{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_12918/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_12918","id":"gutenberg_12918","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/12918","summary":null,"tags":["Arabic literature","Category: History - Other","Category: Mythology, Legends & Folklore","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Persian literature"],"text":"Transcriber's note: The spelling inconsistencies of the original\n                    have been retained in this e-text.\n\n\n\n\n\nIRANIAN INFLUENCE ON MOSLEM LITERATURE, PART I\n\nby\n\nM. INOSTRANZEV\n\nTRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIAN, WITH SUPPLEMENTARY APPENDICES FROM\nARABIC SOURCES BY G. K. NARIMAN\n\n1918\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nGENERAL CONTENTS.\n\nCHAPTER   I. Arabic Writers as Sources of Sasanian Culture   3\n\nCHAPTER  II. Parsi Clergy Preserve Tradition                25\n\nCHAPTER III. Ethico-didactic Books of Arabs Exclusively\n             of Iranian Origin                              38\n\nCHAPTER  IV. Iranian Components of Arabic _Adab_ Literature 53\n\nCHAPTER   V. Pahlavi Books Studied by Arab Authors          65\n\nCHAPTER  VI. Arab Translators from Pahlavi                  76\n\nCHAPTER VII. Pahlavi Rushnar Nameh                          89\n\n\nAPPENDICES\n\n(By the Translator).\n\nAPPENDIX   I. Independent Zoroastrian Princes of Tabaristan\n              after Arab Conquest                           93\n\nAPPENDIX  II. Iranian Material in Mahasin wal Masawi and\n              Mahasin wal Azdad                            101\n\nAPPENDIX III. Burzoe's Introduction                        105\n\nAPPENDIX  IV. The Trial of Afshin,\n              a Disguised Zoroastrian General              135\n\nAPPENDIX   V. Noeldeke's Introduction to Tabari            142\n\nAPPENDIX  VI. Letter of Tansar to the King of Tabaristan   159\n\nAPPENDIX VII. Some Arab Authors and the Iranian Material\n              they preserve:--\n\n                      The Uyunal Akhbar of Ibn Qotaiba     163\n                      Jahiz: Kitab-al-Bayan wal Tabayyin   168\n                      Hamza Ispahani                       171\n                      Tabari                               174\n                      Dinawari                             177\n                      Ibn al Athir                         179\n                      Masudi                               182\n                      Shahrastani                          187\n                      Ibn Hazm                             192\n                      Ibn Haukal                           195\n\nAPPENDIX VIII.\n\n                      Ibn Khallikan                        199\n                      Mustawfi                             203\n                      Muqadasi                             204\n                      Thaalibi                             205\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\nThe facile notion is still prevalent even among Musalmans of learning\nthat the past of Iran is beyond recall, that the period of its history\npreceding the extinction of the House of Sasan cannot be adequately\ninvestigated and that the still anterior dynasties which ruled vaster\nareas have left no traces in stone or parchment in sufficient quantity\nfor a tolerable record reflecting the story of Iran from the Iranian's\nstandpoint. This fallacy is particularly hugged by the Parsis among whom\nit was originally lent by fanaticism to indolent ignorance. It has been\ncredited with uncritical alacrity, congenial to self-complacency, that\nthe Arabs so utterly and ruthlessly annihilated the civilization of Iran\nin its mental and material aspects that no source whatever is left from\nwhich to wring reliable information about Zoroastrian Iran. The\nfollowing limited pages are devoted to a disproof of this age-long\nerror.\n\nFor a connected story of Persia prior to the battle of Kadisiya, beside\nthe Byzantine writers there is abundant material in Armenian and Chinese\nhistories. These mines remain yet all but unexplored for the Moslem and\nParsi, although much has been done to extract from them a chronicle of\nearly Christianity. The archaeology of Iran, as I have shown elsewhere,\ncan provide vital clue to an authentic resuscitation of Sasanian past.\nPre-Moslem epigraphy of Persia is yet in little more than an inchoate\ncondition. Not only all Central Asia but the territories marching with\nthe Indian and Persian frontiers, where persecution of the elder faith\ncould not have been relatively mild, the population professing Islam\nhave been unable to abjure in their entirety rites and practices akin to\nthose of Zoroastrianism. Within living memory the inhabitants of Pamir\nwould not blow out a candle or otherwise desecrate fire. While science\ncannot recognise the claims of any individual professing to have studied\nesoteric Zoroastrianism hidden in the hill tracts of Rawalpindi, the\nmyth has a value in that it indicates the direction in which humbler and\nuninspired scholars may work. These regions and far beyond, teem with\npure Iranian place-names to this day; and you meet in and around even\nthe Peshawar district individuals bearing names of old Iranian heroes\nwhich, if the theory of persecution-mongers be correct, would be an\nanathema to the bigoted followers of Muhammad.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIt is, above all, Arabic literature which upsets the easy fiction of\ntotal destruction of Iranian culture by the Arabs. In its various\ndepartments of history, geography and general science Arabic works\nincorporate extensive material for a history of Iranian civilization,\nwhile Arabic poetry abounds in references to Zoroastrian Iran. The\nformer is illustrated by Professor Inostranzev's pioneer Russian essay\nof which the main body of this book is a translation. The Appendices are\nintended to be supplementary and to be at once a continuation and a\npossible key--continuation of the researches of the Russian scholar and\nkey to the contemned store-house of Arabic letters.\n\nProfessor Inostranzev is in little need of introduction to English\nscholars. He has already been made known in India by the indefatigable\nShams-ul-Ulma Dr. Jivanji Modi, Ph.D., C.I.E., who got translated, and\ncommented on, his Russian paper on the curious _Astodans_ or receptacles\nfor human bones discovered in the Persian Gulf region. He shares with\nProfessor Browne of Cambridge and the great M. Blochet a unique\nscholarly position: he combines an intimate knowledge of Avesta\ncivilization with a familiarity with classical Arabic. It is not\nwilfully to ignore the claims of Goldziher, Brockelmann or Sachau or\nthe Dutch savants de Goeje and Van Vloten. Deeply as they investigated\nArabic writings, it was M. Inostranzev who first revealed to us the\nworth of Arabic: he unearthed chapters embedded in Arabic books which\nare paraphrase or translation of Pahlavi originals. He had but one\npredecessor and that was a countryman of his, Baron Rosen.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn preparing the Appendices, which are there to testify to the value of\nArabic literature especially the annals and the branch of it called\nAdab, I have availed myself of the courtesy of various institutions and\nindividuals. Bombay, perhaps the wealthiest town in the East where\nprosperous Musalmans form a most important factor of its population, has\nnot one public library containing any tolerable collection of Arabic\nbooks edited in Europe. Time after time wealthy Parsis whose interest I\nenlisted have received from me lists of books to form the nucleus of an\nArabic library but apparently they need some further stimulus to\nappreciate how indispensable Arabic is for research into Iranian\nantiquities. The Bombay Government have expended enormous sums in\ncollecting Sanskrit manuscripts--a most laudable pursuit--and have\npublished a series of admirable texts edited by some of the eminent\nSanskrit scholars, Western and Indian. But the numerous Moslem Anjumans\ndo not appear to have demonstrated to the greatest Moslem Power in the\nworld, or its representative in Bombay, the necessity of a corresponding\nsolicitude for Arabic and Persian treasures which undoubtedly exist,\nthough to a lesser extent, in the Presidency. And what holds true of\nBombay holds good in case of the rest of India. Some of the libraries in\nUpper India in Hyderabad, Rampur, Patna, Calcutta possess along with\nmanuscript material cheap mutilated Egyptian reprints of magnificent\ntexts brought out in Leiden, Paris and Leipzig. Nowhere in India is\navailable to a research scholar a complete set of European publications\nin Arabic, which a few thousand rupees can purchase. The state of\naffairs is due to Moslem apathy, politics claiming a disproportionate\nshare of their civic energy, to Government indifference and to some\nextent Parsi supineness and prejudice which, despite the community's\nvaunted advancement, has failed to estimate at its proper worth their\nhistory as enshrined in the language of the pre-judged Arab.\n\nMoulvi Muhammad Ghulam Rasul Surti, of Bombay, himself a scholar, lent\nme from his bookshop expensive works which few private students could\nafford to buy. No western book-seller could have conceived a purer love\nof learning or a gaze less rigidly fixed on \"business\". Sir John\nMarshall, Director General of Archaeology in India, continued very\nkindly to permit me use of books after I had severed official connection\nwith his library at Simla. Dr. Spooner who acted for him obligingly saw\nthat as far as he was concerned no facilities were incontinently\nwithdrawn from me at Benmore. I have particularly to thank the Librarian\nof the Imperial Library, Calcutta, who not only posted me books in his\ncharge but went out of his way to procure me others. Mrs. Besant and her\nwealthy adherents have created at Adyar the atmosphere associated with\nthe Ashramas and the seats of learning in ancient India so finely\ndescribed by Chinese travellers. The Oriental Library there is\nunsurpassed by any institution in British or Indian ruled India. It is\nto be wished in the interests of pure scholarship that some one\nsucceeds--I did not--in prevailing on the President of the Theosophical\nSociety to lend books to scholars who may not be equal to the exertion\nof daily travelling seven miles from Madras to Adyar. Her insistence on\na rigid imitation of British Museum rules in India, mainly because so\nmany of the Theosophical fraternity cut out pages and chapters from\nbooks once allowed to be borrowed by them, inflicts indiscriminate\npenalty on honest research and seals up against legitimate use books\nnowhere else to be found in India.