maḥmūd Farrukh, 3

vols. (Mashhad: Kit bfurīshī-i B st n, 1339–41/1960–62), 2:129.

72 Faṣīḥ Kh

v fī, Mujmal-i Fa , 2:129–30.

73 Daulatsh h b. ‗Al ‘ al-Daula Bakhtīsh h al-Gh zī al-Samarqandī, Tazkirat al-shu‗arā‘, ed.

Edward G. Browne (London: Luzac, 1901), repr. ed. (Tehran: As ṭīr, 1382/2003), 49.

74 Daulatsh h Samarqandī, Tazkira al-shu‗arā, 49–50.

75 Daulatsh h Samarqandī, Tazkira al-shu‗arā, 50.

76 Nūr al-Dīn ‗Abd al-Raḥm n b. Aḥmad J mī, Bahāristān, ed. Ism ‗īl Ḥ kīmī (Tehran: Iṭṭil ‗ t,

1367/1988), 93.

77 Cf. Meisami, Persian Historiography, 52–53; Meisami, ―Šâh-nâma as a Mirror for Princes,‖

266; and Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present,‖ 262–63, where she argues that the

archaic language, style, and content of the Shāhnāma was the reason for its unenthusiastic

reception by sultan Maḥmūd.

78Angelo Michele Piemontese, ―Ta‗rīf-i Firdausī dar dast-nivishta-h -yi kuhan-i Shāhnāma,‖ in

Sukhanvāra: Panjāh guftār-i pazh hish bi yād-i duktur Parv z Nātil Khānlar , ed. Iraj Afsh r

and Hans Robert Roemer (Tehran: Tūs, 1376/1997), 282–83.

79 Piemontese, ―Ta‗rīf-i Firdausī,‖ 283.

102

80

Piemontese, ―Ta‗rīf-i Firdausī,‖ 283.

81 Piemontese, ―Ta‗rīf-i Firdausī,‖ 282–83.

82 Piemontese, ―Ta‗rīf-i Firdausī,‖ 282.

83 Auḥad al-Dīn Anvarī Abīvardī, D vān-i Anvar , ed. Muḥmmad Taqī Mudarris Ra avī, 2 vols.

(Tehran: Bung h-i tarjuma va nashr-i kit b, 1337/1958), 2:659.

84 Ḍiy ‘ al-Dīn Ibn al-Athīr, al-Mathal al-sā‘ir f adab al-kātib wa al-shā‗ir, ed. Aḥmad al-Ḥūfī

and Badawī Ṭab na, 4 vols. (Cairo: Maktabat Nihḍat Miṣr, 1959–65), 4:12:

لى الؼؽة كی ػ الکزخ الوهبؼالیب، كبى نبػؽن یػکؽکزبثب هلب هي أل الی آضؽ ػلی ػا كبی خعد الؼدن یل

الوم، کوب كؼل اللؽظقی كی ظن نؼؽا، نؽذ هى أزال، یکى هغ غلک كی ؿبیخ اللبزخ الجالؿخ كی لـخ

به، قزى ألق ثیذ هي الهؼؽ، یهزول ػلی ربؼیص اللؽـ، هؽآى الوم، هع أخوغ الوم الکزبة الوؼؽف ثهب

كسبإن ػلی أ لیف كی لـزن أكر ه، ػا ال یخع كی اللـخ الؼؽثیخ ػلی اركبػب رهؼت كب أؿؽاب،

. أى لـخ الؼدن ثبلكج الیب کوطؽح هي ثسؽ ػلی

85 In his brief review of the Persian classical works on rhetoric that were written before the

thirteenth century, Qazvīnī refers to eight works, five of which were composed during the reign

of the Ghaznavids. But unfortunately, except for Tarjumān al-balāgha, we only know the titles

and names of the authors of these works. See Shams-i Qays, al-Mu‗jam f ma‗āy r ash‗ār al-

‗ajam, ed. Muḥammad Qazvīnī, ed. Mudarris Ra avī (Tehran: Kit bfurūshī-i Tihr n,

1338/1959), ii–iv.

86 For example, see Omidsalar, ―Mas‗ūd-i Sa‗d-i Salm n,‖ 217.

87 Muḥammad b. ‗Umar al-R dūy nī, Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed. Ahmed Ateş (Istanbul: Ibrahim

Horoz Basimevi, 1949).

88 Muḥammad b. ‗Umar al-R dūy nī, Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed. ‗Alī Qavīm (Tehran: Ch pkh na

Muḥammad ‗Alī Fardīn, 1339/1960), 8.

103

89

Cf. R dūy nī, Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed. Ateş, 130 and 4–7 (Persian text); and R dūy nī,

Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed. Qavīm, 87–89 and 161–63.

90 R dūy nī, Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed. Qavīm, 87–88. Cf. R dūy nī, Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed.

Ateş, 7, line 3, (Persian text).

91 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 3:194, line 1474.

92 R dūy nī, Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed. Qavīm, 69.

93 ‗Aufī, Lubāb al-albāb, 270. In Ateş‘s edition of the Tarjumān al-balāgha, these two verses are

attributed to Muḥammad ‗Abduh, a scribe (dab r/kātib) at the court of Bughr kh n the

Qarakhanid ruler. See R dūy nī, Tarjumān al-balāgha, ed. Ateş, 103–104.

94 Shams-i Qays, al-Mu‗jam, 178, 419.

95 Shams-i Qays, al-Mu‗jam, 178.

96 Shams-i Qays, al-Mu‗jam, 418–19. The verses are quoted as they appear in al-Mu‗jam.

97 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:230, line 1702.

98 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:241, line 1870.

99 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:231, line 1710–11.

100 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:231, line 1715.

101 Cf. ‗Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma: Matn guz da az qarn-i panjum-i hijr , ed. Muṣṭaf

Jayḥūnī and Muḥammad Fish rakī (Mashhad: Āst n-i Quds-i ra avī, Markaz-i Khur s n-shin sī,

1379/2000), 125–26, lines 1165–67, 1169, and 1176. For more on this work, see above pp. 51–

53.

102 Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar Īrān, 283–342.

103 Abū Naṣr ‗Alī b. Aḥmad Asadī Ṭūsī, Garshāsb-nāma, ed. Ḥabīb Yaghm ‘ī (Tehran: Brūkhīm,

1317/1938), 13–14.

104

104

Ṣaf ‘s survey of Persian epics published in 1954 still remains the most comprehensive work

on the subject. For other studies of post-Shāhnāma epics see François de Blois‘s article in

Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Epics;‖ Marijan Molé, ―L‘épopée iranienne après Firdōsī,‖ La

Nouvelle Clio 5 (1953): 377–93; Hanaway, ―Iranian Epics,‖ 89–93; Henri Massé, Les épopées

persanes: Firdousi et l‘épopée nationale (Paris: Librairie Académique Perrin, 1935), 263-91, and

Firdausī, Le livre des rois, liv–lxxvii. For information on the date, location, and authorship of the

manuscripts, and information on edited works see de Blois, Persian Literature 5:465–75.

105 Molé, ―L‘épopée iranienne après Firdōsī,‖ 386. The work was not edited at the time of Molé‘s

research. For a critical edition of K sh-nāma, see Īr nsh n b. Abī al-Khayr, K sh-nāma, ed. Jal l

Matīnī (Tehran: ‗Ilmī, 1377/1998). For more information on this work and a summary of the

story, see Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Kuš-n ma.‖

106 Jal l Matīnī, ―Barkhī az nayrang-h -yi k rz r dar kūsh-n ma,‖ Īrānshinās 11, no. 3

(1378/1999): 651–52.

107 Matīnī, ―Barkhī az nayrang-h -yi k rz r dar K sh-nāma,‖ 652.

108 Matīnī, ―Barkhī az nayrang-h -yi k rz r dar K sh-nāma,‖ 654–66.

109 For example, see Chapters 12–29 of the twelfth-century Ādāb al- arb va al-shujā‗a (The

manners of war and gallantry) in Muḥammad b. Manṣūr b. Sa‗īd Mub raksh h, Ādāb al- arb va

al-shujā‗a, ed. Aḥmad Suhaylī Khv ns rī (Tehran: Iqb l, 1346/1967). This work is written as a

mirror for princes and contains moral and political advice for rulers, but a good part of it is on

how to be victorious in war. For more on this work, see below, p. 303.

110 Jal l Matīnī, ―Tarjuma-i man ūm-i dīgarī az Yādgār-i Buzurgmihr,‖ Īrān-nāma 5, no. 1

(1365): 115–42. The Pahlavi text of Ayādgār-i Wuzurgmihr was first edited and published by

Jamaspji Minocheherji Jamasp-Asana in Pahlavi Texts (Bombay, 1897–1913), 85–101. For the

Pahlavi text of Ayādgār-i Wuzurgmihr and its transliteration and translation in Persian and

105

English see Andarz-nāma-i Buzurgmihr-i ak m, ed. and trans., Farh d Āb d nī (Iṣfah n:

Intish r t-i D nishg h-i Iṣfah n, 1350/1971). Also see Shaul Shaked‘s edition and translation of

the text published on the website of Middle Persian Dictionary Project at

http://micro5.mscc.huji.ac.il/~msshaul/mpdp (accessed June 12, 2011). For a Russian translation

of the text, along with its transliteration and a commentary, see ―Ayādgār Wuzurgmihr,‖ in

Izvedat‘ dorogi i puti pravednykh: Pekhlevijskie nazidatel‘nye teksty, ed. and trans. O. M.

Chunakova, (Moscow: Nauka, 1991), 49–56 (transliteration), 86–93 (translation), and 117–20

(commentary). For the text in the K sh-nāma, see Īr nsh n, K sh-nāma, 379–84.

111 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:286–303.

112 Matīnī, ―Tarjuma-i man ūm-i dīgarī az Yādgār-i Buzurgmihr, 119–26.

113 Īr nsh n, K sh-nāma, 151, lines 108–09.

114 Īr nsh h b. Abī al-Khayr, Bahman-nāma, ed. Raḥīm ‗Afīfī (Tehran: Shirkat-i intish r t-i ‗ilmī

va farhangī, 1370/1991). As remarked by Jal l Matīnī in the introduction to his edition of K sh-

nāma, the correct name of the poet is ―Īr nsh n,‖ not ―Īr nsh h.‖ See Īr nsh n, K sh-nāma, 25–

30.

115 For some examples, see Īr nsh h, Bahman-nāma, xxiii–xxx, and li–lv.

116 Asadī Ṭūsī, Garshāsb-nāma, ii. Rashīd Y samī has collected and published the aphorisms of

Garshāsb-nāma. See Rashīd Y samī, ed., Andarz-nāma-i Asad (Tehran: Sharq, 1307/1928).

117 Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Gardishī dar Garsh spn ma,‖ pt. 2, Īrān-nāma 1, no. 4 (1362/1983):

552–59; and ―Gardishī dar Garsh spn ma,‖ pt.3, Īrān-nāma 2, no. 1 (1362/1983): 94–147.

118 Farāmarz-nāma, ed., Majīd Sarmadī (Tehran: Anjuman-i Ᾱs r va maf khir-i farhangī,

1382/2003).

119 Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Farāmarz-nāma,‖ Īrān-nāma 1, no. 1 (1361/1982): 22–56; and Jal l

Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Muṭ li‗ t-i ḥam sī 2: Farāmarz-nāma,‖ Nashriya-i dānishkada-i adabiyāt va

106

‗ul m-i insān -i Dānishgāh-i Tabr z 128–29 (1362/1983): 85–121, repr. ed., in Farāmarz-nāma,

8–31. I was not able to consult Marjolijn van Zutphen, ―Faramarz, the Sistani Hero‖ (PhD diss.,

Leiden University, 2011).

120 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Farāmarz-nāma,‖ 30–31.

121 See Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s summary of the poem in his ―Farāmarz-nāma,‖ 26–27. For the verses,

see Farāmarz-nāma, 55–62.

122 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Farāmarz-nāma,‖ 27.

123 ‗Al -nāma: Man ma‘ kuhan, ed. Re Bay t and Abū al-Fa l Ghul mī (Tehran: Mīr s-i

Maktūb, 2010). References are to this edition of ‗Al -nāma. For a general review of the work, see

Muḥammad Re Shafī‗ī Kadkanī, ―Ḥam sa-ī shī‗ī az qarn-i panjum,‖ Majalla-i dānishkada-i

adabiyāt va ‗ul m-i insān -i Dānishgāh-i Firdaus -i Mashhad 33, nos. 3–4 (1379/2000): 425–94,

repr. ed., in ‗Al -nāma: Man ma‘ kuhan, a facsimile edition of the Konya Museum Library MS

no. 2562 (Tehran: Mīr s-i Maktūb, 1388/ 2009), xi–lxxv.

124 ‗Al -nāma, 5, line 94:

ؾ هـؿ ظؼؽ اقذ اؾ آى ظلکم اقذ اگؽ چع نبه ـؿ ضل اقذ

125 ‗Al -nāma, 135, lines 2981–88. On the Karramites, see The Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v.

―Karr miya‖ (by C. E. Bosworth).

126 ‗Al -nāma, 5, lines 95; and Al -nāma, 303, line 6759.

127 For a general review of this work and relevant bibliography, see Charles Melville, ―Ibn

Ḥus m‘s Ḫāvarān-nāma and the Šāh-nāma of Firdawsī,‖ in ―Liber amicorum: Études sur l‘Iran

médiéval et moderne offertes à Jean Calmard,‖ ed. Michele Bernardini, Mashashi Haneda, Maria

Szuppe, special issue, Eurasian Studies 5, nos. 1–2 (2006): 219–34.

107

128

Ibn Ḥus m, ―Khāvarān-nāma,‖ ed. Ḥamīdull h Mur dī (MA thesis, Firdausī University,

Mashhad, 1378/1999), 49, as quoted in Parvīn-Dukht Mashhūr, ―Ru‘y -yi ṣ diq va b zt b-i n

dar Khāvarān-nāma,‖ Fa l-nāma-i Pārs 4, no. 4 (1378/1999): 95–96.

129 Mashhūr, ―Ru‘y -yi ṣ diq,‖ 96.

130 Zabīḥull h Ṣaf , ―Ḥam sa-h -yi t rīkhī va dīnī dar ‗ahd-i ṣafavī,‖ Īrān-nāma 1, no. 1

(1361/1982): 5–21. Also see Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar Īrān, 79–90; and Hossein Esmaïli,

―L‘épopée chiite persane,‖ in Feuillebois-Pierunek, Épopées du monde, 203–26.

131 Shafī‗ī Kadkanī provides some examples of moral advices contained in ‗Al -nāma. See ‗Al -

nāma, xxxvii–xxxviii.

132 On Persian historical epics and particularly Iskandar-nāmas, see Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar

Īrān, 343–76. On Ni mī‘s Iskandar-nāma see Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Eskandar-n ma of

Ne mī;‖ Encyclopaedia Iranica., s.v. ―Eskandar-n ma;‖ and de Blois, Persian Literature,

5:366–70.

133 de Blois, Persian Literature, 5:366–67; and Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Eskandar-n ma of

Ne mī.‖

134 Ni mī Ganjavī, Sharaf-nāma: Ni ām Ganja- 5, ed. Bihrūz Sarvatiy n (Tehran: Tūs,

1368/1989), 91, lines 117–19.

135 Ni mī Ganjavī, Sharaf-nāma, 91, lines 120–21.

136 For a study of these works as mirrors for princes, see Julie Scott Meisami, Medieval Persian

Court Poetry (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987), 192–236.

137 Ni mī Ganjavī, Khusrau va Sh r n, 137, lines 46–48.

138 Ni mī Ganjavī, Khusrau va Sh r n, 137, lines 49–50.

139 Ni mī Ganjavī, Haft Paykar, 16, lines 8–9.

140 Ni mī Ganjavī, Haft Paykar, 16, lines, 10.

108

141

Ni mī Ganjavī, Haft Paykar, 16, lines, 10–11.

142 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma bi-inżimām-i Shāhnāma-i Ab al-Qāsim Firdaus , bi

ta -i amdullāh Mustauf , a facsimile edition of the British Library MS Or. 2833, supervised

by Naṣrull h Pūrjav dī and Nuṣratull h Rastg r, 2 vols. (Tehran: Markaz-i nashr-i d nishg hī,

1377/1999). A critical edition of the work is in progress. See Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma,

ed. Mahdī Mad yinī and others (Tehran: Pazhūhishg h-i ‗ulūm-i ins nī va muṭ li‗ t-i farhangī),

1380/2001–.

143 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, 1:7–8; Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, ed. Mad yinī,

1:p nzdah–hifdah, lines 294–346. Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s edition of the Shāhnāma appears on the

margins of the British Library MS Or. 2833, copied in 807/1405, and published in facsimile

edition noted above.

144 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, 1:6; Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, ed. Mad yinī,

1:chah rdah–p nzdah, lines 258–91.

145 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī‘s imitation of the Shāhnāma is to the extent that he even begins his

afar-nāma in the same style as the Shāhnāma, that is, he starts with the praise of God followed

by the praise of wisdom (khirad) and the myth of creation. Most other classical Persian authors

begin their works with the praise of God followed by the praise of the prophet Muḥammad. See

Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, 1:2–5; Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, yik–shish, lines 1–

110.

146 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, ed. Mad yinī, 1:chah rdah, lines 262–64.

147 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, ed. Mad yinī, 1:chah rdah, line 266.

148 Mad yinī edits ―rāyash‖ (meaning ―his intention‖) in line 265 to ―rā bas,‖ adding in the

footnote that the word reads as ―rāyash‖ in the manuscript. He does not explain why he edited

―rāyash‖ to ―rā bas,‖ which does not seem to bear meaning in the verse.

109

149

Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, ed. Mad yinī, 1:chah rdah, line 273:

گؽ اؾ ظن یبثع قطي ؼگ ث كؽااى نظ هیل هؽظم ثع

150 For the titles and brief reviews of some of these works, see Melville, ―The Mongol and

Timurid Periods, 1250–1500,‖ in Persian Historiography, 193–97; and Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar

Īrān, 354–76.

151 For example, see Michele Bernardini, Mémoire et propagande à l‘époque timouride (Paris:

Association pour l‘Avancement des Études Iraniennes, 2008), 127–54; Charles Melville,

―History and Myth: The Persianisation of Ghazan Khan,‖ in Irano-Turkic Cultural Contacts in

the 11th–17

th Centuries, ed. M. Jeremiás (Piliscaba: The Avicenna Institute of Middle Eastern

Studies, 2003), 133–60; and Melville, ―Mongol and Timurid Periods,‖ 197.

152 Charles Melville, ―Between Firdausī and Rashīd al-Dīn: Persian Verse Chronicles of the

Mongol Period,‖ Studia Islamica, nos. 104–105 (2007): 45–65.

153 Melville, ―Between Firdausī and Rashīd al-Dīn,‖ 63.

154 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:286–303.

155 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:177–219.

156 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, afar-nāma, 1368–86.

157 Melville, ―History and Myth,‖ 137–39 and 141–44.

158 Muḥammad b. ‗Alī b. Sulaym n al-R vandī, Rā at al- ud r va āyat al-sur r, ed. Muḥammad

Iqb l (London: Luzac, 1921), 57–58:

زکن نب به آچ جغ رثعاى هیل کػ هعؼ ظیكذ ثیذ اؾ ؽ کدب اضزیبؼکي یبغگیؽ ثؽ ضاعى نب به ... اؾ "

."هظجذ وبی رب نؼؽ ثـبیذ ؼقػ

159 For a facsimile edition of the manuscript of this work, see Abū al-Majd Muḥammad b.

Mas‗ūd Tabrīzī, Saf na-i Tabr z (Tehran: Markaz-i nashr-i d nishg hī, 1381/2002).

110

160

For a study of the Shāhnāma verses in Saf na-i Tabr z, see Sajj d Āydinlū, ―Shāhnāma dar

‗Saf na-i Tabr z,‘‖ Nāma-i Bahāristān 6, nos. 1–2 (1384–85/2005–6): 233–42.

161 Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma. According to the information provided at the end of

one of the Shāhnāma manuscripts copied at the court of the Timurid prince B ysunghur (d.

1434), the compiler‘s name was ―‗Alī b. Aḥmad Q yinī.‖ See Mahmoud Omidsalar, ―Kit b-i

Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma,‖ Īrānshinās 14, no. 4 (1381/2002): 850–855, repr. ed., in Omidsalar, S

va dau maqāla dar naqd va ta h-i mut n-i adab (Tehran: Buny d-i mauqūf t-i duktur

Maḥmūd Afsh r, 1389/2010), 171–72. The compiler‘s name is also given as ―‗Ali b. Aḥmad al-

Q ‘inī‖ in the colophon of Tehran Gulist n/Āt b y II 352. See de Blois, Persian Literature,

5:132n1.

162 According to the information provided at the end of one of the Shāhnāma manuscripts copied

at the court of B ysunghur, the number of verses compiled by ‗Alī b. Aḥmad was five to six

thousand. See Omidsalar, ―Kit b-i Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma,‖ 173–74.

163 For the patron‘s name and his identity as a Saljūq ruler, see the complier‘s panegyric to him

in Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 26–30, lines 65, 108, and 129. Also see Omidsalar,

―Kit b-i Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma,‖ 175–76, where he draws attention to other epithets of the

Saljūq ruler Malikhsh h rendered in different forms in order to fit the metre of the poem.

164 Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 228, line 58.

165 Muḥammad Amīn Riy ḥī maintains that this work was dedicated to a member of the

Suldūqiy n family, who ruled in Erzurum (eastern Anatolia) in the twelfth century and therefore

suggests that the date 474 be emended to 574. See Riy ḥī, Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās ,

245. But, Muḥsin Z rkir al-Ḥusaynī points out that Malik-sh h of Banī Sulduq ruled from 580–

590 and did not have the epithet Abū al-Fatḥ, thus rejecting Riy ḥī‘s suggestion, and arguing that

the compiler was ‗Alī b. Aḥmad Asadī Ṭūsī, the author of Garshāsb-nāma. See Muḥsin Z rkir

111

al-Ḥusaynī , ―Sukhanī chand az ikhtiy r t-i Shāhnāma,‖ Nāma-i farhangistān-i zabān va adab-i

fārs 5, no. 3 (1381/2002): 88, and 90–91.

166 Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 229.

167 ‗Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 227, lines 29–32:

زکوذ نکلذ[ ]گل ثبؽ ظؼ پع بهؼ به رب ا ثگلذ ظؼ ایي

168 ‗Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 24, line 17 (کدب هـؿ نبه ایي ثظ ثف); 228, line 52;

and 227, line 26 (ث چهن ضؽظ ثگؽ ایي اضزیبؼ).

169 Muḥammad b. Badr al-J jarmī, Mu‘nis al-a rār f daqā‘iq al-ash‗ār, ed. Mīr Ṣ lih Ṭabībī, 2

vols. (Vol. 1, Tehran: Ittiḥ d, 1337/1959; Vol. 2, Tehran: Anjuman-i s r-i millī, 1350/1971),

2:841–860.

170 de Blois, Persian Literature, 5:132–37.

171 Charles Melville, ―Firdawsi‘s Shahnama and Its Reception in India‖ (paper presented at the

Seventh Iranian Studies Biennial, Toronto, August 2, 2008). For a recent edition of this work, see

Tavakkul Beg, Tār kh-i dilgushā-yi Shamsh r-Khān , ed., Ṭ hira Parvīn Akram (Islam Abad,

Pakistan: Markaz-i taḥqīq t-i f rsī-i Īr n va P kist n, 2005). Also see de Blois, Persian

Literature, 5:133–134.

172 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Ahammiyat va khaṭar-i ma khiz-i janbī,‖ 728. On problems concerning

critical editions of the Shāhnāma and suggestions for future editions of the poem, see Amin

Mahdavi, ―‗Genetically Modified Text‘ or ‗Critical Edition:‘ The Shāhnāma Genome Project,‖

Persica 19 (2003): 1–31.

173 For example, as shall be pointed out below, two verses from Asadī Ṭūsī‘s Garshāsb-nāma

appear in three of the works reviewed here.

174 Meisami, ―Šâh-nâma as a Mirror for Princes,‖ 265–273; Julie Scott Meisami, ―R vandī‘s

Rā at al- ud r: History or Hybrid?‖ Edebiyat 5, no. 2 (1994): 183–215; and Julie Scott

112

Meisami, ―Mixed Prose and Verse in Medieval Persian Literature,‖ in Prosimetrum:

Crosscultural Perspectives on Narrative in Prose and Verse, ed. Joseph Harris and Karl Reichl

(Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997), 304–9.

175 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, xxii.

176 For these verses in the order in which they appear in the Rā at al- ud r, see Appendix A (1),

and in the order in which they appear in the Shāhnāma, see Appendix A (2). Appendix A (2)

demonstrates which parts of the Shāhnāma were mostly used by R vandī.

177 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, xxii.

178 Meisami, ―Šâh-nâma as a Mirror for Princes,‖ 268 and 273; and Meisami, ―R vandī‘s Rā at

al- ud r,‖ 187.

179 Meisami, ―Šâh-nâma as a Mirror for Princes,‖ 269n13; Meisami, ―R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r,‖

204n14.

180 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, 29, lines 1–5.

181 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, 29, line 6. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:283, line 771:

ظؼضزی ثکهزن ث ثبؽ ثهذ کؿ ثبؼؼرؽ كؽیعى کهذ

182 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:81–82, lines 60–63.

183 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:82–83, lines 64–73.

184 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:83, line 75.

185 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:83–84, lines 74–85.

186 According to Meisami, the tree ―for Firdawsī was his poem,‖ but this is not borne out by the

context. See Meisami, ―Mixed Prose and Verse,‖ 306; and Meisami, ―R vandī‘s Rā at al-

ud r,‖ 189.

187 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, 29, lines 7–16. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 3:3–4, lines 1–12. Also see

Appendix B.

113

188

‗Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 99–100, lines 831–41.

189 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, 29, line 66. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 3:4, line 11. Also see Appendix

B.

190 ‗Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 100, line 841. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 3:4, line 11.

Also see Appendix B. For more examples of the difference in the sequence of verses in the two

works, see Appendix C.

191 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, 29, line 67. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:467, line 29. Also see

Appendix B.

192 ‗Alī b. Aḥmad, Ikhtiyārāt-i Shāhnāma, 145, line 1420; and Appendix B.

193 R vandī, Rā at al- ud r, 59, lines 15–16.

194 Meisami, ―Šâh-nâma as a Mirror for Princes,‖ 265–73; Meisami, ―R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r,‖

201–203.

195 For R vandī‘s citations form other Arabic and Persian sources, see R vandī, Rā at al- ud r,

xxii.

196 For a discussion of R vandī‘s borrowings, especially from Firdausī and Ni mī Ganjavī, see

Meisami, ―R vandī‘s Rā at al- ud r,‖ 186–203.

197 On Khusrau va Sh r n as a mirror for princes, see Meisami, Medieval Persian Court Poetry,

192–98.

198 Abū al-Fa l Yūsuf b. ‗Alī Mustaufī, Khirad-nāma, ed. Adīb Burūmand (Tehran: Anjuman-i

s r-i millī, 1347/1968).

199 Yūsuf b. ‗Alī, Khirad-nāma, 1: رب ؽک رؤهل کع خبى ا ثیلؽؾظ

200 See Muḥammad Dabīrsiy qī, ―Ash‗ r-i Firdausī dar Khirad-nāma va mav i‗-i nh dar

Shāhnāma,‖ Fa lnāma-i anjuman-i āsār va mafākhir-i farhang 2, no. 1 (1381/2002): 4–18.

114

201

Farā‘id al-sul k, ed. Nūr nī Vis l (Tehran: P zhang, 1368/1989). According to the editor of

the work, the identification of the author who refers to himself only with the pen-name ―Shams‖

is unknown. See Farā‘id al-sul k, xxiv–xxv. But, Muḥammad Amīn Riy ḥī opines that this

―Shams‖ is the famous early thirteenth-century poet Shams-i Saj sī. See Jam l Khalīl Shirv nī,

Nuzhat al-Majālis, ed. Muḥammad Amīn Riy ḥī (Tehran: Zavv r, 1366/1987), 72–73.

According to de Fouchécour, the author is Isḥ q b. Ibr hīm Q nim al-Ṭ ‘ī of Saj s, a district of

Zanjan in north-western Iran. See de Fouchécour, Moralia, 288.

202 For a review and analysis of the narratives of this work, see ‗Alīri Nabīlū, ―Barrasī va

taḥlīl-i ‗an ṣur-i d st nī-i Farā‘id al-sul k,‖ Majjala-i dānishkada-i adabiyāt va ‗ul m-i insān -i

Dānishgāh-i I fahān, n.s., 2, no. 3 (1389/2010): 97–116.

203 de Fouchécour, Moralia, 288.

204 Farā‘id al-sul k, 49–63.

205 Farā‘id al-sul k, 82.

206 Farā‘id al-sul k, 71.

207 On Sindbād-nāma, see above, pp. 73–74.

208 Farā‘id al-sul k, 42: اکى ثب هطلى کزبة هؽاخؼذ کین ظؼ هکبؼم هسبقي هلک قطي ؼاین.

209 Farā‘id al-sul k, 42.

210 Farā‘id al-sul k, 42. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 8:458, line 552. This verse is attributed to

Firdausī in the Chahār maqāla as well. See Ni mī ‗Arū ī, Chahār maqāla, 18; trans., Ni mī

‗Arū ī, Four Discourses, 11.

211 Farā‘id al-sul k 43–51.

212 Farā‘id al-sul k, 51. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:85, lines 489–90.

213 For the verses and their location in the Shāhnāma, see Appendix D. For the author‘s

acknowledgement of Firdausī, see Farā‘id al-sul k, 20, 594.

115

214

Farā‘id al-sul k, 7, 11, 13, 20, 21, 42, 51, 52, 594.

215 For the author‘s acknowledgement of Firdausī in the prologue, see Farā‘id al-sul k, 51, and

in the epilogue, see Farā‘id al-sul k, 594.

216 Farā‘id al-sul k, 537. Interestingly, Kh liqī Muṭlaq considered this verse to be an

interpolation and removed it from the main text. For quick reference, see Appendix D, line 65.

217 Farā‘id al-sul k, 330.

218 Farā‘id al-sul k, 351 and 353.

219 Farā‘id al-sul k, 51: ثعام هیبؼ ثیکجبؼگی کی خبى ؼا ثکنع ؾ ثیچبؼگی

―Do not bring him to the point, where he would have no choice but to give up his life.‖

Cf. Asadī Ṭūsī, Garshāsb-nāma, 360, lines 73–74:

ک خبى ؼا ثکنع یکجبؼگی چبهبى هگؽظاى ؾ ثیچبؼگی

220 Jurf diq nī, Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n , 30.

221 Najm-i R zī (Najm al-Dīn Abū Bakr b. Muḥammad b. Sh h var b. Anūshirv n R zī), Mir ād

al-‗ibād, ed. Muḥammad Amīn Riy ḥī (Tehran: Bung h-i tarjuma va nashr-i kit b, 1352/1973),

454; Najm al-Dīn R zī, The Path of God‘s Bondsmen from Origin to Return (Mer ād al-‗ebād

men al-mabdā‘ elā‘l-ma‗ād), trans. Hamid Algar (Delmar, NY: Caravan Books, 1982), 426.

222 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 23, and 738–39. Var vīnī‘s introduction and epilogue, which

contain the name of the dedicatee, and chapter 9 of the work are not included in Levy‘s

translation of Marzbān-nāma.

223 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 20:

ههزول ثؽ چعیي ظاقزبى ثؿثبى جؽقزبى پبؼقی هعین ثبقزبى اظا کؽظ آى ػبلن هؼی ؼا ثلـذ بؾل ػجبؼد ؽ ثبثی

.قبكل ظؼ چهوب ضاؼ گؽظایع

224 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 20–21.

116

225

Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 39; trans., Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 13. In his Qāb s-nāma

(475/1082), ‗Unṣur al-Ma‗ lī Kayk ‘ūs states that his mother was the daughter of Prince

Marzb n b. Rustam b. Sharvīn, who composed the Marzbān-nāma. See ‗Unṣur al-Ma‗ lī

Kayk ‘ūs b. Iskandar b. Q būs, Qāb s-nāma, ed. Ghul m Ḥusayn Yūsufī, 14th ed. (Tehran:

Intish r t-i ‗ilmī va farhangī, 1385/2006), 5.

226 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 39–92.; trans., Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 13–31.

227 See Appendix E for Var vīnī‘s citations from the Shāhnāma.

228 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 173. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:180, line 1108. For quick

references to the verses cited from Marzbān-nāma and their locations in the Shāhnāma, see

Appendix E. Levy‘s translation of Marzbān-nāma does not include this verse, but for its context,

see Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 63.

229 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 206. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 2:419, line 8. The passage containing

this verse does not appear in Levy‘s translation.

230 The verses are not included in Levy‘s translation, but for their context, see Var vīnī, Tales of

Marzuban, 94–96, where the wisdom of a sage is put on display for a demon (d v) who has no

wisdom. The second verse is also cited in Farā‘id al-sul k in the chapter that concerns the virtue

of wisdom, see Farā‘id al-sul k, 114.

231 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 268. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:323, line 383; and Firdausī,

Shāhnāma, 1:4, line 18.

232 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 273. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:4, line 14.

233 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 278–347; trans., Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 99–125.