\n\nI reserve for the Second Part of this book some observations on the\nRussian language with reference to Orientalism, and Arabic and Persian\nliteratures in particular. Only after the outbreak of the War some\ninterest has been aroused in England in matters Russian generally and a\nnumber of grammars and dictionaries and other aids to the study of this\nmost difficult language have recently been placed on the market for the\nuse of students who only a brief three years ago had to depend mainly on\nGerman for acquisition of Russian. This neglect of Russian is wholly\nundeserved. It is doubtful if the researches into Oriental histories and\nliteratures by the Russians have been yet adequately appreciated in\nEngland, the tireless efforts of Dr. Pollen and the Anglo-Russian\nLiterary Society notwithstanding. It is apparently still presumed that\nripe scholarship in Arabic and Sanskrit is inconceivable except through\nthe medium of the languages of Western Europe. No unworthy disparagement\nof French labours is at all suggested. But it is only fair to Russia to\nremember in India that the absence of a Serg d'Oldenberg would leave a\nlacuna which must be felt in Buddhist Sanskrit; without Tzerbatski the\nJain literature both Magadhi and Sanskrit would be appreciably poorer;\nand that the Continent has produced nothing to exceed the series of\nBuddhist Sanskrit texts of Petrograd, where was published the still\nlargest Sanskrit lexicon. Naturally in the province of Chinese and\nJapanese the Russian Academy at Vladivostock stood _facile princeps_\ntill only the other day its magnificent rival was established in London\nunder the direction of Dr. Denison Ross. An individual scholar like\nKhanikoff, who like most of his countrymen in the last century preferred\nto write in French, and a Zukovski has done more signal service to\nPersian antiquities than could be honestly attributed to many a German\nname familiar to Indian scholars. The distinguishing feature of the\nRussian investigator, devoted to the past of Persia, is his uncommon\nequipment. The Russian bring to their task a mature study of Semitic\nlanguages and acquaintance with Avesta philology. Arabic literature\nteems with allusions to the religions, dogma, customs and the court of\nSasanian Iran. Once intended for contemporaries equally at home in the\nArabic and Persian idioms these references have in course of time grown\nobscure to copyists who have mutilated Iranian names of persons and\nplaces and specific Zoroastrian terms which had become naturalised in\nthe language of the ruling Arabs. It is scholars like Baron Rosen and\nRosenberg who have adequately appreciated the value of Arabic texts in\nwhich are interwoven verbal translations of celebrated Pahlavi\ntreatises. Two such have been disinterred by the industry and erudition\nof Inostranzev.\n\nThis is the first book to be translated from Russian into English by an\nIndian and the obvious difficulties of the task may be pleaded to excuse\nsome of the shortcomings of a pioneer undertaking. I look for my reward\nin on awakened interest in Arabic books which hold in solution more\ninformation on Persia than any set work on the history of Iran.\n\nIt would not be in place to advert to the present state of hapless chaos\nin Persia. The most sympathetic outsider, however, cannot help observing\nthat her misfortunes are less due to her neighbours and their mutual\nrelations than to her too rapid political strides and adoption of exotic\nadministrative machinery repugnant to the genius of the ancient nation.\nWhatever the attitude of individual Mullas towards non-Moslems in the\npast the central authority and the people as a whole are actuated to-day\nwith a spirit of patriotism which is still the keynote of the character\nof Persia's noble manhood and womanhood. It declines to make religion\nthe criterion of kinship.\n\nThe inconsistency in the spelling of Arabic words has not altogether\nbeen avoidable being due partly to a desire to adhere to the orthography\nadopted by authors whom I have consulted.\n\nSIMLA, G.K. NARIMAN.\n\nSeptember, 1917.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nIranian literary tradition in the opening centuries of Islam 1\n\nThe character of the Persian history during the Sasanian epoch 6\n\nImportance of this epoch according to the Arab writers of the first\ncenturies of Islam 10\n\nThe position of the Parsi community and the centres of the preservation\nof Persian tradition during the period of the Khalifat in Tabaristan,\nKhorasan and Fars 15\n\nThe castle of Shiz in the district of Arrajan in the province of Fars\ndescribed by Istakhri, p. 118, 2-4; 150, 14-7; Ibn Hauqal, p. 189, 1-2;\ncf. the translator of the _Khoday Nameh_, Behram, son of Mardanshah of\nthe city of Shapur in the province of Fars 19\n\nThis castle was the residence of those acquainted with the Iranian\ntradition (the _badhgozar_) and here their archives were lodged 20\n\n\n_ARABIC WRITERS AS SOURCES OF SASANIAN CULTURE_.\n\nTo the Iranian element belongs a very rich r\u00f4le in the external as well\nas the internal history of Islam. Its influence is obvious and constant\nin the history of the Moslem nations' spread over centuries. Whenever\nthe circumstances have been favourable it has been clearly manifest;\nwhen the conditions have been hostile it is not noticeable at the first\nglance but in reality has been of great consequence. The causes of this\nare very complicated. And it is necessary on account of its universal\nvalue to examine a wide concatenation of facts. But from a general point\nof view there is no doubt that it has its roots principally in the\ncontinuity of the historical and cultural traditions. Particular\nsignificance attaches to the circumstance that just in the epoch\npreceding the Arab conquest Persia had experienced a period of national\nrevival after the horrors that its sovereignty had undergone, at the\nhands, for instance, of Alexander the Great.[1] Therefore for the study\nof Iranian tradition in Islam the period of the Sasanian dynasty\npreceding the Arab conquest has a special significance.\n\n[Footnote 1: This is explained by the hatred given expression to in the\nParsi tradition regarding Alexander. Comp. J. Darmesteter _La Legende de\nAlexandre chez les Parses. Essais Orientaux_, Paris 1883, pp. 227-251.]\n\nThe Sasanian dynasty issuing from a small principality in the south of\nPersia--a principality which, properly speaking bears the title of the\n\"kernel of the Persian nation\"--occupies a considerable position in\nPersian history. Wide imperial aims were united with a plenitude of\nsolid organisation of government so perfect that it passed into a\nproverb among the Arabs. In this last connection the Sasanian tradition\nsurvived for a long time a number of Moslem dynasties. The powerful\ninfluence which Iranian tradition exercised was felt by the Abbaside\nKhahlifs and after them by the Turkish Seljuks. But not only the science\nof government, a good deal of other matters of cultural and historical\nimportance in the latter times have their explanation in the Sasanian\nepoch. Placed on the confines of the Greco-Roman world on the one hand,\nand China and India on the other, Sasanian Persia served during the\ncourse of a long time as a central mart of exchange of a mental as well\nas of a material nature. As against the Achaemenides, emulating the high\nSemitic culture of the West and the Hellenistic endeavours preceding the\nParthian dynasty, the Sasanians pre-eminently were the promulgators of\nthe Iranian principles. Alongside of this, however, although in a\nsubordinate position, the development of the Hellenistic movement and\nthe ancient Irano-Semitic syncretism continued to proceed.\nSimultaneously an ethical amalgamation proceeded especially in Western\nPersia where Semiticism was powerful for a lengthened period,\nNevertheless, the Sasanians continued the unification of the Iranian\ninhabitants of central and western Persia. The political system of the\nSasanian emperors[1] was based on this fusion. Before it pales the\nimportance of the other facts regarding the political organisation of\nthe Sasanians,--centralisation of government in a manner so that the\nelements of feudal constitution made themselves felt throughout the\nexistence of the empire and even after the Arab conquest, when it left\ntraces in circles representing Iranian traditions.\n\n[Footnote 1: On the constitution of the Sasanian government, see A.\nChristensen, _L'empire des Sasanides, le peuple, l'etat, la cour_,\n1907.]\n\nThe Iranophile tendencies which dominated the Sasanian epoch developed\nin intimate cooperation with the State religion (Mazdaism) and the Parsi\npriesthood. Among the latter continued the production of literary works.\nBesides, the redaction of the sacred books was completed in these times.\nAmong them were conserved and propagated Persian ethical ideals, which\nfound expression in literary forms, in ethico-didactic tracts, like\nthose which we notice just in the same circles in later times. To the\nsame end were preserved national traditions and ritual, some of which\nhad nothing to do with Mazdaism. The ethical ideals of the church found\nstrong support in the feudalistic circles comprising the larger and the\nsmaller landholders, the _dehkans_ who, with particular zeal, preserved\nancient heroic traditions.\n\nAlongside of these national currents in the Sasanian empire there\noperated in full force those factors of cultural exchange of which we\nspoke above. Of those factors the most important that deserve our\nattention are questions regarding education and instruction. In this\nconnection, Sasanian Persia found itself under powerful influences from\nthe West. There are sufficient reminiscences of neo-Platonic exiles from\nGreece at the Sasanian Court and of the school of medicine in which the\nleading part belonged to Hellenic physicians. At the same time in the\nsame field we have to examine other influences. For Sasanian Persia did\nnot remain stranger to the sciences of India. We have information\nregarding the renascence of the activity of the translators of\nscientific works into the Persian language and the tradition of this\nactivity survived down to the Moslem times. In connection with this\ntheoretical scientific activity stood high perfection in exterior\nculture issuing to a considerable degree from exchange of materials. And\neven here the Sasanian tradition has survived the dynasties; in the\nstudy of the commerce and industry as well as the art of the Moslem\nepoch we have necessarily to refer back to the preceding times of the\nPersian history.\n\nIn pre-Moslem Arabia the high development of the civilisation of\nSasanian Persia was well known. Among the subjects of the great Persian\nsovereigns in the western provinces of their empire there were a large\nnumber of Arabs who in commercial intercourse carried, to tribes of the\nSyrian desert and further south to the Arabian peninsula, reports\nregarding the great _Iran Shahar_. Not only legends of the heroic\nfigures of the Iranian epic--Rustam and Isfandiar--but religious views\nand persuasions of the Persians found a place and were spread among the\nArab clans. Thus we know that \"fire-worshippers\" were settled among the\nArab tribe of the Temim.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: _See_ for example Ibn Rustah (B.G.A. VII, p. 217, 6-9).]\n\nAs regards the political influence of the Persians on the tribes of\nArabia a vast deal has been related in the pre-Moslem epoch. As is\nwell-known, thanks mainly to the Persian influence, there was a small\nArab kingdom of the Lekhmides in the South-Western portion of the\nSasanian empire[1]. It played its part, most beneficial for Persia,\nholding back on the one hand Roman-Byzantine onrush from the West, and\non the other restraining the perpetual attempts at irruption into\nPersian territory by Arab nomadic tribes. Not long before the appearance\nof Islam, Sasanian influence was extended to the Arabs and the South as\nwell as Yemen passed into the sovereignty of the Persians. Khusro and\nhis Court appeared to the Arab an unattainable ideal of grandeur and\nluxury.\n\n[Footnote 1: _Die Dynastie der Lekhmiden in al-Hira, Ein Versuch zur\narabisch-persischen Geschichte zur Zeit der Sasaniden Berlin_, 1899.]