234 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:374–81. Also see the editors‘ extensive comments on this story in

Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, Yāddāsht-hā-yi Shāhnāma (bā i lā āt va afz da-hā), 4 pts. in 4 vols., pt. 1

in 2 vols., pts. 3–4 in vol. 4, pt. 3 with the cooperation of Maḥmūd Ūmīds lar and Abū al-Fa l

117

Khaṭībī (New York: Persian Heritage Foundation, 2001–9), repr. ed., 4 pts. in 3 vols., pts. 2–3 in

1 vol. (Tehran: Markaz-i d ‘irat al-ma‗ rif-i buzurg-i isl mī, 1389/2011), pt. 3, 344–48, 423.

Pagination is the same in both editions. All references are to the reprint edition.

235 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 278–85; trans., Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 99–105.

236 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 285. The wording of the first verse is slightly different in the

Shāhnāma. See Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:219, lines 1575–76. Levy‘s translation does not include

these verses, but for their context, see Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 101.

237 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 288–92; trans.,Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 102–4.

238 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 293. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 7:179, line 1094, and Firdausī,

Shāhnāma, 7:180, line 1104.

239 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 315–20; trans., Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 114–16.

240 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 457–70; trans., Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban,173–77.

241 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 470.

242 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 4:3, line 5.

243 On Firdausī‘s preambles to his tales, see below, pp. 137–38.

244 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 4:3, lines 1–15.

245 See Muḥammad b. ‗Alī b. Muḥammad al-Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Sindbād-nāma, ed. Aḥmad Ateş

(Istanbul: Milli e itim basimevi, 1949), 126, line 10. For a more recent edition of this work, see

Muḥammad b. ‗Alī Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Sindbād-nāma, ed. Muḥammad B qir Kam l al-Dīnī

(Tehran: Mīr s-i Maktūb, 2002). Subsequent references to this work are to Ateş‘s edition.

246 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 482–536; trans., Var vīnī, Tales of Marzuban, 183–98.

247 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 536.

248 For the first verse in the Shāhnāma, see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:326, line 411:

ث هؽظی هکي ثبظ ؼا ظؼ هلف قذ کف هگی آچ ؽگؿ گلز

118

Do not say what no one has ever said

Do not [try] to put the wind in a cage, [relying] on your manliness (that is, do not try to

do something impossible).

The second verse is not modified. See Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:326, line 417. In the third verse,

only one word is changed. See Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:330, line 467:

یی ک آاؾ ؼثب هیع یی ر گؽظکهبى ؼا کدب ظیع

For a translation of this tale and the above-mentioned verses, see Jerome W. Clinton, trans., In

the Dragon‘s Claws: The Story of Rostam and Esfandiyar from the Persian Book of Kings by

Abolqasem Ferdowsi (Washington, DC: Mage, 1999), 56, 59.

249 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 620; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 4:248, line 1220.

250 Var vīnī, Marzbān-nāma, 23–24:

قطي هزبػی ظؼ ثبؼ ضظ جكزن، ؼأیذ الؼؽی ضیؽا لی هي ضبۀ كکؽد یچ يبزت ظابی آنکبؼ بى ظاع ک اؾ بى

الثة الوؼبؼ ؽ ظؼی ک ظؼ خیت كکؽ گؽیجبى قطي هبعم اؾ ظؼج هلکؽۀ ضیم ثیؽى گؽكزن ؽ هؽخبی ک اؾ

.یطزن، اؾ ضؿاۀ زبكظۀ ضظ ثؽآؼظمآقزیي ػول خبى ؼ

and 736–37:

اع، چبى هسزؽؾ ثظ ک ظاهي قطي ثثلل ضبئیع اؾ اهثبل ناع انؼبؼ ربؾی پبؼقی ک ظیگؽاى ظؼ کزت ایؽاظ کؽظ

.کؽظهبلیعۀ ظیگؽاى اقزهوبم هکیعۀ ایهبى ثبؾ یلزبظ اال ػلی قجیل اعؼح ثگلبی ثئیع ظقذ

Levy‘s translation does not include these passages.

251 Farā‘id al-sul k, 593:

…ام اؾ یچ يسیل هؼبذ طلجیػ ظؼ پؽظاضزي ایي هدوع ثیچ کزبة اقزؼبذ جؽظ

252 For commentaries on the Persian and Arabic verses and proverbs used in this work, as well as

a glossary of its terms, see ‗Alīmuḥammd Hunar, Yāddāsht-hā-yi Sindbād-nāma (Tehran:

Buny d-i mauqūf t-i duktur Maḥmūd Afsh r, 1386/2007).

119

253

On Sindbād-nāma as a symbolic account of the Zurvanite cosmogony, see Mohsen Zakeri,

―Sindbādnāma: A Zurvanite Cosmogonic Legend?‖ in Early Islamic Iran, ed. Edmund Herzig

and Sarah Stewart (London: I. B. Tauris, 2011), 42–58.

254 The work also contains six more verses in the meter of the Shāhnāma, which I could not

identify. For all fifteen verses, see Appendix F.

255 For a list of poets whose works are cited in Sindbād-nāma, see Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Sindbād-

nāma, 412–14. Under the entry ―Firdausī,‖ Ateş refers the reader to four verses cited in the text,

but one of them (p. 120, line 17) is in Arabic. Also, the reference to p. 116, line 5, should be

amended to p. 116, line 13.

256 For the four verses, see Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Sindbād-nāma, p. 36, lines 7–9 and p. 252, line

10.

257 Aufī, Lubāb al-albāb, 120–21.

258 Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Aghrāż al-siyāsa f a‗rāż al-riyāsa: Matn az qarn-i shishum-i hijr , ed.

Ja‗far Shi‗ r (Tehran: Intish r t-i D nishg h-i Tehran, 1349/1970).

259 Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Aghrāż al-siyāsa, v–vii, and 4–5.

260 The author states that he selected seventy-five men, but the work contains seventy-four

chapters on seventy-four men. See Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Aghrāż al-siyāsa, 18–19. It is possible

that he counted his own patron as one of the seventy-five men; although, no chapter is devoted to

his aphorisms.

261 See Appendix G for the Shāhnāma verses cited in Aghrāż al-siyāsa.

262 Ẓahīrī Samarqandī, Aghrāż al-siyāsa, 210–11; and Appendix G, lines 3–5.

263 Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 412–79; trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 394–

444.

120

264

Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 451, 542; and Appendix H, lines 6–10; trans., Najm-i R zī,

Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 423, 490.

265 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Ahammiyat va khaṭar-i ma khiz-i janbī,‖ 738.

266 Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 2 and 66; trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 26 and

95. Appendix H, lines 1–2.

267 Fakhr al-Dīn ‗Ir qī (d. 688/1289), who was contemporaneous with Najm-i R zī, cites this

verse in his address to God without any reference to Firdausi. See Fakhr al-Dīn Ibr hīm

Hamad nī ‗Ir qī, Kulliyāt-i ‗Irāq , ed. Sa‗īd Nafīsī (Tehran: Kit bkh na-i San ‘ī, 1335/1956),

338, (lam‗a no. 8). ‗Aṭṭ r alludes to God‘s forgiveness of Firdausi because of the verse he

composed on the oneness of God, but he does not quote the verse. See ‗Aṭṭ r, Asrār-nāma, 188–

190. We find a verse with similar wording and addressed to God in Ni mī Ganjavī‘s Sharaf-

nāma. See Ni mī Ganjavī, Sharaf-nāma, 53, lines 1–2:

ضعایب خبى پبظنبی ر ؼاقذ ؾ هب ضعهذ آیع ضعائی ر ؼاقذ

آچ غری ذئی و یكزع پغری ذئی تلذیپب

Another version of this verse that is addressed to God, appears in J mī‘s Khirad-nāma-i

Iskandar . See J mī, Masnav -i haft aurang, ed. Murti Murdarris Gīl nī (Tehran: Sa‗īdī,

1337/1958912), lines 1–4:

الی کوبل الی ر ؼاقذ خوبل خبى پبظنبی ر ؼاقذ

خوبل ر اؾ قغ ثیم ثؽى کوبل اؾ زع آكؽیم ثؽى

طان ر ؼا هویع ث ایب عان ر ؼا تلذی پغری

غری ذییظ كذ ریی ک كزیتلذی پغری رب

This verse and the account associated with it (that is, Firdausī composed it on the oneness of God

and, in return, God forgave all his sins and sent him to heaven) appears in Dabīrsiy qī‘s edition

of the prose preface to B ysunghurī Shāhnāma (completed in 833/1430), but Riy ḥī‘s edition of

121

the same preface does not include it. Cf. Dabīrsiy qī, Zindig nāma-i Firdaus , 198; and Riy ḥī,

Sarchishma-hā-yi Firdaus -shinās , 416. Daulatsh h Samarqandī too includes this verse and the

account associated with it in his work. See Daulatsh h Samarqandī, Tazkirat al-shu‗arā‘, 54.

268 Cf. Firdausī, Shah Nameh: An Heroic Poem; Containing the History of Persia from Kioomurs

to Yesdejird, ed. Turner Macan, 4 vols. (Calcutta, 1829), 2:714; Firdausī, Le livre des rois, ed.

Mohl, 3:200, line 731; Firdausī, Shāhnāma-i Firdaus , ed. E. È. Bertel‘s and others, 9 vols.

(Moscow: Nauka, 1960–71), 4:254n11; Firdausī, Shāhnāma, ed. Kh liqī Muṭlaq, 3:238.

269 Cf. Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 82; trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 109;

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:7, lines 65–66. Appendix H, lines 3–4.

270 Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 93–94; trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 120.

271 Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 94; trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 120–21.

272 Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 95–96; trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 121.

273 Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 96; trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 121. Cf.

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:151, line 993.

274 Najm-i R zī, Mir ād al-‗ibād, 444:

گؽ خبى ظاؼاقزی، ن ظؼ خبى ظاؼاقزی چى خبى ثگؽكذ اقکعؼ ؾ ظاؼا، ن عانذ

نبى ثكز کوؽ خؾاقزی کؿ یت ریؾ آى و نببى ایؽای رؼای کدبقذ

trans., Najm-i R zī, Path of God‘s Bondsmen, 419:

Alexander took the world from Darius, then lost it,

For Darius would yet be king, were rule everlasting!

Where now are all the kings of Iran and Turan

From the awe of whose swords Gemini stood girded to serve?

275 This study is not concerned with references of later medieval (post-Mongol and beyond)

historians to Firdausī and his work.

122

276

‗Al al-Dīn ‗Aṭ Malik b. Bah ‘ al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Muḥammad Juvaynī, Tār kh-i

jahāngushāy, 3 pts., ed. Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Vahh b Qazvīnī (Leiden: Brill, 1912–37); ‗Al

al-Dīn ‗Aṭ Malik Juvaynī, The History of the World-Conqueror, trans. John Andrew Boyle, 2

vols. (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1958).

277 For the verses that contain aphorisms, see Appendix I, lines 2, 3, 7, 8, 13, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34,

47, 48, 49, 53–54, 64, 70, 71, 74, 75–77.

278 For some examples, see Appendix I, lines 7–8, 19–20, 44–46, 62–63.

279 Cf. Juvaynī, Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, 2:139, line 15; trans., Juvaynī, History of the World-

Conqueror, 2:408; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:347, line 125. For quick reference, see Appendix

I, line 59.

280 Cf. Juvaynī, Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, 2:116, line 15; trans., Juvaynī, History of the World-

Conqueror, 2:386; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 2:186, line 866. For quick reference, see Appendix

I, line 50.

281 For some examples, see Żiy ‘ al-Dīn Sajj dī, ―Shāhnāma dar Tār kh-i jahāngushāy-i

Juvaynī,‖ in Shāhnāma-shināsi 1, 243–45. On Juvaynī‘s use of the Shāhnāma, also see

Assadullah Souren Melikian-Chirvani, ―Le livre des rois: Miroir du destin II; Takht-e Soleym n

et la symbolique du Shāh-nāme.‖ Studia Iranica 20, no. 1 (1991): 54–74.

282 Juvaynī, Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, 2:31, line 7; trans., Juvaynī, History of the World-Conqueror,

1:302.

283 Juvaynī, Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, 1:103, line 5–6; trans., Juvaynī, History of the World-

Conqueror, 1:130.

284 Rashīd al-Dīn Fa lull h Ḥamad nī, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, ed. Muḥammad Raushan and Muṣṭaf

Mūsavī, 4 vols. (Tehran: Alburz, 1373/1994); [Rashīd al-Dīn Fa lull h] Rashiduddin Fazlullah,

Jami‗u‘t-tawarikh (Compendium of Chronicles): A History of the Mongols, trans. W. M.

123

Thackston, 3 pts. ([Cambridge, MA]: Harvard University, Department of Near Eastern

Languages and Civilizations, 1998–99.

285 See Appendix J.

286 The same may be observed in the works of later historians whose citations from the

Shāhnāma point to intermediary sources and not the Shāhnāma itself. For example, Tār kh-i

guz da contains three verses from the Shāhnāma in a passage that is clearly taken from the works

of earlier historians. Cf. Mustaufī, Tār kh-i guz da, 469–70; Juvaynī, Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, 2:31;

trans., Juvaynī, History of the World-Conqueror, 1:302; Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, 1:349;

trans., Rashīd al-Dīn, Compendium of Chronicles, 1:170.

287 Cf. Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, 2:163; trans., Juvaynī, History of the World-Conqueror, 2:431;

Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, 1:265; trans., Rashīd al-Dīn, Compendium of Chronicles,

1:131. Also cf. Juvaynī, Tār kh-i jahāngushāy, 1:143; trans., Juvaynī, History of the World-

Conqueror, 1:182; Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, 2:1085; trans., Rashīd al-Dīn, Compendium

of Chronicles, 530.

288 For a list of Persian verses cited in Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, see Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh,

4:2445–56.

289 For example, see Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, 1:474, where two consecutive verses are

cited, one of which is from the Shāhnāma and the other one is not. Also see Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗

al-tavār kh, 2:1103, where three consecutive verses are cited, in which the first and third verses

are from two different parts of the Shāhnāma, and the second verse is not from the Shāhnāma.

For the location of the verses in the Shāhnāma, see Appendix J.

290 Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, lxi.

291 Charles Melville, ―Rashīd al-Dīn and the Shāhnāma‖ (paper presented at the Shahnama

Millennium Conference: Firdausi; The Next Thousand Years, Cambridge, December 13–15,

124

2010). For Bay vī‘s particular treatment of Iranian history, see Charles Melville, ―From Adam

to Abaqa: Q ḍī Baiḍ wī‘s Rearrangement of History,‖ Studia Iranica 30, no. 1 (2001): 67–86;

and Charles Melville, ―From Adam to Abaqa: Q ḍī Baiḍ wī‘s Rearrangement of History (Part

II),‖ Studia Iranica 36, no. 1 (2007): 7–64. For a Persian translation of these two articles, see

Charles Melville, Az Adam tā Abaqa: Barqarār -i tart b-i tāza dar tār kh tavassuṭ-i Qāż

Bayżāv , trans. Muḥammad Ri Ṭahm sbī, Ᾱyina-i M rās: Fa lnāma-i v zha-i naqd-i kitāb,

kitābshinās , va iṭṭilā‗-risa n dar auzh-i mut n 6, no. 14 (1387/2009).

292 Rashīd al-Dīn, Jāmi‗ al-tavār kh, 22; trans., Rashīd al-Dīn, Compendium of Chronicles, 1:13.

293 Mujmal al-tavār kh va al-qi as , ed. Malik al-Shu‗ar ‘ Bah r (Tehran: Kul la Kh var,

1318/1939).

294 Mujmal al-tavār kh, xxxv–xxxvi.

295 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 2: اؾ آچ ضاع این ظؼ نببهۀ كؽظقی ک ايلی اقذ، کزبثبء ظیگؽ ک نؼجبء آكذ

296 As noted by Malik al-Shu‗ar ‘ Bah r, the style of the prose in certain passages seems to be

older than that of the author. These changes in style made him suspect that the author quoted

directly from the prose Shāhnāma of Abū al-Mu‘ayyad. See Mujmal al-tavār kh, v–vi.

297 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 30–31; and Appendix K, lines 4–5.

298 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 41; and Appendix K, lines 3 and 6.

299 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 28 and 58.

300 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 28.

301 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 65.

302 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 63.

303 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 29.

304 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 8; and Appendix K, line 2. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:175, line 1036.

305 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 3; and Appendix K, line 1. Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 3:192, line 1436.

125

306

Mujmal al-tavār kh, 3.

307 Mujmal al-tavār kh, 2.

308 Ibn Isfandiy r, Tār kh-i abaristān, 1:58; and Appendix L, line 1. The Persian verses are not

translated in the abridged translation of the work.

309 Ibn Isfandiy r, Tār kh-i abaristān, 1:60; Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:85, lines 489–90; and

Appendix L, lines 2–3.

310 Cf. Farā‘id al-sul k, 51; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:85, lines 489–90.

311 Ibn Isfandiy r, Tār kh-i abaristān, 1:155; and Appendix L, lines 5–8. For the context of

these verses in the abridged translation of the work, see Ibn Isfandiy r, History of abaristán, 98.

312 Ibn Isfandiy r, Tār kh-i abaristān, 1:60, 1:82, 1:135; trans., Ibn Isfandiy r, History of

abaristán, 18, 85. The reference to Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma in Tār kh-i abaristān, 1:82 does not

appear in the translation of the work.

313 On ‗Utbī‘s work and its translation by Jurf diq nī, see Meisami, Persian Historiography, 53–

66, and 259–61.

314 Jurf diq nī, Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n , 30:

ک ؾبؼ ظاظى ؾ پیکبؼ ث چ ؾبؼ ضاع ؾبؼ ظ

ک خبى ؼا ثکنع یکجبؼگی ثعاى نبى هیبؼ ؾ ثیچبؼگی

If they seek forgiveness, forgive them, because forgiving is better than fighting.

Do not bring them to the point where they would give up their lives altogether.

Cf. Asadī Ṭūsī, Garshāsb-nāma 360, lines 73–74.

315 The verse in Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n reads:

ؾهیي نع نم آقوبى گهذ هذ ؾقن قزؼاى ظؼآى پي ظنذ

Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:348n 34. For the other verse that might be from the Shāhnāma, see

Jurf diq nī, Tarjuma-i Tār kh-i Yam n , 179 and 182.

126

316

Muṣliḥ b. ‗Abudull h Sa‘dī, Gulistān, ed. Khalīl Khaṭīb Rahbar, 19th ed. (Tehran: Ṣafī ‗Alī-

Sh h, 1386/2007), 68–70.

317 ‗Izz al-Dīn Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, ed. ‗Umar ‗Abd al-Sal m Tadmurī. 11 vols.

(Beirut: D r al-kit b al-‗arabī, 1997), 7:710:

! ثلی: أهب هؽأد نببه، ربؼیص اللؽـ، ربؼیص الطجؽي، ربؼیص الوكلویي؟ هبل: العل ، هبل ل هدعأزؽ

كوب زولک ػلی : هبل. ال: كل ؼأیذ نبب یعضل ػلی نب؟ هبل: هبل! ثلی: هب زبلک هي هؽأب؛ أهب لؼجذ ثبلهطؽح؟ هبل: هبل

.قیؽ الی ضؽاقبى هوجب أى قلوذ لكک الی هي أهی هک؟ ثن

318 Sa‗dī, Kulliyāt-i Sa‗d : Gulistān, B stān, Ghazaliyāt, Qa ā‘id, Qaṭa‗āt, va rasā‘il, ed.

Muḥammad ‗Alī Furūghī, 12th ed. (Tehran: Amīr Kabīr, 1381/2002), 724:

ري اقلعیبؼ اع ؼقزن ؼئی ب آؼظ ایک ظؼ نبه

اع ایي ضعاعاى هلک کؿ ثكی ضلوكذ ظیب یبظگبؼرب ثع

چهن یچ گؽكزین اؾ ایهبى اػزجبؼ ایو ؼكزع هبی نش

319 al-Fatḥ b. ‗Alī al-Bund rī, trans., al-Shāhnāma, 2 vols. in 1, ed. ‗Abd al-Vahh b ‗Azz m,

1932; repr. ed. (Tehran: Asadī, 1970).

320 Bund rī, al-Shāhnāma, 1:3 and 2:277.

127

Chapter Two

The Portrayal of Ardashīr in the Shāhnāma

In order to illustrate how the Shāhnāma functions as a mirror for princes, I have selected the

cycle of accounts about the reign of Ardashīr (r. 224–241), the founder of the Sasanian dynasty

(224–651).1 Firdausī‘s account about the Sasanian dynasty is commonly known as the

―historical‖ part of the Shāhnāma because the main characters and events of this part can

generally be identified with historical figures and events. The Ardashīr cycle would therefore

serve as a good example to show how little historical information can be gleaned from the

―historical‖ part of the work, and how history only constitutes a framework in the Shāhnāma to

present lessons on kingship. In addition, the Ardashīr cycle contains both heroic and mythical

materials, and these make the cycle comparable to the other two parts of the Shāhnāma that are

generally known as ―heroic‖ and ―mythical.‖ A further reason why I chose Ardashīr is that he

plays an important role in both the Middle Persian literature and the Perso-Islamic literature of

advice for rulers. Like other usurpers in history, the Sasanians, who supplanted the Parthians by

forceful seizure of power, had to construct a foundation myth to legitimate their rule. The

attributes of a legitimate king, as formulated by the Sasanians, were recorded in Sasanian

historical writing, preserved in the Shāhnāma, and later adopted by authors of Islamic mirrors for

princes with certain modifications. In the Middle Persian, Arabic, and Persian literature, Ardashīr

is depicted as a wise and powerful ruler with a noble lineage, who rebelled against his overlord

and established a new dynasty. He is portrayed as a king who was granted farr (divine

glory/fortune), charismatic power, which enabled him to rule over an empire. According to the

extant sources, Ardashīr restored Zoroastrianism, which had been neglected under the reign of

128

the Parthians, and he centralized power, which had previously been divided among local rulers.

He is described as establishing new laws, building new cities, promoting agricultural

development, and securing peace and prosperity for people by maintaining order and justice in

society. More important, his name is always associated with the idea of the union of kingship and

religion, as he reportedly proclaimed that ―religion and kingship are twin brothers,‖ an idea that

formed the basis of almost all Perso-Islamic mirrors for princes. Through my textual analysis of

the Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma, in which I compare it to the available Middle Persian,

Persian, and Arabic historical sources, I aim to demonstrate how in the Shāhnāma history is

turned into a series of symbolic tales the aim of which is to promote ideas and ideals of kingship.

Although our knowledge of Ardashīr‘s life before he came to power is very limited, the

available sources describe him as a rebel who became a successful king. The historicity of the

portrayal of Ardashīr in the sources, however, has been questioned by modern scholars who

argue that it was a later Sasanian invention.2 Various reasons have been offered for this, but the

general supposition is that by representing their ideal ruler through the figure of Ardashīr, the

revered founder of their dynasty, later Sasanian political propagandists validated and legitimized

their ideas and claimed an historical precedent for their ideals.3 But even if the portrayal of

Ardashīr is an idealized one, studying it is still important because it represents what was

understood in late antique and medieval Iran to represent an ideal ruler. Therefore, the present

study will not be concerned with the historical accuracy of Ardashīr‘s portrayal in the available

sources; rather, it will focus on how Ardashīr is portrayed in Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma. An analysis

of Firdausī‘s treatment of the accounts about Ardashīr will reveal how he composed a versified

history that functioned primarily as a book of wisdom and advice for kings. In this study, I will

also examine other medieval Arabic and Persian sources that contain accounts about Ardashīr to

demonstrate how Firdausī‘s presentation of similar accounts differs from them.

129

Before discussing the image of Ardashīr in the Shāhnāma, it would be instructive to

explain where the Shāhnāma stands in relation to the available historical sources that contain

accounts about Ardashīr. In this connection, I will also attempt to explain why these sources,

which were written in different languages, do not always agree.

All indications point to the fact that the ancient Persian dynasties kept historical records.

According to the Greek historian Diodorus (first century BCE), Ctesias, who wrote a history of

Persia in the fourth century BCE, had stated that he had access to the Persian royal archives

(basilikai anagraphai and basilikai diphtheria).4 Also, as may be inferred from the writings of

the Persian-period Biblical authors, the kings of the Medes and Persians preserved in their royal

archives the historical records of previous kings and had these chronicles read to them for

entertainment, or consulted them when making decisions about contemporary issues.5 The fact

that ancient Persian monarchs kept records of important events of their reigns is confirmed by

the many remaining royal rock-reliefs and inscriptions—not only from the Sasanian era, but also

from earlier periods such as those of the Parthians, Achaemenids, and Elamites—which depicted

the king and his courtiers at various occasions, such as victories in battle, royal investitures,

ritual ceremonies, and the hunt. The inscriptions of Sh pūr I (r. 240–70) and the Sasanian chief

priest Kerdīr at Naqsh-i Rustam in southern Iran, for example, attest to the fact that both royal

and religious records were kept at the Sasanian courts.6

The archaeological evidence on keeping historical records in ancient Iran in turn confirms

the reports of medieval historians about the existence of such records. For example, one of the

most erudite historians of pre-Islamic Iran, Ḥamza Iṣfah nī (b. ca. 280/893–d. after 350/961),

refers to the Persians‘ ―houses of wisdom‖ (buy t al- ikma), that is, libraries/archives, where

they kept their histories (akhbār), accounts about wars, and love stories.7 Also, the celebrated

medieval historian Mas‗ūdī (d. 345/956) writes that in 303/915–16 he had seen a large book on

130

Persian sciences, accounts of their kings, buildings, and government policies that contained

twenty-seven portraits of Sasanian rulers (twenty-five men and two women), accompanied by

full accounts of their reigns. Mas‗ūdī states that the book was copied in mid-Jamādā al-ākhir of

113 (August 731) from the records of Persian royal archives, and that it was translated from

Persian into Arabic for the caliph Hish m b. ‗Abd al-Malik. He explains that when Persian kings

died, their portraits were drawn and submitted to the treasury along with detailed accounts of

their reigns, so that future generations would know what their former rulers looked like and how

they ruled.8 Mas‗ūdī‘s description of this book is supported by Ḥamza, who describes the

portraits of all Sasanian monarchs contained in the book that he calls a kitāb uwar mul k ban

Sāsān (the book of portraits of the Sasanian monarchs).9 In fact, Ḥamza Iṣfah nī‘s description of

Khusrau I appears to be confirmed by the portrait of this king found on a Sasanian bowl.10

Further evidence for the ancient Persian practice of keeping historical records is found in

the Histories of the Byzantine historian Agathias (d. ca. 582). Agathias mentions that a friend of

his working at the court of the Sasanian king Khusrau I (r. 531–79) provided him with a

summary of the annals kept in the royal archives.11

Furthermore, medieval Persian epics

frequently refer to the existence of historical records at the courts of ancient Persian kings and

state that histories were read to kings and courtly élites as a form of entertainment.12

Despite all the evidence for the existence of ancient Persian historical writing, however,

no historical text from the Sasanian era has survived (except for inscriptions on coins, artefacts,

and rock-reliefs). The only extant Middle Persian text that contains an account about a Sasanian

king is Kārnāmag Ardaš r Pābagān (The book of feats of Ardashīr, son of B bak), a

legendary account about Ardashīr, the earliest manuscript of which dates from 1322.13

Moreover,

the date of the composition of the Kārnāmag Ardaš r has been questioned by modern scholars.

Whereas some maintain that the work was originally written during, or shortly after, the reign of

131

Ardashīr and was revised and expanded under Khusrau I, others argue that it was written during

the reign of Khusrau I or later.14

We also know that the extant Kārnāmag Ardaš r is a redaction

of a more comprehensive work, as its opening sentence reads: ―It is written in the Kārnāmag

Ardaš r Pābagān that ....‖15

These are, in fact, common problems with the extant Middle

Persian texts, because they all date from the early Islamic era and, most probably, were also

subjected to changes during the long period of Sasanian rule. The extant Kārnāmag Ardaš r is

nevertheless important for the present study because, despite some minor differences, it closely

corresponds to Firdausī‘s account about Ardashīr.

With the fall of the Sasanian dynasty and the Arab conquest of Iran, the official language

eventually changed from Middle Persian to Arabic. As a result, during the early Islamic era in

Iran, the Sasanian historical records were apparently translated into Arabic.16

At the same time,

as Middle Persian gradually evolved into New Persian, New Persian translations of the accounts

about ancient Persian kings were made either directly from Middle Persian or from Arabic

translations.17

Regrettably, none of these early Arabic and New Persian translations of ancient

Persian histories has survived. Consequently, we only know about these translations through

excerpts from them included in the works of later authors or through sporadic references to them

in later literature.

The best-known of these now-lost works is Ibn al-Muqaffa‗‘s (ca.102/720–ca.139/756)

Arabic translation of ancient Persian history, which is commonly referred to by such titles as

Siyar mul k al-furs (The history of the kings of the Persians), Siyar al-‗ajam (The history of the

Persians), and Siyar mul k al-‗ajam (The history of the kings of the Persians).18

The names of

other less well-known Arabic and Persian translators, compilers, and editors of ancient Persian

histories, as well as some information about their works, may be gleaned from the works of

medieval Muslim historians and scholars.19

For example, we learn from these later works that the

132

early Muslim historians used the title ―Khudāynāma‖ (The book of lords) to refer to the ancient

Persian histories.20

When Persian Muslims began to use the term khudāy (lord) as a translation

for All h, the title Khudāynāma was gradually replaced by the title Shāhnāma (The book of

kings).21

It is interesting to note that, in his translation of Ṭabarī‘s history (352/963), Bal‗amī

refers to Ibn al-Muqaffa‗‘s translation of ancient Persian histories with the title ―Shāhnāma-i

buzurg‖ (the great Shāhnāma) not with the above-mentioned Arabic titles.22

This would indicate

that early medieval Persian authors used the terms khudāynāma, shāhnāma, and siyar al-mul k

interchangeably in reference to ancient Persian histories.

Referring to the profusion of historical works on ancient Persia in the early Islamic era,

Ḥasan Taqīz da suggests that we may aptly refer to this period as ―the era of the shāhnāmas‖

(‗ahd-i shāhnāma-hā).23

By the tenth century, historians complained about inconsistencies in

Persian historical sources due to their transmission through various languages and scripts.24

Ḥamza Iṣfah nī states that the information available on the regnal years of Persian kings were

erroneous and confused because they were transmitted 150 years later from one language to

another and from a script that looked like numbers (ruq m al-a‗dād) to another script that looked

like strings of necklaces (ruq m al-‗uq d). So, he adds, he had no choice but to compare eight

works on the topic in order to provide the correct information in his own work.25

He also reports

that Mūs b. Īs al-Kasrawī, one of the early translators of ancient Persian histories into Arabic,

could not find two identical works on the history of Persian kings due to erroneous translations.26

Ḥamza further states that the Zoroastrian priest Bahr m b. Mard n-sh h collated more than

twenty copies of Khudāynāma in order to write his history of ancient Persian kings ( atta

a la tu minhā tawār kh mul k al-furs).27

With respect to Persian translations of Khudāynāmas, we know of four works, none of

which has survived. The earliest of these is Mas‗ūdī Marvazī‘s composition in verse. The Arab

133

historian Muqaddasī (fl. 355/965), quotes three verses from Mas‗ūdī Marvazī and refers to the

Persians‘ high regard for that work.28

Considering the time that was needed for the work to

become popular, we may surmise that it was written much earlier than Mas‗ūdī‘s work. Another

medieval author who refers to Mas‗ūdī Marvazī is Tha‗ libī (350/961–429/1038).29

But, neither

Muqaddasī nor Tha‗ libī refer to the title of Mas‗ūdī Marvazī‘s work. From their citations,

however, we know that the work was on Persian history, and that it was composed in the form of

a masnav , which is usually used for long tales, and in the hazaj metre.

The prose Shāhnāma of Abū al-Mu‘ayyad Balkhī—a well-known poet at the court of the

Samanids—is another Persian work on the history of Persian kings. The earliest source that

refers to Abū al-Mu‘ayyad‘s Shāhnāma is Bal‗amī‘s adaptation (352/963) of Ṭabarī‘s (d.

310/923) history.30

Abū al-Mu‘ayyad‘s prose Shāhnāma seems to have been recognized as an

authoritative work on ancient Persian history, as it was referenced by several medieval authors.31

The third lost Shāhnāma is the well-known Abū Manṣūrī Shāhnāma commissioned by

Abū Manṣūr Muḥammad b. ‗Abd al-Razz q in 346/957. We know more about this work because

its preface has survived, thanks to later copyists of Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma who preserved it by

appending it to the work.32

The information contained in the preface to the Abū Manṣūrī

Shāhnāma, as well as Firdausī‘s own statements, have led Shāhnāma scholars to opine that

Firdausī used this prose Shāhnāma as his source.33

The fourth Shāhnāma, which was only cited by Bīrūnī (b. 362/973–d. after 442/1050), is

that of the poet Abū ‗Alī Muḥammad b. Aḥmad Balkhī.34

The identity of this poet has been the

subject of debate among modern scholars, but, as convincingly argued by Kh liqī Muṭlaq, he

must be identical with Abū al-Mu‘ayyad Balkhī just mentioned above.35

Irrespective of who the

actual author of this Shāhnāma might have been, Bīrūnī‘s citation from it, which differs from

134

other contemporary and near contemporary sources of ancient Persian history, points to the

inconsistent information available on the topic in the early Islamic era.36

As may be deduced from Mas‗ūdī‘s reports, inconsistencies in historical accounts were

not just the result of the transmission of texts in different languages and scripts, as disagreements

seem to have existed in the original sources as well. Mas‗ūdī claims to reveal a secret kept by

Persian kings and Zoroastrian priests that explains the reason for a major discrepancy in Persian

historical sources. According to him, when Ardashīr assumed power, he realized that no more

than two hundred years were left in the Zoroastrian calendar until the end of the millennium.

Since the end of the millennium was to bring destruction to Persian kingship and religion, in

order to guarantee the support of the faithful who expecting defeat would probably surrender to

enemies, Ardashīr altered history by reducing the length of the Parthian era, which was about

500 years, by almost half, thereby securing the future of his newly-established kingship for

another 250 years.37

Although Mas‗ūdī‘s claim cannot be verified, his report points to the issue

of inconsistency in the original sources.

By examining the excerpts from earlier translations of Khudāynāmas, which have

survived in later sources, modern scholars have hypothesized that different types of historical

works were available during the Sasanian era and this is what gave rise to incongruities in later

historical writings.38

For example, Kh liqī Muṭlaq argues that Sasanian chronicles consisted of

two distinct types, royal and religious.39

The royal chronicles were recorded by the scribes who

accompanied the king during historically significant events, such as wars and special ceremonies,

while the religious chronicles were written by Zoroastrian priests, who related their accounts of

history based on the Avestan myths.40 In Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s opinion, the early translators of the

Khudāynāmas used different types of Sasanian chronicles as their source, and later medieval

historians combined the materials from these translations, creating in the process a convoluted

135

body of accounts about ancient Persian history.41

He further postulates that the process of

compiling Khudāynāmas during the Sasanian era caused discrepancies in historical sources as

well. Basing his argument on Ḥamza Iṣfah nī‘s and Bīrūnī‘s references to al-siyar al-kab r (large

chronicles) and al-siyar al- agh r (small chronicles), Kh liqī Muṭlaq maintains that, during the

reign of each Sasanian king, detailed accounts of contemporary events, court decrees, official

letters, and the king‘s throne speech and testament were recorded in separate books.42

Later,

these individual books were assembled and incorporated into large chronicles (al-siyar al-kab r)

that contained historical records of previous kings, a process that most likely entailed the

redaction of the original works.43

Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s suppositions appear to be confirmed by the

extant sources on Ardashīr and help to explain why these are not in agreement.

The conflation of different versions of Khudāynāmas can be seen in the Arabic and

Persian accounts about Ardashīr in later medieval histories. A case in point is two reports about

Ardashīr‘s son, Sh pūr, in Ṭabarī‘s history, Ta‘r kh al-rusul wa al-mul k (The history of

prophets and kings). According to Ṭabarī, Sh pūr fought alongside his father in the decisive

battle against Ardav n (the last Parthian king), a battle which marked the beginning of

Ardashīr‘s kingship.44

Ṭabarī also provides an account of Sh pūr‘s birth and upbringing in secret

in the household of Ardashīr‘s minister, an account which contains motifs similar to those

connected with the birth and upbringing of such ancient Persian kings as Cyrus, Farīdūn, and

Kay-Khusrau.45

Ṭabarī‘s description of Sh pūr‘s bravery in the battle against Ardav n (before

his father became king), and his account of Sh pūr‘s birth after Ardashīr‘s accession to the

throne indicate that he recorded these two reports from two different types of Khudāynāmas.

Ṭabarī‘s report about Sh pūr in the battle against Ardav n is supported by a rock-relief (without

inscription) in Fīrūz b d, which depicts Ardashīr and two young men assaulting Ardav n and

two others in attendance.46

If one of the young men fighting alongside Ardashīr is Sh pūr, as

136

suggested by Ghirshman and other archaeologists,47

then it may be surmised Ṭabarī took this part

of Ardashīr‘s account from the royal chronicles, because this was how the Sasanian monarch

depicted his victory and announced it to the public. Subsequently, the account of Sh pūr‘s birth,

which borrows motifs from the legends about great kings in the Zoroastrian tradition, might have

been taken from the religious version of chronicles, which emphasized the divine protection of

the infant king, which granted him the divine right of kingship. These two accounts somehow

found their way into Ṭabarī‘s history and, from there, to Bal‗ mī‘s expanded translation of

Ṭabarī‘s work.48

Other medieval historians seem to have avoided the confusion of depicting

Sh pūr both as a young man before Ardashīr‘s kingship and a new-born after Ardashīr became

king. Similar discrepancies of this type, caused by the conflation of materials from different

versions of Khudāynāmas, can be found in the sources on Ardashīr.

Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s hypothesis about inconsistencies created in the process of

incorporating separate small works into the large chronicles is also helpful for understanding the

state of the extant sources on Ardashīr. The Arabic and Persian sources available for the study of

Ardashīr consist of the accounts of his reign and the political treatises attributed to him. One of

the political treatises attributed to Ardashīr is his testament (‗ahd).49

The text of Ardashīr‘s

testament has been preserved in Arabic translation in three works that present it as an

independent political treatise.50

This text is also preserved as part of the account about Ardashīr‘s

reign in three other works. One of these is Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma. The second is the early

medieval Arabic work Nihāyat al-arab f tār kh al-furs wa al-‗arab (The utmost proficiency in

the history of the Persians and the Arabs).51

The third is Tajārib al-umam f akhbār mul k al-

‗arab va al-‗ajam (The experiences of peoples in the history of the kings of the Arabs and the

Persians), which is a twelfth-century Persian translation/adaptation of the Nihāyat al-arab.52

When the texts of Ardashīr‘s testament (‗ahd) in the Shāhnāma, the Nihāyat al-arab, and the

137

Tajārib al-umam are compared with those works that present it as an independent treatise, the

omissions and changes that occurred in the process of incorporating this treatise into large

chronicles become apparent.53

Obviously, we cannot determine whether Firdausī or the

anonymous authors of the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam worked from large chronicles

that contained already abridged treatises or whether they summarized the text of Ardashīr‘s

testament themselves, but we can see the kinds of changes and omissions that could have taken

place when these treatises were incorporated into large chronicles. Not surprisingly, the abridged

treatises in the Shāhnāma, Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam do not exactly correspond

either.

In addition to the above-mentioned explanations for the discrepancies in the sources,

another reason for the variations in accounts about Ardashīr may be the intended audience of the

authors. For example, Muslim historians adapted certain parts of the account about Ardashīr for a

Muslim readership. Similarly, as will be demonstrated in this chapter, Firdausī, or his sources,

adjusted certain parts of the account to make them suitable for conveying lessons on kingship.

The Structure of the rd sh r Cycle in the Shāhnāma

Firdausī divides his accounts about Ardashīr into two parts. The first part deals with

Ardashīr‘s birth and upbringing as well as his campaigns against the Parthians.54

The episodes in

this first part aim to establish the legitimacy of Ardashīr‘s rule on the basis of ancient Persian

criteria for kingship. The second part is concerned with Ardashīr‘s wisdom with respect to the

maintenance of kingship.55

These two parts are preceded by a prologue in the form of a

conversation between the poet and Fate, in which Fate declares that man‘s success is determined

by his own wisdom and God‘s will, not by fate.56

Thus, the prologue prepares the reader for the

general theme of the Ardashīr cycle, that is, divine intervention and Ardashīr‘s wisdom are the

main contributors to his success. Firdausī‘s technique of using prologues to encapsulate the

138

central message of his tales can be found in other parts of the Shāhnāma, a practice which

demonstrates that he carefully planned the details of his narratives.57

Firdausī‘s method of setting

the stage for the reader does not seem to have been used by other medieval Persian historians.

Firdausī‘s use of this technique indicates that he was more concerned with the concepts he aimed

to present in his tales than with recording historical events. These prologues also demonstrate

that he wanted to help his readers understand the lessons he aimed to convey.

The prologue is followed by a panegyric to the Ghaznavid ruler sultan Maḥmūd (r.

388/421–998/1030) that seems to be designed to do more than simply praise the ruler. Like

Ardashīr, Maḥmūd was originally an underling who challenged his master and established his

own rule. This common background shared by the two rulers might have been why Firdausī

included a panegyric to sultan Maḥmūd at the beginning of his account about Ardashīr. The poet

probably aimed to draw Maḥmūd‘s attention to the story about Ardashīr by praising the sultan at

the beginning of the account.

Part I – rd sh r s Eligibility for Kingship

Noble Lineage and Protection of Religion

According to ancient Persian tradition, the ruler had to be of royal blood in order to be

considered eligible for kingship.58

Therefore, rulers who were not of royal descent usually

fabricated a noble genealogy for themselves. Royal descent, however, was not enough to

legitimate power; the ruler had to demonstrate that he intended to protect the ―right‖ religion as

well. Thus, Ardashīr‘s fictitious lineage traced his roots back to Isfandiy r and Gusht sp, two

prominent religio-political figures in Zoroastrian history and myth.59

Gusht sp was believed to

have been the first king to convert to Zoroastrianism and promote the new religion. Isfandiy r

was Gusht sp‘s son and the champion of Zoroastrianism on account of the many battles he

139

fought for the propagation of the religion.60

By connecting Ardashīr to these highly revered

figures, the Sasanian political propagandists not only claimed a noble lineage for Ardashīr, but

also associated his campaigns with those of Gusht sp and Isfandiy r, thereby superimposing the

image of these defenders of Zoroastrianism onto Ardashīr. Firdausī‘s emphasis on Ardashīr‘s

relationship with Isfandiy r in particular is evident in his frequent references to Isfandiy r as

Ardashīr‘s ancestor,61

as well as in his explanation of Ardashīr‘s name. According to the

Shāhnāma, because he looked like Isfandiy r‘s son Bahman, who was also called Ardashīr,

Ardashīr was named after him.62

This statement, which does not seem to have been reported

anywhere else, served to assert Ardashīr‘s kinship to Isfandiy r. Moreover, Firdausī describes

Ardashīr‘s background at great length. First, he introduces Ardashīr‘s father, S s n, whom he

calls a descendant of the ancient Persian king D r who was defeated by Alexander of

Macedon.63

He then lets S s n proudly talk about his forefathers:

[ث ثبثک چیي گلذ اؾ آى پف خاى] ک هي پؼ قبقبن ای پلاى

وی یبظگیؽ ک ثوي ل ضاعی جیؽ خبعاؼ نب اؼظنیؽ

قؽاكؽاؾپؼ یل اقلعیبؼ ؾ گهزبقت اعؼ خبى یبظگبؼ

―I am the son of S s n,64

O hero!

I am the great great-grandson of the ruler of the world, king Ardashīr,

Whom the intelligent man calls Bahman,

The honourable son of hero Isfandiy r,

A memorial left to the world from Gusht sp.‖ 65

By using titles such as jahāndār (ruler of the world), shāh (king), sarafrāz (honourable),

and yal (hero) in reference to Ardashīr‘s forefathers, Firdausī highlights Ardashīr‘s nobility.

Firdausī‘s particular concern with the genealogy of Ardashīr becomes more prominent when the

140

Shāhnāma is compared to other historical sources: There is no mention of Isfandiy r or Gusht sp

in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, which only refers to Ardashīr‘s father, S s n; although, it does call

him a descendant of the ancient Persian king D r .66

In the Arabic and Persian sources,

references to Ardashīr‘s genealogy are limited to a list of names which, although they often

include Isfandiy r and Gusht sp, place no particular emphasis on them.67

To Firdausī, however,

who understood the political implications of Ardashīr‘s genealogy, Isfandiy r was not just a

name in Ardashīr‘s lineage; rather, he was a symbol of nobility and protection of religion, a

symbol that Firdausī frequently used to underline the two essential criteria for legitimate

kingship. To stress further Ardashīr‘s right to rule as a protector of religion, Firdausī comments

that Ardashīr‘s construction of fire temples in honour of his major victories renewed ancient

Persian traditions.68

Divine Election

Another criterion for legitimate kingship was divine sanction of the ruler‘s power.

Influenced by ancient Near Eastern traditions and Indo-European ideas of leadership, ancient

Iranian societies considered legitimate rulers to be representatives of God on earth, who

maintained order, peace, and prosperity.69

Throughout history and across cultures, whenever

divine affirmation of religio-political matters was required, concocted dream narratives served

the purpose best because dreams were understood to be a medium of communication between

human and divine realms.70

Thus, according to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, the emergence of a new

ruler from the house of S s n was foreseen in a series of dreams experienced by Ardashīr‘s

maternal grandfather, B bak. This type of dream narrative, which announces the coming of a

great ruler, is a recurrent topos that appears in the legends of other ancient Persian kings such as

Cyrus, Farīdūn and Kay-Khusrau and persists into the later Islamic period.71

141

According to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, S s n—whose family had kept its noble lineage

secret from the time of the death of its putative ancestor D r —worked as a shepherd in the

service of B bak, a vassal of the Parthian king Ardav n.72

One night, B bak dreamed that the sun

was shining from S s n‘s head, illuminating the entire world.73

The second night, B bak

dreamed of S s n sitting on a decorated white elephant while everyone praised him.74

And on the

third night, he dreamed that the three sacred fires of Zoroastrianism, representing the three social

classes of priests, warriors, and peasants, were seen shining from S s n‘s house, again

illuminating the entire world.75

The dream interpreters told B bak that his dreams meant that

either S s n or one of his sons would become the king of the world. 76

B bak therefore married

his daughter to S s n, and Ardashīr was born of their union.77

A similar account is related in the Shāhnāma, except that the dream of the first night is

not described and the other two dreams are described with minor differences.78

In Firdausī‘s

version, S s n was sitting on a formidable elephant, holding an Indian sword in his hand.79

This

depiction of S s n, which more effectively conveys the idea of a world conqueror, seems to be

an allusion to sultan Maḥmūd, who was known for his use of royal elephants in battles and

ceremonies.80

Given that the poet had just praised the sultan in his introduction, he may have

used this allusion as another means to attract the sultan‘s attention. Firdausī‘s version of the third

dream may be interpreted as an allusion to the poet‘s time as well. According to the Shāhnāma,

the Zoroastrian symbols of the three holy fires—which were cleverly used by Sasanian political

propagandists to demonstrate the support of Ardashīr by all classes of society—are carried to

S s n‘s house.81

The act of carrying fires to S s n by representatives of the three classes of

society may be understood as a symbolic representation of the shift of the people‘s allegiance

from one ruler to another, which could also refer to the political shift from the Samanids to the

Ghaznavids. Even if these subtle variations in the dream narratives were not introduced by

142

Firdausī himself but were in the sources available to him, we may assume that the poet chose the

version that best reflected the political circumstances of his own time.

To further reinforce Ardashīr‘s legitimacy, Sasanian political propagandists also took

advantage of astrology, a science that was highly regarded during the Sasanian period and used

at royal courts.82

According to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, the astrologers at the court of Ardav n

predicted that his kingship would be terminated by an underling (bandag) who would run away

from his master (xwatāy).83

Firdausī relates the same account regarding the astrologers‘

predictions with respect to Ardav n‘s kingship, but he is careful not to give the impression that

the renegade, i.e. Ardashīr, was a mere underling by adding that the ―underling‖ (kihtar) was

descended from a commander (sipahbud-nizhād) and was a hero (gund-āvar). 84

As with the dream interpreters at the court of B bak, the astrologers at the court of

Ardav n merely predicted the upcoming change of kingship. Neither the dream interpreters nor

the astrologers could determine who the new king would be. In other words, the Sasanian

literature does not suggest that Ardashīr‘s kingship was pre-determined; what was pre-

determined was the rise of a new king. Who that individual would be depended on who proved to

be most qualified for the position. Any wise, knowledgeable, and courageous nobleman who

aspired to protect religion and restore legitimate authority could be helped to win the throne by

divine intervention. Thus, in both the Kārnāmag Ardaš r and the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr‘s

eligibility as a qualified candidate for kingship is depicted in a series of tales that precede his

eventual coronation as king of kings.

Whereas Ardashīr‘s efforts to prove worthy of divine support are taken into consideration

in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r and the Shāhnāma, in Ṭabarī‘s account, and following him, in the

histories of Bal‗ mī and Ibn al-Athīr, the narratives are presented in a way that suggest

Ardashīr‘s kingship was predetermined. According to these Muslim historians, astrologers told

143

Ardashīr that he would become king.85

In addition, Ardashīr himself dreamed that an angel

brought him the news and asked him to be prepared for kingship.86

This modification of the

dream narrative reflects a frequently quoted prophetic Tradition ( ad s) which states that in the

absence of the prophet Muḥammad, God sends His messages to Muslims through an angel, who

appears to them in their dreams.87

In a variation of the account related in the Tajārib al-umam, it

is Ardashīr‘s father who appears to him in a dream and tells him that God will bestow kingship

upon him.88

Interestingly, the Tajārib al-umam, which is a twelfth-century Persian translation of

the Nihāyat al-arab, does not follow its source in this part of the account, as it contains no

mention of dreams predicting Ardashīr‘s kingship. According to the Nihāyat al-arab, when

B bak—who is introduced as Ardashīr‘s father—died, the people of F rs expressed their

allegiance to Ardashīr on account of his wisdom, zeal, and beauty, even though he had elder

brothers who expected to succeed their father.89

The author of the Tajārib al-umam, who

probably took the dream narrative from another source, perhaps decided that, as a non-Muslim,

Ardashīr could not have received God‘s message through an angel. In any case, the exact

predictions about Ardashīr‘s kingship in the works of these historians seem to point to the

Qur‘anic verses that state that God bestows sovereignty on whomever He wills.90

In short,

according to the Islamic versions of the accounts about Ardashīr, it was God‘s will that Ardashīr

should be king. Although these Muslim historians do refer to Ardashīr‘s competence in

leadership, their references to this are very brief. To Firdausī, however, the concept of

demonstrated aptitude for kingship seems to have been of great significance and he deals

extensively with it in his narrative.

Divine Support of rd sh r

In addition to being of royal descent, Ardashīr had to acquire the knowledge and skills

required for kingship. According to the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr received such a thorough education

144

that the repute of his excellence reached Ardav n, who asked for his service at the royal court.91

It is at the court of Ardav n that Ardashīr‘s aptitude for kingship begins to manifest itself. As

Ardashīr‘s prowess becomes more and more evident, he receives more and more support from

the Divine. Consequently, divine support results in Ardashīr‘s victory and accession to the throne

as king of kings.

Like their ancient Near Eastern predecessors, the Sasanian kings‘ ability to protect their

subjects against enemies was demonstrated in the sport of hunting, because similar techniques,

skills, and courage were required for fighting on the battlefield.92

Thus, the first sign of

Ardashīr‘s capability for kingship is displayed in his hunting skills. During a hunting expedition

with Ardav n and his entourage, Ardashīr shoots an arrow at an onager in such a skilful manner

that the arrow together with its shaft passes right through the animal‘s buttock.93

Astonished by

the scene, Ardav n exclaims:

ذک ثب ظقذ آى کف ؼاى ثبظ خل ث ریؽی یکی گؼ کبكگع گلذ

Who is the one who shot an onager with a single arrow?

The swift (ravān) wind (bād) is paired (juft) with the hand of that person. 94

As Frantz Grenet points out, Ardav n immediately realizes the supernatural power of the

hunter and attributes it to the deity Wind (Middle Persian, V d).95

In addition to being an ancient

divinity,96

the wind was also associated with Verethraghna (Middle Persian, Warahr n/Wahr m;

New Persian, Bahr m), the deity Victory, who manifests itself in the material world in many

different forms, one of them being a powerful wind.97

Irrespective of whether Ardav n meant

that Ardashīr was helped by the wind, or that his extraordinary skill was comparable to the wind,

his remark contains an allusion to the fact that Ardashīr received divine favour. This allusion,

which is not mentioned in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, is invoked by Firdausī who paid close

145

attention to the symbolic representation of the concepts he found in his sources. As shall be seen,

wind and other avatars of Verethraghna will appear again in the tale to support Ardashīr.

Ardashīr responds to Ardav n‘s question of who shot the onager by stating that it was he.

However, Ardav n‘s son claims that it was he who shot the onager and says that he is seeking its

―pair‖ (hamān juft) as well, a response which conveys a double meaning of both seeking the pair

of the onager and the support of the deity.98

Ardashīr challenges Ardav n‘s son by asking him to

shoot another onager in the same manner if he is telling the truth and adds that lying is a sin.99

Ardashīr‘s fearless confrontation of Ardav n‘s son demonstrates his courage in defending the

truth in spite of his own inferior status. Truth and falsehood are two important concepts in

Zoroastrianism connected with both moral virtue and the natural order of the world. In order to

maintain order and peace in the world, Zoroastrians were urged to protect the principle of Truth.

As the story evolves, we realize that Ardashīr is rewarded for his righteousness and for

upholding the principle of Truth.

Furious with Ardashīr for his lack of respect, Ardav n imprisons him in the royal

stables.100

Ardashīr spends his time in prison playing music, drinking, and eating, the means for

which are provided by B bak, who advises him to be obedient to his overlord and stay in

prison.101

Ardashīr‘s greatest joy in prison, however, is Guln r, Ardav n‘s favourite concubine.

She falls in love with Ardashīr and visits him in the stables every night.102

As Ardav n‘s

confidante, Guln r hears the astrologers‘ prediction of the possible defeat of the king by a

renegade and she shares this information with Ardashīr.103

This news encourages Ardashīr to

consider escaping from prison, and subsequently, they decide to escape together.104

The

following night, Guln r collects Ardav n‘s jewels from the treasury and brings them to Ardashīr,

who had prepared Ardav n‘s best horses for their flight.105

146

Guln r‘s willingness to endanger her own life to help Ardashīr does not make sense when

we consider her high status at Ardav n‘s court and note that her role in the tale ends after she

escapes with Ardashīr. Her descriptions in the Shāhnāma, however, help us to understand the

short but important role that she plays. According to the Shāhnāma, Guln r was like a minister

(dast r) to Ardav n (bar-i Ardavān hamch dast r b d), and she also functioned as his treasurer

(bar ān khvāsta n z ganj r b d).

106 Furthermore, when Ardav n invited the astrologers to his

palace to predict the future of his kingship, he sent them to Guln r‘s residence to work.107

These

references indicate that she was the most trusted person at the royal court. Moreover, Ardav n

would only wake up to her beautiful face in the morning, because he believed her beauty would

bring good omen to him throughout the day.108

Besides the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, none of the

available historical sources contain any reference to such an important figure at the court of

Ardav n. Hence, we may consider Guln r to represent a symbolic, rather than historical,

figure.109

As noted above with regard to the deity Wind, and as will be further discussed in this

chapter, divine support of Ardashīr in this tale is represented through symbols. According to

Zoroastrian sources, the deity Ashi protects the treasure of the pious.110

This responsibility of

Ashi corresponds to Guln r‘s position as protector of Ardav n‘s treasure (ganj r). Furthermore,

Guln r‘s extreme beauty and her tremendous help to Ardashīr seem to correspond to the

descriptions of Ashi‘s splendour and her rewards to the pious, as described in Zoroastrian

literature. According to the Avesta, Ashi endows the upholders of truth with all the good things

of life, such as wealth and abundance, beautiful women, jewellery, and swift horses.111

Thus, we

might interpret Ardashīr‘s pleasures in prison, that is, abundant food, drink, and music, Guln r‘s

night visits, as well as the jewels and swift horses that they stole from the palace as signs of

Ashi‘s rewards to him. Guln r‘s turning away from Ardav n and her love for and support of

147

Ardashīr might also be interpreted as a symbolic representation of Ardav n‘s loss of divine

support in favour of Ardashīr. The significance of Ashi‘s support of Ardashīr, if we consider

Guln r as a symbolic representation of her, is that Ashi also helps the righteous to defeat their

enemies.112

As soon as Ardav n is informed of Ardashīr‘s escape, he gathers an army and sets out in

pursuit of him.113

Along the way, Ardav n is told by villagers that they saw two riders galloping

away, followed by a mountain sheep.114

In response to Ardav n, who asks his minister why a

mountain sheep would follow Ardashīr, the minister says:

چیي ظاظ پبقص ک آى كؽ اقذ ث نبی یک اضزؽی پؽ اقذ

... It is [a sign of] his farr,

It is his wings/feathers (parr) in (achieving) kingship (shāh ) and good fortune (n k-

akhtar ). 115

Ardav n‘s minister warns that if the mountain sheep reaches Ardashīr, he must not try to

catch him; otherwise, he warns, he will get into a serious battle with Ardashīr.116

The minister‘s

references to farr (divine glory/fortune), parr (wings/feathers), and a serious battle, in his

interpretation of the mountain sheep, might be an allusion to Verethraghna‘s support of Ardashīr.

As mentioned in the Avestan hymn dedicated to him, Verethraghna, who is praised as a deity

most endowed with farr,117

appeared to Zoroaster in ten different forms, one of them being a

beautiful mountain sheep.118

All avatars of Verethraghna, that is, a swift wind, a bull, a horse, a

camel in rut, a wild boar, a young man, a bird of prey, a beautiful mountain sheep, a mountain

goat, and an armed hero, represent the virility of this deity and reflect the meaning of his name,

that is, ―smiting resistance.‖119

If the mountain sheep is a sign of Verethraghna‘s support of

Ardashīr, its supernatural power of smashing the resistance of the opponent must be what

148

concerns Ardav n‘s minister when he advises Ardav n to stop trying to catch Ardashīr if the

mountain sheep reaches him. The minister‘s reference to wings/feathers (parr) also seems to

allude to another avatar of Verethraghna, that is, a bird of prey. The feathers of the bird that

represents Verethraghna, as described in the hymn dedicated to him, have the magical power of

bestowing victory upon warriors who seek his support.120

Thus, when Ardav n‘s minister

mentions that the mountain sheep is Ardashīr‘s parr (wings/feathers) in achieving kingship and

good fortune, he might be alluding to the extraordinary power of the feathers of the bird of prey

that represents Verethraghna. Verethraghna is also worshipped as a deity who protects

voyagers,121

and Ardashīr is clearly in need of protection on his dangerous journey from

Ardav n‘s prison. Moreover, the allusion to Verethraghna has important ideological

implications. As will be discussed in detail later in this chapter, the Sasanian political

propagandists represented Ardashīr as a Saviour of the world and a number of parallels can be

drawn between his character in the Shāhnāma and those of the Saviours of the world in

Zoroastrian apocalyptic literature.122

According to Zoroastrian eschatological beliefs,

Verethraghna will be a mighty helper of Pešōtan, one of the world Saviours at the end of time.123

Thus, the references to the avatars of Verethraghna might also be understood as an attempt on

the part of Sasanian political propagandists to represent Ardashīr as a Saviour of the world who,

like his counterpart Pešōtan, was helped by Verethraghna in renovating the world order and

restoring Zoroastrianism.

Although one would expect Ardav n to have pressed harder to catch Ardashīr on hearing

his minister‘s advice—as is the case in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r—in the account in the

Shāhnāma, Ardav n stops to rest.124

It is possible that Firdausī wanted to contrast the efforts of

Ardav n with those of Ardashīr in trying to achieve victory, as we learn that Ardashīr does not

spare a moment along the way.

149

As narrated in the Shāhnāma, when Ardashīr and Guln r stop at a spring to refresh

themselves, they see two young men, who advise them not to stop but to continue riding.125

Ardashīr tells Guln r that they should take their advice, and they dash away.126

The theme of two

young men advising Ardashīr is repeated later in the tale, when Ardashīr struggles to overcome a

formidable enemy. The sudden appearance of these young helpers in the tale, their advice, and

how they are represented in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r and the Shāhnāma indicate that they are of

supernatural nature. According to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, Ardashīr and Guln r arrive at a

village and fear to pass through it lest they be recognized and captured by its inhabitants. As they

decide to avoid the village, they see two women, one of whom calls out to Ardashīr:

Do not be afraid, Kay Ardashīr, son of B bak, of the seed of S s n, descendant of D r !

You have escaped from all evil. No one can catch you. You are to rule Iran for many

years. Hasten towards the sea. When the sea comes into your sight, do not delay until you

reach it. When you reach the sea, you will have no fear of the enemy.127

The woman‘s knowledge of Ardashīr‘s genealogy, his future, and his fear of being

captured, as well as her insistence that he reach the sea, all indicate that she is not an ordinary

villager but someone with knowledge of the unknown. Although the episode, as narrated in the

Kārnāmag Ardaš r, differs from that narrated in the Shāhnāma, the advice given to Ardashīr

occurs in both versions. In the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr‘s helpers are two young men and they do not

mention anything about the sea, but the significance of Ardashīr‘s eventual arrival at the sea

becomes clear, for as soon as he reaches it, he praises God for His help along the way.128

Also,

the meaning of a verse that immediately precedes the episode in the Shāhnāma supports the idea

that the two young men are of the same nature as the two women in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r:

کؽا یبؼ ثبنع قپؽ ثلع ثؽ ثؽ ؾ ظنوي یبیع گؿع

150

He who is befriended by the lofty Sphere/fortune (sipihr),

Is not harmed by the enemy. 129

The term sipihr often refers to the firmament containing the constellation of stars that

determine one‘s destiny or fortune. It also denotes ―sky,‖ which according to Zoroastrian

literature is the realm of the Zoroastrian supreme deity, Ohrmazd, and other divine entities.130

In

Zoroastrian mythology, the sky is itself a divine entity that is often depicted as an invincible

warrior protecting Ohrmazd‘s creations.131

These connotations of the term sipihr convey the idea

that Ardashīr was helped by a supernatural force, be it the force of fortune or that of a divine

entity. Thus, the episode immediately following the above-mentioned verse might be understood

as an illustration of how Ardashīr was protected by this force. Since one of the ten avatars of

Verethraghna was a young man, we may suppose that the young man advising Ardashīr not to

stop and continue riding represents Verethraghna.

The significance of arriving at the sea, which is mentioned in both the Kārnāmag

Ardaš r and the Shāhnāma, might be interpreted in the context of Zoroastrian apocalyptic

literature as well. As will be further discussed later in this chapter, the Zoroastrian prophetic

literature introduces Ardashīr in the same way that it introduces other Saviours of the Good

Religion.132

As described in the Avesta, the last Saviour of the world will emerge at the shore of

a lake.133

Thus, the motif of the sea in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r and the Shāhnāma, which marks

the starting point of Ardashīr‘s long journey in restoring the Good Religion, might be understood

as parallel with the motif of the lake in the descriptions of the coming of the last Saviour of the

world. Furthermore, according to the Avesta, the Saviours of the world, Saošyants, are endowed

with farr, a divine power, that helps them renovate the world and restore the Good Religion.134

As may be inferred from a statement made by Ardav n‘s minister, Ardashīr too receives the farr.

151

As related in both the Kārnāmag Ardaš r and the Shāhnāma, when Ardav n stops at another

village to inquire, he is told that two dusty and thirsty riders passed by their village, and that an

exceptionally beautiful mountain sheep was sitting on the rump of the horse of one of the

riders.135

On hearing this, Ardav n‘s minister tells him that it is now useless to pursue Ardashīr

because the mountain sheep has already reached him.136

He advises Ardav n to send a letter to

his son Bahman, who was the governor of P rs, to find Ardashīr there and stop him from milking

the mountain sheep.137

According to the Middle Persian text of Wiz dag hā Zādspram,

Ohrmazd, who had created the farr of Zoroaster before he was even conceived, transferred the

farr of the prophet to the bodies of his parents through cow‘s milk.138

When the prophet‘s

parents drank the milk that contained the farr of the prophet, they transferred it to their son when

he was conceived. And according to the Middle Persian text of the Dēnkard, the material essence

(tan-gohr) and soul (fravahar) of Zoroaster, which were also created before he was conceived,

were transferred to the bodies of the prophet‘s parents through the milk that they drank on the

night that Zoroaster was conceived.139

―Milk‖ in these texts functions as a vehicle for the

transmission of divine gifts. Similarly, the milk of the mountain sheep in the Shāhnāma account

about Ardashīr might be interpreted as a vehicle for the transmission of farr to him. Thus, the

advice of Ardav n‘s minster might mean that he wanted Bahman to try one last time to find

Ardashīr and stop him from receiving that divine gift/power. But, Ardav n‘s efforts will be in

vain, as Ardashīr will triumph over him and his son.