\n\nThe rapid conquest of Persia by the Arab warriors proved a complete\ncatastrophe to the Sasanian empire. But Persian culture was not to be\nextirpated by the success of Arab arms. Persia was overwhelmed only\nexternally and the Arabs were compelled to preserve a considerable deal\nof the past. Having lost the position of rulers, the Persian priesthood\npreserved intact its control of the indigenous populace in the eyes of\nthe latter as well as of the foreign Government. The same remark holds\ngood of the class of landed proprietors.[1] Iranian tradition continued\nto live In and with them. Not only what was preserved but all that was\ndestroyed for long left vestiges in the memory of the conquerors.\n\n[Footnote 1: Regarding the part played by this class in the times of the\nKhalifs, see A. Von Kramer _Culturgeschiche des orients unter den\nChalifen_ II. pp, 150, 62.]\n\nMany years after the Arab conquest the ruins that covered Persia excited\nthe admiration of the Arabs. Their geographers of the ninth and tenth\ncenturies considered it their duty to enumerate the principal buildings\nof the Sasanians reminding the reader that here Khusro built in his time\nin bye-gone days a castle, there a mountain fastness, again at a third\nplace, a bridge.[1] Regarding various ancient structures which had\nsurvived the Sasanian times, we refer, _inter alia_, to Istakhri, (ibid\nI), pp. 124; Ibn Hauqal (ibid II) 195; Ibn Khordadbeh (ibid VI) p. 43,\n(text); Ibn Rusteh (ibid VII), 153, 162, 164, 165, 166, 167, 189; Yakubi\n(ibid VII), 270, 271, 273, &c.\n\n[Footnote 1: _See_ the enumeration of the noteworthy buildings of\nancient Persia as given in Makdisi (B.G.A. III), p. 399, and\nIbn-ul-Fakih (_ibid_ V), p. 267.]\n\nThe remains of the structures, monuments of art from the Sasanian times\nand the ages preceding them attracted the attention of the Arabs and\nthey have left descriptions of the same in more or less detail.[1] From\nthe information of the same Musalman writers we possess accurate\naccounts of the inhabitants of Persia and their religions. Thus, for\ninstance, Yakubi indicates that the inhabitants of Isfahan, Merv, and\nHerat, consisted mainly of high-born Dehkans.[2] Makdisi notices a\nconsiderable number of fire-worshippers in several provinces of Persia,\nfor instance, Irak and Jibal.[3]\n\n[Footnote 1: Istakhri, p. 203, Ibn Hauqal, p, 266, 256, Makdisi pp. 396\nand 445, Ibn Rusteh, p. 166.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Yakubi, pp. 274, 279-280.]\n\n[Footnote 3: Makdisi, pp. 126, 194.]\n\nISTAKHRI AND IBN HAUQAL[1]\n\n_Relate that the inhabitants of several localities of Kerman during the\nentire Umayyad period openly professed Mazdaism._\n\nIn a more detailed fashion, however, the Arab writers notice the Mazdian\ndwellers of Fars, the heart of the Persian dominion. Makdisi says that\nin Fars existed the customs of fire-worshippers but that the\nfire-worshipping inhabitants of the capital of the province of Shiraz\nhad no distinguishing mark on their clothes; from which it follows that\nin that age these people were in no way differentiated from the Musalman\nsubjects.[2] Istakhri[3] and Ibn Hauqal[4] relate that the bulk of the\ninhabitants of Fars consisted of fire-worshippers and they were there in\nlarger number than anywhere else, Fars being the centre of sacerdotal\nand cultural life of the empire in the days of Persian independence.\nVery minute information is supplied us by these writers[5] regarding the\nancient castles and fire-temples scattered over the whole of Fars in\nabundance. The latter is of capital importance since here was the\nresidence of those two classes of Persian society, noblemen and priests,\nwho were the staunchest conservators of the ancient national tradition.\n\n[Footnote 1: Istakhri, p. 164; _Ibn_ Hauqal, p. 221.]\n\n[Footnote 2: _See_ Makdisi, pp. 421, 429.]\n\n[Footnote 3: P. 130.]\n\n[Footnote 4: P. 207.]\n\n[Footnote 5: Istakhri, pp. 116-119; also p. 100. Ibn Hauqal, 187-190;\nalso p. 181.]\n\nIt is undoubted that the position of the Parsi community after the\nMoslem conquest was comparatively comfortable. Still sometimes it was\ndarkened by excessive fanaticism and the intrigues of the followers of\nother faiths. Although sometimes the Parsis could push themselves\nforward to positions of officials and instructors and played an\nimportant part in the history of the Khalifate, generally speaking, this\ncommunity was a close one leading a more or less exclusive life, a\ncircumstance enabling the conservation of national peculiarities and\nattachment to antiquity. As time went on, however, the condition of\ntheir existence necessarily became worse and the consequence was the\ngradual emigration of a portion of the community from the motherland to\nWestern India.\n\nIn the entire Parsi literature we come across only one historical\ncomposition which recounts this emigration. But the narrative is so\nobscure that of the main occurrence in it there must have remained only\na general memory.[1] This book is called the \"Kisseh-Sanjan\" and was\nwritten at a very late date at the very close of the 16th century, so\nthat the data given in it have to be looked upon as a reverberation of\nancient tradition.[2]\n\n[Footnote 1: The modern historian and Parsi scholar Karaka, in analysing\nthe events subsequent to the Arab conquest follows the views of the old\nSchool of writers regarding this epoch as a complete destruction of all\nthe previous organisation and the triumph of fanaticism of the new\nfaith. See D.F. Karaka, _History of the Parsis_, Vol I; on the history\nof the Parsis subsequent to the Arab invasion _see_ page 22 ff.]\n\n[Footnote 2: E.B. Easrwick, Translation from the Persian of the\n\"_Kisseh-Sanjan_\" or \"History of the arrival and settlement of the Parsis\nin India.\" J.B.B.R.A.S., I. 1844, pp. 167-191. (_See_ also Vol. 21,\nextra number, 1005, pp. 197-99).]\n\nFrom the circumstances detailed in this book it appears that the\nemigrators after the establishment of Musalman domination passed a\nhundred years in a mountainous locality and only after the lapse of\nthese long years migrated to Hormuz, from where they proceeded to the\npeninsula of Gujarat and finally after negotiations with the local chief\nsettled in Sanjan. Subsequently fresh refugees joined them from\nKhorasan. From this last we can infer that the emigration was gradual\nand this is confirmed by the fact that in case of migration in a mass\nthe diaspora of the Parsis would have left some traces in the Arabic\nliterature. Further there is no doubt that considerable number of Parsis\nremained behind in their country and their descendants are the modern\nPersian Guebres who, together with the Parsis of India, may be called\nthe only preservers of ancient Iranian tradition to the present times.\n\nThus, throughout Persia in the first centuries of Islam national\nelements with, changed fortunes persisted in their existence. It is,\nhowever, to be remarked that their success was not uniform in, every\nquarter of the country, that their fate depended to a considerable\nextent upon the geographical position and the historical life of the\nvarious provinces of the land. Western provinces owing to their\nproximity to the centre of the Arab ruling life had more than the rest\nto mingle with, the Arab stream, and to participate in the cycle of\nevents in the Arabic period of the history of the Musalman East. Central\nPersia, owing to its geographical position, could not constitute the\npoint _d'appue_ of the Persian element. For the latter the most\nfavourably situated provinces were those in the North, East, and South,\nTabaristan, Khorasan, and Fars.\n\n\nTABARISTAN.\n\nAs is well-known throughout the floruit of the Arab empire this province\nfound itself in almost entire independence of the central power. Local\ndynasts called the Ispahbeds enjoyed practical independence and in those\ntimes Arabo-Moslem influences simply did not exist. Local\nrulers,--Bavendids, Baduspans, Karenides--appeared successively or\nsimultaneously following the traditions left to them by the Marzbans or\nthe land holders and partly the successors of the great King who were\nindependent from the times of the Arsacide dynasty.[1] Subsequently as\nAliides and Ziyarids, they were closely attached to Shiaism with its\ndefinite expression of Persian sympathy. Nevertheless, this province was\nnot favourable for a particularly successful national evolution. The\nfact was that even in the Sasanian epoch Tabaristan remained a distant\nand obscure frontier division and did not take part in the progress of\ncivilisation of the times. Therefore it could not form the centre of\ngravity of Persian life although there is no doubt that in several\nrespects in this province there were preserved typical features of\nSasanian antiquity.\n\n[Footnote 1: For a general conspectus of the history of the provinces\nwith regard to their independence during the Sasanian and Arab\ndomination, _see, e.g._ F. Justi, G.I. Ph., II, pp. 547-49--\"History of\nIran from the earliest to the end of the Sasanides\" in German--Appendix\nI.]\n\n\nKHORASAN.\n\nIt was otherwise with the Eastern provinces of Khorasan, too far distant\nfrom the territary occupied by the Arab settlers, and too densely\ninhabited by Iranians to rapidly lose its previous characteristics. On\nthe contrary, we know from the historians that in this province Iranian\nelements remained steadfast throughout the Umayyad dynasty and it was\nexclusively due to the support given by Khorasanians to the Abbasides\nthat the latter succeeded in overthrowing the previous dynasty and\ncommenced the era of powerful Iranian influences in the history of the\nMusalman Orient.[1] Khorasan played a vital part in the development of\nthe modern Persian literature and especially its chief department,\npoetry. The entire early period of the history of modern Persian poetry,\nfrom Abbas welcoming with an ode Khalif Mamun into Merv down to\nFirdausi, may be labelled Khorasanian. There flourished the activity of\nRudaki, Kisai, Dakiki, and other less notable representatives of the\nearly period of modern Persian bards.[2] The culture of poetry was\nfavoured not only by the geographical position of the province of\nKhorasan but by its political conditions. Already in the beginning of\nthe ninth century in Khorasan there had arisen national Persian\ndynasties and under their patronage began the renascence of the Persian\nnation (Taherides, Saffarides, Samanides).\n\n[Footnote 1: On the history of Khorasan in the Umayyad period _see_ J.\nWellhausen _Das Arabische Reich und Sein Sturz,_ p, 247 f. and p. 306\nf.]\n\n[Footnote 2: _See_ the general survey of this period in J, Darmesteter,\n\"The Origins of the Persian Poesy\", in French and E.G. Browne \"Literary\nHistory of Persia\", I, p, 350 ff.]\n\n\nFARS.\n\nUnder different circumstances but with considerable significance for the\nPersian national ideals lay the Southern province of Fars. Here with\ntenacious insistence survived not only national but also political\ntraditions of ancient Sasanian Persia. Here was the centre of a\ngovernment and from here started fresh dynasties. After the Arab\nconquest this province came into much more intimate connection with the\nKhalifate, than, for instance, Khorasan. But Persian elements were\nfavoured by its geographical position,--the mountainous character of its\nsituation and the consequent difficulty of access by the invaders. We\nalready produced above the information of the Arab geographers of the\ntenth century regarding the abundance of fire-temples and castles in\nFars. They relate that there was no village or hamlet of this province\nin which there was no fire-temple. Residence was taken up in strong\ncastles by the native aristocrats whose ideals were rooted in the\nSasanian epoch. Just in these geographers, Istakhri and Ibn Hauqal, is\nto be found information of unusual importance, so far as we can judge,\nregarding the conservation of the Parsi tradition in Fars These authors\nhave been up to now not only not appreciated but their significance for\nour question has not yet been adequately recognised.