The Support of the Military and the Priesthood

Another requirement for an individual who aspires to challenge the ruling power and

become king is the support of the military and the priesthood. Thus, the Shāhnāma relates that,

on his arrival at the seashore, Ardashīr is welcomed by a large crowd of warriors (shamsh r-zan)

and wise men/priests (rāy-zan) who had gathered there to express their allegiance to him.140

152

Since Firdausī refers to this idea immediately after his depiction of the divine support Ardashīr

received, this indicates that a would-be ruler also needs the support of the military and the

priesthood in addition to the support of the divine. In a speech delivered to the assembly,

Ardashīr asserts his right to rule on the basis of his being a descendant of Isfandiy r.141

As

already mentioned above, Ardashīr‘s alleged kinship to Isfandiy r secures for him a noble

lineage and justifies his wars. Claiming his right to the throne, Ardashīr asks those assembled for

their support in his restoring religion and legitimate authority. By inserting Ardashīr‘s speech

just before his account of Ardashīr‘s battles, Firdausī lends legitimacy to Ardashīr‘s seizure of

power. This speech, which is not found either in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r or in any other

historical sources, demonstrates how meticulously Firdausī dealt with the details of the narrative

in order to present the concepts that characterized an ideal king.

rd sh r s Battles: The Stages of Founding a New Empire

According to the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr fought four major battles before ascending to the

throne as king of kings.142

These battles, however, are not reported in the way that the accounts

of Ardashīr‘s wars are recorded in other sources.143

Compared to other works, Firdausī‘s

accounts are dramatic descriptions of battlefields, heroic acts, and legends rather than accurate

historical records. Whereas historians like Ṭabarī and others report on Ardashīr‘s numerous

battles, Firdausī‘s account is limited to four battles. Furthermore, according to several medieval

historians, Ardashīr received the title king of kings after he killed Ardav n, but this is not the

case in the Shāhnāma.144

Why do the accounts of Ardashīr‘s battles in the Shāhnāma differ from

those in other medieval sources? The answer to this question may be sought in the purport of the

work. As a work written to convey ethico-political concepts within an historical framework, the

accounts in the Shāhnāma are presented in an entertaining manner so as not to bore the reader

153

with a dry record of historical events. Firdausī certainly knew that his account of Ardashīr‘s

battle against a giant worm, for example, would not be understood as historical fact, for he urges

the reader to look for the lesson that can be learned from that extraordinary tale.145

The poet‘s

advice to learn lessons from his tales is an indication that he wanted his reader to focus on the

concepts presented in them not on their historicity. Therefore, rather than attempting to

determine how Firdausī‘s account of Ardashīr‘s battles might correspond with actual historical

events, the following analysis aims to reveal the message that it conveys.146

Each of the four battles described in the Shāhnāma seems to represent a different stage in

the process of Ardashīr‘s founding of a new dynasty. In his first battle, which is against

Ardav n‘s son, Ardashīr aims to take control of his homeland, an endeavour in which he has the

support of the military and the priesthood. Ardashīr‘s second battle is against Ardav n himself,

the chief Parthian ruler in Iran. He embarks on this battle only after achieving victory in his local

territory and receiving the support of its inhabitants. In his third battle, which is against the

Kurds, Ardashīr restores peace and order in his realm. In the fourth and final battle, which deals

with Ardashīr‘s slaying of a giant worm, Ardashīr is portrayed as a Saviour of the world, who

defeats Ahriman (Evil) and restores the Good Religion (Zoroastrianism). In this fourth battle,

Ardashīr‘s efforts to expand his territories and promote Zoroastrianism is also displayed. Only

after the fourth battle is Ardashīr proclaimed king of kings. This victory marks the end of the

first part of the Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma, which is concerned with establishing Ardashīr‘s

legitimacy and qualifications for kingship.

Battles nos. 1 and 2. When Ardashīr sets out to defeat the Parthians, a Zoroastrian priest

(m bad) advises him that if he wishes to re-establish kingship (sar-i shahriyār ham nau kun ),

he should first clear his homeland, P rs, of enemies.147

Next, he should challenge Ardav n

because he is the most powerful ruler, and once he is defeated, other rulers will not offer

154

resistance.148

It was obviously wise to start with P rs, where Ardashīr already had the support of

his own people. We know that Ardav n‘s appointment of his son Bahman as governor of Pars

had caused discontent in the region because the nobility had expected one of their own to be

assigned to the position.149

Before Ardav n‘s son, B bak had ruled over P rs, but B bak died

when Ardashīr was in Ardav n‘s captivity.150

So, when the people of P rs heard the news of

Ardashīr‘s escape from Ardav n, they gathered at the seashore to show him their support in

restoring P rs to B bak‘s family.151

Ardashīr also had the support of S s n‘s family, the putative

descendants of the ancient Persian king D r .152

In addition to these, Bun k, a vassal of Ardav n

in Jahrum, and his large army also allied with Ardashīr.153

Confident in the strength of his army, Ardashīr heads for Istakhr, the seat of Bahman, and

wins the battle against him.154

Ardashīr‘s victory against Bahman increases the number of his

supporters; thus, he will have an even larger army when he sets out to fight against Ardav n. It is

noteworthy that in both battles with Bahman and Ardav n, Ardashīr prevails over the enemy

right after the occurrence of a powerful wind.155

In the battle against Ardav n, the forceful wind

frightens Ardav n‘s troops, and everyone in his army comes to understand that the war against

Ardav n is being waged by the Divine (ki n kār bar Ardavān zad st).156

References to the wind

in these two battles, especially in the second battle, where the wind is associated with the Divine,

may be understood as allusions to Verethraghna, the deity Victory, one of whose avatars, as

mentioned above, is a powerful wind. So, Ardashīr‘s wise planning and divine support of him are

presented as main contributors to his success.

As related in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, having failed to catch Ardashīr, Ardav n and his

son jointly wage war against Ardashīr.157

In this version of the account, in which Ardav n

initiates the war, Ardashīr is not represented as a courageous man who arises to restore faith and

order; nor can he (or his advisor) be credited with a well-planned war. So, the depiction of

155

Ardashīr‘s proactive role in the Shāhnāma is absent in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r. Furthermore,

whereas in the Shāhnāma Ardashīr‘s victories over Bahman and Ardav n are attributed to both

his wisdom and divine intervention, according to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, Ardashīr wins the

battle because of his royal farr (xwarrah Kayān).158

Firdausī‘s emphasis on Ardashīr‘s wisdom

and divine support harks back to the prologue to the Ardashīr cycle, where Fate asserts that

man‘s success is due to his own wisdom as well as to God‘s help.

Battle no. 3. The purpose of Ardashīr‘s next battle, which is against the Kurds, is to

eliminate them because they are thieves (duzd).159

As clearly stated in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr‘s

aim is not to subjugate a local ruler or to conquer a new territory; but rather, to punish the Kurds

who were disturbing peace and order. This is evident from the end of the account, where it is

stated that Ardashīr‘s victory made the region so safe that if an old man with a tray of gold coins

on his head passed through the area, no one would even dare to look at him.160

In the Kārnāmag

Ardaš r, however, the purpose of this battle is different from that stated in Shāhnāma. In the

Kārnāmag Ardaš r, Ardashīr‘s opponent is the Median king of the Kurds, and there is no

mention of thieves at all.161

The outcome of the war is the capture of the Median king and his

noblemen and the confiscation of all their properties.162

In other words, Ardashīr‘s battle against

the Kurds, according to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, is a typical conquest war. The difference

between the two versions demonstrates how Firdausī utilizes the framework of an historical

account to illustrate a political concept—in this case, the restoration of peace and order after the

collapse of a major power.

Firdausī‘s account of this battle contains two additional notions that are not included in

the Kārnāmag Ardaš r. One of these is the importance of using spies, and the other concerns

the role of good fortune in achieving victory versus man‘s wisdom. According to both versions

of the account, Ardashīr fails in his first assault on the Kurds. He escapes from the battlefield in

156

the dark of night and gets lost in the mountains.163

Ardashīr‘s underestimation of the power of

the Kurds and his getting lost in the dark clearly point to his unfamiliarity with the region he

invaded. According to the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr prepares himself for his second assault by

sending spies into the region.164

The spies report that the Kurds are not alarmed by him anymore

because they believe that his good fortune (bakht) has ―become old‖ (kahun gashta), meaning

that he is not as fortunate and powerful as he used to be.165

Based on this information, Ardashīr

makes a night raid on the Kurds and triumphs over them.166

By providing the detail of Ardashīr‘s

strategy in his second assault, Firdausī points to several important issues: First, he demonstrates

that Ardashīr wisely responded to his mistake of engaging in a battle without sufficient

knowledge of the opponent. Second, he illustrates the benefits of espionage.167

As we shall see in

the next chapter, the political literature attributed to Ardashīr makes a point about his use of spies

in all areas of government.168

And third, he confirms that Ardashīr‘s success was due to wise

planning not good fortune. As related in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, the Kurds assumed that

Ardashīr conceded defeat and returned to P rs. Instead, he prepared a large army and invaded

them again.169

So, the general story line in both accounts is the same, but the details provided in

the Shāhnāma demonstrate, once again, Firdausī‘s desire to illustrate the characteristics of an

ideal ruler.

Battle no. 4. As noted above, throughout the Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma, references

are made to Ardashīr‘s endeavour to restore the Good Religion, which had allegedly become

corrupted under the Parthians. But it is in the symbolic tale of Haftv d‘s worm that Ardashīr‘s

role as a Saviour of the Good Religion is represented in full relief. The full account of this battle

is provided only in the Shāhnāma; the Kārnāmag Ardaš r does not contain the details, and

historians like Ṭabarī and others either strip the account of its ―legendary‖ content or refer to it

only very briefly.170

The details of this account, however, are indispensable for understanding its

157

symbolic significance. Firdausī certainly understood the meaning of this fantastic tale and did not

omit the details that help the reader to grasp it.

Firdausī begins his account by describing how the daughter of a man named Haftv d

finds a worm in an apple and discovers its power to bring good luck to those who believe in it.171

According to the Shāhnāma, the name of this man was Haftv d because supposedly he had seven

(haft) sons.172

Modern scholars, however, have offered different opinions about the meaning of

this name.173

But, irrespective of its meaning, the esoteric number seven (haft) in the name points

to the symbolic meaning of the character that Haftv d represents in the tale.

Haftv d‘s daughter nurtures the worm, and the worm in turn generates income for her

family.174

Soon, the number of worm worshippers increases, the worm grows as large as an

elephant, and Haftv d becomes a very powerful man in the region.175

Eventually, Haftv d builds

a castle on top of a mountain to protect the worm and its caretakers, and he himself becomes the

chief of the castle.176

When the news of Haftv d and the worm reaches Ardashīr, he is not

pleased with the idea of a worm being worshipped.177

Therefore, he undertakes the challenging

task of eliminating it.

Based on the etymology and meaning that he suggests for the name ―Haftv d,‖ Walter

Bruno Henning offered an interpretation of the historical background of this tale.178

In his

opinion, ―Haftv d‖ is the New Persian form of an Old Aramaic word meaning ―the protector of

the seventh realm.‖ He adds that this term was used by the Achaemenids to refer to the governor

of a specific region of the empire. Based on this interpretation and the location of the story on the

coasts of the Persian Gulf, Henning postulates that Haftv d was probably a pirate chief who

controlled the southern regions of Persia after the collapse of the Parthians, and that his

association with the giant worm might be connected with his pirate activities along the Indian

coasts and his close contacts with the Indian cult of snake-gods (N ga).179

In Henning‘s opinion,

158

Ardashīr‘s slaying of the worm represents his effort to promote Zoroastrianism and abolish the

cults in southern Persia. This interpretation, however, does not explain the symbolism of the

worm in the apple and how it becomes a ―snake-god.‖ A different interpretation has been offered

by Grenet, who, based on the association between the worm and spinning, suggests that this tale

might have been connected with a Khotanese belief regarding the deity of silk-worm.180

But the

story takes place on the shores of the Persian Gulf far from Khotan in Central Asia.181

Jules

Mohl, too, had already suggested that the story has to do with the introduction of silk worm

industry to Iran and the prosperity it brought.182

But, Firdausī clearly states that the girl finds the

worm in an apple, and that she spins cotton (panba) not silk. Other scholars, such as James

Darmesteter, pointed to parallels between this story and the ancient Indo-European epics of

dragon-slaying heroes.183

But there is certainly more to this long tale than just the killing of a

worm/dragon by a hero.

When interpreted within the context of Zoroastrian beliefs regarding the Saviours of the

world, the contours of the tale become more meaningful. As it turns out, the themes of the tale

closely correspond with the themes of Zoroastrian apocalyptic literature, which describe the acts

of the Saviours of the world. The parallel themes between this tale and the relevant Zoroastrian

literature will demonstrate that the account of Ardashīr‘s slaying of the giant worm depicts him

as a Saviour of the Good Religion and destroyer of Ahriman (Evil). Before discussing these

themes, it will be helpful to review briefly the Zoroastrian ideas concerning the world and its

Saviours.

According to the Zoroastrian worldview, the world was in a state of pure goodness when

Ohrmazd first created it, but later, Ahriman and his helpers attacked Ohrmazd‘s good creation

and destroyed it. Nevertheless, Ohrmazd and his helpers fought back and restored the world.

Since then, the world has undergone several periods of destruction by Ahriman and restoration

159

by its Saviours. These alternating periods of destruction and renovation will continue until the

end of time, when the last Saviour will come and eliminate Ahriman and all his helpers

forever.184

The destruction of the world by Ahriman manifests itself in different ways.

Widespread disease, the death of humans, domestic animals, and crops, and even harsh winters

are considered to be the result of Ahriman‘s attacks on the world, but more importantly, the signs

of Ahriman‘s success are tyrannical rule and ―Bad Religion.‖ Detailed accounts of the past and

future periods of world history are related in the Zoroastrian prophetic literature. The fact that

some of these texts praise Ardashīr as one of the restorers of the Good Religion and of order in

the world appears to confirm the idea that in his battle against the worm, Ardashīr is represented

as one of the Saviours of the Good Religion.185

The motif of the worm. According to Zoroastrian teachings, the worm was a khrafstra, a

noxious creature of evil nature that harms people, domestic animals, and crops. Hence, Haftv d‘s

daughter should have killed it because khrafstras were considered to be helpers of Ahriman in

the cosmic battle against Ohrmazd.186

Instead, she put the worm in her spindle-case, fed it, and

even pleaded with it to give her good luck. In other words, by nurturing a khrafstra, the girl took

the side of Ahriman in the battle between Ohrmazd and Ahriman. The Shāhnāma clearly states

that the worm of the tale is to be considered a demon (d v) and an opponent of the Creator:

قذ خبى آكؽیع ؼا ظنوي

خگی اقذ ؼیؿع ضى یکی ظی

قذ وبى کؽم ؼا کؿ هـؿ آؽهي

وی کؽم ضای ث چؽم اعؼى

You call that worm, which is of the very essence of Ahriman (az maghz-i Ahr man)

[And] the enemy of the Creator of the world (jahān-āfar nanda),

[Just] a worm inside a leather[-sheath]?

It is a warring demon (d v-i jang ) that sheds blood (r zanda-kh n). 187

160

Ridding the world of khrafstras is one of the tasks of the Saviours of the world.

According to the Bundahishn, all khrafstras will perish when Ūshīdarm h (one of the great

Saviours of the world) will arise to renew the Good Religion.188

As mentioned in another

Zoroastrian text, when Ūshīdarm h comes, all members of the serpent species will go to one

place and merge into one extremely large serpent.189

Ūshīdarm h will then form an army of the

righteous to combat that colossal serpent. The description of Ūshīdarm h‘s battle against a

monstrous serpent strikingly resembles Ardashīr‘s battle against the worm that is described as

being as large as an elephant. Thus, like the colossal serpent of Ūshīdarm h‘s epoch, Haftv d‘s

gigantic worm may be understood as the symbol of all khrafstras (noxious creatures) of

Ardashīr‘s time, and thus, Ardashīr‘s killing of the worm represents his victory over Ahriman

and the re-establishment of the Good Religion.

A reference to the destruction of khrafstras during the glorious periods of world history is

made in the Dēnkard, which states that one of the miracles of the prophet Zoroaster was that,

during his epoch, people learned how to get rid of khrafstras.190

Further evidence that Ardashīr‘s slaying of the worm represents his triumph over

Ahriman comes from the sphere of archaeology. In a rock-carving at Naqsh-i Rustam in southern

Iran, which depicts Ardashīr‘s investiture scene, Ardashīr and Ohrmazd are shown facing each

other on horseback and trampling two human figures.191

The figure beneath Ohrmazd‘s horse is

depicted with a snake (or perhaps a giant worm) on his head. That the snake-crowned figure is

crushed by the horse of Ohrmazd indicates that Ardashīr‘s victory in the material world equalled

Ohrmazd‘s triumph over Ahriman on the cosmic level.

The theme of greed. It may be argued that it was greed on the part of Haftv d‘s daughter

that instigated the worm‘s response. Later, Haftv d‘s greed for possessions and power turns the

worm into a monster. In other words, it is greed that fuels evil. Similarly, in the Zoroastrian

161

apocalyptic texts, the demon Greed (Ᾱz) is represented as one of the mighty helpers of Ahriman,

who will be removed from the world when Ahriman is vanquished.192

As described in the Zand

Wahman Yasn, during periods of evil rule, people become ―worshippers of Ᾱz and of the religion

of wealth,‖ and their ―greedy eyes will never be satisfied by wealth.‖193

Furthermore, according

to a passage in the Bundahishn, ―along with the khrafstras, Ūshīdarm h will destroy the evil that

is from the seed of Greed (Ᾱz) and is a snake.‖194

Ūshīdarm h‘s destroying of a snake that has its

origin in greed represents another remarkable parallel with our tale, as Ardashīr likewise kills a

giant worm/snake that is generated by greed.

Although Firdausī does not explicitly refer to greed as a demon in the tale, he implicitly

associates the girl with its demonic power. When the girl‘s parents notice how much cotton their

daughter was spinning in one day, they ask her in astonishment whether she had become sister to

a par (magar bā par giriftast ay pāk-tan khvāhar ).

195 According to ancient Iranian traditions,

par s (Avestan, pairikā; Middle Persian, par g) were female demons who appeared to people in

the form of beautiful women in order to deceive them.196

In addition to this, Firdausī refers to the

girl by means of such terms as par -r y (fairy-face) and pur-fus n (deceitful), which may be

understood as allusions to the girl‘s association with demonic powers.197

Furthermore, as argued

by R. C. Zaehner, the demon Ᾱz is a female companion of Ahriman.198

As a female caretaker

(nigahdār) of the worm associated with demonic powers, Haftv d‘s daughter may be considered

to represent the demon Ᾱz, the chief companion of Ahrīman, whom Ardashīr will eliminate in

order to renew the world.199

The motif of molten metal. Ardashīr‘s method of killing the worm with molten metal is

another theme that finds parallels in the Zoroastrian apocalyptic texts.200

According to these, at

the end of time, all creatures will be submerged in a river of molten metal, which will only burn

the wicked, and thus, the world will be cleansed of all evil-doers.201

Aradshīr‘s use of molten

162

metal to slay the worm may be interpreted as an act of removing evil from the world in the same

manner that the last Saviour of the Good Religion will uproot evil.

But, this part of the tale seems to represent another idea as well. As prophesied in the

Zand Wahman Yasn, during the reign of Ardashīr‘s son, Sh pūr, the ordeal of molten metal

would be undergone by a Zoroastrian priest named Ᾱdūrb d, whose survival would prove the

authenticity of the Good Religion practised in Sh pūr‘s reign.202

This prophecy indicates that the

ordeal of molten metal was performed to distinguish liars from those who spoke the truth.

Therefore, Ardashīr‘s pouring molten metal on the worm may be understood as an ordeal that

proves the falsehood of the worm and its believers and the truthfulness of Ardashīr‘s claim

regarding his restoration of the true faith. We know from the Letter of Tansar that Ardashīr was

accused of introducing innovations to the ancient faith, and that his minister defended him by

arguing that he restored the Good Religion, which had become corrupted.203

Thus, the theme of

molten metal in this tale also alludes to Ardashīr‘s effort to prove the authenticity of the faith he

was restoring.

The motif of two friendly hosts. The role of Ardashīr‘s two companions in his battle

against Haftv d‘s worm in the Shāhnāma may be compared with the two deities who help

Saōšyant, the last Saviour of the Good Religion. When Ardashīr withdraws from the battle

against Haftv d to return to P rs to take care of a matter there, he arrives at a town where two

friendly and hospitable young men invite him to their home.204

Ardashīr first hides his identity

from his hosts, but after he realizes how wise they are, he reveals who he is and asks them for

guidance in his battle against the worm.205

The two young men give Ardashīr a piece of good

advice, which helps him to overcome Haftv d and the worm.206

These young men will later

accompany Ardashīr to the worm‘s castle and help Ardashīr to melt the metal that will be poured

on the worm.207

Similarly, the two divine entities that help the Zoroastrian Saviour Saōšyant,

163

namely, Ᾱtar (fire) and Airyaman, will help him by melting metals for the ordeal of the Last

Day.208

The names of Ardashīr‘s hosts are not mentioned in the Shāhnāma, but Firdausī

repeatedly refers to them as ―m zbān‖ (host) and ―d st‖ (friend).209

It has been suggested that

―Airyaman‖ personifies the Spirit of ―hospitality,‖ or ―friendship towards a guest,‖ a notion that

exactly reflects the terms Firdausī uses to refer to them.210

Moreover, Saōšyant is said to recite

the prayer Airyemā išyō, which invokes Airyaman for victory over Ahriman.211

In this

connection, one might speculate that Ardashīr‘s appeal to the two young men for guidance and

help is analogous to Saōšyant‘s invocation of Airyaman for victory in battle.

The motif of seven helpers. As narrated in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr enters Haftv d‘s

impregnable castle disguised as a merchant and takes with him, as his associates, seven noble

men from his army.212

Similarly, according to the Zand-i Wahman Yasn, Pešōtan, another one of

the Saviours of the Good Religion, will be helped by seven divine entities, namely, Nēryōsang,

Srōš, Mihr, Rašn, Wahr m (Verethraghna), Ašt d, and Xwarenah.213

The role of Ardashīr‘s

seven helpers in the Shāhnāma is unclear; only one line of the poem tells us that Ardashīr

selected seven noble and courageous men to help him, but we do not hear about them anymore.

This single verse of the poem, which does not seem to add much meaning to the tale by itself,

becomes meaningful when the motif of Pešōtan‘s seven helpers are taken into account.

The theme of replacing idol-temples by fire temples. One last theme that is shared by the

tale and Zoroastrian literature is the destruction of idol-temples and the building of fire-temples

in their stead. According to the Bundahishn and the Zand-i Wahman Yasn, Pešōtan will destroy

the abode of evil and establish the Warahr n fire in its place.214

In the same manner, Ardashīr

renews the ancient traditions by building a fire temple on the same spot where he destroyed the

worm‘s castle.215

164

The striking similarities between the motifs in the tale of Ardashīr‘s battle against the

monstrous worm and Zoroastrian apocalyptic literature leave little doubt about the symbolic

meaning of this tale, in which Ardashīr is represented as a Saviour of the ancient faith and

restorer of order in the world. It is noteworthy that the account of Ardashīr‘s act of saving the

world is related not in the Zoroastrian apocalyptic texts but in the book of acts of Ardashīr. This

points to the intention of political propagandists who aimed to present an idealized image of

Ardashīr by comparing him to such great figures of Zoroastrianism as Pešōtan, Ūshīdarm h, and

Saōšyant. 216

To determine how much of this idealized figure of Ardashīr was recognized by

Firdausī‘s contemporary readers would require a study of the religious and social culture of the

time, but we know that the poet repeatedly asks his readers not to treat his tales as legends and

even advises them to find their meaning through symbols (ramz).217

If Firdausī expected his

readers to perceive the symbolic meaning of his fabulous accounts, then we may assume that

they were able to grasp the ideas presented in them.

On the surface, the tale of Ardashīr‘s fight against Haftv d represents his efforts to

expand his realm and promote the Good Religion. As related in the Shāhnāma, when Ardashīr‘s

army is besieged by Haftv d, he receives the news from P rs that Mihrak-i Nūshz d, one of his

generals, has taken over his palace.218

On hearing this news, Ardashīr says:

ا قبضزن ؼؾم ثیگب ؼاچؽ گلذ بقبضز ضب ؼا وی

... with an unfinished [battle at] home,

Why did I start a combat with strangers? 219

Along the same lines, when Ardashīr seeks the advice of his generals in this regard, they

respond:

خبى چؽا خكذ ثبیع ث قطزی ظ ظنوي اعؼ بى چهؽک ث

165

Since Mihrak [has turned out to] be a covert enemy,

Why should [we] take pains to conquer the world? 220

As clearly expressed in these lines, Ardashīr‘s fight against Haftv d takes place outside

his homeland. In other words, his battle against Haftv d is part of his effort to expand his

territories by promoting the Good Religion. But he soon realizes that political stability at home

takes priority over expansion of territory. Thus, he withdraws from the battle and returns to P rs

to settle the problem there. After he secures peace and order in P rs, he returns to Haftv d‘s

castle to complete his task. This episode also depicts Ardashīr‘s wise handling of a problem that

could have led to his complete loss of power.

Part II – rd sh r s Successful Kingship

Ardashīr‘s success in maintaining his kingship is portrayed in the second part of the

Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma. Several important concepts concerning the maintenance of

kingship are presented in this part of the work in the form of a long and entertaining tale. These

concepts include the importance of having an heir to the crown and a wise minister, as well as

avoiding vengeance against old powers.221

In addition to these, this part of the cycle contains

three pieces of wisdom literature attributed to Ardashīr that demonstrate his wisdom in

organizing and maintaining his kingship. They are his āy n (custom and practice) in governing

the state,222

his andarz (advice) to high officials (referred to as khuṭba ―throne speech‖ in the

medieval Arabic and Persian sources),223

and his ‗ahd (testament) addressed to his son,

Sh pūr.224

The tale will be analysed here and the three pieces of wisdom literature will be

examined in the next chapter.

166

A Wise and Conscientious Minister

The tale focuses on the benefits of having a wise and conscientious minister by

portraying the important role Ardashīr‘s minister played in saving the life of the crown prince

and ensuring the continuation of the dynasty after Ardashīr‘s death. As related in the Shāhnāma,

after Ardashīr kills Ardav n, he marries Ardav n‘s daughter.225

Later on, provoked by her

brother, Ardav n‘s daughter attempts to take revenge on Ardashīr on behalf of the family by

poisoning him, but her plot is discovered and Ardashīr orders his minister to execute her.226

The

minister finds out that the queen is pregnant and advises Ardashīr not to kill his own child by

executing the queen, but Ardashīr insists.227

The minister refuses to implement Ardashīr‘s order

and hides the queen in his own home, so that she can give birth to the king‘s legitimate

successor.228

Whereas other historical sources either do not explain why the minister refused to

kill the pregnant queen, or simply state the he did not want to ―uproot the seed that the king had

planted,‖ the Shāhnāma implies that the minister had a political purpose in mind, for if the queen

and her unborn child were killed, the king would not have had an heir to the throne:229

گؽ ا قبلیبى ثی نوؽ ثهوؽظ ث ظنوي ؼقع رطذ چى ثگػؼظ

Even if he (Ardashīr) should live countless years,

When he passes away, his throne will go to the enemy.230

When the minister decides to save the life of the pregnant queen and hides her in his own

house, he castrates himself in order to protect himself against possible accusations. He then puts

his testicles and a note explaining the situation in a sealed box and takes the box to Ardashīr and

asks him to keep it for him in the treasury.231

Later on, when Ardashīr realizes how his minster

endangered his own life in order to protect his kingship, he orders his minister‘s name to be

167

inscribed on coins.232

Ardashīr‘s order highlights the importance of wise ministers at royal

courts. This point seem to have been understood by the Ilkhanid historian Ḥamdull h Mustaufī,

who provides a summary of the account related in the Shāhnāma and adds that the Barmakid

family (a reputable family of ministers and court officials serving the early Abbasid caliphs)

were descendants of Ardashīr‘s minister.233

A Rightful Heir to the Crown

The tale emphasizes that Ardashīr‘s kingship could continue to exist only if he had a son

to succeed him. According to the Shāhnāma, as he gets older, Ardashīr starts to worry about the

future of his kingship, because he does not have a son of his own to continue his legacy. A

comparison between this part of the tale and the Kārnāmag Ardaš r demonstrates how Firdausī

highlights the necessity of having an heir apparent for the continued existence of kingship.

According to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, during a hunting expedition, when he witnesses wild

animals protecting their young and their mates, Ardashīr feels ashamed for having ordered the

murder of his own wife and innocent child. Remembering what he did to his wife and child,

Ardashīr starts sobbing in front of his entourage.234

The Shāhnāma, however, does not mention

anything about Ardashīr‘s regret, nor does it describe an emotional scene; rather, it merely

relates that as Ardashīr approached the end of his life, he became concerned about not having an

heir to the throne.235

It seems that Firdausī avoids the emotional aspect of the account in order to

underscore Ardashīr‘s rational thinking about the future of his kingship. Firdausī‘s deliberate

attempt to highlight rational, as opposed to emotional, decisions of his characters can be seen in

the account of the minister‘s decision not to kill the queen. According to the Shāhnāma, when he

realizes he has a son, Ardashīr interprets this to mean that God wanted his kingship to continue

and therefore saved the life of his son.236

168

The characteristics of a crown prince, such as noble lineage, valour, and proper education

are among other concepts that feature in this tale. Once again, Firdausī‘s desire to underline these

concepts becomes evident when his narrative is compared to other sources that relate the same

account.

Noble lineage. According to the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr marries Ardav n‘s daughter

because as a princess, she possesses farr (royal glory/fortune) and also because, through

marriage with her, he could take hold of all the wealth of Ardav n.237

According to historians

like Ṭabarī and others, however, Ardashīr falls in love with a girl who he thinks is a former

servant of the Parthians, and only after making love to her, does he realize that she is of Parthian

descent. Because he had earlier pledged not to leave a single Parthian alive, Ardashīr orders her

execution despite her being pregnant.238

Whereas the Shāhnāma explicitly refers to Ardashīr‘s

purposeful decision to marry Ardav n‘s daughter, other writers represent Ardashīr as unaware of

the background of the woman he married, and even relate that the woman‘s Parthian origin was

the reason why Ardashīr ordered her execution.239

Interestingly, we encounter exactly the same

difference between Firdausī‘s account about the marriage of Ardashīr‘s son, Sh pūr, and the

accounts of Ṭabarī, Bal‗amī, and Ibn al-Athīr. According to these historians, Sh pūr falls in love

with a beautiful girl who he thinks is a shepherd‘s daughter, and only after marrying her, does

the girl reveal her noble background.240

In the Shāhnāma, however, Sh pūr notices the noble

manners of the girl and therefore asks her about her background.241

When the girl tells Sh pūr

who she is, Sh pūr asks for her hand in marriage.242

The outcome of Sh pūr‘s marriage to this

noble girl is the crown prince, Ūrmazd.243

Both Ardashīr‘s and Sh pūr‘s conscious decisions to

marry noblewomen point to the importance of the nobility of women who would give birth to

future crown princes, a concept that is taken into consideration in both the Shāhnāma and the

169

Kārnāmag Ardaš r, but ignored by the Muslim historians who present both Ardashīr‘s and

Sh pūr‘s marriages to noblewomen as being incidental.

Kingly aura and courage. According to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, as soon as the minister

reveals the truth about the king‘s son being alive, Sh pūr is brought into Ardashīr‘s presence.244

In the Shāhnāma, on the other hand, Ardashīr asks the minister to bring Sh pūr and a hundred

boys of Sh pūr‘s age and appearance to a polo field to play, so that he might test his fatherly

instinct by recognizing his son among them.245

When the boys are brought to the field, Sh pūr

stands out and Ardashīr recognizes him, but he decides to confirm his son‘s identity by testing

his courage.246

To do so, he asks his men to shoot the ball in such a way as to have it fall right in

front of him. The boys would then have to come near him to get the ball.247

As Ardashīr had

expected, the only boy who is not afraid to approach him is his son.248

A similar episode is

narrated in the account about Sh pūr‘s son, Ūrmazd, except that in his case the incident is not

pre-arranged.249

The point of both these episodes is that the crown prince stands out in the crowd

on account of his royal aura and courage.250

Education. Compared to other historical sources that relate the accounts about Ardashīr,

Sh pūr, and Ūrmazd, the Shāhnāma is the only work that emphasizes the importance of the

education of prospective kings by describing Ardashīr‘s, Sh pūr‘s, and Ūrmazd‘s educations.

The Kārnāmag Ardaš r and other historical works only refer to the education of Ardashīr and

do not mention anything about the schooling of Sh pūr or Ūrmazd, but the Shāhnāma both refers

to the tutoring of Ūrmazd and provides detailed information on how Sh pūr learned all the skills

of the time, such as writing, hunting, fighting, and royal etiquette.251

The importance of this

concept in the Shāhnāma becomes evident when we note that Firdausī refers three times to the

education of princes in his account about Ardashīr, whereas other historians do not deal with it as

prominently.

170

Reconciliation with Former Enemies

Another concept that is presented in this tale teaches new rulers that they can avoid

perpetual wars and revolts by avoiding vengeance. As related in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr had not

seen peace since he ascended the throne, because local rulers, who had lost their semi-

autonomous power, kept revolting against him.252

So, he decided to seek the advice of an Indian

sage and inquire whether he could ever rule over the entire realm without any worries.253

The

Indian sage tells Ardashīr that peace will prevail in his realm only if a marital union is made

between his house and that of Mihrak, the general who had rebelled against him when he was at

war with Haftv d.254

What the Indian sage suggests is that peace can only be achieved through

reconciliation between the new and old powers. Unable to imagine making peace with his

enemy, Ardashīr rejects the advice of the Indian sage and makes every effort to destroy Mihrak‘s

family, but Mihrak‘s daughter somehow survives.255

Later on, irrespective of their families‘ old

vengeance, Sh pūr marries Mihrak‘s daughter, and as a result, peace prevails in Ardashīr‘s

kingdom.256

The symbolic meaning of this episode is lost in the reports of Ṭabarī, Bal‗amī and Ibn al-

Athīr. According to these historians, the astrologers had predicted that a descendant of Mihrak

would succeed Ardashīr; therefore, fearing that his kingship would fall into the hands of

enemies, Ardashīr killed all members of Mihrak‘s family except for one girl who fled and sought

refuge with some shepherds. Later, assuming that she is a shepherd‘s daughter, Sh pūr marries

her and Ūrmazd is born of their union.257

When Ardashīr finds out that Ūrmazd is a descendant

of Mihrak, he is relieved to know that the prophecy of the astrologers had come true but without

ending his kingship.258

The important concept of the recognition of old powers by new rulers

does not stand out in the accounts of these historians. Firdausī, however, who paid attention to

171

the political concepts he found in his sources, did not miss the fine point of this episode and

clearly presented it in his work.259

According to the Shāhnāma, after peace prevails in his realm, Ardashīr is officially

recognized as king of kings by all local governors in his kingdom. As mentioned above, Ardashīr

also received the title king of kings after his victory over Haftv d and the giant worm. But his

first designation as king of kings seems to have been limited to his own court. This is yet another

fine point that is only found in the Shāhnāma. As mentioned above, other historians report that

Ardashīr was called king of kings after he killed Ardav n. Apparently, for Firdausī, simply

defeat of former powers would not make a new ruler worthy of the title king of kings.