\n\nIstakhri and Ibn Hauqal enumerating the castles of Fars declare as\nfollows regarding the castle of Shiz:[1]\n\n\"The castle of Shiz is situated in the district of Arrajana. There live\nfire-worshippers[2] who know Persia and her past. Here they study. This\ncastle is very strong.\"\n\n[Footnote 1: Istakhri, p. 118, 2-4; Ibn Hauqal, p, 180, 1-2.]\n\n[Footnote 2: In the text occurs the Persian word _badgozar_, that is to\nsay, the rhapsodists, the relators of the national traditions; on this\nword see B.G.A. III, pp. 182-83, and Vuller's _Lexicon Persico-Latinum_\nS.V. For a parallel to the archives of the Achamenide empire _see_ F.\nJusti, _Ein Tag aus den Leben des konigs Darius._]\n\nFurther we read the following in Istakhri (page 150, 14-17):--\n\n\"In the district of Sabur on the mountain there are likenesses of all\nthe noteworthy Persian kings and grandees, of illustrious preservers of\nfire, high _mobeds_ and others. Their portraits, their acts and\nnarratives about them are successively recorded in volumes. With\nparticular care are preserved these volumes by the people living in a\nlocality in the district of Arrajan called the castle of Shiz.\"\n\nFrom this information we learn that in one of the castles of Fars down\nto the tenth century there were preserved manuscripts written probably\nin the Pahlavi language containing narratives from Persian history and\nillustrated with, portraits after the style of the Sasanian reliefs to\nbe found in the rocks in the district of Sabur.[1] This strong mountain\nfastness was probably little accessible to the Arabs and afforded an\nasylum to the _mobeds, dehkans_ and others interested in the past of\ntheir country.\n\n[Footnote 1: That is after the style of the Sasanian bass-reliefs which\nwere preserved in his time on the rocks in the vicinity of Shapur and\nthe most famous type of which are the bass-reliefs representing the\ntriumphs of the Sasanian Shapur I, over the emperor Valentine].\n\n\nThese facts generally important for the history of the preservation of\nthe epic, historic and artistic traditions of Iran, are particularly\nimportant for the investigation of the sources of the Arabic\ntranslations of the Sasanian chronicles and of the epopee of Firdausi.\nAs we know, the translators of these chronicles were Persian\n\"fire-worshippers\" or Musalmans who had adopted Islam only externally\nand had remained true to the ancient Persian religion. Among them the\nforemost is called _Mobed_ belonging to the city of Sabur in the\nprovince of Fars. He is important as a worker in the Iranian historical\ntradition and about him we shall have occasion to speak later on. This\n_Mobed_ probably made Arabic translations of Sasanian chronicles from\nmaterials in the archives in the castle of Shiz. Further, the\ninformation adduced by us above regarding the castle refers to times a\nlittle previous to the age of Firdausi and undoubtedly among the\nmaterials in these archives were the sources of the Shah Nameh which\nwere available to Firdausi through intermediate versions. Finally, we\nsee that these Sasanian histories were illustrated, a fact which is\nconfirmed by the statement of other Arab writers as we shall see later\non. Generally the district of Arrajan enjoyed its ancient glory with\nreference to its cultural connections. Yakut[1] has preserved for us the\ninformation that at Raishahar in the district of Arrajan there lived in\nthe Sasanian times men, versed in a peculiar species of syllabary who\nwrote medical, astronomical and logical works.\n\n[Footnote 1: \"_Muajjam ul Buldan_\", ed. Wustenfeld, II, p. 887. This\npassage has been translated by Barbier de Maynard in his \"Geographical,\nHistorical and Literary Dictionary of Persia\", in French, pp. 270-271.\n_See_ also Fihrist II, p, 105.]\n\nWhat we have studied above establishes the existence of Persian literary\ntradition in its national form for several centuries after the Arab\ninvasion. Now we have to survey wherein lie the characteristic features\nof this tradition and what were its main contents. And we pass on to\ntheir consideration.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nThe Parsi Clergy and the Musalman Iranophile party of the Shuubiya 26\n\nThe part played by them in the conservation of the Persian literary\ntradition 30\n\nThe different varieties of this tradition; scientific, epico-historic,\nlegendary and ethico-didactic 32\n\n\n_PARSI CLERGY PRESERVE TRADITION_\n\nWe have demonstrated above that in the time subsequent to the Arab\nconquest Iranian tradition found a congenial asylum in the bosom of the\nParsi priesthood. There it was maintained and developed orally as well\nas in a written form. The most competent among the Persian historians\nwho employed the Arabic language in those times turned to the Parsi\nclergy for information. Of this we have first-hand proof in their own\nworks and in the quotations from other works preserved in later authors.\nFor example, they frequently remark \"the Mobedan-mobed related to me\",\n\"the _mobed_ so and so told me\" and so on. In their quest for ancient\nPersian books, too, Arab authors searched for them among the Parsi\npriesthood and it was only there that they found them. Thus it was the\nmerit of the Parsi community that it conserved Iranian traditions daring\nunfavourable times and handed them on to Moslem Persia under more\nauspicious conditions.\n\nInvoluntarily we are led to a comparison, to their advantage, with the\nactivity of the Iranophile party of the same times in the Moslem\ncommunity, the party of the Shuubiya,[1] In their capacity as promoters\nof learning and exponents of literature they concentrated their activity\nin the cultured centre of the Khalifate at Baghdad and other cities, and\nbeing familiar with Persia played an important part in the development\nof Moslem culture of the Middle Ages. But in the preservation of the\nIranian tradition they turned to much restricted and greatly exclusive\nParsi circles. In the second half of the tenth century and in the\neleventh century the currents which were preparing the Persian\nrenascence party were lost and their significance forgotten. But for\nthe purpose of illuminating historical questions a careful examination\nof these currents deserves our undivided attention. It was owing to them\nthat literary materials were preserved which were sometimes direct\ntranslations from books belonging to the Sasanian period. The course by\nwhich these materials found their way into Arabic literature can be\ndefinitely traced. They came from Parsi centres through older circles\nof Moslem civilisation which were sympathetic towards Persia. Generally\nspeaking they were trustworthy transmitters. As a matter of fact the\nShuubiya turned only to the Parsi circles for materials and in the\nexplanation of the material they did not distinguish them from their\nother sources. Their sources betray themselves by an exaggerated Parsi\npartiality where the penchant of these circles is clearly manifest. And\nthese are intimately connected with certain questions of daily\nlife,--the struggle for power between the Arab and the Iranian element\nin the Khalifate. Enthusiastic partisans of the Persian element, these\ncircles as a counterblast to the poverty of civilizing factors of the\npre-Islamic Arab nation, turned to the glories of Persia, principally\nof the Sasanian past. Iranophile writers had no need for inventions,\nsince historical truth was on their side. The effectiveness of their\nmethod was indisputable. In this connection Iranian tradition among the\nMusalmans as transmitted by Arab writers must take precedence of a\nsimilar transmission, the Christian literature of the East, where all\npossibility was excluded of polemics such as obtained under the Moslem\ndomination between the pro-Iranian and anti-Iranian parties. It is,\ntherefore, to be regretted that the literary activities of the Musalman\ncircles sympathising with Persian culture have descended to us only in\noccasional extracts and are sometimes confined only to the titles of\nbooks written by them.\n\n[Footnote 1: For details, Goldziher. _Muhammedanische Studien,_ I,\n147-310.]\n\nWe noticed above the revival of scientific activities in Sasanian\nPersia. This activity for the most part has its significance in its\nquality of being a connecting link, in the first place, as the\ntransmitter of Greek knowledge to the East, and secondly, as the unifier\nof this knowledge with the heritage which Sasanian Persia had received\nfrom scientific works belonging to Semitic culture, as well as from the\nscience of India. The principal representatives of this activity were\nnot Persians, but Christians, mainly the Syrian Nestorians, and\nMonophysites from the school of Edessa.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: For a general account of the character of this activity see\nT.J. de Boer, _History of Philosophy in Islam_, 17-20.]\n\nWhat was the share in these operations of the Persians themselves it is\nhard to tell. But at all events, it was not considerable.[1] The general\ncharacter of this activity does not leave particular room for wide\ncreative science, since it has expressed itself pre-eminently in\ncompilations, translations of philosophical, astronomical, astrological,\nmedical, mathematical and ethical commentaries on Greek and some Indian\nauthors. It was not in this field that the activity of the Persian\nsacerdotal community in the Sasanian epoch was concentrated. And\nlatterly in the period of the development of analogous scientific work\ndining the eastern Khalifate under the Abbasides the principal role\nbelonged just to the same class of scholars, Christian Syrians, with\njust this difference that the activity of the latter continued among the\nMusalman alumni of various nationalities whilst in Sasanian Persia their\noperations were cut short by the unfortunate circumstances of the Arab\ninroads. It is interesting that in the Abbaside period the translations\nmade from the Persian authors or authors belonging to Persia appertain\nto a certain special _genre_ of works of a technical nature, books on\nwarfare[2], on divination, on horse-breaking[3], on the training of\nother animals, and on birds[4] trained to hunting. These special\ntreatises were of no abstract scientific contents but referred to the\npractical demands of life.\n\n[Footnote 1: As regards philosophical traditions of Sasanian Persia in\nthe Musalman epoch principally we may refer to the influence of the\nsystem of \"_Zervanism_\" on the adherents of the system of \"_Dahar_\", de\nBoer 15 and 76.]\n\n[Footnote 2: See my studies on the _Ain-Nameh_.]\n\n[Footnote 3: See my book on _Materials from Arabic Sources for Culture\nHistory of Sasanian Persia_.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Fihrist 315.]\n\nA different kind of importance attaches to histories devoted to\ngovernment and national life of the Sasanian period and to the epic and\nliterary tradition of Persia. Their value as history has been\nacknowledged and appreciated by the progressive circles of the Musalman\ncommunity. Contemporary researches directing the greatest attention to\nthis aspect of Iranian movement appreciated its value and thanks to\ntheir works, we are enabled to speak with some clearness regarding\nbooks of exceeding importance. Traces of ancient Iranian epic tradition\nare observable in some Greek writers, Ktesias, Herodotus, Elian, Charen\nof Mytelene and Atheneus. But it has survived in a considerable quantity\nin the Avesta.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: The principal works for investigating the Persian\nhistorical and literary tradition are, besides the introduction to his\nedition and translation of the Shah-Nameh by Mohl, Noeldeke's German\n_History of the Persians, and Arabs at the time of the Sasanians_, his\nintroduction, and his Iranian national epic G.I.Ph. II, 130--212; Baron\nRosen, _On the question of the Arabic translations of the Khudai Nameh_\n(Paraphrase by Kirst in W.Z.K.M.X, 1896); H. Zotenberg, History of the\nKings of Persia by Al-Thalibi, Arabic text with translation, especially\nPreface, XLI-XLIV. A number of profound ideas and ingenious suggestions\nare made in the various articles and reviews by Gutschmid. (See Appendix\nV, p. 141).]\n\nThe most recent and pregnant exposition is by Lehmann.\n\nIt existed also in official writings of the Sasanian times, recensions\nof which, we possess in several Arab histories and in the Shah Nameh.\nLike the scientific literature these writings were subjected to a final\nredaction towards the close of the Sasanian dynasty and it is this\nrecension that has mainly come down to posterity. Alongside of official\nwritings of a general character, there existed various books of\nepic-historical contents, for instance, the _Yadkari-Zariran_.[1] As in\nthese writings, so in the versions appearing from them at later times,\nthe materials embodied were of a kindred nature, like the Romance of\nBehram Chobin, Story of Behram Gor, the narrative of the introduction\ninto Persia of the Game of Chess. Besides these there were writings\nrelating to local histories. It is noteworthy that the epic element was\nand is preserved with persistence by the Parsis. Mohl notes that the\nmajority of Persian epic poems, excepting the Shah Nameh, has been\npreserved only in manuscripts belonging to Parsis[2]. Farther\ndevelopment of this phase of Persian literary tradition bifurcated into\ntwo directions. It has been shown that the official chronicles of the\nSasanian times exercised influence on the development of the Musalman\nscience of history. On the other hand, the epic was resuscitated in\nheroic romances and tales[3]. Alongside of the historical traditions and\nthe epos stands the romantic poesy which has entered into Musalman\nliterature in a marked degree in the shape of Iranian tradition. At the\ntime this species of poetry prospered in Arabic literature there was a\nstrong Persian influence and some of its representatives were\nundoubtedly inclined to Persian literary motifs, for instance, the\nShuubite Sahal Ibn Harun.[4]\n\n[Footnote 1: We refer mainly to the epic cycle of Soistan for the views\nof the authorities on which see Mohl (LXII) and Noeldeke _National\nEpic_, 80-81. As a supplement to the bibliography furnished by Noeldeke\nsee V. Rugarli, the _Epic of Kershasp_, G.S.A.I., XI, 33-81, 1898.]\n\n[Footnote 2: LXVII, note 2.]\n\n[Footnote 3: On the process of the latter nature see Mohl LXXII ff.\nRegarding one of the principal representatives of the later stage of\nthis development see Abu Taher Tarsusi, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1, 115.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Fihrist 120, 1-13. For this kind of poetry see Fihrist 306,\n8-308, 14, and compare also the books characterised at page 314, 1-7.]\n\nTo the same type of literary monuments we have to add the vast field of\nstory literature. Although a considerable portion of it belongs to the\nprovince of migratory subjects, and although to Persia belongs often\nonly the r\u00f4le of the transmitter, nevertheless, collections of stories\nof this class undoubtedly had their assigned place in the Sasanian epoch\nand the dependence of the core of the _Thousand and One Nights_ on the\nPersian stories collected in the _Hazar Afsan_[1] is indisputable. We\nshall not, therefore, stop here further regarding facts which have been\ndecided more than once. We will only observe that in connection with the\nPersian literary age of the Sasanians we have to indicate a series of\nworks of the character of epic tales arisen from the ancient historical\nperiod of the western boundary of Persia and representing \"stories of\nthe Babylonian kingdom\" which have been enumerated among the books of\nthis class and also among Persian books,--a circumstance which proves\nthat these tales originated in Sasanian literature. Finally, just as in\nhistorical and especially in narrative literature, Persian tradition\nsurvived to the Musalman times so also it continued to live in the\nwritings of the ethico-didactical category. The importance of the\nPahlavi translation of the book of _Kalileh and Dimneh_ for the\nmigration of this collection of tales to the West is well-known. The\nsignificance of Pahlavi translations is not less evident with regard to\nthe _Hazar Afsan_ in connection with the _Thousand and One Nights_.\nStill Persian tradition in the field of ethico-didactic literature has\nbeen studied and appreciated much less than in the historical and story\nliterature. We have now to examine a few questions in connection with\nthe Persian tradition regarding the ethico-didactic literature of the\nearly Musalman epoch. We shall devote the following chapter to its\nstudy.\n\n[Footnote 1: Fihrist 304, 10-305, 2. Fihrist 306, 6; Fihrist 305, 7.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nThe ethico-didactic books in the Fihrist (315, 19-316, 25) 38\n\nThey are almost exclusively of Persian origin 38\n\n\n_ETHICO-DIDACTIC LITERATURE OF IRAN_\n\nOpinion on the importance of the influence of ethical and didactical\nworks of the Sasanian times on the literature of this class of early\nMoslem epoch, generally speaking has been expressed in scientific works\nand has found admittance into a few general surveys of Persian\nliterature. To the literary monuments go back a number of books on what\nis called _Adab_, good behaviour or agreeable manners, in modern Persian\nliterature. Besides several literary monuments of later ages,[1] for the\nsolution of this question, capital importance attaches to the\ninformation given in the _Fihrist_ of an-Nadhim which is the fundamental\nsource of the history of entire Arabic literature bearing on our period.\nFurther on we shall draw upon this work with the object of determining\nthis species of literary tradition in Arabic books of the first\ncenturies of Islam.\n\n[Footnote 1: P. Horn, Geschichte der persischen Letteratur, _(Die\nLetteraturen des Ostens in Finzeldarslellungen_ Bd VI) 38, and _Die\nMittelpersische Letteratur_, 237.]\n\nGreat importance for this problem lies in that portion of the Fihrist\nwhich when first edited had elicited little interest, and where are\nenumerated the titles of books of ethico-didactic character, Persian,\nGreek, Indian, Arabic, by well-known authors and by anonymous\nwriters[1]. We are aware that in the Fihrist there are partly Arabic,\npartly Persian, titles of books which have come down to us in a\nmutilated form, but at the same time some of them have reached us in\ntheir correct shapes and others are often easily restorable.\n\n[Footnote 1: Fihrist 315, 19-316, 23.]\n\nIn this section of the Fihrist we have in all forty-four titles of\nbooks. Among them a large number can be directly traced to Persian\norigin and a portion were evidently written under Persian influence. To\nthe first class we have no hesitation in assigning fourteen names of\nbooks, since as we shall see, two of them or possibly three pertain to\none and the same work. We will examine these titles in some detail.\n\n1. The first book is by Zadan Farrukh and is a testament to his son[1].\nAlthough we are not able to recall a book of this title among the\nPahlavi literature that has come down to us, still the general character\nof this work is presented to us in perfect definiteness. It is\nundoubtedly one of the testaments or counsels, the so-called _Pand\nNameh_ or _Andarz_, of a father to a son, or some one person to another,\nand the typical representatives of which in the Pahlavi literature\nappear to be the well-known book of testament of Adarbad to his son, the\nbook of advice to his son by Khosro Anushirvan and the book of counsel\nto the latter by his Wazir, Buzurj Meher[2].\n\n[Footnote 1: In the text the term is Zadan Farrukh, but Justi already in\nhis _Iranisches Namenbuch_ in 1895 proposed the reading Zadan Farrukh.]\n\n[Footnote 2: As regards the first, see my _Materials from Arabic\nSources,_ page 68-69. For the second, West Pahlavi literature G.I. Ph.\nII, 112. For the third, in Pahlavi verse West 113. For Musalman times\nsee Schefer Chrestomathy 3-6 and Salemann and Zukovski, Persian Grammar\npage 41-49. Also compare _Melanges Asiatiques_ IX, 215. In Arabic\nAnthologies especially of the character of what is known as\nFurstenspiegel the maxims of this wise Wazir are very frequently quoted.\nSee for instance, _Sirajul Mulk_ of Tartushi, also compare the\nbibliography in V. Chaubin, of Arabic works, Leige 1892, page 66.]\n\nAlongside of this most celebrated _Pand Nameh_ in the Pahlavi\nliterature are also famous a number of other analogous literary\nmonuments traceable to definite persons, while some are anonymous. They\nare of a nature, for instance, of a simple testament from father to\nson[1].\n\n[Footnote 1: West 109-111, and 113-115.]\n\nAs we have already observed, and as we shall have occasion to speak\nfurther, this category of literary remains undoubtedly survived in the\nMusalman literature and partly in the literature of the Arabs. For the\nstudy of the Pahlavi literature this class of tracts has already evoked\nattention and has called forth several editions and translations. We\nnotice that their interest goes beyond that of Pahlavi literature proper\nand they are important also for the history of the literature of\nMusalman nations. Moreover, they are of interest from a general point of\nview, for the study of Musalman culture. In fact, by their very\ncharacter these works are brief catechisms with no pretensions to\nabstract theoretical acquaintance with the sacerdotal tracts, composing\nanother important section of Pahlavi literature, but immediately\nconnected with the daily ordinary life. It goes without saying that\nwhoever read them in the original, their interest did not lie in their\ntheoretical character, but that they were rendered into Arabic and\nmodern Persian languages with a view to the same practical end. Hence\nhowever monotonous they are,[1] whatever wearisome character these books\npossess, they are of great interest for the purpose of comparison with\nsimilar productions of Musalman literature and for the purpose of\nestablishing their influence in the unfolding of ethical ideas of the\nMusalman east, which are far from being clearly made manifest. This side\nof the question deserves, in my opinion, in these days ampler attention\nand research.