* * * *

Although Firdausī‘s accounts about the Sasanian kings are generally regarded as

constituting the historical or semi-historical parts of the Shāhnāma, there is little historical

information that can be gleaned from his account about Ardashīr, the founder of the dynasty.

This account has little to do with history. It is presented only within an historical framework that

informs us that Ardashīr revolted against the Parthians, established a new empire, and set new

policies. Ardashīr‘s accomplishments are narrated through symbolic episodes and tales that are

based on ancient Persian mythology, and that aimed at promoting Sasanian political ideology.

Firdausī‘s ―history‖ of Ardashīr does not provide any information about the dates or precise

locations of significant events, which are typically provided in historical accounts. More

important, unlike many historians who avoided legends to increase the credibility of their

reports, Firdausī did not hesitate to include ―legends‖ in his ―historical‖ accounts. True to his

sobriquet ― ak m‖ (sage), however, he insists that everything in the Shāhnāma accords with

wisdom and he emphasizes the symbolic (ramz) meaning of his fabulous accounts.260

Interestingly, despite the fact that it contains more ―legends‖ than historical facts, the Shāhnāma

172

presents the most comprehensive account about Ardashīr as an ideal king. Through a series of

entertaining tales, the Shāhnāma depicts in detail Ardashīr‘s eligibility for kingship, his

legitimation of power, and his success in maintaining his kingship.

These characteristics of the Shāhnāma set it apart from other historical writings of the

period. Modern scholars who have approached the Shāhnāma as history have noted the

distinctiveness of the work and proposed divergent views about it. Julie Scott Meisami, for

example, refers to the Shāhnāma as an ―anomaly‖ in Persian medieval historiography.261

She

maintains that, although ―Firdausī considered his primary purpose to be historical,‖ his work

―was not taken seriously as history.‖262

She argues that, at a time when writers and rulers

favoured Islamic traditions and current events, the Shāhnāma, with its focus on ancient Persian

traditions and legends, was too archaic and outmoded for contemporary tastes.263

But, as shown

in the previous chapter, the Shāhnāma enjoyed continuous perusal and was highly admired by

the literati for centuries after its completion. If the language and content of the Shāhnāma were

outdated by the time Firdausī composed his work, why would it have received such enduring

attention over the centuries? Ehsan Yarshater, on the other hand, maintains that the myths and

legends of the Shāhnāma were conceived as history and that ―in the hands of Firdausī, who

understood the character and direction of Persian historical writing, Iranian history developed

into a literary masterpiece.‖264

If legends and myths were conceived as history, why would the

poet need to emphasize that the meaning of his tales should be understood through symbols?

And why would medieval historians seek to distance themselves from fantastic materials and

refer to works that contain them as fit only for night-time entertainment?265

A further difference between Firdausi‘s Shāhnāma and other medieval Persian historical

writings is Firdausī‘s inclusion of throne speeches, testaments, letters, and similar materials that

contain ethico-political wisdom and advice. These are not usually included in other historical

173

writings, and when they are, they are not presented as part of the narrative. As will be shown in

the following chapter, Firdausī presents the wisdom literature attributed to Ardashīr, that is, his

āy n (custom and practice), andarz (advice to dignitaries/throne speech), and ‗ahd (testament to

his son, Sh pūr) as part of his narrative and in a way that would keep the attention and interest of

the reader. Firdausī‘s inclusion of these types of texts in his work and his particular form of

presenting them constitutes a notable difference between his work and other historical writings.

The following chapter deals with Firdausī‘s presentation of the political literature attributed to

Ardashīr.

174

1 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:133–238.

2 Arthur Emanuel Christensen, Les gestes des rois dans les traditions de l‘Iran antique (Paris: P.

Geuthner, 1936), 75–105; Geo Widengren, ―Sources of Parthian and Sassanian History,‖ in

Yarshater, Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 3, pt. 2, 1272; J. de Menasce, ―Zoroastrian Pahlavī

Writings,‖ in Yarshater, Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 3, pt. 2, 1184; Touraj Daryaee, ―The

Ideal King in the Sasanian World: Ardaxšīr ī Pabag n or Xusrō Anūšag-ruw n?‖ Nāme-ye Irān-e

Bāstān: The International Journal of Ancient Iranian Studies 3–4 (2003): 33–45; and Jamsheed

K. Choksy, ―Sacral Kingship in Sasanian Iran,‖ Bulletin of the Asia Institute, n.s., 2 (1988): 40;

and Sara Mashayekh, ―Epic of K rnamag and the Late Sasanian Period,‖ e-Sasanika 17 (2007):

1–37, URL: http://www.humanities.uci.edu/sasanika/pdf/e-sasanika17-Mashayekh.pdf.

3 Philippe Gignoux, ―Church-State Relations in the Sasanian Period,‖ in Monarchies and Socio-

Religious Traditions in the Ancient Near East: Papers Read at the 31st International Congress of

Human Sciences in Asia and North Africa, ed. Mikasa No Miya Takahito (Wiesbaden:

Harrasswotiz, 1984), 72–80; Gherardo Gnoli, The Idea of Iran: An Essay on Its Origin (Rome:

Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1989), 164–74.

4 Diodorus 2.32.4–5. This statement has been contested by modern scholars who maintain such

archives never existed. But, as aptly argued by Jan P. Stronk, ―absence of proof does not equal

proof of absence.‖ See Stronk, ed. and trans., Ctesias‘ Persian History, Pt. 1, Introduction, Text,

and Translation (Dusseldorf: Wellem Verlag, 2010), 15–25.

5 Esther, 6:1 and 10:2; Ezra, 4:14, 4:15, and 4:19.

6 Shapur Shahbazi, ―Iranian Notes 7–13,‖ Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran (1986): 165–66;

and Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ 391–93.

175

7 Ḥamza b. al-Ḥasan al-Iṣfah nī, al-Amthāl al- ādira ‗an buy t al-shi‗r, ed. Aḥmad b.

Muhammad al-Ḍubayb (Beirut, D r al-mad r al-Isl mī, 2009), 64:

ى كي ثطى الکزت، اهب اللؽـ كبى هثؼ اضجبؼن، زؽثن، هزهؽ أجبء ػهبهن کبذ رولت لولکن أنؼبؼا، رع

. رطلع كي الطؿائي، الزي کبذ ثید السکوخ

8 al-Mas‗ūdī (Abū al-Ḥasan ‗Alī b. al-Ḥusayn al-Mas‗ūdī), al-Tanb h wa al-ishrāf, ed. M. J. de

Goeje. 1894, repr. ed. (Beirut: Maktaba khayy ṭ, 1965), 106:

لی ػع ثؼ ال ثیربد الوهؽكخ هي اللؽـ کزبثب ػظیوب یهزول ػ ٣٠٣ ؼایذ ثوعیخ ايططؽ هي اؼ كبؼـ كی قخ

ؼ كی هلک كبؼـ هي آل قبقبى قجؼخ ػهؽى هلکب ... ػلم کثیؽ هي ػلهن اضجبؼ هلکن اثیزن قیبقبرن ه

کبا رؤؼیص ػا الکزبة ا کزت هوب خع كی ضؿائي هلک كبؼـ للق هي ... هن ضوكخ ػهؽى ؼخال اهؽأربى

.ػجع الولک ثي هؽاى هي اللبؼقیخ الی الؼؽثیخ ول لهبم ثي ١١٣خوبظی اآلضؽح قخ

9 Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin mul k al-arḍ wa al-anbiyā‘, ed. and trans. I. M. E. Gottwaldt, 2

vols. in 1, Vol. 1, Arabic text, Vol. 2, Latin translation (Petropoli: Sumtibus editoris, 1844–

1848), 1:48–63.

10 Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:49. Cf. Friedrich Sarre, Die Kunst des alten Persien (Berlin: B.

Cassirer, 1922), 144; and Arthur Emanuel Christensen, L‘Iran sous les Sassanides, 2nd ed.

(Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard, 1944), 398–99.

11 Agathias, Histories 2.27.4 and 4.30. For a detailed study of Agathias‘s use of Sasanian

chronicles see Averil Cameron, ―Agathias on the Sassanians.‖ Dumbarton Oaks Papers 23–24

(1969–70): 67–183.

12 For example, see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:442, line 319; Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:445, line 357;

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 8:6, lines 31–32; and Asadī Ṭūsī, Garshāsb-nāma, 13, line 16.

13 All other existing manuscripts of the Kārnāmag Ardaš r have been derived from this

fourteenth-century manuscript (known as MK), which was copied in Gujarat and assumed for a

long time to have been lost. As indicated in its colophon, this manuscript was copied from

176

another manuscript that was copied in 1255. See Frantz Grenet, ed. and trans., La geste

d‘Ardash r fils de Pâbag: Kārnāmag Ardaxšēr Pābagān (Die, France: Éditions A Die, 2003),

26 and 47. Grenet provides the transliteration of the Pahlavi text along with a French translation

and a comprehensive introduction. Also see Bahr m Farahvashī, ed. and trans., Kārnāma-i

Ardash r-i Bābakān, 3rd ed. (Tehran: Intish r t-i D nishg h-i Tihr n, 1382/2003). Farahvashī

provides the transcription and transliteration of the Pahlavi text along with a Persian translation

of the text and a glossary. He also provides the edition of the text by Edalji Kers sji Anti

(Bomby, 1900) and the excerpts from the Shāhnāma and other Persian and Arabic sources that

contain an account about Ardashīr. For an English translation of the work, see Rah m Asha, ed.

and trans., The Book of the Acts of Ardašir Son of Pābag: Kārnāmag Ardašir Pābagān

(Vincennes: Erm n, 1999).

14 Cf. Christensen, Les gestes des rois, 82–83; Ahmad Tafazzoli [Aḥmad Tafa ulī], Tār kh-i

adabiyāt-i Īrān p sh az Islām, ed. Zh la Āmūzg r (Tehran: Sukhan, 1997), 263–64; Grenet, La

geste d‘Ardash r, 32, 35, 45; Daryaee, ―The Ideal King in the Sasanian World,‖ 37–38.

15 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 3, 1.1; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 53, 1.1.

16 Clifford Edmund Bosworth, ―The Persian Impact on Arabic Literature,‖ in Arabic Literature

to the End of the Umayyad Period, ed. A. F. L. Beeston and others (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1983), 483–96. For an extensive study of one of the less-known early

translators of Persian texts into Arabic, see Mohsen Zakeri, ed. and trans, Persian Wisdom in

Arabic Garb: ‗Al b. ‗Ubayda al-Ray ān (d. 219/834) and his Jawāhir al-kilam wa-farā‘id al-

ikam, 2 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 2007), especially 1:100–150. Also see Dimitri Gutas, Greek

Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early

‗Abbāsid Society (2nd–4th/8th–10th centuries), 2nd ed. (New York: Routledge, 1999), 25–27;

Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 7–10; Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar Īrān, 68–72; Taqīz da,

177

―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 96–106; and Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Az Shāhnāma t Khudāynāma,‖ 70–

71.

17 Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 10–16; Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar Īrān, 88.

18 Copious citations from Ibn al-Muqaffa‗‘s work and frequent references to him are found in

[Pseudo-Aṣma‗ī], Nihāyat al-arab f tār kh al-furs wa al-‗arab, ed. Muḥammad-Taqī

D nishpazhūh (Tehran: Anjuman-i s r va maf khir-i farhangī, 1374/1995), 82, 85, 89, 99, 110,

159, 203, 208, 212, 213, 216, 256, 277, 324, 328, 336. Also see Abū al-Faraj Muḥammad b. Abī

Ya‗qūb Isḥ q b. al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist, ed. Yūsif ‗Alī Ṭawīl (Beirut: D r al-kutub al-‗ilmiyya,

1416/1996), 190; Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:8 and 64; and Mujmal al-tavār kh, 2, 8, 521.

19 For example, see Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist, 475–77; Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:8–9; Abū

al-Rayḥ n Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Bīrūnī al-Khv razmī, al-Ᾱthār al-bāqiya ‗an al-qur n al-

khāliya, ed. Eduard Sachau, 1878, repr. ed. (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1923), 99; Mujmal al-tavār kh,

2 and 521; Kayk ‘ūs, Qāb s-nāma, 4; Abū ‗Alī Muḥammad b. Muḥammad b. Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i

Bal‗am : Takmila va tarjuma-i Tār kh-i abar , ed. Muḥammad Taqī Bah r ―Malik al-Shu‗ar ‘‖

and Muḥammad Parvīn Gun b dī, 3rd ed. (Tehran: Zavv r, 1385/2006), 90; and Mas‗ūdī, Mur j

al-dhahab wa ma‗ādin al-jauhar, ed. Barbier de Meynard and Pavet de Courteille, rev. ed.,

Charles Pellat, 7 vols. (Beirut: Manshūr t al-j mi‗at al-lubn niyya, 1965–74), 1:12–16; for a

French translation of Mur j, see Mas‗ūdī, Les prairies d‘or, trans. Barbier de Meynard and Pavet

de Courteille, rev. ed., Charles Pellat, 5 vols (Paris: Société Asiatique, 1962–1997), 1:4–8. Also

see Taqīz da, ―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 98–106.

20 Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:16, 24, and 64; Mas‗ūdī, al-Tanb h, 106; Mujmal al-tavār kh,

85; and Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist, 190.

21 Ṣaf , amāsa-sarāy dar Īrān, 64–66; Shapur Shahbazi, ―On the Xwad y-N mag,‖ in Iranica

Varia: Papers in Honour of Professor Ehsan Yarshater (Leiden: Brill, 1990), 208–9; M. Rahim

178

Shayegan, ―The Evolution of the Concept of Xwad y ‗God,‘‖ Acta Orientalia Academiae

Scientiarum Hungaricae 51, nos. 1–2 (1998): 31–54; and Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 10n1.

22 Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 3–4.

23 Taqīz da, ―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 105.

24 Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:8–12 and 1:16–17.

25 Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:8–9.

26 Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:16–17. Based on J ḥi ‘s (d. 255/868 or 869) citations from the

works of Kasrawī (Khusravī), as well as other medieval references to this translator, Taqīz da

opines that Kasrawī probably wrote his history of ancient Persia around 253/867. See Taqīzada,

―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 102n2.

27 Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:23–24. We do not have any information on Bahr m b.

Mard nsh h, but he seems to have been recognized by medieval authors as an authority on

ancient Persian history. Ḥamza refers to Bahr m b. Mard nsh h‘s Tār kh-i mul k-i ban Sāsān

(the history of Sasanian kings) as one of his eight sources. See Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:9.

The author of Mujmal al-tavār kh frequently cites him and refers to him as Bahram-i mūbad

(Bahr m, the priest) and Bahr m, m bad-i Sh pūr (Bahr m, the m bad of the city of Sh pūr).

See Mujmal al-tavār kh, 21, 32, 39, 58, 65, 83. Taqīz da identifies a Mard nsh h who was the

son of Z d n Farrukh b. Pīrī Kaskarī (d. 82/701–2), a scribe at the court of Ḥajj j b. Yūsif (d.

95/714). See Taqīzada, ―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 102n1.

28 Muṭahhar b. Ṭ hir al-Muqaddasī (Maqdisī), al-Bad‗ wa al-tār kh, ed. Clement Huart, 6 vols.

(Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1899–1919), 3:138.

29 Abū Manṣūr ‗Abd al-Malik b. Muḥammad b. Isma‗īl Tha‗ libī, Ghurar akhbār mul k al-furs

wa siyarihim: Histoire des rois des Perses, ed. and trans. Hermann Zotenberg (Paris: Imprimerie

nationale, 1900), repr. ed. (Amsterdam: Academic Publishers Associated, 1979), 10 and 388.

179

30

Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 90.

31 Kayk ‘ūs, Qāb s-nāma, 4; Mujmal al-tavār kh, 2 and 3; Ibn Isfandiy r, Tār kh-i abaristān,

60; and Tār kh-i S stān, 13, 16, 17, 35.

32 For the text of the preface, see Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 30–90; Minorsky, ―Older

Preface,‖ 166–79.

33 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Az Shāhnāma t Khudāynāma,‖ 2–11; Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Yikī mihtarī būd

gardan-far z,‖ 59–73; and Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Jav n būd,‖ 75–92; Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics,

63–69; Taqīz da, ―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 158–59; Qazvīnī, ―Muqaddama-i qadīm,‖ 22.

Despite compelling arguments set forth in support of this opinion, some scholars maintain that

Firdausī used oral sources in the composition of his oeuvre. See Olga M. Davidson, Poet and

Hero in the Persian Book of Kings, 2nd ed. (Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 2006); Olga M.

Davidson, ―The Text of Ferdowsi‘s Shāhnāma and the Burden of the Past,‖ Journal of the

American Oriental Society 118, no. 1 (1998): 63–68; and Dick Davis, ―The Problem of

Ferdowsi‘s Sources,‖ Journal of the American Oriental Society 116, no. 1 (1996): 48–58. Also

see Mahmoud Omidsalar, ―Unburdening Firdausi,‖ Review of Poet and Hero in the Persian

Book of Kings, by Olga M. Davidson, Journal of the American Oriental Society 116, no. 2

(1996): 235–42; and Michael Wickens, review of Poet and Hero in the Persian Book of Kings,

by Olga Davidson, International Journal of Middle East Studies 27, no. 4 (1995): 528–30.

34 Bīrūnī, Āthār al-bāqiya, 99–100.

35 For a review of different opinions about the identity of Abū ‗Alī Balkhī, and Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s

argument, see Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Abū ‗Alī Balkhī,‖ in Dānishnāma-i Īrān va Islām (Tehran:

Bung h-i tarjuma va nashr-i kit b, 2537/1979), 8:1073–77.

36 According Abū ‗Alī‘s account, Kayūmars was the first man not the first king. He lived for

3000 years in heaven and for another 3000 years on earth. The details of this account closely

180

correspond with the myth of creation related in the Zoroastrian literature. Other medieval

sources, however, report that Kayūmars was the first king who ruled for thirty years. For Abū

‗Alī‘s account about Kayūmars, see Bīrūnī, Ᾱthār al-bāqiya, 99–100.

37 Mas‗ūdī, al-Tanb h, 97–98.

38 Nöldeke, Iranische Nationalepos, 13–19; Christensen, Les gestes des rois, 33–41. Shahbazi,

―On the Xwad y-n mag,‖ 215–18; Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Abū ‗Alī Balkhī,‖ 1074–75; Kh liqī Muṭlaq,

―Az Shāhnāma t Khudāynāma,‖ 27–28; and Taqīz da, ―Mash hīr-i shu‗ar -yi Īr n,‖ 91.

39 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Abū ‗Alī Balkhī,‖ 1074–75. Shahbazi considers a third type for the

Khudāynāmas and refers to them as ―heroic‖ chronicles. See Shahbazi, ―On the Xwad y-n mag,‖

217–18. According to Christensen, Sasanian chronicles were of two types of ―national‖ and

―religious.‖ See Christensen, Les gestes des rois, 33.

40 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Abū ‗Alī Balkhī,‖ 1074–75.

41 For a diagram of the relationships between early translations of Khudāynāmas and later

historical writings, see Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Az Shāhnāma t Khudāynāma,‖ 48. Also see

Pourshariati, Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire, 458–63, where she points to the Sasanian

and Parthian versions of the Khudāynāmas.

42 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Az Shāhnāma t Khudāynāma,‖ 27–28 and 40. For Ḥamza Iṣfah nī and

Bīrūnī‘s references, see Ḥamza Iṣfah nī, Tār kh sin , 1:21; and Bīrūnī, Ᾱthār al-bāqiya, 123.

43 Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Az Shāhnāma t Khudāynāma,‖ 27–28.

44 Abū Ja‗far Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh al-rusul wa al-mul k, ed. M. J. de Goeje, 15

vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1879–1901), 2:819; Ṭabarī, The History of al- abar (Ta‘r kh al-rusul wa‘l-

mul k), ed. Ehsan Yarshater, vol. 5, The Sāsānids, The Byzantines, The Lakhmids, and Yemen,

trans. C. E. Bosworth (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999), 13–14.

181

45

Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:823–24; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:23–25. For the legend of Cyrus, see

Herodotus, Histories 1.108–122; for the legends of Farīdūn and Kay-Khusrau, see Firdausī,

Shāhnāma, 1:62, lines 108–147; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma 2:365, lines 2369–2435 respectively.

46 Roman Ghirshman, Iran: Parthes et Sassanides, (Paris: Gallimard, 1962), 125, pl. 163; and

Hubertus von Gall, Das Reiterkampfbild in der iranischen und iranisch beeinflussten Kunst

parthischer und sasanidischer Zeit (Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1990), 20, fig. 3, and pls. 5 and 6.

47 Ghirshman, Iran: Parthes et Sassanides, 127–28; Gall, Reiterkampfbild, 20; and Walter Hinz,

Altiranische Funde und Forschungen (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1969), 115–18.

48 Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 616 and 620.

49 The other political treatises attributed to Ardashīr are his customs and practice (āy n), his

throne speech (khuṭba/andarz), and a political letter attributed to his chief priest and minister,

Tansar. On his āy n, see below, pp. 203–13; and on his khuṭba/andarz, see below, pp. 214–23.

The letter has been preserved in Persian translation in Tār kh-i abaristān (written during

603/1206–7 to ca. 613/1216–17) by Ibn Isfandiy r, who claims to have translated it from Ibn al-

Muqaffa‗‘s Arabic translation of the original Pahlavi text. In the letter, Tansar justifies

Ardashīr‘s new policies in response to the complaints of the ruler of Ṭabarist n. See Nāma-i

Tansar bi Gushnasp, ed. Mujtab Mīnuvī and Muḥammad Ism ‗īl Ri v nī, 2nd ed. (Tehran:

Khv razmī, 1354/1975). For an English translation of the letter and an informative introduction

to it, see Mary Boyce, trans., The Letter of Tansar (Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed

Estremo Oriente, 1968).

50 On the sources that contain Ardashīr‘s testament as an independent political treatise, see ‗Ahd-

i Ardash r, ed. Iḥs n ‗Abb s (Beirut: D r Ṣ dir, 1387/1967), 39–45.

51 Nihāyat al-arab, 177–200. The exact date of the Nihāyat al-arab is unknown. Whereas some

attribute it to early eleventh century, others argue it was written in the seventh century. See the

182

editors‘ introduction to a twelfth-century translation/adaptation of this work in Tajārib al-umam

f akhbār mul k al-‗arab wa al-‗ajam, ed. Ri Anz bī-nizh d and Yaḥy Kal ntarī (Mashhad:

Intish r t-i D nishg h-i Firdausī, 1373/1994), 11–19.

52 Tajārib al-umam, 176–95.

53 Cf. ‗Ahd-i Ardash r, 49–84; Nihāyat al-arab, 196–200; Tajārib al-umam, 192–95; and

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:229–36.

54 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:133–189, lines 1–781.

55 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:193–238, lines 1–654.

56 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:133–35, lines 1–22.

57 For more examples of Firdausī‘s use of prologues see Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq, ―Nig hī kūt h bi

fann-i d st n-sar ‘ī-i Firdausī‖ (paper presented at the Shāhnāma Conference, Cologne,

Germany, 1990), in Kh liqī Muṭlaq, Sukhan-hā-yi d r na, 119–22.

58 Choksy, ―Sacral Kingship in Sasanian Iran,‖ 36–37.

59 For Ardashīr‘s lineage in Zoroastrian literature, see Zand-Ᾱkās h: Iranian or Greater

Bundahišn, ed. and trans. Behramgore Tehmuras Anklesaria (Bombay, 1956), 297, chap. 35.36;

and Bundahish, ed. and trans. Mihrd d Bah r, 2nd ed. (Tehran: Tūs, 1380/2001), 151, sec. 232.

60 For references to Gusht sp (Avestan, Vīšt spa) in the Avesta, see Yasnas 28.7, 46.14, 51.16,

53.2, 12.7, 23.2, 26.5, and Yashts 19.84–87, 9.29–31, 5.99–100, 5.108–9, and 5.132. Various

Pahlavi texts such as Dēnkard, bk. 7, chaps. 4.64–89 and 5.1–12; Dēnkard, bk. 5, chaps. 2.8–11

and 3.1; Wiz dag hā Zādspram, chap. 24.6; and the Pahlav Rivāyat of the Dādestān Dēn g,

chap. 47 provide information about Vīšt spa‘s conversion to Zoroastrianism. For Persian

translations of these passages, see Zh la Ᾱmūzg r and Aḥmad Tafa ulī, ed. and trans., Usṭ ra-i

zindig -i Zardusht, 3rd ed. (Tehran: Chishma, 1375/1996), 95–105, 110–12, and 147–49.

Isfandiy r (Avestan, Spentōdh ta) is portrayed more prominently in the Shāhnāma than in the

183

Avestan and Pahlavi texts. On Spentōdh ta in the Avesta, see Yasht 13.103 and Vīšt sp

Yasht.25. On Gusht sp and Isfandiy r in the Shāhnāma, see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 5:76–438.

61 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:157, line 353; Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:183, line 706; and Firdausī,

Shāhnāma, 6:210, line 246.

62 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:143, lines 137–38.

63 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:139–40, lines 87–98.

64 According to the Shāhnāma, D r ‘s son and four generations of sons after him, including

Ardashīr‘s father, were all named S s n. See Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:139, lines 87–92.

65 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:142, lines 126–28.

66 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 5, 1.6 and 33, 2.17; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 55, 1.6

and 69, 3.19. Although the names of Isfandiy r and Gusht sp are not mentioned in the

Kārnāmag Ardaš r, they are included in Ardashīr‘s genealogy in the Bundahishn. See Zand-

Ᾱkās h, 297, chap. 35.36; and Bundahish, 151, sec. 232.

67 Cf. Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:813; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:2–3; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 610;

Mas‗ūdī, Mur j, 1:285, sec. 576; trans., Mas‗ūdī, Prairies d‘or, 1:217, sec. 576; Mas‗ūdī, al-

Tanb h, 99; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:348; Abū Ḥanīfa Aḥmad b. Da‘ūd al-Dīnawarī,

al-Akhbār al-ṭiwāl, ed. Vladimir Theodorovich Guirgas (Leiden: Brill, 1888), 44; Mujmal al-

tavār kh, 32–33; Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Tār kh-i guz da, 102; trans., Ḥamdull h Mustaufī,

Ta‘ríkh-i-Guzída or Select History, 36. Ḥamza Iṣfah nī does not provide any genealogy for

Ardashīr.

68 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:165, line 460; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:188, 773.

69 Richard Frye, ―The Charisma of Kingship in Ancient Iran,‖ Iranica Antiqua 4 (1964): 36–40;

Choksy, ―Sacral Kingship in Sasanian Iran,‖ 35–36. For a general study of the Mesopotamian

view of the world power structure see Thorkild Jacobsen, ―Mesopotamia,‖ chaps. 5–7 in The

184

Intellectual Adventure of Ancient Man (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1946), 125–

219; see especially chap. 6, ―The Function of the State,‖ 185–201.

70 Across different cultures, certain types of dreams are recognized as having been caused by a

divine force with especial regard for kings. See John C. Lamoreaux, The Early Muslim Tradition

of Dream Interpretation (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2002), 71.

71 For the case of Cyrus, see Herodotus, Histories, 1.107–108. For Farīdūn and Kay-Khusrau see

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:58–61, lines 43–106; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 2:365, lines 2369–77

respectively. For the use of dreams in political propaganda in the Islamic period see Toufy Fahd,

―The Dream in Medieval Islamic Society,‖ in The Dream and Human Societies, ed. G. E. Von

Grunebaum and Roger Caillois (Berkely, CA: University of California Press, 1966), 351–63;

Sholeh A. Quinn, ―The Dreams of Shaykh Ṣafī al-Dīn in Late Safavid Chronicles,‖ in Dreaming

across Boundaries: The Interpretation of Dreams in Islamic Lands, ed. Louise Marlow (Boston:

Ilex Foundation, 2008), 221–32; and Caroline Finkel, Osman‘s Dream: The Story of the Ottoman

Empire, 1300–1923 (New York: Basic Books, 2005), 2 and 11–12.

72 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 5, 1.6–7; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 55, 1.6.

73 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 5, 1.9; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 55, 1.8.

74 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 5–7, 1.10; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 57, 1.9.

75 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 7, 1.11; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 57, 1.11.

76 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 7, 1.13; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 57, 1.13.

77 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 11, 1.20; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 59, 1.20–2.1.

78 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:139–43, lines 87–138.

79 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:140, line 100.

185

80

For the significance of elephants for sultan Maḥmūd, see Clifford Edmund Bosworth, The

Ghaznavids: Their Empire in Afghanistan and Eastern Iran (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University

Press, 1963), 115–19.

81 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:140–41, lines 104–6.

82 Antonio Panaino, ―The Two Astrological Reports of the Karnamag i Ardaxshir i Pabagan (III,

4–7; IV, 6–7),‖ Die Sprache 36, no. 2 (1994): 181–98; and Enrico G. Raffaelli, L‘oroscopo del

mondo: Il tema di nascita del mondo e del primo uomo secondo l‘astrologia zoroastriana

(Milan: Mimesis, 2001), 184.

83 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 25–27, 2.5–6; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 65–67, 3.5–

6.

84 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6: 150, line 251.

85 Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:815; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:7; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 612; Ibn al-

Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:349.

86 Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:815; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:7; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 612; Ibn al-

Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:349. The authors of Tār kh-i guz da and Mujmal al-tavār kh, who

seem to have followed Firdausī‘s account, attribute the dreams to B bak not Ardashīr. See

Mujmal al-tavār kh, 32–33; and Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Tār kh-i guz da, 102; trans., Ḥamdull h

Mustaufī, Ta‘ríkh-i-Guzída or Select History, 36. In Tha‗ libī‘s version, both B bak and S s n

dream that light was shining from S s n‘s head and body. See Tha‗ libī, Ghurar, 474.

87 Lamoreaux, Early Muslim Tradition, 4, 28, 35, 58, 82. Also see Pierre Lory, Le rêve et ses

interprétations en Islam (Paris: Albin Michel, 2003), 145–49.

88 Tajārib al-umam, 177.

89 Nihāyat al-arab, 177.

90 Qur‘an 2:247 and 3:26.

186

91

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:143, lines 141–50.

92 Philippe Gignoux, ―La chasse dans l‘Iran sasanide,‖ in Orientalia Romana: Essays and

Lectures 5; Iranian Studies, ed. Gherardo Gnoli (Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo

Oriente, 1983), 101–18; William L. Hanaway, ―The Concept of the Hunt in Persian Literature,‖

Boston Museum Bulletin 69, nos. 355–56 (1971): 25–27; and Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v.

―Hunting in Iran, i. In the Pre-Islamic Period.‖

93 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:145, lines 181–82.

94 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:145, line 184.

95 Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 41.

96 Mary Boyce, A History of Zoroastrianism, 3 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1989), 1:79n384.

97 Yasht 14.2.

98 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:146, line 186.

99 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:146, lines 187–88.

100 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:146, lines 189–95.

101 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:148, lines 213–14; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:147, lines 200–208.

102 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:149, lines 214–30.

103 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:150–51, lines 242–56.

104 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:151, lines 258–62.

105 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:151–52, lines 267–74.

106 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:148, line 216.

107 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:150, line 242.

108 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:153, lines 280–81.

187

109

In his Tār kh-i guz da, Ḥamdull h Mustaufī mentions in passing that Ardashīr and one of

Ardav n‘s concubines got together and escaped from the palace. See Ḥamdull h Mustaufī,

Tār kh-i guz da, 103. This passage is not included in the translation of Tār kh-i guz da.

110 Zand-Ᾱkās h, 229, chap. 26.96; and Bundahish, 115, sec. 176. The Middle Persian translation

of the S h-rōzag, too, contains a passage (1.25) on Ashi‘s protection of the property of the pious.

For this text and its English translation, see Enrico Raffaelli, The Sīh-rōzag and its Middle

Persian Version (forthcoming). For a study of Ashi, see Éric Pirart, L‘Aphrodite iranienne:

Étude de la déesse Ārti; Traduction annotée et édition critique des textes avestiques la

concernant (Paris: L‘Harmattan, 2006).

111 For example, see Yashts 17.6–14 and 13.107.

112 Yasht 13.107.

113 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:153, lines 291–93.

114 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:154, lines 297–98.

115 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:654, line 033.

116 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:154, lines 300–301.

117 Yasht 14.3

118 Yasht 14.23.

119 Boyce, History of Zoroastrianism, 1:63. Given the ancient proto-Aryan roots of Verethraghna

[see Paul Thieme, ―The ‗Aryan‘ Gods of the Mitanni Treaties,‖ Journal of the American Oriental

Society 80, no.4 (1960): 312-14)], we might suppose that the recurrent motifs of rams, mountain

goats, wild boars, and birds of prey (or just their wings) in the art of ancient Iran from pre-

historic times to the Sasanian era represent the ancient warrior-god Verethraghna. For some

images of these motifs from pre-historic times to Sasanian era, see Ghirshman, Perse: Proto-

iraniens, Mèdes, Achéménides (Paris: Gallimard, 1963), 25, pl. 25; 32, pl. 34; 33, 34, pl. 37; 35,

188

pl. 40; 36, pl. 43; 40; 58; 67; 78; 94, pl. 124; 97, pl. 128; 96, pl. 125; 107, pl. 138; 113, pl. 148;

115; 116; 249; 251; 254; 255; and Ghirshman, Iran: Parthes et Sassanides, 1, pl. 2; 31; 101; pl.