\n\n[Footnote 1: See Noeldeke \"_Persische Studien_\" II, S.B.W.A, 1892, 29,\nNoeldeke remarks, with reference to this class of literature, \"that the\ninvestigation of this fatiguing business demands an unusual amount of\npatience\", see for instance, the comparison instituted between ethical\nnorm in the Parsi and in the Musalman Literature by Darmesteter in\n_Revue Critique_, 21, 1-8.]\n\n2. The second book in the Fihrist is attributed to a _Mobedan-mobed_\nthat is, head of the Parsi clergy, who in Arabic texts is sometimes\ncalled simply Al-Mobedan and whose name was not understood by Flugel[1].\nThe same word is met with in a mutilated form in another place in the\nFihrist[2]. (119-20).\n\n[Footnote 1: Fugel took it for a dual, and consequently divided the name\ninto two.]\n\n[Footnote 2: The book next following is called _Kitab kay Lorasp_ and\napparently it had to do with questions connected with Persian literary\ntradition.]\n\nHe is mentioned by Ali Ibn Rayhani, Arabic author, who stood in near\nrelationship to the Khalif and who was partial to the Zindiks, that is,\nin this case, to the Dualists. He is a reputed author of several books\namong which there is one whose title was restored by Justi in the\n_Namenbuch_[1]. The conjecture of Justi that this name should be read\nMihr Adar Jushnas is fully supported by a sketch of it in a passage of\ninterest to us in the Fihrist. Justi hesitated to declare whether this\nwas the name of the book or of its author. But in another place in the\ntext this word is accompanied by the designation Al-Mobedan from which\nwe can undoubtedly conclude that this book was ascribed to a particular\nperson, the supreme _Mobed_ Mihr Adar Jushnas. Therefore, this title of\nthe book should be read as that of the book of Mihr Adar Jushnas, the\nMobedan. This book stands at the head of the works we are considering in\nthe Fihrist. Therefore, we can fully trace it to the Persian literary\ntradition.\n\n[Footnote 1: _Namenbuch_ Mahr Adar Jushnes.]\n\n3. Similarly there can be no scepticism regarding the individual nature\nof the book called the _Book of the Testament of Khusro to his son\nOrmuz_, the admonition given to the latter when he handed over to him\nthe reins of government and the reply of Ormuz. Flugel already perfectly\ncorrectly noticed that by Kisra we must here understand Kisra\nAnushirvan. In this way in this book or in the first half of it we have\ncertainly the _Andarz Khusro_, the celebrated work in the Pahlavi\nliterature which has been preserved up to our times and which has been\ntranslated into the European languages.[1] It contains a number of\ncounsels of Khusro to his son and occupies the place of importance in\nthis species of literature. It is of a pseudo-epigraphic character.\n\n[Footnote 1: See West, 112. The full title is: _Andarz-e-Khusro Kavadan.\nIV._]\n\n4. With this book is identical another mentioned just there but a little\nfurther and entitled the _Book of Counsels of Kisra Anushirvan to his\nson_ who was called \"a well of eloquence\". In this way these third and\nfourth titles indicate one and the same book sufficiently known in the\nPersian literary tradition in which we are interested.\n\n5. To the same category belongs another book ascribed to the Kisra. It\nis possible that in this book we have a treatise identical with the one\nreferred to above as the book of the Testament of Khosro Anushirwan,\nsince in several redactions his testaments are represented as advice to\nhis son while in some they stand as admonition directed to the general\npublic.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Salemann, _Mittel-persische Stude\u00een, Melanges Asiatiques_,\nix, 1888, 218.]\n\n6. Under the sixth heading appears a _Book of Counsels of Ardeshir\nBabekan to his son Sabur._ This work which was sufficiently known and\nmade use of in the early Moslem period has not come down to us in the\noriginal Pahlavi. We know of the existence of a verse translation of\nthis book in the Arabic made by Belazuri (Fihrist, 113 and 114).\nMoreover, this work was considered as a model composition (probably as\nrepresented by Belazuri), and in this connection it was comparable\n(Fihrist 126, 15-19) to _Kalileh wa Dimneh,_ the Essays of Umar Ibn\nHamza,[1] Al Mahanith,[2] the tract called _Yatima_ of Ibn al Mukaffa,\nand the Essays of Ahmed Ibn Yusuf, secretary of Mamun. In view of the\nimportance attached to this and the following _risalas_ by the author of\nthe Fihrist, it would be interesting to have their editions and\ntranslations.\n\n[Footnote 1: A relative of the Khalif Mansur and Mahdi, a secretary of\nthe former Fihrist, 118, 8-12. In the _Kitab al Mansur wal Manzum_ of\nAhmed ibn Abi Taher (_vide_ Baron B.P. Rosen, _On the Anthology of Ahmed\nibn Abi Taher_, Journal of the Russian Oriental Society, Vol. III, 1889,\npage 264). The essay probably referred to is called _Rasalat fi al\nKhamis lil Mamun_. (Or Rislat al Jaysh). See Fihrist, II, 52.]\n\n[Footnote 2: This was probably the title of the epistle of Umar Ibn\nHamza to Ali ibn Mahan preserved by the same Ahmed ibn Abi Taher. As\nregards persons by the name of Mahan in the Musalman period see Justi\n_Namenbuch_ 185.]\n\nExtracts from this testament especially from its concluding portion,\nhave been handed down to us in the _Kitabat Tambih._[1] They relate to\nthe prophecy of Zaradusht regarding the destruction of the Persian\nreligion and empire in the course of a thousand years after him.[2]\n\n[Footnote 1: By the same Ahmed ibn Abi Taher has been preserved the\nEssay of this Ahmed ibn Yusuf on \"Thankfulness\"--_Risalat Ahmed ibn\nYusuf fishshukr_ which possibly is referred to by the author of the\nFihrist. See also there the highly important _Risalat ibn Mukaffa\nfissahobat_.\n\nB.G.A. VIII, 98, 16-99, 1. Macoudi, _Le livre de l'avertissement et de\nla revision_, trad. par Carra de Vaux, Paris, 1897, 141-142.]\n\n[Footnote 2: In connection with this prophecy, as regards the changes\nwhich were made in the chronological system of the Persian history see\nA. Gutschmid, _Kleine Schriften,_ III, Leipzig, 1892. 22-23, and 97,\n&c.]\n\nIt is highly interesting that just like the well-known testament by\nTansar to the king of Tabaristan this testament was written at a\nconsiderably later period, in the time of Anushirwan.[3]\n\n[Footnote 3: See on this question Christensen 111-112 and Appendix VI.]\n\nRegarding the general character of this apocryphal testament we may\njudge by the counsels of the founder of the Sasanian dynasty which have\ncome down to us in various Arabic and Persian historical works and in\nthe Shah Nameh.\n\n7. The 7th title refers to the book of a certain _mobedan mobed_ on\nrhetorical passages which were analogous probably to the anonymous _Pand\nNamehs_ which are found in the Pahlavi literature.\n\n8. The 8th is the book on the correspondence between the Kisra and a\nMarzban.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Does not this appear like a book containing the\ncorrespondence on the well-known episode in the history of the Persians\nin Yemen and the letters which were exchanged between the Marzban or\nMavazan and Khosrau Parviz? (See Noeldeke, Tabari 237, 264, 350-351).]\n\n9-10. The 9th and the 10th titles relate to books of questions directed\non a certain occasion by the king of Rome to Anushirwan and on another\noccasion by the king of Rome to another emperor of Persia.\n\n11. The 11th book refers to the order of Ardeshir to bring out from the\ntreasury books written by Wisemen on \"Government.\"\n\n12. The 12th book was written for Hormaz, son of Kisra, _i.e.,_ Kisra\nAnushirwan on the correspondence between a certain Kisra and\n\"Jamasp.\"[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Are we to understand under this name a reference to the\nwell-known Jamasp Hakim occurring in Pahlavi literature (Weat, 110)?\n\nOn the Persian wisdom of Jamasp, see C.H.L. Flise, cher _Kleinere\nSchriften_ 3 Leipzig, 1888, 254-255, and Justi _Namenbuch_, 109.\n\nThe name, however, cannot be clearly read, Hadahud (see Fihrist, 316,\n13) where instead of Mardyud should be read Mardwaihi. In the same book\n162, 6, instead of Zaydyud should be read Zaiduya. As regards the name\nHadahud generally, see Justi, 177, who mentions a son of Farrukhzad.]\n\n13. The 13th book is attributed to a certain Kisra and it is added that\nit treated of gratitude and was written for the benefit of the public.\n\n14. Finally, the 14th heading referred no doubt to one of those Persian\nbooks written by Persians bearing Persian names and embodying various\nstories and anecdotes.\n\nOf the remaining 30 books, 11 belong to the Moslem period but were\ncomposed at the time of complete Persian influence on Arabic literature.\nWe have three books on Adab written for Khalif Mahdi, Rashid and for the\nBarmecide Yahya ibn Khalid. Then there are nine books by authors who are\npartly unknown and partly belong to the same period of Persian influence\nand who have been mentioned in other places in the Fihrist.\n\nOf the remaining 19 books a considerable number is to be found to have\nissued from Persian sources. Of Persian origin probably were two books\ntranslated by the aforesaid Mihr Adur Jushnasp--one relating to 'Adab'\nand the other on 'house-building.'\n\nThe book on the refutation of the Zendiks by an unknown author was\nprobably derived from Parsi circles. For, especially in the reign of\nMamun there existed various controversies with the followers of Mazdaism\nand Dualists.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: A. Barthel\u00e9my, Gujastak Abalish. _R\u00e9lation d'une Conf\u00e9rence\nTh\u00e9ologique, presid\u00e9e par le Calife Mamoun_, Paris, 1887. (Bibliotheque\nde l'\u00e9cole des hautes \u00e9tudes, sciences philologiques et historiques,\nLXIX., fascicule.)]\n\nFurther, undoubtedly under Persian books must be reckoned the book of\nthe 'Counsels' of ancient kings and the book of the 'Questions' to\ncertain Wisemen, and their Answers. If these are not of direct Persian\norigin they are similar in contents to Persian books. Two books included\nin this list, namely, one by a certain Christian on ethico-didactical\nsubjects as is stated in the title itself, drawn from Persian, Greek and\nArabic sources, and the other, a book translated by the author of the\nFihrist himself containing the anecdotes regarding the people of a\nsuperior class and of the middle class--these two books on account of\ntheir contents embody the experiences relating to ethico-didactical\nquestions and were of the nature of compilation similar to the book of\nIbn Miskawaihi of whom we shall speak later on. Finally, all the\nremaining books relate to that class of anecdotal and didactic\nliterature which spread so wide among Arabic writers through Pahlavi and\noriginating from Indian authors. Such books were, for instance, the\nstory of Despair and Hope, the Book of Hearing and Judgment, the Book of\nthe two Indians, a liberal man and a miser, their disputation, and the\njudgment passed on them by the Indian prince, etc. That our assumption\nis highly probable is confirmed by the mention among these books of the\nbook of the philosopher and his experiences with the slave girl\nKaytar.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: This book no doubt is a portion of the well-known fable Lai\nd'--Aristote preserved in certain ancient monuments of Arabic\nliterature. The same book is mentioned among Persian books in another\nplace in the Fihrist. (305-6). Kitab Musk Zanameh, w[=a] shah Zanan.\nThese two books have been variously transcribed by the copyists.]