114; 111; 187; 189, pls. 231–32; 194–95; 200; 206–7; 255; 218; 221; 228–29. In her article on

the representation of Verethraghna in Iranian art, Parivash Jamzadeh only refers to the forms of

hero, eagle (falcon), wild boar, and fire (which is not included in the ten avatars of Verethraghna

mentioned in the hymn dedicated to this deity) as avatars of Verethraghna in Seleucid, Parthian,

and Sasanian arts. See Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Bahr m, ii., Representation in Iranian Art.‖

120 Yashts 14.34–40 and 16.42–46.

121 Boyce, History of Zoroastrianism, 1:62n267. Another allusion to Verethraghna‘s help to

voyagers in the Shāhnāma may be found in the story of Rustam‘s second trial, in which Rustam,

extremely hot and thirsty in the middle of the desert and unable to find water, asks God for help.

At this point, a mountain sheep suddenly appears and leads Rustam to a water spring. See

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 2:23–24, lines 302–17.

122 See below, pp. 158–64.

123 For the role of Verethraghna (Middle Persian, Wahr m; New Persian, Bahr m) at the end of

time, see Carlo G. Cereti, ed. and trans., The Zand Wahman Yasn: A Zoroastrian Apocalypse

(Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1995), 165, chap. 8.1. For the names of

deities whom Ahura Mazda sends to help Pešōtan, see Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn, 164, chap.

7.28.

124 Cf. Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 41, 3.16; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 73, 4.18; and

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:154, line 302.

125 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:154–55, lines 306–14

126 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:155, lines 315–16.

127 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 33–35, 2.16–18; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 69, 3.16–19.

189

128

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:156, lines 337–38.

129 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:154, line 305.

130 Harold Walter Bailey, Zoroastrian Problems in the Ninth-Century Books, rev. ed. (Oxford:

Clarendon, 1971), 139–41.

131 Bailey, Zoroastrian Problems, 141–47.

132 See below, pp. 158–64.

133 Yasht 19.66 and 19.92.

134 Yasht 19.22–23. The meaning of farr has been the subject of much discussion in modern

scholarship. For a general study and review of different opinions, see Gherardo Gnoli‘s article in

Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Farr(ah).‖ For a chronological study of the concept of farr, see

Abolala Soudavar, The Aura of Kings: Legitimacy and Divine Sanction in Iranian Kingship

(Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 2003).

135 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:155, lines 323–24.

136 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:155–56, lines 325–27.

137 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:656, line 029. Ardav n‘s minister‘s concern about Ardashīr‘s milking

the sheep is not mentioned in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r.

138 Philippe Gignoux and Ahmad Tafazzoli, eds. and trans. Anthologie de Zādspram: Édition

critique du texte pehlevi traduit et commenté (Paris: Association pour l‘Avancement des Études

Iraniennes, 1993), 60–61, chap. 6.1; Persian trans., Muḥammad-Taqī R shid-Muḥaṣṣil, Guz da-

hā-yi Zādspram (Tehran: Mu‘assisa-i muṭ li‗ t va taḥqīq t-i farhangī, 1366/1987), chap. 6.1.

139 Dēnkard 7, 2.46–47, as cited in Ᾱmūzgar, Usṭ ra-i zindig -i Zardusht, 67. For the Pahlavi text

and French translation of this passage, see Marijan Molé, La légende de Zoroastre selon les

textes pehlevis (Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1967), 22–23.

140 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:157, lines 344–48; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:158, line 357.

190

141

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:157, lines 353.

142 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:160–89, lines 398–781.

143 Cf. Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:815–22; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:7–22; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am ,

612–18; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:349 –52; Dīnawarī, Akhbār al-ṭiwāl, 44–45; Ibn al-

Balkhī, Fārs-nāma, 60; Tha‗ libī, Ghurar, 478–80; Nihāyat al-arab, 177–83; Tajārib al-umam,

177–80.

144 Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:819; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:14; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 616; Ibn al-

Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:351; Tha‗ libī, Ghurar, 480; and Mujmal al-tavār kh, 60.

145 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:169, line 516: چ ایي ظاقزبى ثهی یبظگیؽ

146 Firdausī‘s accounts of Ardashīr‘s battles correspond closely (but not exactly) with the

Kārnāmag Ardaš r.

147 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:158, lines 367–68.

148 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:158, lines 369–71.

149 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:149, line 234; Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:157, lines 343–45; and Firdausī,

Shāhnāma, 6:158, lines 359–60.

150 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:149, line 232.

151 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:157, lines 343–48; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:158, lines 359–63.

152 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:157, line 345; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:158, line 360.

153 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:159, lines 376–82.

154 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:160, line 398.

155 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:161, lines 404–10; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:163, lines 426–31.

156 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:163, lines 428–29.

157 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 43, 3.22; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 73–75, 5.1–2.

158 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 49, 4.14; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 77, 5.13.

191

159

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:166, line 468.

160 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:169, lines 510–11.

161 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 51, 5.1; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 79, 6.1.

162 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 53 –55, 5.11; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 81, 6.9.

163 Cf. Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 51–53, 5.2–6; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 79–81, 2–5;

and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:166–67, lines 470–90.

164 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:168, line 495.

165 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:168, lines 496–98.

166 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:168–69, lines 503–9.

167 In classical Persian literature, the metaphor ―the king‘s eyes and ears‖ is often used to refer to

the king‘s spies, a metaphor which might be connected with the hymn to the Zoroastrian divinity

Mithra, who, with his one thousand eyes and one thousand ears, watches over the pact made

between Ahura Mazda and Ahriman. See Yasht 10.7.

168 According to the Letter of Tansar, Gushnasp the ruler of Ṭabarist n criticized Ardashīr for his

excessive use of spies. See Nāma-i Tansar, 71; trans., Boyce, Letter of Tansar, 49–50.

169 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 53, 9–10; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 81, 8–9.

170 Cf. Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 55–87; Grenet, Lat geste d‘Ardash r, 81–95; Ṭabarī,

Ta‘r kh, 2:817 and 820; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:9 –10 and 5:16; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 614

and 617; Mujmal al-tavār kh, 60; and Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Tār kh-i guz da, 103; trans.,

Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Ta‘ríkh-i-Guzída or Select History, 36.

171 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:170–71, lines 528–539.

172 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:170, line 528. Cf. Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 54, 6.1; and

Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 81, 7.1. Farahvashī reads this name as ―haft n buxt,‖ but Grenet

reads it as ―Haftow d.‖ The Kārnāmag Ardaš r does not offer any meaning for this name.

192

173

For a review of different opinions and references, see Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Haftv d.‖

174 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:172, lines 549–56.

175 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:172–75, lines 557–89.

176 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:173–74, lines 571–79.

177 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:175, line 590.

178 Walter Bruno Henning, ―Ein persischer Titel im altaramäischen,‖ in Memoriam Paul Kahle,

(Berlin: Alfred Töpelmann, 1968), 138–45, repr. ed., in W. B. Henning Selected Papers, ed.

Mary Boyce, Vol. 2 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977).

179 Henning, ―Ein persischer Title im altaramäischen,‖ 140–42.

180 Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 34.

181 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:170, line 518.

182 Mohl, Le livre des rois, 5:iv–v. Recent studies too refer to the connection between this tale

and the introduction of sericulture to Iran. See Sara Kuehn, The Dragon in Medieval East

Christian and Islamic Art (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 7.

183 James Darmesteter, Études iraniennes, vol. 2, Études sur la langue, la littérature, les

croyances de la Perse ancienne (Paris: F. Vieweg, 1883), 83. For other interpretations and

suggested historical backgrounds for this tale see Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Haftv d.‖ Also

see Abbas Daneshvari, Of Serpents and Dragons in Islamic Art: An Iconographical Study (Costa

Mesa, CA: Mazda, 2011), 49–50.

184 For a study of the development of the concept of world Saviours in Zoroastrianism, see Almut

Hinze, ―The Rise of the Saviour in the Avesta,‖ in Iran und Turfan: Beiträge Berliner

Wissenschaftler, Werner Sundermann zum 60. Geburtstag gewidmet, ed. Christiane Reck and

Peter Zieme (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1995), 77–90. For the periods of world history in

Zoroastrianism, see Andres Hultgård, ―Mythe et histoire dans l‘Iran ancien: Étude de quelques

193

thèmes dans le Bahman Yašt,‖ in Apocalyptique iranienne et dualism qoumrânien, ed. Geo

Widengren, Andres Hultgård, and Marc Philonenko (Paris: Librairie Adrien Maisonneuve,

1995), 85–96; Boyce, History of Zoroastrianism, 1:285–93; Mary Boyce, ―On the Antiquity of

Zoroastrian Apocalyptic,‖ Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of

London 47, no. 1 (1984): 57–75; and Mahnaz Moazami, ―Millennialism, Eschatology, and

Messianic Figures in Iranian Tradition,‖ Journal of Millennial Studies 2, no. 2 (2000): 1–16.

185 For example, see Zand-Ᾱkās h, 277, chap. 33.15; Bundahish, 140, sec. 215; Cereti, Zand

Wahman Yasn, 152, chap. 3.25; and Dēnkard, bk. 4, as cited in Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn,

182.

186 Zand-Ᾱkās h, 183, chap. 22.4; and Bundahish, 98, sec. 143. Also see Boyce, History of

Zoroastrianism, 1:90; and Mahnaz Moazami, ―Evil Animals in Zoroastrian Religion,‖ History of

Religions 44, no. 4 (May 2005): 300–317.

187 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:186, line 682–83.

188 Zand-Ᾱkās h, 281, chap. 33.32; and Bundahish, 142, sec. 219.

189 A. V. Williams, trans., The Pahlavi Rivāyat Accompanying the Dādestān Dēn g, 2 pts.

(Copenhagen: Munksgard, 1990), 2:81, chap. 48.26.

190 Dēnkard 7, 5.9, as cited in Ᾱmūzgar, Usṭ ra-i zindig -i Zardusht, 104. For the Pahlavi text

and its French translation, see Molé, La légende de Zoroastre, 64 and 65, sec. 9.

191 Hinz, Altiranische Funde und Forschungen, 126, 127, pl. 60, and 131, pl. 64.

192 Zand-Ᾱkās h, 291, chap. 34.28, 30; Bundahish, 148, sec. 227; Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn,

166, chap. 8.2; and Williams, Pahlavi Rivāyat, 2:87, chap. 48.94; Gignoux, Anthologie de

Zādspram, 120–121, chap. 34.34; Persian trans., R shid-Muḥaṣṣil, Guz da-hā-yi Zādspram,

chap. 34.34.

193 Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn, 156, chap. 4.41; and 157, chap. 4.62.

194

194

Bah r‘s Persian translation of this line reads: ―Ᾱn dur j-i āz-tukhma rā ki mār ast, bā

khrafstarān nāb d kunad‖ (... will destroy that dr j that is from the seed of Greed and is a snake,

along with the khrafstras). See Bundahishn, 142, sec. 219. Anklesaria, however, reads ―az-

tôkhma‖ instead of ―āz-tôkhma‖ and translates the line as ―the ‗druj‘ of the race-of-the-dragon

will-perish.‖ See Zand-Ᾱkās h, 281, chap. 33.32.

195 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:172, lines 550–51.

196 Boyce, History of Zoroastrianism, 1:62–63.

197 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:172, lines 548, 549, and 551.

198 R. C. Zaehner, The Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism (New York: G. P. Putnam‘s Sons,

1961), 230–31.

199 For the term nigahdār in reference to the girl, see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:174, line 581.

200 For this part of the tale in the Shāhnāma, see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:186, lines 744–48.

201 Zand-Ᾱkās h, 289, chap. 34.18–19; Bundahish, 147, sec. 225; Williams, Pahlavi Rivāyat,

2:84, chap. 48.70–72.

202 Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn, 152, chap. 3.25. Also mentioned in Dēnkard, bk. 4, as cited in

Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn, 183. That the ordeal of molten metal was performed on Adūrb d ī

Mahrspand n is also mentioned in the Pahlavi text of Ardāv rāf-nāma, but with no reference to

Sh pūr. See Zh la Āmūzg r, ed. and trans., Ardāv rāf-nāma (Ardāv rāz-nāma) (Tehran: Mu‗īn

and Institut Français de Rechereche en Iran, 1382/2003), chap. 1, sec. 10. Ardāv rāf-nāma is the

account about the journey to the other world of a Zoroastrian priest, known as the righteous

Vīr f/Vīr z. According to the narrative, Vīr f travelled to the other world in order to find out

whether the religion practised at the time was right or wrong and in order to remove any doubts

about religious duties. Although there is no mention of Ardashīr in the Pahlavi text of Ardāv rāf-

nāma, according to the extant New Persian versions of the account, which are available in both

195

prose and verse, it was Ardashīr who wanted to ensure that the religion he promoted was right,

and it was him who ordered that the most righteous man be selected for the task of traveling to

the other world to confirm the authenticity of the religion practised under his reign. The New

Persian versions of Ardāv rāf-nāma, which portray Ardashīr as doubtful about the religion of the

time, do not conform to the portrayal of Ardashīr in the Pahlavi texts, which represent him as a

king who rose to restore the Good Religion. Modern scholars have drawn attention to the

differences between the Pahlavi and New Persian versions of Ardāv rāf-nāma, suggesting that

they represent different strands of Zoroastrianism. For Ardāv rāf-nāma in New Persian prose, see

Dariush Kargar, Ardāy-V rāf Nāma: Iranian Conceptions of the Other World (Uppsala: Uppsala

Universitet, 2009), 3–66 (Persian text); for a study on an extended New Persian version of the

text in verse, see Olga Yastrebova, ―The Influence of the Shahnama in the Extended Version of

Arday Virafnama by Zartusht Bahram,‖ in Shahnama Studies II: The Reception of Firdausi‘s

Shahnama, ed. Charles Melville and Gabrielle van den Berg (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 79–100. For

differences between the Pahlavi and New Persian versions of Ardāv rāf-nāma, see Bijan Gheiby,

―Ard Vīr z N mag: Some Critical Remarks,‖ Nāme-ye Irān-e Bāstān: The International

Journal of Ancient Iranian Studies 1, no. 1 (2001): 3–16; and Kargar, Ardāy-V rāf Nāma, 169–

83.

203 Nāma-i Tansar, 55, 68; trans., Boyce, Letter of Tansar, 36, 47.

204 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:180, lines 654–664.

205 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:181, lines 672–74.

206 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:181, lines 678–79.

207 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:182, line 689; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:186, lines 743–47.

196

208

Zand-Ᾱkās h, 289, chap. 34.18–19; and Bundahish, 147, sec. 225. According to the Pahlavi

Rivāyat, the divine entity who melts the metal is Shahrīwar. See Williams, Pahlavi Rivāyat, 2:84,

chap. 48.70.

209 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:184, lines 717–18; Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:186, line 743, and Firdausī,

Shāhnāma, 6:188, line 774. In the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, the names of Ardashīr‘s hosts are Burzag

and Ᾱtūr Burzag. See Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 69, 7.2; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r,

87, 8.7.―Ᾱtūr‖ in the name of Ᾱtūr Burzag may refer to the deity Ᾱtar (Fire), who helps to melt

metals.

210 Boyce, History of Zoroastrianism, 55–56.

211 Boyce, History of Zoroastrianism, 1:261.

212 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:183–84, lines 709–16.

213 Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn, 163, chap. 7.19 and 164, chap. 7.28–29.

214 Cereti, Zand Wahman Yasn, 165, chap. 7.37; Zand-Ᾱkās h, 279, 32.28; and Bundahishn,

142, sec. 218.

215 Firdausī, Shāhnāma 6:188, line 773.

216 The abridged version of this tale in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r is evidence that Firdausī did not

invent this account.

217 For example, see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:12, lines 113–14; Firdausī, Shāhnāma 3:289, lines

17–18; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 3:296, lines 134–41.

218 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:177–78, lines 621–26.

219 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:178, line 628.

220 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:178, line 600.

221 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:194–214, lines 15–294.

222 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:214–23, lines 296–419.

197

223

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:223–28, lines 423–501.

224 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:230–37, lines 541–644.

225 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:194, lines 15–16.

226 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:194–96, lines 19–48.

227 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:196–97, lines 51–55.

228 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:197, lines 56–63.

229 Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:824–25; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:24–25; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 619–

20; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:352–53; Dīnawarī, Akhbār al-ṭiwāl, 45, Nihāyat al-arab,

183; Tajārib al-umam, 180. Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, who presents a summary of the account related

in the Shāhnāma, states that the minister did not execute the queen because Ardashīr had no son.

See Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Tār kh-i guz da, 103. According to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, the

minister thought it was inappropriate to kill a child of royal origin. See Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i

Ardash r, 99, 9.20; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 101, 10.14.

230 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:197, line 58.

231 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:197–98, lines 63–72.

232 Ardashīr orders that his own name be inscribed on one side and the name of his minister on

the other side of the coins. See Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:203–4, lines 151–52. According to

Dīnawarī, Ardashīr ordered that the face of the minister be engraved on coins. See Dīnawarī,

Akhbār al-ṭiwāl, 46. Dīnawarī‘s reference provides further evidence for Michael Alram, who

argues against the commonly-held belief that the two images on a particular series of Ardashīr

coinage, known as ―throne-successor‖ coins, depict Ardashīr and his crown prince, Sh pūr.

Alram suggests that the image of the young beardless man on these coins might belong to a

eunuch priest not Sh pūr, an idea that agrees with the account about Ardashīr‘s castrated high

priest/minister related in the Shāhnāma and other historical sources. As mentioned by Alram,

198

scholars have not been able to decipher the name of the beardless person inscribed on the coins.

According to the Shāhnāma, the minister‘s name is Gir n-khv r, which is a rather unusual name,

as it means ―gluttonous‖ (See Lughat-nāma-i Dihkhudā, s.v. ―gir n-khv r‖). If this name is a

corrupted form of a Middle Persian name, perhaps it could help the experts to decipher the name

on the coins. See Michael Alram, ―Ardashīr‘s Eastern Campaign and the Numismatic Evidence,‖

Proceedings of the British Academy 133 (2007): 236–37.

233 Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Tār kh-i guz da, 103; trans., Ḥamdull h Mustaufī, Ta‘ríkh-i-Guzída or

Select History, 36. Ni m al-Mulk (d. 485/1092) too refers to the Barmakid family as descents of

Ardashīr‘s minister. See Ni m al-mulk, Siyar al-mul k (Siyāsat-nāma), ed. Hubert Darke

(Tehran: Bung h-i tarjuma va nashr-i kit b, 1340/1962), 219; Ni m al-Mulk, The Book of

Government or Rules for Kings: The Siyar al-Muluk or Siyasat-nama of Nizam al-Mulk, trans.

Hubert Darke, 2nd ed. (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978), 174.

234 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 101–3, 10.1–6; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 103, 11.1–5.

235 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:198–99, lines 77–88. The account about Ardashīr‘s emotional

experience on the hunting field, which is related in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, does not appear in

Bertle‘s, Mohl‘s, or Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s editions of the Shahnama, nor does it seem to have been

recorded in any of the manuscripts that were consulted for these editions. It does, however,

appear in a nineteenth-century illustrated manuscript of the Shāhnāma preserved in the

Government Museum in Alwar, India (ms. ACC 114). See my paper, ―A Unique Episode from

the Kārnāmag Ardaš r Ardash r i Pābagān in a Nineteenth-Century Illustrated Indian

Manuscript of the Shāhnāma,‖ in ―Pre-Islamic Iranian Literary Heritage,‖ ed. Enrico Raffaelli,

special issue, Iranian Studies 45, no. 2 (2012): 203–16. After my article was published, I came

across a similar account in the Marzbān-nāma, but with no reference to Ardashīr. See below,

p. 302.

199

236

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:203, line 138.

237 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:164, lines 452–53.

238 Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:823; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:24; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 619; Ibn al-

Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:352; Dīnawarī, Akhbār al-ṭiwāl, 45, Nihāyat al-arab, 183; and

Tajārib al-umam, 180.

239 According to the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, Ardashīr knowingly marries Ardav n‘s daughter, but

no reason is given for it. See Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 49, 4.16; Grenet, La geste

d‘Ardash r, 77, 5.13.

240 Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:832; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:41; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 626–27; Ibn

al-Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:355. Ṭabarī, Bal‗amī, and Ibn al-Athīr seem to be the only

historians who relate this story. The Shāhnāma closely corresponds with Kārnāmag Ardaš r in

relating this account except that, in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r, Sh pūr appears very rude in his first

encounter with the girl. In the Shāhnāma, however, Sh pūr behaves properly when he first meets

the girl. This difference points to Firdausī‘s attention to details and his desire to represent the

crown prince as a young man with noble manners. Cf. Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 119,

12.1–24; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 111, 13.1–22; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:208, lines 212–

13.

241 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:209, lines 229–30.

242 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:209–10, lines 238–42.

243 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:210, lines 244–48.

244 See Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 109, 10.15; Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 107, 11.14.

245 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:201, lines 111–15.

246 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:201, line 118; and Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:202, lines 122–23.

247 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:202, lines 124–28.

200

248

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:202, lines 130–32.

249 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:210–11, lines 250–60.

250 Other historians relate similar accounts about Ardashīr‘s recognizing Sh pūr and Ūrmazd. For

their reports on Sh pūr and Ūrmazd respectively, see Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:825, 2:832–33; trans.,

Ṭabarī, History, 5:26–27, 5:41–42; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 620–21, 627; Ibn al-Athīr, al-

Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:353, 1:355; and Dīnawarī, Akhbār al-ṭiwāl, 46.

251 For Sh pūr‘s education, see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:203, lines 147–50; and for that of Ūrmazd,

see Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:210, line 251. The reference to Ūrmazd‘s schooling is implied in the

verse in which Firdausī relates that the young boy was tired of [too much] learning.

252 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:204, lines 160–61.

253 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:205, lines 170–74.

254 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:205–6, lines 181–84.

255 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:206, lines 189–96.

256 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:207–13, lines 201–93.

257 Ṭabarī Ta‘r kh, 2:831–32; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:40–41; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 626–

27; Ibn al-Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:355.

258 Ṭabarī, Ta‘r kh, 2:832–33; trans., Ṭabarī, History, 5:42; Bal‗amī, Tār kh-i Bal‗am , 627; Ibn

al-Athīr, al-Kāmil f al-tār kh, 1:355.

259 Except for subtle differences, Firdausī‘s account corresponds with the Kārnāmag Ardaš r.

See Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 111–35; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 107–15.

260 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 1:12, lines 113–14.

261 Meisami, Persian Historiography, 53; Meisami, ―Šâh-nâma as a Mirror for Princes,‖ 266; and

Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present,‖ 263.

262 Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present,‖ 253 and 265.

201

263

Meisami, ―The Past in Service of the Present,‖ 262–65; and Meisami, Persian

Historiography, 52–53.

264 Yarshater, ―Iranian National History,‖ 366, 369.

265 For example, see Miskūya, Tajārib al-umam, 48–49.

202

Chapter Three

The Wisdom of Ardashīr and His Advices in the Shāhnāma

The second part of the Ardashīr cycle in the Shāhnāma portrays Ardashīr as a wise king, who

successfully organized and maintained his kingship. This image of Ardashīr is presented through

his customs and practice (āy n), his throne speech or advice (andarz) to dignitaries, and his

testament (‗ahd) to his son, Sh pūr. In what follows Ardashīr‘s āy n, andarz, and ‗ahd as

presented in the Shāhnāma and other medieval sources will be examined in order to demonstrate

how Firdausī‘s presentation of the wisdom literature attributed to Ardashīr differs from that of

others, and how he uses this material to impart lessons on kingship.

Firdausī introduces this section of the Ardashīr cycle, by enjoining the reader to learn

from Ardashīr‘s wisdom:

یک یبظگیؽ ث قطي ثه یک کى اؾ ضؽظهعی اؼظنیؽ

Now hear the words of wisdom (khiradmand ) of Ardashīr,

And keep each one of them in mind.1

Throughout his presentation of Ardashīr‘s āy n, andarz, and ‗ahd, Firdausī urges the

reader to pay attention and learn, a clear indication that he intended to teach, not to merely record

historical documents. As shall be demonstrated in this chapter, this is a major point of difference

between Firdausī‘s presentation of the advice and wisdom literature attributed to Ardashīr and

that of other medieval authors.

203

rd sh r s Custom and Practice (āy n)

The term āy n is the New Persian form of the Middle Persian term ēwēn, which means

―manner, custom, form, propriety.‖2 As we are informed by the Pahlavi and medieval Arabic

sources, āy n-nāma/ēwēn-nāmag (book of customs/manners) was a generic title applied to

Pahlavi works and treatises that described a variety of customs and protocols, such as the

customs of royal courts, state administration, the rules of war, royal sports, as well as religious

customs and ceremonies.3 Unfortunately, no āy n-nāma has survived in its entirety in the Pahlavi

language. But, we know from the medieval Arabic sources that some of these Pahlavi works

were translated into Arabic in the early Islamic era.4 It appears that Ardashīr‘s customs and

practice (āy n) in organizing the state constituted one of these surviving works.

In addition to the Shāhnāma, three other medieval sources have preserved Ardashīr‘s

āy n; although, with the exception of Firdausī, who uses the term āy n to refer to Ardashīr‘s

customs and practice, other medieval writers used different terms and titles for it.5 The Nihāyat

al-arab, which refers to Ardashīr‘s āy n with the title ―mā waḍa‗a Ardash r min uss al-mulk wa

mihnat al-sulṭān‖ (what Ardashīr established regarding the foundation of kingship and the task

of the king),6 uses the term tadb r (wisdom/management) in reference to Ardashīr‘s specific

customs and practices in different areas of the government, for example, the tadb r in hiring

scribes.7 The Tajārib al-umam, a twelfth-century Persian translation/adaptation of the Nihāyat

al-arab, uses the term ‗ādat (custom) to refer to Ardashīr‘s customs and practice.8 The third

source, identified and introduced by Mario Grignaschi as Āy n li-Ardash r (Ardashīr‘s Āy n),9 did

not have a title of its own, but, since its opening sentence was similar to the title of a work on

Ardashīr‘s customs and practice listed by the medieval bibliographer Ibn al-Nadīm (d. 380/990–

91) in his al-Fihrist, Grignaschi entitled it Āy n li-Ardash r.10

The work that Ibn al-Nadīm refers

204

to is Kitāb mā amara Ardash r bi-istikhrājih min khazā‘in al-kutub allat waḍa‗ahā al- ukamā‘

f al-tadb r (The book that Ardashīr had ordered to be extracted from the treasury of books that

the sages had composed on wisdom/management).11

The opening sentence of Grignaschi‘s text

reads: ―…[Ardashīr] amara bi-istikhrāj kitāb al-da‗a wa tadb r al-maṭā‗im wa al-mashārib min

khazā‘in al-kutub …‖ (... [Ardashīr] ordered that the book of composure and the customs of

eating and drinking be extracted from the libraries …).12

According to Grignaschi, the manuscript that contains Āy n li-Ardash r was copied in the

sixteenth or seventeenth century from a twelfth-century work, which contained several other

treatises from the eighth or ninth century.13

Āy n li-Ardash r mostly deals with protocols to be

observed by different classes of society, especially the nobility. For example, what should be

done at different times of the day, what should be worn according to social rankings, how people

of different classes should interact with each other, how women and boys should be treated, and

detailed guidelines concerning the decorum to be observed at official banquets. Aside from a

short paragraph in the Nihāyat al-arab, entitled ―Dhikr mā kāna min tadb r Ardash r f ta n fih

ahl al-mamlaktih (On Ardashīr‘s wisdom regarding the classification of the people of his

kingdom),14

which briefly refers to some of the topics discussed in Āy n li-Ardash r, most of the

information found in this text does not appear in the other sources that contain Ardashīr‘s āy n.

This suggests that the extant āy ns of Ardashīr are only parts of a larger work, which has not

survived in its entirety. The evidence that supports this is a report given by the medieval

historian Mas‗ūdī (d. 345/956–57) about an āy n-nāma, which he renders in Arabic as kitāb al-

rus m (book of customs), that was in the possession of Zoroastrian priests and nobles and that

amounted to thousands of pages.15

Medieval authors such as Tha‗ libī, Ibn al-Balkhī, and Abū

‗Alī Miskūya (Miskawayh) also refer to the large size of Ardashīr‘s wisdom and advice

literature.16

205

The topics covered by Ardashīr‘s āy n in the Shāhnāma are presented in the following

order: Ardashīr‘s customs and practice concerning the army, the scribal class (dab rs), the local

governors, war, the reception of foreign delegates, the construction of new cities, bankrupt

individuals, grievances, and the taxes of regions that suffer from drought and other disasters.17

These topics are discussed in the same order, but with minor differences in details, in both the

Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam. The similarity of the materials covered in these works and

the same order of their presentation point to a common source.

It must be noted, however, that one additional topic not found in the Shāhnāma is

discussed in both the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam. It concerns Ardashīr‘s effort to

protect people against oppressive local governors and tax functionaries by appointing jurists in

all provinces to settle disputes and prevent transgressions. According to the Nihāyat al-arab and

Tajārib al-umam, Ardashīr personally interviewed the most devout, knowledgeable, experienced,

and well-reputed scholars of religion and sent them to all districts of his realm, where he had

appointed local rulers and tax functionaries (al-jibāt wa al-umarā‘ wa a āb al-bard/umarā‘ va

a āb-i kharāj), so that they would ensure that justice was maintained and people were not

oppressed.18

The use of Islamic terms, such as qużāt (judges), ‗ulamā (scholars of religion), and

ahl al-fiqh (jurists), in reference to the judges selected indicates that this topic was probably a

later Islamic addition to Ardashīr‘s āy n. According to the Shāhnāma, prior to sending local

rulers (kārdār) to provinces, Ardashīr himself briefed them on proper conduct and maintaining

justice, and he inquired about their performance through local people who came to visit the

court.19

As we shall see in the discussion of Ardashīr‘s advice (andarz) to dignitaries, Firdausī

did not include in his work concepts that did not suit a Muslim context, but it seems that he did

not add Islamic-era concepts to his work either.

206

The Army

As described in the Shāhnāma, in order to expand his army, Ardashīr ordered that all

families educate their sons in the arts of battle, such as riding (suvār ) and using the mace (gurz),

bow (kamān), and arrow (t r-i khadang).20

After the boys mastered these skills, they were

supposed to go to the royal court (dargāh-i shāh) to have their names registered by the army

registrar (‗ariż).21

When these young soldiers were sent to battle, Ardashīr would assign a priest

(m bad) to every thousand soldiers to watch over them and report on their performance.22

Those

who excelled would receive great recompense and robes of honour (khil‗at) from Ardashīr.23

These generous rewards, as stated in the Shāhnāma, would encourage those who did not perform

well to work harder.24

In this way, Ardashīr managed to form an extremely large army.25

According to his āy n, Ardashīr raised the ranks of the wise (rāy-zan) soldiers.26

He also offered

robes of honour (khil‗at-i shahriyār) to those who sought to satisfy the king (khushn d -i shāh

just) and demonstrated great courage in the battlefield.27

The Scribal Class

Ardashīr‘s āy n in the Shāhnāma also describes the particular attention Ardashīr devoted

to the position of dab rs—scribal officials, such as writers of official correspondence,

accountants, judicial secretaries, chroniclers, and copyists.28

According to the āy n, posts in the

d vān (government financial and administrative offices) were not given to the uneducated (b -

dānishān). Also, Ardashīr had informers (kār-āgahān) in his d vān to report to him on the

performance of the dab rs.29

Based on the reports he received, Ardashīr would increase the salary

(r z ) of those who were skilful in the use of language and had good penmanship (balāghat

nigah dāshtand va khaṭṭ).30

Those who were less qualified were sent to work for local governors

(kār-dārān).31

As stated in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr had very high regard for his dab rs because

the prosperity of his realm, the strength of his military, and the welfare of people depended on

207

their work.32

Ardashīr trusted the judgement of his dab rs and acted based on their opinion

(rāy).33

Local Governors

According to the Shāhnāma, when Ardashīr assigned a local governor (kārdār) to a

province, he encouraged him to make the country prosperous (ābād) by maintaining justice

(dād).34

He advised the local governors to uphold honesty (rāst ) and wisdom (farzānig ) and to

avoid greed (āz) and evil-doing (d vānig ).35

The local governors were not allowed to take their

family and relatives (payvand va khvishān) with them, and were asked not to take any more

companions (yār) than the retinue (sipāh) that Ardashīr had already sent along with them.36

Ardashīr also advised them to give monthly alms to the poor (darv sh) and not to be benevolent

to the evil-minded (bad-and sh).37

To ensure that local governors performed their duties

properly, whenever people from the provinces came to the royal court, Ardashīr‘s agents asked

them about the performance of their governors.38

These visitors were also asked to introduce the

knowledgeable (dānā), the pious (pārsā), and the sages (jahān-d da p r) of their local areas, so

that they could be brought to the royal court, where their knowledge and wisdom could be put to

good use.39

As stated in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr not only sought the expertise of the old (p r),

but also looked for young men who were knowledgeable (dānā), patient (burdbār), and eager-to-

learn (dānish-paz r) for employment at his court.40

The War

Prior to sending his troops to war, Ardashīr would send a wise (khiradmand) and

knowledgeable (bā-dānish) scribe (dab r) along with a well-written (bih-āy n) and flattering

(charb) letter to his opponent to encourage him to surrender without fighting—a further purpose

of sending the envoy was to collect information on the adversary.41

If the opponent responded

208

positively, Ardashīr would send him a robe of honour (khil‗at-i shahriyār) and official

documents (‗ahd va mansh r) recognizing the opponent as a new vassal. He would also send the

new vassal a pair of earrings (g shvār), which was a symbol of obedience to the king.42

But, if

the opponent did not surrender, Ardashīr would wage war against him.43

Before war, Ardashīr would distribute money in his army to satisfy the soldiers.44

Then,

he would assign a wise (khiradmand), courageous (pahlavān), and well-mannered (bih-āy n)

scribe (dab r) to watch over the troops and ensure that they would not plunder or mistreat

innocent people.45

Ardashīr‘s representative also took note of those who escaped from the

battlefield; those soldiers would be dismissed from the military, imprisoned, or executed.46

The

scribe would also advise the commander-in-chief (sālār) to embolden the soldiers by his

provocative words.47

Another important duty of the scribe was to advise the commander-in-chief

about the proper placement and function of the vanguard (ṭalāya), the elephant infantry, the left

wing (maysara) and the right wing (maymana), the centre (qalbgāh), and the supplies (buna).48

The scribe also would advise the commander-in-chief to avoid bloodshed when the enemy

withdrew or surrendered.49

The commander-in-chief was supposed to give quarter (zinhāhr) and

avoid vengeance (k na); yet, he had to beware of possible surprise attacks.50

He was also

instructed to distribute the spoils of war (ghan mat) among those who fought courageously.51

According to the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, one-fifth (khums) of the spoils of war

was to be put aside for the king, and the rest distributed among the soldiers.52

This instruction,

which is not mentioned in the Shāhnāma, seems to be another Islamic-era addition.