\n\nThe name has been much mutilated and serves as an example of the degree\nto which Persian titles have been corrupted. Nevertheless, thanks to the\ncircumstance that the name of the slave girl has come down to us, in the\nArabic version of the story we are able to trace the title adduced in\nthe Fihrist.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Le Livre des beautes et des antithesis attribute a Abu\nOthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Djahiz texte publie par G. Van Vloten, Leyde,\n1898, 225-257; E. G., Browne, \"some account of the Arabic work entitled\nNihayatu'l-irab fi Akhbari'l Furs wa'l-Arab,\" particularly of that part\nwhich treats of the Persian kings, J.R.A.S. (900, 243-245).]\n\nThis name is Mushk Daneh or a grain of Musk. The book of Musk Daneh and\nthe _mobed_ became famous in Arabic literature as a separate Persian\ncomposition.[2]\n\n[Footnote 2: Similarly the title Shahzanan in the Fihrist is possibly\nMobedan, (See Browne 244, 2, 3, 11, 15; 245, 4, 15; and Van Vloten 255,\n16; 256, 1, 4, 14; 257, 7, 9; or Shaikh al mobedan, Browne 245.)]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nThe Persian, sources of the compilation of Ibn Miskawaihi 54\n\nPreponderance of the Persian element in the evolution of the Musalman\nmorals 57\n\nThe \"Book of Adab\" by Ibn al Muqaffa and other similar Arabic works 59\n\n\n_IRANIAN COMPONENTS OF ADAB LITERATURE IN ARABIC_\n\nAt the head of works under the title of ethico didactic writings, which\nhave come down to us stands a group most characteristically denominated\n_Adab ul Arab val Furs_ belonging to the pen of a writer of the 10th and\n11th centuries, Ibn Miskawaihi whose name is pronounced in Persian Ibn\nMushkuya. At the basis of this collection lies the ancient Persian\npseudepigraphical book _Javidan khired_, or \"Eternal wisdom.\" But in the\nbody of it there is a series of literary monuments of Sasanian\nliterature and its descendants.[1] The author is known, besides, by his\nphilosophical works, as a historian[2] and as such he is particularly\nimportant for the history of the Buides.[3] And his Persian origin would\npoint to his sympathy for Persian literary tradition. As a matter of\nfact, his ethico-didactic collection is based on a book of the Sasanian\nepoch. It would appear that this circumstance has undoubted significance\nfor the determination of the influence in the compilation of Moslem\nethical ideals. However, in contradiction to this basal fact and\nnotwithstanding that in the province of the development of Islam as a\nreligion, Persian element played an important part,[4] the development\nof the Moslem ethical tracts in contemporary literature, for the most\npart, is dependent upon more antique, specially Greek, tradition. J.\nGoldziher recognizing the importance of the influence of Parsism on\nIslam says the exact demonstration of the dependence of these phenomena\non the culture historical facts, whose consequences they are, would be\nthe most interesting task which those studying Islam in its present\nposition can place before themselves. Many of the dominating views\nregarding the original spirit of Islam would receive the needed\ncorrection by such investigation.\n\n[Footnote 1: On this work and its manuscripts see my _Material from Arab\nsources_ 68-69.]\n\n[Footnote 2: For Miskawaihi as a philosopher see Boer 116-119.]\n\n[Footnote 3:--He was the treasurer and a close friend of the Buide\nAdudad-Daula.]\n\n[Footnote 4: For a general sketch of Moslem ethics in ancient times see\nCarra de Vaux, _Gazali_, 129-142, and _Encyclopaedia of Islam_ 4,\n244-246.]\n\nLet us examine three points regarding the influence on Moslem morals and\ngeneral conduct. In the first place stand the moral writings of\necclesiastical character. The morality is rooted in and based on the\nmoral of the Bible and then on the developed Moslem law and has absorbed\nin itself some of the elements of the ethics of Christianity. In the\nsecond place, there is a series of ethical documents of a most valued\nnature in the shape of proverbs, dicta, maxims, fables, constituting a\nkind of moral philosophy, often independent of each other, varied in\ntheir character, and different as to time and the place of their\ncompositions. Here we may separate a certain stratum of Persian element,\nand an analysis of them may reveal partly contemporary knowledge and\npartly elements of foreign religious ethics. The third but not the last\nplace in importance is occupied by the Greek ethical tradition in which\nlatterly are discernible important Christian constituents. Recent\nstudies have yielded us as their result, this structure of Musalman\nethics. But it is to be noted that the theoretical deductions at first\nsight do not find confirmation in facts. For we do not know which Greek\nbooks on ethics were translated in the beginning of the period of the\nscientific development of Islam, and for the support of our thesis we\nhave to point to the possibility of oral transmission of Hellenic\nethical tradition through Syriac scholars, although this circumstance\ndoes not militate against our hypothesis. Besides a small amount of\ntranslations from Greek ethical works, especially the books of\nAristotle, there are observed among the works embodied in this tradition\na series of pseudographs which, however, can have only an external\nrelation with the Greek sciences and which would rather lead to the\nsecond group of the influences on Musalman ethical monuments namely, the\ngroup of monuments of \"Oriental wisdom.\" The most typical of the\npseudographical _wisaya_, or \"Testaments\" are ascribed to Aristotle,\nPythagoras, and others. To our mind, they are derived from Persian\ntradition to the same extent, if not in a larger extent than from the\nChristian. Actual studies demonstrate that the basal work for this epoch\nwas the book above-mentioned of Ibn Miskawaihi which as we saw above,\nissued from Persian literary tradition. And the character of that\ntradition can be explained from exterior circumstances without an\nanalysis of its contents. The fact is that Ibn Miskawaihi worked upon\nthat class of Persian material, for instance the _Pand Nameh_ or\n_Andarz_, which had nothing to do with the province of the indefinite\ngnomic literature but which had the character of a catechism and\ntherefore expresses a definite system of religious morals, the morals of\nParsism.[1] The appreciation of the influence of Parsism on Islam has\nonly just commenced. But we are already in a position to emphasise the\ngreat influence, which Parsi ethics have exercised on Islam and this\ninfluence has been attested by a number of Greek and Christian\nwitnesses. So far, for an acknowledgment of this influence serves a\npurely external fact, namely, a glance at the bibliography of the\nancient ethico-didactic tracts in the Musalman literature and an\nexamination of the contents of the book of Ibn Muskawaihi. A number of\nadditional facts confirm this hypothesis.\n\n[Footnote 1: For a general review of the morals of Parsism see A.V.W.\nJackson's G. I. Ph. Vol. II, 678-683.]\n\nWell-known is the importance enjoyed in the beginning of the epoch of\nthe development of the Arabic Musalman literature, by the activities of\nthe Parsi Ibn al Muqaffa.[1] He is famous as the first commentator of\nthe Greek books on logic in Arabic literature, but he is particularly\nrenowned as the efficient supporter of the Persian literary tradition\nand its translator into the Arabic literature. His rendering of _Kalila\nand Dimma_ is well-known. It enjoys a prime role in the migration of\nthis collection of stories to the West. Well-known also is his\ntranslation of the Persian book of _Khoday Nameh_,--that is, the\nofficial chronicle of the Sasanian times and of the _Ain Nameh_, the\nInstitutes of the time. We shall have occasion to speak about these\nbooks later on. To him also belong the books closely connected with the\nSasanian epoch, namely, the _Book of Mazdak_ the _Book of Taj_ to which\nwe shall refer further on. It is interesting that he is also the reputed\nauthor of two books on Adab, perhaps among the most ancient ones in\nArabic literature.[2] One of these books called the Smaller was probably\ncontained in the other which is called the Larger and has the purely\nPersian title of Mah farra Jushnas. (This is how the title is to be read\naccording to Hoffmann and Justi).[3] Since the interest of Muqaffa was\nconcentrated in the province of Persian culture it is indisputable that\nhis activity was not confined in this direction to one book and the\ncontents of the book have vestiges in a high degree of dependence on\nPersian motifs. This is proved by a variety of circumstances. We have\ndescended to us his book called _Al Yatima_, a tract on that aspect of\nmorals which was especially diffused in the Sasanian epoch and was\ndevoted to politics and in form represented the species of writings\ncalled Furstenspiegel.[4] A tradition of this kind of literature for\nlong continued to live in the Musalman writers and the typical\nrepresentative of the species seems to be the famous _Siyasat Nameh_, of\nNizam-ulmulk, the Saljuk Wazir. On some occasions it directly serves as\na source for the internal history of the Sasanian domination. It bears\nparticularly on didactic literature though it has been as yet very ill\nstudied from the comparative standpoint. The Sasanian influence is\nperfectly obvious. Some portions of Al Yatima of Ibn Muqaffa may be\nparallelled to corresponding remnants from Pahlavi literature in the\n_Kabus Nameh_ and the _Siasat Nameh._[5] We know further that books\nunder the title of Persian Adab were spread among those who sympathised\nwith Mazdaism and Manichism in the circle of Moslem society.[6] These\nbooks by their character were comparable to books on Mazdak but also to\nKalila wa Dimna.\n\n[Footnote 1: Fihrist, 118, 18-29, and Ibn al Qifti's _Tarkh al hukama_\nedited by Lippert, page 220, 1-10.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Brockelmann, On the rhetorical writings of Ibn all Mukaffa,\nZ.D.M.G. 53, 231-32.]\n\n[Footnote 3: Hoffmann \"Extracts from Syrian acts of Persian martyrs\",\n1880 page 289 note, and Justi, _Namenbuch_ 186.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Precise information regarding its contents is rather to be\nfound in Ibn al Qifti than in the _Fihrist_. In the former the heading\nis _Fi taat us Sultan_, in the latter _Fi rasail._ See _La perle\nincomparable ou_ l'art du parfait courtisane de Abdallah ibn al-Muqaffa,\n1906. See the French translation from the Dutch rendering of this\ntract.]\n\n[Footnote 5: On the political ideas of the latter see Pizzi, Le idee\npolitiche di Nizam-ul-Mulk G.S.A. 1., 131-141.]\n\n[Footnote 6: Tabari \"Annales\" Vol. 3, 1309, 9-15, and Browne A literary\nHistory of Persia, 1, 332.]\n\nBesides Muqaffa a number of writers of the epoch of the development of\nArabic Musalman literature interested themselves in themes connected\nwith Persian antiquities. One of them, Aban Ibn Abdul Humiad ar Rakashi\notherwise known as Aban al-Lahiki chose a number of themes from ancient\nPersian literature and according to the Fihrist versified them (119,\n1-6-163, 7-10). Such subjects were--_Kalila and Dimna,_ the _Book of\nBarlaam and Yuasef, the Book of Sindbad_, the _Book of Mazdak_ and\nfinally books on two popular representative of the Sasanian dynasty,\nnamely, the _Book of the acts of Ardasher_ and the _Book of the acts of\nAnushirvan._[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Versification of the history of Anushirvan is also to be\nmet with in later Parsi literature, see, Sachau, Contribution to the\nknowledge of the Parsi literature, J.R.A.S. 1870 page 258.]