Finally, according to Ardashīr‘s āy n in the Shāhnāma, a new city (shārstān) was to be

built for the accommodation of prisoners of war (as r).53

209

Foreign Delegates

As may be inferred from Ardashīr‘s āy n in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr‘s custom of

receiving foreign dignitaries was designed to inspire them with awe. Frontier guards (marzbān)

were aware of the upcoming visits of foreign envoys (firistāda) and never underestimated (khvār

nagzāsht ) such matters.54

The envoy‘s accommodation, food, clothing, and everything else that

he needed to make his way to the royal court were pre-arranged.55

As soon as local governors

would find out the purpose of the envoy‘s visits (ki bar chi āmad bar-i shahriyār), a scribe

(dab r) would immediately bring the information to Ardashīr, so that the court could prepare for

the visit.56

Ardashīr would have his turquoise throne (takht-i p r za) and the military (sipāh)

prepared for the visit, and the courtiers (parastanda) would dress in golden (bi-zar āzda) attire to

receive the envoy.57

The envoy would be seated near the king‘s throne, and Ardashīr would ask him about the

customs and practice (āy n), army (lashkar), justice (dād), and injustice (b dād) in his country.58

According to the Nihāyat al-arab and the Tajārib al-umam, Ardashīr would ask the envoys what

they thought of his kingdom, its buildings, and its people.59

These questions do not seem to fit

the portrayal of Ardashīr in the medieval sources, as he is often depicted as being keen in

gathering information about others. Firdausī‘s description of Ardashīr‘s questions to the envoys,

which is more consistent with the depiction of Ardashīr in the Shāhnāma, points to his attention

to detail.

As described in the Shāhnāma, the envoy would be seated on a golden throne (takht-i

zarr n) and served food and wine (khvān va may).

60 Ardashīr and his entourage would also take

their guest on the hunt (nakhch r).61

Finally, on his departure, the envoy would receive a robe of

honour (khil‗at-i shahriyār) as a gift.62

Ardashīr‘s royal treatment of foreign envoys and his

210

boasting of his wealth and power would not only impress the envoys, but also intimidate their

respective rulers, who received the reports of their visits to Ardashīr‘s empire. This point is

clearly expressed by the authors of the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, who mention that

the reports of the envoys inspired awe and fear (haybat/ru‗b) in the hearts of foreign rulers and

made them obedient to Ardashīr.63

Construction of New Cities

As described in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr sent the Zoroastrian priests (m badān) all over

the country to oversee the building of new cities for the accommodation of the poor. The poor

were provided with not only housing (jāygāh-i nishast) but also food (khurish). The purpose of

this custom was to increase the subject population (tā farāvān shavad z rdast).64

This custom of

Ardashīr would encourage people to stay and work in his kingdom.

Bankrupted Individuals

According to the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr‘s informers (kār-āgahān) reported to him if a

wealthy man (māya-dār) went bankrupt (b -māya), so that the king might assist him to rebuild

his fortune. This would be done secretly in order to protect the reputation of the individual.65

As

part of his assistance to those who were bankrupt, Ardashīr would provide for the education of

their children (k dakash rā bi farhangiyān sipurd ), a custom that points to the importance of

education for the prosperity of the empire.66

As mentioned in the āy n, Ardashīr built schools

(dabistān) and fire temples (khān-i ātash-parastān), which were also centres of religious

learning, in every district.67

As shall be discussed below, according to the Arabic texts of

Ardashīr‘s testament, Ardashīr advised his successors to help the wealthy to maintain their social

status. The rationale given for this was that if people of higher classes of society lost their fortune

211

and were moved to lower classes, they would hold grudges against their former peers, and this

could eventually threaten the ruling power.

As stated in the Shāhnāma, unless people kept their hardship secret (magar dāsht sakht -

i khv sh rāz), no one in Ardashīr‘s kingdom had to live in need (niyāz).

68 This point highlights the

importance of providing for all groups of people in society, so that everyone might contribute to

the prosperity of the kingdom.

Addressing Grievances

According to the āy n, regardless of their social status, all individuals who had grievances

were to go to the main square (maydān) to seek justice from Ardashīr, who personally heard

people‘s complaints every morning.69

The outcome of this custom was that Ardashīr‘s subjects

were happy (shād) and his entire kingdom was prosperous (ābād).70

Taxes

As described in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr‘s wise (khiradmand) and vigilant (b dār)

informers, whom he had sent all over his kingdom, would report to him if a particular region

suffered from drought and poor harvest. In such cases, Ardashīr would abolish the taxes on that

land (kharāj andar ān b m bardāsht ). He would also provide farmers of that region with

farming supplies and animals (ālat va chār-pāy) in order to help them survive.71

Ardashīr‘s āy n, in general, conveys the idea that, in order to successfully organize his

state, the king must give utmost priority to the strength of the military, the wisdom and

knowledge of the government financial and administrational officers, and the satisfaction of the

subjects. To ensure that these priorities were in place, the ruler had to have accurate knowledge

about what was going on in his realm, and that knowledge could not be gained but through the

212

reports of informers. We know that Ardashīr was even criticized for his excessive use of spies.72

Ardashīr‘s custom of using spies everywhere is clearly expressed in his āy n in the Shāhnāma:

كؽااى قطي ظؼ بى ظانزی ث ؽخبی کبؼآگبى ظانزی

[Ardashīr] knew many secrets (sukhan dar nihān).

He had spies (kār-āgahān) everywhere.73

It is noteworthy that while the Shāhnāma version of Ardashīr‘s āy n provides information

about his customs and practice concerning all classes of society, from the army to the scribes and

the subjects, it does not provide any information about his policy towards religious authorities.

The information given in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam about Ardashīr‘s

appointment of ‗ulamā‘ (scholars of religion) and ahl al-fiqh (jurists) does not provide much

insight into this matter. In Grignaschi‘s opinion, the reason for the lack of information about the

Zoroastrian religious institution in Ardashīr‘s āy n might be that Muslim historians and

translators of the Sasanian chronicles intentionally did not include in their works any information

that had to with the Zoroastrian religion.74

As we shall see in the discussion of Ardashīr‘s

testament (‗ahd) to his son, a religious institution does not seem to have existed during the reign

of Ardashīr. This might explain the reason for the lack of any information about religious

institutions in Ardashīr‘s āy n.

In his description of Ardashīr‘s āy n, Firdausī repeatedly urges the reader to heed and

learn from Ardashīr‘s wisdom. The first time, as noted above, is just before he starts describing

Ardashīr‘s āy n. The second time, he states:

اؾ ایي پعب یچ گ هگؽظ چ ضای ک هبی ر ثی ؼح ظؼظ

Do not deviate from these advices (pandhā) in any way,

If you want to stay [in power] without distress and pain. 75

213

This verse appears at the end of the advice that Ardashīr‘s representative (scribe) gives to

the commander-in-chief just before war. So, while it reads as part of the advice given to the

commander-in-chief, it can also be read as Firdausī‘s own words trying to draw the attention of

the reader to what is being said. The third time, Firdausī states:

ظ ظچ پف اؾ هؽگ ا یبظگبؼی ث ي ا ظؼ خبى نؽیبؼی ث

If there is a ruler like him (i.e., Ardashīr) in the world,

The memory (yādgār) of him will remain after his death. 76

In the above-mentioned verse, Firdausī suggests that rulers should try to leave a good

name behind just like Ardashīr did. Finally, at the end of Ardashīr‘s āy n, Firdausī tells the ruler

to act like Ardashīr:

ظاؼخبى ؼا ثؽیي گ آثبظ ؾ ظاب قطي ثه ای نؽیبؼ

Listen (bishnau) to the words of the wise (dānā), O king!

Make the world prosperous (ābād) in this same manner (bar ng na). 77

―Dānā‖ (wise/knowledgeable) in the above-mentioned verse could refer both to the poet,

who is sharing Ardashīr‘s wisdom with the reader, and to Ardashīr himself as a wise king.

Firdausī‘s direct and indirect calls on the ruler to learn from Ardashīr‘s wisdom indicate that he

wanted the ruler to look up to Ardashīr as a model and emulate his deeds. These reminders are

not found in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, which contain a similar text of Ardashīr‘s

āy n. Whereas Firdausī highlights the importance of Ardashīr‘s āy n by his calls on the ruler to

learn from it, the other two works present Ardashīr‘s āy n without any particular emphasis on its

benefits to rulers.

214

rd sh r s Throne Speech (andarz)

In the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr delivers two throne speeches. The first one, which is his

speech on accession, is delivered after his victory in the four major battles.78

In this very short

speech, Ardashīr, as a new king, promises to uphold justice. The medieval historian Mas‗ūdī (d.

345/956) reports that a part of Ardashīr‘s throne speech had survived to his time and he quotes it

in his work.79

Mas‗udī‘s citation is very similar to Ardashīr‘s accession speech in the Shāhnāma.

At the end of Mas‗ūdī‘s citation, Ardashīr tells the audience that his deeds will confirm his

words, that is, his promises to uphold justice will be fulfilled. This statement indicates that

Mas‗ūdī‘s citation was from a speech that Ardashīr had delivered at the beginning of his career,

and that Ardashīr‘s accession speech in the Shāhnāma was not fabricated by Firdausī.

The second throne speech, which is analysed here, is delivered after peace prevails in

Ardashīr‘s realm and everyone recognizes him as king of kings.80

In this speech, Ardashīr shares

his experiences with his high officials and local governors and gives them moral and pragmatic

advice. Ardashīr‘s second throne speech in the Shāhnāma may be divided into three parts. In the

first part, after praising God for having bestowed kingship upon him, Ardashīr describes his tax

policy. In the second part of the speech, Ardashīr advises his high officials on proper conduct.

Finally, in the third part, Ardashīr describes the responsibilities of the king and subjects towards

each other.

The general outline and many details of Ardashīr‘s throne speech in the Shāhnāma

correspond with the text of the throne speech (khuṭba) preserved in the Nihāyat al-arab and

Tajārib al-umam.81

The first part of Ardashīr‘s throne speech in the Shāhnāma is also very

similar to the short text of Ardashīr‘s throne speech preserved in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r.82

This

would point to the likelihood of a Sasanian origin for Ardashīr‘s throne speech. The Kārnāmag

215

Ardaš r, the Shāhnāma, the Nihāyat al-arab, and its Persian translation, Tajārib al-umam, are the

only sources known to contain the text of Ardashīr‘s throne speech.

Ardashīr‘s throne speech in the Shāhnāma begins with his call on the audience to regard

him as a role model:

طكزیي ؾ کبؼ هي اعاؾ گیؽ گػنز ثع یک هي ربؾ گیؽ

First of all, measure (andāza g r) [your deeds] against mine,

Consider my past good and bad [practices] to be current (tāza). 83

This advice, which does not appear in the other texts of Ardashīr‘s throne speech, seems to be

Firdausī‘s own words addressed to the ruler of the time to compare himself to Ardashīr.

To assert the legitimacy of his kingship, Ardashīr continues his speech by stating that

God bestowed kingship upon him because he sought help from Him.84

Then he talks about his

justice (dād) by referring to his cancellation of the tithe (dah yik) on land and livestock (b m va

rama) and the imposition of a levy only on surpluses (ān-chi āyad fuz n).85

He continues that the

tithe was solely used to raise a large army (lashkar-i b -shumār) for the security ( man ) of

people and to eliminate the Ahrimanic Religion (nihān kardan-i k sh-i āharman ).86

The Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam both include the information about Ardashīr‘s

imposing a tax (kharāj) on surpluses (mā kāna faḍlan ‗an al-ma‗ sha/āncha fāżil az ma‗āsh), but

they do not mention anything about the cancellation of the tithe.87

The term kharāj used in these

two works is an Islamic term, which refers to a canonical Islamic tax. Firdausī does not use this

term to refer to Ardashīr‘s levy on surpluses. So, here we have another Islamic-era concept

introduced into a text originating in pre-Islamic era. The Kārnāmag Ardaš r, on the other hand,

only refers to the tithe (sāk ud bāj az dah ēk) and does not mention anything about its

cancellation and the new levy on surpluses.88

The absence of information about the levy on

216

surpluses in the Kārnāmag Ardaš r might suggest that it was a later addition, but it could also

mean that Firdausī had access to a more comprehensive source.

According to the Shāhnāma, before proceeding to the second part of his speech, Ardashīr

calls upon everyone in his realm to heed his advice:

ایع اعؼیي هؽؾ هي و ؽ ک کدب گل ظاؼیع اعؼؾ هي

All of you who are within my borders,

Listen (g sh dār d) to my advice (andarz).89

Two verses later, Firdausī asks his audience to pay attention to what Ardashīr is about to say:

گل ظاؼیع ثؽب پیؽو اؼظنیؽ ث گلزبؼ ایي بهعاؼ

Listen (g sh dār d) to the words of the renowned (nāmdār) Ardashīr,

All of you, young and old. 90

Two more times during the course of his speech, Ardashīr urges the audience to heed his advice:

ي قظهع هؽاقطي گلز و گل ظاؼیع پع هؽا

ثظ ثؽ ظل ؽکكی اؼخوع ک یبثع اؾ ایوی اؾ گؿع

All of you, listen (g sh dār d) to my advice (pand),

[And to] my useful speech.

[My advice] is precious to all hearts,

For, owing to it, they find safety from harm. 91

و یبظ ظاؼیع گلزبؼ هب کهیعى ثعیي کبؼ ریوبؼ هب

All of you, keep my words in mind,

[And my] exertion in this job (that is, kingship).92

217

None of these calls on the audience to listen carefully appears in the Nihāhyat al-arab and

Tajārib al-umam. The recurrence of the verb g sh dār d (listen, pay attention), the use of the

verb yād dār d (keep in mind), and references to Ardashīr‘s speech as valuable (s dmand,

arjumand) advice (pand, andarz) indicate that Firdausī aimed to do more than just record the text

of Ardashīr‘s throne speech. By having Ardashīr repeatedly ask the audience to pay attention to

his advice, which is described as valuable and useful, Firdausi not only emphasized the

importance of Ardashīr‘s advice, but also broke the monotony of a long list of counsels and

helped the reader to be more attentive.

In the Shāhnāma, and also in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, Ardashīr‘s

counsels are grouped under various headings, for example, ―five qualities that would promote

health and happiness‖ or ―five virtues that would improve faith.‖93

According to Shaul Shaked,

grouping lists of precepts under numerical headings is a common stylistic device used in the

Pahlavi advice and wisdom literature.94

The precepts in the extant texts of Ardashīr‘s throne

speech, which are grouped under numerical headings, thus further point to the Pahlavi origin of

the speech.

Ardashīr‘s first group of advices in the Shāhnāma is introduced as five guidelines (rāh)

that are ―more beneficial than crowns and treasures (tāj va ganj).‖95

These are:

1. Belief in God.96

2. Knowledge (dānish) should not be taken lightly (khvār), neither by the king (shahriyār)

nor by the subjects (z rdast).97

3. To a wise man (mard-i dānā), wise words (sakhun) never become outdated (kahun).98

4. The wrongdoer‘s fear of punishment (b m-i gunāh) is worse than the punishment.99

5. Nobody respects slanderers/those who speak ill (mardum-i zisht-g y).100

218

A comparison of this first group of advices in the Shāhnāma with the first group of advices in

the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam reveals Firdausī‘s (or his source‘s) particular attention

to detail in presenting Ardashīr‘s throne speech. According to the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib

al-umam, Ardashīr‘s first group of advice consists of five virtues that ―improve faith.‖101

These

are:

1. Belief in God (yaq n bi-Allāh/yaq n bi-Khudā)

2. The indispensability of traditions (luz m āli al-sunan/luz m-i sunan)

3. Observing religious duties (adā‘ al-farā‘iḍ/adā-yi farā‘iż)

4. Respecting religious scholars (tawq r al-‗ulamā‘/tauq r-i ‗ulamā)

5. Attending the circle of sages ( uḍ r majālis al- ukamā/ uż r dar majālis-i ukamā102

).

Just like its heading, the contents of the first group of advices in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib

al-umam give the speech a religious tone. In the Shāhnāma, however, the references to crowns

and treasures in the heading of the group clarify that the speech is about those who possess

crowns and treasures, that is, rulers. Furthermore, the precepts about the importance of learning

and the validity of ancient wisdom that are included in this group of advice in the Shāhnāma

indicate that Firdausī (or his source) intentionally presented Ardashīr‘s first group of advice with

such heading and contents to establish right from the beginning that Ardashīr‘s wisdom was still

a valid model for rulers to learn from and emulate.

The second group of Ardashīr‘s advices in the Shāhnāma is introduced as being ―better

(bihtar) than having eyes (d da), soul (jān), and property (ch z).‖103

These are:

1. To make the world prosperous (ābād).104

2. To speak softly (āvāz-i narm) and pleasantly (guftār-i garm), while maintaining wisdom

(khirad) and respect (sharm).105

3. Not to spend money boastfully (az bahr-i lāf) and in vain (bar gazāf).106

219

4. To choose the mean (miyāna) between two extremes.107

As presented in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, Ardashīr‘s second group of advices

consists of three precepts that would ―improve one‘s livelihood ( alā ma‗ā‘ish/ alā -i

ma‗ shat).‖108

The first advice in this group is on promoting agricultural development. This

advice closely corresponds with what is given in the Shāhnāma as the first precept in the same

group: ―good for those who make the world prosperous (ābād).‖109

The other two counsels given

in this group in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam are on making good judgements about

financial gains and spending.110

When examined more closely, we notice that the third and fourth

precepts in the same group of advices in the Shāhnāma are about avoiding unreasonable

expenses and practicing moderation. Thus, although the headings and contents of the second

group of advice in the Shāhnāma and the other two works seem to be different, their general

themes are almost the same.

The third group of Ardashīr‘s advices in the Shāhnāma consist of five precepts that are

put together under three headings: Precepts (rāy) that would invigorate faith and religion (tāza

gardad turā d n va k sh), promote health and happiness (tan-āsān va shād afzāyadat), and

whose sweetness offsets the bitterness of poison (ki bā shahd-i zahr nagzāyadat).111

These are:

1. Know that by greed (bi āz) and endeavour (bi k shish), you cannot surpass (nayāb

guzar) the lot that God has assigned (bakhshish-i dādgar) to you; he who is contented

(khursand) becomes wealthy (tavāngar).112

2. Avoid greed (āz), and do not tell secrets (rāz) to women.113

3. Avoid rivalry in reputation (nang) and battles (nabard).114

4. Keep sorrow (gham) from your heart, and do not worry about ills that have not come (nā-

āmada bad).115

5. Do not strive for things that are not within your reach.116

220

Four of the above-mentioned injunctions appear in the third group of advices in the Nihāyat al-

arab and Tajārib al-umam. These are advice on being content with one‘s own destiny,117

avoiding greed,118

avoiding rivalry,119

and not striving for what cannot be achieved

successfully.120

Also, one of the headings of this group of advices in the Shāhnāma, that is, five

things that promote health and happiness, is exactly the same as the heading given to the same

group in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam.121

Interestingly, the heading that the Nihāyat

al-arab and Tajārib al-umam use for the first group of advice, that is, ―five virtues that improve

faith‖ is used as a second heading for this third group in the Shāhnāma.

One can only speculate why Firdausī gave three headings to one group of advices, one of

which used for an entirely different group in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam. But the

close correspondence of this second group of advice in the Shāhnāma with the same group in the

other two works indicates that these texts shared the same origin. The differences we find among

them, however, might be due to the discretion of the authors who included the text of Ardashīr‘s

throne speech in their work. We may also consider the alterations that took place in the original

text in the process of its transmission form one language and cultural sphere to another.

The precepts in the fourth group of Ardashīr‘s advices in the Shāhnāma are introduced as

that which ―bestows safety against harm‖ (ki yāband az man az gazand).122

These are:

1. Never take a rest (zamān mayāsāy) from learning (ām khtan) if you wish to enlighten

(afr khtan) your soul (jān).123

2. Have your children educated (bi farhang dār), and limit their play (bāz ).124

3. Do not avoid socializing with one another (ām zish-i yikdigar).125

The heading of this fourth group of advices is very similar to that of the same group in the

Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam.126

But, the counsels given there are different from what is

given in the Shāhnāma. The above-mentioned first and third precepts, that is, advice on

221

education and friendship, do however appear in the fifth group of Ardashīr‘s advices in the

Nihāyat al-arab and the Tajārib al-umam.127

Finally, the fifth and last group of Ardashīr‘s advices in the Shāhnāma is presented as

four precepts that ―comfort hearts and bring about goodness (kh b ) and benefits (s dmand ).‖

These are:

1. To have fear (b m) of God and show modesty (āzarm va sharm) toward Him.128

2. To be one‘s own judge (that is, before the Day of Judgement), to keep the faith from

corruption, to obey God and the king, and to like the king just like oneself.129

3. To seek the truth (rāst ) and avoid falsehood (kazhzh va kāst ).130

4. To be obedient to the king.131

Neither the heading nor the precepts of this group appear in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-

umam.

The third part of Ardashīr‘s throne speech in the Shāhnāma describes the responsibility of

the king and his subjects towards each other. The king is responsible for upholding justice and

penalizing those who oppress the people. In turn, people are supposed to be obedient to the

king.132

In the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, this last part of Ardashīr‘s speech is more

extensive, although it is not quite clear whether it is still part of the speech or not, because in

both works, after his last group of advices, Ardashīr states, ―this is all my advice to you.‖133

Regardless of this statement, which signals the end of the speech, the text continues in both

Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam by explaining the responsibility of people towards those

from whom they draw benefits. Thus, people are responsible toward God, toward their own

souls, toward the king, and toward each other, because they receive advantages and benefits from

God, from their own souls, from the king, and from each other. Based on whom they serve most,

people are then divided into four groups. The first group consists of those who choose to devote

222

their lives to the worship of God. The second group consists of people who choose to serve the

king by helping him to maintain justice and protect people. The third group is devoted to taking

care of the financial and administrative affairs of the state, thereby serving the king and all his

subjects. Finally, the people of the fourth group busy themselves with acquiring wealth and

property, which means that they serve their own souls.134

This is a peculiar, perhaps Islamic,

form of describing the four classes of society, that is, the priests, the warriors, the scribes, and the

peasants/artisans/merchants. As pointed out by de Fouchécour, by describing the Sasanian social

class system in moral terms (that is, people‘s responsibility toward those from whom they draw

benefits) and thereby making it impossible to define the functions of each class, the author of the

Nihāyat al-arab adapted the Iranian concept of the division of society into four classes to an

Islamic society.135

As mentioned above, in this part of Ardashīr‘s throne speech in the

Shāhnāma, Firdausī only refers to the responsibility of the king toward his people and vice versa,

and there is no mention of the four classes of society. We know that Firdausī was aware of the

class system in ancient Iranian societies, because he clearly describes it in his account about the

mythical king Jamshīd.136

We might presume that Firdausī (or his source) intentionally left out

the information about Ardashīr‘s classification of society, because it was no longer applicable to

a Muslim context. Whereas other medieval authors modified ancient Persian concepts to make

them suit the standards of a Muslim society, Firdausī seems to have only recorded concepts that

were useful and relevant without trying to change what was no longer valid. This is a further

indication that Firdausī‘s primary goal was not to record history; rather, he intended to teach

lessons on kingship by drawing upon experiences of past rulers that were still relevant.

At the end of Ardashīr‘s throne speech in the Shāhnāma, an old man named Khurr d

stands up and praises Ardashīr for securing peace and prosperity in the kingdom. Khurr d also

exalts Ardashīr for his wisdom:

223

کف چى ر ظاؼظ ؾ نببى ضؽظ اعیه اؾ ؼای ر ثگػؼظ

No king has your wisdom

Nobody‘s perception surpasses your insight.137

This short episode, which functions as a confirmation of Ardashīr‘s ideas, also appears in

the Tajārib al-umam and Nihāyat al-arab, where ―the head of the country‖ (ra‘ s ahl al-

mamlaka/ra‘ s-i mamlikat) praises Ardashīr for upholding justice (ma‗dila), securing peace, and

unifying the country.138

This person does not however praise Ardashīr for his wisdom. While

Firdausī begins and ends Ardashīr‘s throne speech by highlighting Ardashīr‘s wisdom, we do not

find any particular emphasis placed on Ardashīr‘s wisdom in the other two works that contain his

throne speech. Moreover, Firdausī‘s poetic narration brings the scene of Ardashīr‘s throne

speech to life. For example, while Firdausī describes Khurr d and mentions him by name, the

Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam merely refer to him as the head of the country and do not

provide any information about him. Firdausī‘s employment of literary techniques to bring the

scene of Ardashīr‘s throne speech to life helps him to make his didactic text more entertaining. It

also helps him to convey his message in a more effective manner. This is something that is

absent in the Nihāyat al-arab and the Tajārib al-umam.

Ardashīr s Testament (‘ah )

In the early Islamic period, Ardashīr‘s testament was a well-known Arabic work on

statecraft and kingship, as a number of medieval authors refer to its significance. For example,

the early medieval historians Abū ‗Alī Miskūya (d. 421/1030) states that the best thing that

survived from Ardashīr was his testament.139

Ibn al-Balkhī (fl. 498/1105–510/1116), another

medieval historian, reports that several copies of Ardashīr‘s testament were available at the

time.140

Both Miskūya and Ibn al-Balkhī mention that the Sasanian king Anūshīrv n (r. 531–79)

224

perused and practiced Ardashīr‘s testament.141

In Ibn al-Nadīm‘s list of ―the best books in

everyone‘s opinion‖ (al-kutub al-majma‗ ‗alā j datihā), ‗Ahd-i Ardash r (Ardashīr‘s testament)

appears at the very top.142

Ibn al-Nadīm also states that Bal dhurī (d. 279/892), a translator of

Persian works into Arabic, versified Ardashīr‘s testament.143

According to the celebrated

medieval philologist Mubarrad (d. 286/899), the ‗Abbasid caliph Ma‘mūn (r. 198/813–218/833)

had asked the tutor of his son al-W thiq bi-All h (b. 199/814–15) to teach him Ardashīr‘s

testament after teaching him the Qur‘an.144

The famous medieval Arab belletrist J ḥi (d.

255/868), on the other hand, scorned the scribes (kuttāb) who admired Ardashīr‘s testament and

who cited it ―as if it were the greatest authority in organizing the state.‖145

This scornful

statement, nevertheless, points to the popularity of Ardashīr‘s testament among members of the

scribal class.

The Arabic translation of Ardashīr‘s testament has survived in several medieval sources.

The earliest work that contains a copy of it is al-Ghurra, an Arabic anthology of poems and

treatises on various topics by authors of different nationalities.146

Based on the names of poets

and writers given in al-Ghurra, Iḥs n ‗Abb s suggests that it must have been written in the early

tenth century.147

Miskūya‘s Tajārib al-umam is another work that has preserved the text of

Ardashīr‘s testament in Arabic translation.148

The third work is Nathr al-durr composed by Abū

Sa‗d Manṣūr b. al-Ḥusayn al-Ābī (d. 421/1030).149

These three texts and other medieval sources

that contained excerpts from Ardashīr‘s testament were used by Iḥs n ‗Abb s in his edition of

‗Ahd-i Ardash r (1967). Another copy of Ardashīr‘s testament was identified and introduced by

Grignaschi in 1966.150

The manuscript that contains this fourth copy of Ardashīr‘s testament also

contains Āy n li-Ardash r, which was mentioned above. According to ‗Abb s, the Pahlavi text of

Ardashīr‘s testament was translated into Arabic sometime in the eighth century.151

Based on the

information given in the Arabic text of Ardashīr‘s testament, Grignaschi opines that the Pahlavi

225

text of the testament was written during the reign of the last Sasanian king, Yazdgird III (r. 632–

51).152

Mary Boyce and Aḥmad Tafa ulī, however, maintain that the Pahlavi text of Ardashīr‘s

testament was written in the early Sasanian era but modified and expanded in later periods.153

Summaries of Ardashīr‘s testament have also survived in the medieval sources.

Muntakhab min ‗ahd Azdash r [sic.] b. Bābak al-malik (Selections from the testament of

Ardashīr son of B bak the king) is a short text that contains selections from Ardashīr‘s

testament.154

The Nihāyat al-arab and its Persian translation, Tajārib al-umam, also contain a

summary of Ardashīr‘s testament.155

In addition to these, excerpts from Ardashīr‘s testament are

scattered in various medieval sources.156

As shall be discussed below, while the text of

Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma shares commonalities with the Arabic texts, it contains

concepts that are not found in the Arabic versions of the testament. On the other hand, some of

the concepts that are discussed at length in the Arabic texts of the testament do not appear in the

Shāhnāma version. Aside from differences in content, the major point of difference between

Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma and that preserved in the other works is the form of

presentation of the testament.

It must also be noted here that the addressee, and hence the precise title, of Ardashīr‘s

testament is inconsistent in our sources. In the text of the testament in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr

clearly speaks to his own son, and the testament is presented under the rubric ―‗Ahd-nāma-i

Ardash r-i Bābakān bā Shāp r‖ (The testament of Ardashīr son of B bak to Sh pūr). But, the

Arabic texts of the testament refer to it as Ardashīr‘s testament not only to his son, Sh pūr, but

also to all who succeeded him.157

In the Muntakhab min ‗Ahd, which consists of selections from

the testament, the rubric simply reads ―Ardashīr‘s testament to his successors.‖158

Grignaschi

maintains that the testament was originally addressed to all successors of Ardashīr, and that the

name of Sh pūr was added to the title by later Muslim translators.159

But, the inconsistency is not

226

just in the title. In the Arabic text of the testament in the Nihāyat al-arab, a number of

paragraphs start with ―a‗lam yā bunay,‖ in which ―a‗lam ‖ (be aware) is a plural verb used

with a singular addressee, that is, ―yā bunay‖ (oh, my son). The Tajārib al-umam, the Persian

translation of the Nihāyat al-arab, however, translates this phrase as ―bidān ay pisar-i man,‖ (be

aware, oh, my son), using the singular form of the verb in Persian. Furthermore, except for the

last paragraph, the text of the testament in this Persian work only addresses Ardashīr‘s son, and

not his successors.160

Moreover, in his al-Fihrist, Ibn al-Nadīm refers to Ardashīr‘s testament

twice with the title ‗Ahd-i Ardash r (Ardashīr‘s testament) and once with the title ‗Ahd-i

Ardash r ilā ibnih Sāb r (‗Ardashīr‘s testament to his son Sh pūr).161

Ibn al-Nadīm‘s use of two

titles in reference to Ardashīr‘s testament might imply that he referred to two different works. To

determine whether the extant texts of the testament might be combinations of two different texts

would take us away from the main topic of the discussion here, but a note had to be made here

about this inconsistency in order to avoid confusion while citing from these different texts.

Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma begins with a preamble on the transient nature of

the world and advice on leaving a good legacy behind.162

This preamble contextualizes

Ardashīr‘s testament, for the poet concludes it by stating:

چ اؾ هي قطي ثهی یبظگیؽ

هبى ثف ثظ نؽیبؼ اؼظنیؽ

There are many signs (nishān) [left behind by] king Ardashīr

Learn (yād g r) [from them] as you hear [about them] from me. 163

Firdausī thus presents Ardashīr‘s testament as a legacy, which immortalized his name.

Having prepared the stage for discussing the legacy of Ardashīr, Firdausī describes Ardashīr

growing old and realizing that he has approached the end of his life, a state that makes him think

227

about sharing his experiences of ruling the empire with his crown prince in order to have his

kingdom survive after his death. Firdausī then presents the testament as Ardashīr speaks to his

son and advises him on kingship. In other medieval works, Ardashīr‘s testament is not preceded

by any preamble; nor is it contextualized. It is not presented in the form of a conversation

between a father and son either. For example, the anonymous author of the Tajārib al-umam

simply states that when Ardashīr approached the end of his life, he wrote a testament to his son.

Following this statement, the author presents the testament.164

The Nihāyat al-arab does not even

provide an introductory statement before presenting Ardashīr‘s testament and simply presents it

under the rubric ―A copy (nuskha) of Ardashīr‘s testament to his son, Sh pūr, and his order to

obey it, learn its contents, and not oppose it. Here is what his testament contained.‖165

Miskūya

writes in his Tajārib al-umam ―the best thing Ardashīr left behind is his testament to his

successors, and here is a copy of it (hādhih nuskhatuh).‖166

Firdausī‘s technique of using a preamble and a narrative introduction to the testament, as

well as his way of presenting it, that is, having Ardashīr speak to his son, lends immediacy to the

text. If Firdausī‘s main goal was simply to record an historical document, he would not need to

try to keep his reader attentive by making the text as entertaining as possible. Like a teacher who

tries to keep his students engaged, Firdausī employs literary techniques to make his lessons

interesting. Moreover, as narrated in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr begins his lecture to Sh pūr by

asking him to commit his testament to memory (bid guft n ‗ahd-i man yād dār) and to put his

words into practice (sakhun-hā-yi man ch n shin d bivarz).167

These reminders, which we find

only in the Shāhnāma version of the testament, might be Firdausī‘s own words to emphasize the

importance of what is going to be said—just like the reminders at the beginning of Ardashīr‘s

āy n and andarz, which were mentioned above. Firdausī‘s desire to keep the reader attentive

demonstrates that he wanted to help his reader follow his work carefully.

228

The Concept of Justice

According to the Shāhnāma, the first concept that Ardashīr refers to in his advice to his

son is justice (dād). Surprisingly, this concept is not discussed in the extant texts of Ardashīr‘s

testaments. In the Shāhnāma version of the testament, the issue of justice is raised again when

Ardashīr enumerates three things that end kingship, one of them being an unjust king (b dādgar

shahriyār).168

But, in the other texts of Ardashīr‘s testament, injustice is not mentioned as one of

the causes that can end kingship. It is difficult to determine whether the original text of the

testament included the concept of justice or not, but, based on the excerpts from Ardashīr‘s

testament preserved in other medieval works, we may presume that the concept did exist in the

original text. In his al-Kāmil, Mubarrad quotes the following maxim from Ardashīr‘s testament:

―‗adl al-sulṭān anfa‗ lilra‗ya min khi b al-zamān‖ (the king‘s justice is more beneficial to the

peasant than the abundance of time‖).169

Tha‗ libī quotes the same maxim by Ardashīr; although,

he does not mention that it is from his testament.170

The eleventh-century author, Ẓahīrī

Samarqandī, too attributes a similar maxim to Ardashīr: ―Sulṭān ‗ādil khayr min maṭar wābil‖ (A

just sultan is better than torrential rain).171

In the extant texts of Ardashīr‘s testament, this maxim

reads ―rishād al-wāl khayr lilra‗ya min khi b al-zamān‖ (the integrity of the conduct of local

governors is more beneficial to the peasant than the abundance of time).172

The use of the term

‗adl (justice) in the citations by Mubarrad Tha‗ libī, and Ẓahīrī Samarqandī indicates that, for

some reason, the authors of the extant texts of the testament, or their sources, preferred not to use

this term in the above-mentioned maxim. Moreover, while the concept of justice and the term

‗adl are mentioned several times in the Muntakhab min ‗ahd (selections from the testament), no

mention of it is made in the corresponding sections of the longer versions of the testament.173

This would further corroborate the assumption that the concept of justice was included in the

original text of the testament.

229

The Idea of the Union of Kingship and Religion

The most prominent theme of Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma and all other sources

that contain it is the idea of the union of kingship and religion. Firdausī highlights this idea by

explaining it in eleven consecutive lines.174

The fact that so many lines are allocated to one

particular concept demonstrates its importance. While medieval sources often ascribe this idea to

Ardashīr, modern scholars argue that it could not have been proclaimed by Ardashīr because

there is no historical evidence for the existence of an established religious institution or a

prominent religious figure who could be considered an ally of the institution of kingship during

the reign of Ardashīr.175

However, modern scholars‘ interpretation of this concept seems to differ

from what it actually means in the Zoroastrian literature. According to the Dēnkard, every time

religion and good kingship are united in the person of a good Zoroastrian king, the world is

restored to its ideal state.176

In other words, ideally, kingship and religion are conjoined and

manifested in the person of the king. As mentioned in the previous chapter, the Zoroastrian

tradition holds that there are several alternating periods of world renovation and destruction from

the time of creation to the end of time.177

It recognizes Ardashīr as one of the Saviours who

restored the world to its ideal state. Thus, we may interpret the idea of the union of kingship and

religion under Ardashīr in terms of the Zoroastrian notion of an ideal world, that is, one in which

kingship and religion are conjoined in the person of a good Zoroastrian king.178

As noted

previously, the Sasanian authors of the account about Ardashīr represent his acts as being

analogous to those of Saōšyant, Ūshīdarm h, and Pešōtan, the Saviours of the Good Religion,

whose coming is still expected.179

According to Marijan Molé, the coming of Saōšyant coincides

with the reunion of kingship and religion.180

Thus, the idea of the union of religion and kingship

during Ardashīr‘s reign draws a further parallel between the eras of Ardashīr and Saōšyant. In

230

other words, kingship and religion were conjoined and manifested in the person of Ardashīr, just

as they will be in Saōšyant‘s epoch.

According to Molé, however, the ideal state of the union of kingship and religion in one

person, as described in the Dēnkard, reflects an eschatological concept; otherwise, according to

him, kingship and religion are normally represented by two different persons.181

But the above-

mentioned passage of the Dēnkard specifically mentions ―every time‖ not ―at the end of time‖

when describing the state of an ideal world, and we know that the Zoroastrian tradition

recognizes several periods of world restoration before the end of time.182

So, ―every time‖ may

be understood to refer to the times when the world is renovated by a Saviour, one such Saviour

being Ardashīr. Furthermore, we have a clear example of a time when the world was in an ideal

state and the king represented both kingship and priesthood. The reign of the mythical king

Jamshīd is always represented in Zoroastrian literature as a glorious period of world history,

during which there was no disease or death, no extreme heat or cold, no drought, and no evil

activity.183

Jamshīd‘s ideal world is even compared to Zoroaster‘s.184

The Shāhnāma describes

Jamshīd‘s reign in the same way and provides a further piece of information that conforms to the

Dēnkard passage regarding the union of kingship and religion in an ideal world:

ایؿظی ون نؽیبؼی ن هثعی هن گلذ ثب كؽ

He (Jamshīd) said, ―I possess the divine glory (farrah-i zad ),

I possess both kingship (shahriyār ) and priesthood (m bad ).‖ 185

Thus, as both king and priest, Jamshīd exemplifies the ideal king of the Dēnkard passage,

as does Ardashīr, in whose person kingship and religion were conjoined. There is also a small

clue in the Shāhnāma that points to a link between Ardashīr and priesthood. According to the

Shāhnāma, having victoriously escaped from Ardav n‘s prison, Ardashīr prepares himself for

231

serious battles with Ardav n and his son Bahman. Just before leaving for his decisive battles,

Ardashīr goes to the fire temple of R m Khurr d to pray for guidance and victory.186

R m

Khurr d is another name of Āzar Farnbagh, one of the three major fire temples associated with

the class of priests. It is remarkable that Ardashīr should pray at this particular fire temple that

was used by Zoroastrian priests. This brief reference might be understood as an indication that

Ardashīr was not only a king but also a priest.

The Sasanian authors of Ardashīr‘s testament aimed to depict an ideal image of Ardashīr

by likening his era to the era of the mythical king Jamshīd and the last Saviour of the world,

Saōšyant. Considering the parallel themes between the ideal world of Ardashīr and those of

Jamshīd and Saōšyant, we may suppose that the Sasanian political authors of Ardashīr‘s

testament and the accounts about him aimed to provide an historical precedent for their ideal

world. Perhaps the mythical and eschatological worlds of Jamshīd and Saōšyant were too far

from the real world to be used as exemplars of an ideal kingship.

A statement from Ardashīr‘s throne speech cited by Tha‗ libī also points to the same

meaning for the idea of the union of kingship and religion that is found in the Zoroastrian

literature. According to Tha‗ libī, Ardashīr stated that God favoured him and chose him as his

representative, so that he might redress the affairs of religion and kingship, which are like twin

brothers: اقزطللی ػلی ػجبظ ثالظ الرعاؼک اهؽ العیي الولک اللػیي وب اضاى رءهبى ….187

This statement

clearly represents Ardashīr as a leader not only in the realm of kingship (mulk), but also in the

realm of religion (d n).

Ardashīr‘s warning in his testament against the dangers of religion also supports the idea

that his proclamation of the union of religion and kingship does not refer to an alliance between

two different institutions. In the Arabic texts of the testament, Ardashīr warns his son/successors

that the men of religion have the power to overthrow kingship. He admonishes them not to allow

232

the men of religion (al-‗ubbād wa al-nussāk wa al-mutabattal n) to defy their orders. As a

remedy for dealing with the men of religion who turn people against the king, Ardashīr refers to

his ancestors‘ solution, which was to defame such people by calling them ―heretics in religion‖

(al-mubtadi‗ n). The defamation, according to Ardashīr, was enough to eliminate these people

(yaqtuluhum) and rid (yuri ) the king of them.188

Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma contains similar warnings. The following verses

appear right after Ardashīr‘s explanation of the concept of the brotherhood of religion and

kingship:

ؼا پبؼقب ظاؼ کیي ظاؼظ اؾ پبظنب چ ظیي گؽ رب طای

ؽ آکف ک ثؽ ظاظگؽ نؽیبؼ گهبیع ؾثبى هؽظ ظیم هعاؼ

If the man of religion (d n-dār) holds grudges (k n) against the king (pādshā),

Take care not to call him pious (pārsā).

He who opens his mouth against a just (dādgar) king (shahriyār)

Do not consider him to be a man of religion (mard-i d n). 189

As may be inferred from the above-mentioned verses, Ardashīr asserts the supremacy of

the king over men of religion and avows that the king holds absolute power in both secular and

religious realms. Thus, in an ideal state, the men of religion are supposed to be obedient to the

king. The king‘s supreme authority is also mentioned in the Dēnkard.190

The references to the

absolute power of the king in Zoroastrian literature and also in the Arabic and Persian texts of

Ardashīr‘s testament point to the ever-present tension between royal and religious power, and

further support the idea that Ardashīr‘s proclamation of the union of kingship and religion meant

that both political and religious power should be held by the king.

233

Threats to Kingship

According to Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma, three things can overthrow kingship

(sar-i takht-i shāh bip chad si kār).191

The first is an unjust king (b dādgar shahriyār). The

second is the king‘s assigning high positions to those who are incompetent (b -s d rā bar

kishad). And the third is when the king endeavours to increase his own wealth (bi d nār k shad

ki b sh kunad).192

Firdausī refers to these three dangers in three verses of the Shāhnāma, and this

is the only occasion in Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma where threats to kingship are

mentioned. In the Arabic texts of the testament, however, threats to kingship are discussed at

length. In fact, almost half of Ardashīr‘s testament in these texts deals with issues that lead to the

collapse of kingship. The seriousness of these issues is emphasized in these texts by the use of

terms and phrases such as al-balā (affliction), ra‘sa mā akhāfu ‗alaikum (what I fear the most for

you), akhwaf (most dreadful), aw ash (most frightening), ashadd mā yużirrukum (what harms

you the most), aqwā ‗aduww (the most powerful enemy), and the recurrent use of terms and

phrases that denote the end of kingship, such as ḍahāb al-duwal (transfer of kingship), tanaqqul

al-malik ‗an mulkih (removal of the king from his kingship), and fasād al-mulk (disintegration of

kingship).193

These terms and phrases give an ominous tone to the entire text. The followings are

some examples of the threats discussed at length in the Arabic texts of the testament:

1. When people of lower classes surpass the king in the study of religion, secret religious

leaderships are formed. Secret religious leaders do not get along with kings, and in the

end, religious leaders will take control of power.194

2. Two things overthrow kingship. The first is defeat by the enemy, and the second is the

corruption of the kings‘ proper conduct (fasād adabikum).195

According to the text of the

testament edited by Grignaschi, the second cause is the corruption of the king‘s religion

234

(fasād d nikum).196

In the Nihāyhat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, the second cause is the

corruption of judgement (fasād ra‘y) and bad management (s ‘ tadb r).197

3. People should always be occupied. When they have no work to do, they start scrutinizing

the performance of authorities. This leads to the formation of different groups with

different agendas, who all oppose the king. The king is not able to deal with too many

opposing groups, and the chaos tempts foreign enemies to take advantage of the unstable

situation created.198

4. People should be banned from moving between different classes of society. If people of

lower classes are allowed to move to higher classes, they will eventually aspire to

become king. It is also dangerous when people of higher classes lose their social status,

because they will hold grudges against those who are above them, and this will

eventually turn into a threat to those in power. People of higher classes should therefore

be helped to remain in their own classes.199

5. Five groups of people threaten kingship: those who enjoy the excitement of opposing the

king; those who hold grudges against the king and people; those who have left the court

but keep in touch with current court officials; those who are ambitious but pretend to be

humble; those who advise the king on religious matters and pretend to be more concerned

about religion than the king.200

6. Revealing the name of the crown prince before the king has died leads to the

disintegration of kingships.201

As may be inferred from the above-mentioned examples, the Arabic texts of the testament

evince concerns about the socio-political issues that can lead to revolts. Except for the warning

against the men of religion, none of the above-mentioned issues are discussed in the Shāhnāma.

According to the Shāhnāma version of the testament, the root cause of all threats to kingship is

235

the conduct of the king himself. As mentioned above, if the king upholds justice, avoids greed,

and assigns competent men to high positions, he will be able to maintain his kingship. In other

words, the Shāhnāma version of Ardashīr‘s testament holds the king himself, and not society or

ambitious court officials, responsible for what goes wrong in the kingdom. In the Arabic texts of

the testament, the king is portrayed as the target of all kinds of threats originating in society and

at the royal court, notwithstanding his proper conduct. He is therefore advised to be vigilant and

to detect any possible threat to his kingship before it is too late.

Commonalities and Differences

The common points shared by the Shāhnāma and the Arabic texts of Ardashīr‘s testament

are moral and pragmatic advices for kings. For example, not telling lies, 202

avoiding fear,203

not

divulging secrets,204

and inquiring about the affairs of the state.205

Sometimes even the wording

of the injunctions in the Shāhnāma are similar to those in the Arabic texts. For example, in the

Shāhnāma, Ardashīr tells his son that anger leads to regret (ch khishm āvar ham pash mān

shav ).206

Similarly, in the Arabic texts, the kings are advised to avoid anger (ghaḍab), for it

leads to regret (nidāma).207

Or, in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr admonishes his son against allowing

whims (havā) to overcome (ch ra gardad) his wisdom (khirad).208

Similarly, in the Arabic texts,

Ardashīr advises his successors to have their wisdom (ra‘y) overcome their whims (hawā).209

These commonalities point to a common source for the text of the testament, just as in the case

of the texts of Ardashīr‘s āy n and andarz.

The Shāhnāma version of the testament also contains a number of moral counsels that are

not found in the other texts of the testament. Similarly, some of the moral advice given in the

Arabic texts does not appear in the Shāhnāma. For example, in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr advises

his son not to feast and hunt on the same day, because the wine will make him incapable of

hunting.210

This advice is not included in the Arabic texts of the testament. Also, advice on how

236

to treat enemies appears in the Shāhnāma but not in the Arabic texts of the testament.211

On the

other hand, the Arabic texts of the testament advise the kings to have someone to point out their

faults to them, so that they might recognize them before other people notice them.212

This advice

is not found in Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma.

If the extant texts of Ardashīr‘s testament have a common source, we might presume that

they contain selections from that original source. Depending on the socio-political conditions of

the time and the purpose of the authors who included Ardashīr‘s testament in their works,

relevant parts seem to have been selected from it and, at the same time, new concepts were added

to it. Although we cannot determine the reason behind the inclusion or exclusion of certain

topics, by comparing the extant texts of Ardashīr‘s testament, we can discern that their authors

pursued different goals. As demonstrated above, a comparison of the extant texts of Ardashīr‘s

testament demonstrates that while proper conduct and moral integrity of the king seem to have

been Firdausī‘s main concern, the authors of the Arabic texts of the testament seem to be more

concerned with the maintenance of kingship through vigilance and exercise of power. To

Firdausī, whose work centred on the conduct of kings, the maintenance of kingship was a

corollary of the maintenance of justice, and the maintenance of justice was the responsibility of

the king.

At the end of his counsels in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr once again stresses the importance

of his testament by asking his son to take care of his father‘s testament like his soul (tau ‗ahd-i

pidar bā ravānat bidār), to leave it as a legacy for his own son (bi farzand mān hamchun n

yādgār), and to always remember his advices (tau pand-i pidar hamchun n yād-dār).213

The

personal tone of Ardashīr‘s words to his son bring life to an otherwise dull text and make it more

interesting for the reader. In the Arabic texts of the testament, Ardashīr tells his successors that

since he could not make his body immortal, he left them his wisdom. He states that by sharing

237

his wisdom, he did what he considered to be his duty and asks his successors to consider it their

duty to follow his advices.214

rd sh r s Prediction

In conclusion, as described in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr predicts that, in five hundred

years, the prosperous empire that he created will fall into ruin, and that his testament will be

destroyed (tabah gardad) and injustice (b dād) and Evil Religion (k sh-i āharman ) will

prevail.215

According to the Arabic texts of the testament, however, Ardashīr predicts that the

good world he created will be destroyed in one thousand years.216

In his synopsis of Ardashīr‘s

testament, Mas‗ūdī states the same thing.217

Ardashīr‘s original testament must have included

this particular length of time because, according to the Zoroastrian view of world history, it

would take one thousand years for the world to completely collapse after it had been restored by

a Saviour. This prediction of Ardashīr‘s would have served as another indication that he was

viewed as a world Saviour. The fact that in the Shāhnāma version, the length of time is five

hundred not one thousand years suggests that Ardashīr‘s prediction concerned not the end of

Zoroastrian reckoning of the period of world history, but rather the Arab conquest of Iran, or,

more precisely, about a hundred years before the collapse of the Sasanian empire. We encounter

a similar situation in Ardashīr‘s prediction in the Nihāyat al-arab and the Tajārib al-umam,

where the length of time is six hundred years, that is, precisely when the last Sasanian king was

defeated by Arab forces.218

This discrepancy in the number of years might have had to do with a

prevalent view about the imminent end of time around the turn of the millennium and the efforts

of the political and religious propagandists to convince people that the world was not going to

end any time soon.219

238

rd sh r s Cities

In the Shāhnāma, following his prediction, Ardashīr tells his son that he ruled for forty

years and two months and that he built six prosperous cities (shārstān). He then names the cities

and describes their beautiful gardens, numerous springs, fragrant air, and dense populations.220

The first city he names is Khurrah-i Ardashīr (Ardashīr‘s glory) in the province of Khūz

(kishvar-i kh ziyān). The second is Ūrmazd Ardashīr; the third is R m Ardashīr en route to P rs,

and the fourth, Birka-i Ardashīr (the pond of Ardashīr). The fifth and sixth cities are those built

in Būm-i Mīsh n by the Euphrates (dau bar b m-i Mishān va r d-i Furāt). These he names

Sat b d-i Sh h Ardashīr.221

Here again, Firdausī uses his poetic skills to draw attention to

something important. Prosperous cities are the signs of successful kings, and, as deftly presented

in the Shāhnāma, Ardashīr boasts about his success by describing the affluent cities he built.

Among the Arabic texts of Ardashīr‘s testament, only the Nihāyat al-arab and its Persian

translation, Tajārib al-umam, mention the names of the cities that Ardashīr built. But, they do

not provides this information as part of the testament. Rather, they mark the end of the testament

by stating, ―then he (Ardashīr) died‖ (thumma māta/va vafāt farm d), and following this, they

state that Ardashīr built six cities (seven, according to the Tajārib al-umam) and provide their

names and location without describing them.222

The numbers, names, and locations of the cities

built by Ardashīr are reported by several medieval historians. These reports are not consistent,

but they all point to Ardashīr‘s reputation in the construction of new cities. But, more

importantly, when compared to the Shāhnāma, these reports reveal how Firdausī provides the

same information in a different way to make an impact. The reader may not pay much attention

to the hard data about Ardashīr‘s cities, but the beauty and prosperity of these cities, as skilfully

portrayed by Firdausī, does stay in the mind.

239

To end his words with his son, Ardashīr wishes him success and asks him to keep his

father‘s soul happy by upholding justice. Unlike the Arabic texts of the testament, which do not

include the concept of justice, Ardashīr‘s testament in the Shāhnāma begins and ends with this

concept, a further indication that for Firdausī, justice was the key to the maintenance of kingship.

* * * *

Except for the anonymous authors of Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam, other

medieval historians who provide accounts about Ardashīr‘s reign only refer to the significance of

his political treatises and do not include the texts of these in their accounts, or else, they only

provide a few synopses of them.223

On the other hand, the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam,

which include the texts of Ardashīr‘s political treatises, provide very brief accounts about

Ardashīr‘s reign. Firdausī‘s Shāhnāma is thus the only work that provides a comprehensive

account about the rise to power and reign of Ardashīr, complemented by the wisdom and advice

literature attributed to him. Instead of simply stating that Ardashīr established new laws and

regulations and that his books of advice were voluminous and well-known, Firdausi included

these materials in his work, so that his reader would understand what exactly was meant by the

wisdom of Ardashīr. He was not satisfied with simply appending the texts of Ardashīr‘s āy n,

andarz, and ‗ahd at the end of his account about him, but endeavoured to make these didactic

texts as interesting as possible. Also, he broke the monotony of successive injunctions by his

frequent calls to the reader at intervals throughout the text to heed the advice of Ardashīr and to

learn from him. Occasionally, he even commented on Ardashīr‘s greatness and asked the ruler of

the time to be like him.

Although medieval historical writings were in general exemplary and intended to impart

lessons on kingship by drawing upon the experiences of past rulers, it is in Firdausī‘s work that

we see a deliberate effort to make these lessons interesting and entertaining so as to make an

240

impact on the reader. A significant difference between Firdausī‘s work and other historical

writings, which is often ignored when they are compared, is that Firdausī took the trouble to

versify his. Indeed, presented in verse, Ardashīr‘s testament would be more pleasant to read or

listen to. It would also be easier to commit to memory. As medieval authors often mentioned, the

ideas expressed in a prose text are like unbored pearls, whose true value and beauty transpire

when they are pierced and strung together (that is, when they are put into verse). In other words,

it is when the ideas in a prose text are versified that they make an impact. This is what Firdausī

did with the prose texts of the advice and wisdom literature attributed to Ardashīr.

A further difference between Firdausī‘s recording of these texts and other medieval

writers is that he did not include in his work those ancient Persian concepts that were no longer

applicable to a contemporary Muslim society. This is further evidence that he wanted his work to

be used as a practical guide on kingship and not merely a chronicle describing past events and

ancient traditions.

Finally, a comparison between the Shāhnāma version of the testament and that of the

Arabic texts reveals Firdausī‘s particular concern for the proper conduct of kings. Whereas the

Arabic texts of Ardashīr‘s testament consider socio-political problems to be the reasons for the

collapse of kingship, according the Shāhnāma, it is solely the conduct of the king that leads to

the loss of his power. As a work designed to entertain and instruct rulers, the Shāhnāma

concentrates on the importance of their conduct. Firdausī‘s particular treatment of the literature

of wisdom and advice attributed to Ardashīr clearly points to his desire to teach through the

experiences of past rulers.

241

1 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:214, line 295.

2 D. N. MacKenzie, A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary (London: Oxford University Press, 1971), s.v.

―Ēwēn.‖ The term ēwēn/ēwēnag also means ―mirror,‖ and, as pointed out by Shaul Shaked, it is

close in meaning to the term andarz (advice), when it is applied to customs and protocols at royal

courts. See his article in Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Andarz.‖ This remark points to a possible

connection between ēwēn/ēwēnag and the title ―Fürstenspiegel‖ or ―mirrors for princes‖ applied

to the books of advice for rulers.

3 Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Ā‘īn-n ma;‖ and Tafazzoli, Tār kh-i adabiyāt, 245–48.

4 For example, Ibn al-Nadīm refers to Ibn al-Muqaffa‗‘s Arabic translation of an ā‘ n-nāma. See

Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist, 190. He also refers to a Kitāb āy n al-ramy (Book of customs of

archery) of the Sasanian king Bahr m Gūr and a Kitāb ā‘ n al-żarb bi-al- awālija (Book of

customs of playing polo) of the Persians. See Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist, 490. Also, in his

discussions about the customs of battle ( arb), archery (ramy), polo ( awlajān), and

prognostication by the flight of birds (‗ayyāfa), Ibn Qutayba frequently states ―I read in the āy n‖

(qara‘tu f al-āy n). He does not clarify, however, whether he read the āy n in Pahlavi or used a

translation. See ‗Abdull h b. Muslim b. Qutayba al-Dīnawarī, ‗Uy n al-akhbār, ed. Aḥmad Zakī

al-‗Adawī, 4 vols., 1925–30, repr. ed. (Cairo: al-Mu‗assasat al-miṣriyya al-‗ mma li al-ta‘līf wa

al-ṭib ‗a va al-nashr, 1964), 1:112, 1:133, and 1:151. Tha‘ libī also refers to a Kitāb al-ā‘ n

(Book of customs). See Tha‘ libī, Ghurar, 14–15.

5 In the Shāhnāma, the opening verse of the section that describes Ardashīr‘s customs and

practice starts with the hemistich ―bik sh d va āy n-i n k nihād‖ (He endeavoured to establish

good customs), but the title of the section is ―Guftār andar buzurg -i Ardash r-i Bābakān (On the

greatness of Ardashīr-i B bak n). See Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:214, line 296.

242

6 Nihāyat al-arab, 186.

7 Nihāyat al-arab, 187–92.

8 Tajārib al-umam, 183–89.

9 Mario Grignaschi, ―Quelques spécimens de la littérature sassanide conservés dans les

bibliothèques d‘Istanbul,‖ Journal Asiatique 254 (1966): 3–4 (introduction), 91–102 (Arabic

text), 111–28 (French translation).

10 Grignaschi, ―Quelques spécimens,‖ 3–4.

11 Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist, 492.

12 Grignaschi, ―Quelques spécimens,‖ 91.

13 Grignaschi, ―Quelques spécimens,‖ 2. As shall be discussed below, this manuscript also

contains a copy of Ardashīr‘s testament.

14 Nihāyat al-arab, 196.

15 For Mas‗ūdī‘s report, see Mas‗ūdī, al-Tanb h, 104:

بهب کزبة الؽقم ػظین كی االلف هي االؼام ال یکبظ یخع کبهال اال بهب رلكیؽآئیي ػا الکزبة هي خولخ آئیي...

.ػع الواثػ ؿیؽن هي غی الؽئبقبد

16 Tha‗ libī, Ghurar, 481: بجبر هکبرجبر لوعؼر ػلی رجسؽ كی کبى یطیل الکالم كی هط ; Miskūya,

Tajārib al-umam, 1:122: ل هکبئع زؽة یطل الکزبة ثػکؽب ; Ibn al-Balkhī, Fārsnāma, ed. G. Le

Strange and R. A. Nicholson (London: Luzac, 1921), 66.

17 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:214–23, lines 296–419.

18 Nihāyat al-arab, 188; Tajārib al-umam, 185.

19 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, lines 325–34. The advices that Ardashīr gives to local rulers is

given to the scribes in the Nihāyat al-arab and Tajārib al-umam. Cf. Nihāyat al-arab, 187; and

Tajārib al-umam, 184.

20 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:214, line 297–99.

243

21

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:214, line 300–2. According to Dihkhud ―‗ariż‖ is the contracted form

of ―‗āriż,‖ meaning the officer who keeps record of the military personnel. See Lughat-nāma

Dihkhudā, s.v. ―‗ariż.‖ The term is vocalized as ―‗araż‖ in Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s edition of this line.

22 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:214, lines 303–5.

23 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215, line 309.

24 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215, line 310.

25 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215, line 311.

26 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215, line 312.

27 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215, lines 313–14.

28 On the position of scribes during the Sasanian era, see Ahmad Tafazzoli, Sasanian Society

(New York: Bibliotheca Persica Press, 2000), 28–34.

29 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215, line 316.

30 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215, lines 317–18.

31 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:215–16, lines 319–20.

32 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, lines 321, 323, and 324.

33 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, line 322.

34 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, line 330.

35 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, line 327.

36 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, line 328. In the Nihāyat al-arab and the Tajārib al-umam, this

advice is given to the scribes and tax functionaries. See Nihāyat al-arab, 187; and Tajārib al-

umam, 184.

37 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, line 329.

38 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, lines 332–34.

39 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:217, lines 335–36.

244

40

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:216, lines 339–40.

41 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:217, lines 341–44.

42 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6: lines 345–46.

43 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:217, line 347. Other medieval historians too have reported on this

custom of Ardashīr. For example, Mas‗ūdī refers to the letters of Ardashīr‘s minister to different

rulers to ask them to submit to Ardashīr. In addition to the Letter of Tansar to the ruler of

Ṭabarist n, Mas‗ūdī also refers to another letter by Tansar to the king of India. See Mas‗ūdī, al-

Tanb h, 100. Muqaddasī (Maqdisī) is another historian who writes about Ardashīr‘s letters to

rulers of far and near. See Muqaddasī, al-Bad‘ wa al-tār kh, 3:156. Dīnawarī refers to Ardashīr‘s

letter to the last Parthian king, Ardav n, before engaging in war with him. See Dīnawarī, Akhbār

al-ṭiwāl, 44.

44 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:218, line 348.

45 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:218, lines 349–55.

46 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:218, lines 356–58.

47 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:218–19, lines 361–64.

48 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:218, line 360; and 6:219, lines 365–70.

49 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:219, line 371.

50 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:219, lines 372–74.

51 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, line 376.

52 Nihāyat al-arab, 189; and Tajārib al-umam, 186.

53 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, lines 377–78.

54 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, lines 381–82.

55 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, lines 383–84.

56 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, lines 385–86.

245

57

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, lines 387–88.

58 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220–21, lines 389–91.

59 Nihāyat al-arab, 190; and Tajārib al-umam, 187.

60 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:221, line 393.

61 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:221, line 394.

62 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:221, line 395.

63 Nihāyat al-arab, 191; and Tajārib al-umam, 187–88.

64 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:221, lines 396–99.

65 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:222, lines 403–7.

66 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:233, line 408.

67 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:222, line 409.

68 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:222, line 410.

69 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:222, lines 411–12.

70 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:222, line 413.

71 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:223, lines 415–19.

72 See Nāma-i Tansar, 71; trans., Boyce, Letter of Tansar, 49–50.

73 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:222, line 403.

74 Mario Grignaschi, ―Les Rêgles d‘Ardaşîr b. Bâbak pour le gouvernement du royaume,‖ Islâm

Tetkileri enstitüsü dergisi (Review of the Institute of Islam Studies) 5, nos. 1–4 (1973): 103.

75 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, line 379.

76 Firdausī, Shāhnāma 6:221, line 401. I have followed Jal l Kh liqī Muṭlaq‘s suggestion in

changing the last word of this verse from ―nab d‖ to ―buvad.‖ For his argument, see Kh liqī

Muṭlaq, Yāddāsht-hā-yi Shāhnāma, pt. 3, 185.

77 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:220, line 423.

246

78

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:193, lines 4–11.

79 See Mas‗ūdī, Mur j, 1:285, sec. 577; trans., Mas‗ūdī, Prairies d‘or, 1:217, sec. 577.

80 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:223–28, lines 427–501. As discussed in the previous chapter, Ardashīr

is proclaimed king of kings twice in the Shāhnāma. For more on this, see above, p. 171.

81 Nihāyat al-arab, 193–96; and Tajārib al-umam, 189–92.

82 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:224–25, lines 438–49; Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 139–43;

and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 77–79.

83 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:224, line 406.

84 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:224, line 437.

85 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:224–25, lines 443–46.

86 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:225, lines 447–49.

87 Nihāyat al-arab, 193, Tajārib al-umam, 190.

88 Farahvashī, Kārnāma-i Ardash r, 141; and Grenet, La geste d‘Ardash r, 77.

89 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:225, line 456.

90 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:225, line 458.

91 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226–27, lines 478–79.

92 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:227, line 482.

93 Cf. Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:225, line 457; Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, lines 464 and 470;

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:227, line 484; Nihāyat al-arab, 194; and Tajārib al-umam, 190.

94 Encyclopaedia Iranica, s.v. ―Andarz.‖

95 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:225, line 457: حک قظل كؿى آیع اؾ ربج گ

96 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:225, line 459.

97 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:225, line 460.

98 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 461.

247

99

Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 462.

100 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 463.

101 Nihāyat al-arab, 194: كیي يالذ ظیکن; Tajārib al-umam, 190: ايالذ ظیي نوب ظؼ آى اقذ.

102 This phrase seems to have been missing from the manuscript of Tajārib al-umam, since the

editors have added it to the text from the Nihāyat al-arab. See Tajārib al-umam, 190n2.

Nevertheless, the importance of frequenting the homes of sages is clearly mentioned there.

103 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 464.

104 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 465.

105 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 466.

106 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 467.

107 Firdausī, Shāhnāma, 6:226, line 469.

108 Nihāyat al-arab, 194; Tajārib al-umam, 190.