\n\nAnother author, Ahmed Ibn Tahir Taifur, wrote according the Fihrist\n(146, 21) a special Book of Hormuz son of Kisra Anushirvan.[1] No doubt,\nfurther more, writers of Persian origin followed in their books on\n_Adab_ Persian models. Such probably was the book of Adab by an author\nwhose name has been mutilated in the Fihrist (139, 15, 18). There is\nanother class of writings which bears relation to this one and which is\nmentioned in the Fihrist. It is quite possible that on this literary\nPersian tradition, were based also some of the tracts under the title of\n\"_Books on counsels_\" a considerable number of which we meet with in the\nFihrist.[2]\n\n[Footnote 1: See the essay of Baron Rosen on the anthology of Ahmed Ibn\nAbi Tahir.]\n\n[Footnote 2: 78, 15; 105, 10; 293, 12; 204, 17-18; 204, 29; 207, 21;\n210, 23; 212, 22-23; 217, 4-5; 220, 25; 222, 14; 234, 23; 281, 20; 282,\n5.]\n\nEthico-didactical treatises in the form of counsels, maxima or\ntestaments, constitute a singular group of literary mementos the genesis\nof which in the Musalman literature maybe established only after an\nexamination of similar books in the Persian writings of the Sasanian\ntimes. Examples of a like class of testaments, literary compilations\nunder the title, for the most part, of pseudo-graphs going up to\npre-Moslem period we have already noticed in the _Book of the counsels\nof Ardasher_ and the _Pand Nameh_ of Kisra Anushirvan.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nThe _Taj Nameh_ as mentioned in the Fihrist page 305, and page 118, and\nrepeatedly referred to in the _Uyunal Akhbar_, Part I, of Ibn Kutayba 65\n\nThe Persian book with illustrations mentioned by Masudi in his _Kitab at\nTambih_, page 106-7 and the illustrations in the scrolls in the castle\nof Shiz 68\n\n\n_PAHLAVI BOOKS STUDIED BY ARAB AUTHORS_.\n\nWe have indicated in the preceding chapter the translations of Ibn al\nMuqaffa from Persian books into Arabic. Besides those of an\nethico-didactic contents, among them there were books of historical\ncharacter. All these translations have not come down to us. Extracts of\nthese renderings into Arabic, however, have been preserved in the\noriginal and sometimes in paraphrase. Unusually important was the\ntranslation of the book called the _Khuday Nameh,_ the value of which\nhas long been appreciated by science. Questions of vital importance in\nconnection with this history are its relation to the _Shah Nameh_ and\nthe examination of its various translations in the Musalman period. The\nloss of this book, perhaps the most important monument of Middle Persian\nliterature, is to be particularly deplored in that with it has perished\nthe connecting link of the historical evolution of Iran, incorporating\nthe religious and clerical legislature in an official redaction. Of\ncapital importance also was another book called the Ain Nameh[1] or the\nBook of Institutes, a valuable source of the internal history of the\nSasanian Empire, comprising a descriptive table of official dignitaries\nor the _Gah Nameh._[2] Judging by the clue given in the Fihrist (118,28)\nit would appear that the _Book of Taj_ also was a historical one since\nit has been explained that the book treated of the \"Acts of Anushirwan.\"\nAs a matter of fact, among the books written by the Persians on epic and\nhistorical subjects and indexed in the same Fihrist (305, 8-13) has been\nmentioned the _Book of Taj._[3]\n\n[Footnote 1: See below and also my book on _The Materials from Arabic\nsources,_ &c., 63-66. Like Masudi in his _Kitab_ at Tambih, Asadi in\nhis _Lughal al-Furs_ (Asadi's _neupersischen Worterbuch Lughat al-Furs,_\nedited by P. Horn, 1897, 110, 1), identifies the word _ain_ with the\nword _rasam,_ practice or custom. As regards the word _ain_ in the\nIranian languages see Horn _Grundriss der neu persischen Etymologie_,\n15-16; Hubschmann, _Persische Studien_ 11, and B.G.A. IV, 175, and VIII,\nGlossarium IX. To understand the ancient usage of the term the modern\nParsi expression _Dad wa ain din_ in the sense of religious law and\ncustom helps us. In this phrase the word _dad_ corresponds to the modern\nMusalman _shariyat_ and the word _ain_ to _adat_. Regarding its special\nmeaning in the Umayyad times see J. Wellhausen _Das Arabische Reich und\nsein Sturz_ 189.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Most probably in connection with the materials of this book\nstood A collection of Persian genealogy written by the well-known Ibn\nKhurdadbeh (Fihrist 149, 4), representing a peculiar antithesis to the\nnumerous selections of Arab tribal and family genealogies.]\n\n[Footnote 3: Here are first mentioned the two books translated by Jabala\nibn Salim, namely, the _Book of Rustam and Isfandiyar_ and the _Book of\nBehram Chobin_ (the well-known Romance of the King about which, sea\nNoeldeke's Tabari 474-478), and further the _Book of Shahrzad and\nAberviz_ (which no doubt was connected with the _Thousand and one\nNights_), the _Book of Kar Nameh_ or the \"Acts\" of Anushirwan belonging\nto the same class of books as the _Kar Nameh of Ardashir_. Then the\nbooks that interest us are the _Book of Taj_, the _Book of Dara and the\nGolden Idol_, the _Ain Nameh_, the _Book of Behramgor and his brother\nNarseh_ and finally, one more _Book of Anushirwan._]\n\nIt is possible that the book of Ibn al Mukaffa was not the first\ntranslation of the Persian book since this title is applied by not a few\nother Arabic writers of the time to some of their own works. (For\nexample, Abu Ubaida, See Goldziher _Muhammed Studien_ 1,198).\n\nIn his time Baron Rosen called attention to quotations from a certain\n_Book of Taj_ in _Uyunal Akhbar_ of Ibn Qutaiba.[1] These quotations are\nonly to be found in the first part of the _Uyunal Akhbar_. All these\nquotations, eight in number, bear a didactic character, and excepting\nthree, refer back to Kisra Abarviz and contain his testament to his sons\n(two), secretaries, treasurers and _hajibs_. Of the remaining three one\nbears on general maxims of practical politics. Another is a testament of\nan ancient Persian king to his Wazir. And the third is a maxim of one of\nthe secretaries of a king. In this manner all these citations are of an\nethicodidactic nature; only they have been invested with a historical\nenvironment and under ordinary circumstances would represent the general\ntype of writings on political conduct for rulers, standing for the class\nof literature designated _Furstenspiegel_. A similar class of citations\nis preserved in the \"speeches from the throne\" and the counsels of the\nSasanian kings which we come across in various Arab historical and\nanthological works bearing on Sasanian Persia, as also in the Shah\nNameh.\n\n[Footnote 1: Baron Rosen, Zur arabischen Literatur geschichte der altern\nzeit, 1. Ibn Qutaiba; _Kitab Uyunal Akhbar_ (Melanges Asiatiques, VIII,\n1880, 745-779, especially 774-775). These citations correspond to those\nin the edition of Brockelmann as follows: 21, 12-16; 27, 11-15; 32, 2-8;\n44, 13-45, 4; 67, 13-66, 8; 84, 8-16; 107, 2-17; 120, 16-121, 5.]\n\nGutschmid already noticed in his time that by the Persian historians to\neach Sasanian ruler was ascribed a maxim and indicated that with\nreference to Ardashir and Anoshiravan these maxims may be taken as the\nbasis since the _Book of Counsels_ of the former was well-known and a\nlarge number of edifying proverbs of the latter had found admittance\ninto the national language.[1] Let us add that, as we showed above,\nthere has been preserved a similar class of _Books of Counsels_, the\nreputed author of which is Anoshiravan. The putative dicta of the other\nSasanian kings Gutschmid considered as fabricated being designed to be\nbrief characterisations of each of them. Gutschmid further advanced the\nconjecture that these apophthegms formed the texts under the portraits\nof the kings in the book which was used by Hamza Ispahani[2] and which\nwas seen by Masudi.[3] According to the information supplied us by the\nlatter (Masudi) he saw this book in Istakhr in an aristocratic Persian\nfamily, and that it included, besides information of a scientific\ncharacter, the history of the Persian kings and their reigns and a\ndescription of the monuments erected by them.[4] In the book were the\nportraits of the Sasanians and it was based on the documents found in\nthe royal archives. And the portraits also were prepared from the\nmaterials deposited there. The book was completed in A.H. 113 (A.D.\n731), and it was translated for the Khalif Hisham from the Persian into\nthe Arabic language.\n\n[Footnote 1: Gutschmid, Kleine schriften, III, 35-36.]\n\n[Footnote 2: About this book see Gutschmid, III, 150-151.]\n\n[Footnote 3: B.G.A. VIII, 106, 5-107, 5. Translation by Carra de Vaux\n150-151. See Christensen 90-91.]\n\n[Footnote 4: Gutschmid 150, 151.]\n\nWe called attention above to the information supplied by Istakhri and\nIbn Haukal regarding the castle of Shiz and the preservation in it of\nthe archives and the portraits of the Sasanian kings. It is highly\nprobable that for the reproduction of these portraits of the sovereigns\nthe authors were guided as much by the bas-reliefs, not far from this\ncastle, as by the tradition regarding them which was embalmed in older\nbooks belonging to the class mentioned by Masudi which undoubtedly\nexisted in the Imperial archives.[1] Along with the literary tradition\nthere must have survived the artistic tradition. It is highly probable\nthat the peculiar Persian art of illuminating manuscripts which was yet\nunknown according to Masudi in his own time,--the embellishing of books\nwith gold, silver, and copper dust was practised by the Manichians whose\ncalligraphy[2] delighted the Musalman authors and whose style of\nillustrating manuscripts must have been fashioned after the art\ndisplayed in those books which in the tenth century were preserved in\nthe castle of Shiz[3] and which at an earlier period were widely\ndesseminated among the Parsi circles.\n\n[Footnote 1: Connected with ancient tradition, but dependant upon modern\nscience, are the portraits of the Sasanian kings in the recently\npublished _Nameh Khusrawan_, Tehran 1285, (A.D. 1868).]\n\n[Footnote 2: In connection with the art of the Persian calligraphist and\nillustrative of the Sasanian epoch stand the indications of the ancient\nMoslem writers regarding the Avesta, which is reported to have been\ninscribed by Zoroaster in gold ink on parchment and also writings in\ngold ink of certain ancient Persian books. According to the _Zafar\nNameh_, Anushirwan directed that the maxims of Buzurjamihr should be\nwritten down in golden water,--(ba-abizar). From early Sasanians also\ncomes the custom of writing on valuable parchment or paper. Masudi\nspeaks of the purple ink of these books.]\n\n[Footnote 3: See Browne, \"A Literary History\", I, 165-166.]\n\nNow we revert to the supposition of Gutschmid. Had he known the\nquotations from the _Book of Taj_ in _Uyunal Akhbar_ he would have\nadduced them in confirmation of his hypothesis, and he would have\ncompared the book mentioned by Masudi with the _Book of Taj_ referred to\namong the Persian books enumerated in the Fihrist. On the basis of the\nlast-mentioned work it may be affirmed that in the Sasanian times there\nexisted a certain _Taj Nameh_ comparable to the _Khuday Nameh_ and _the\nAin Nameh_. The extracts in the _Uyunal akhbar_ do not contain anything\nof a special nature with reference to king Anushirwan so that the _Book\nof Taj_ on the \"Acts of Anushirwan\" mentioned in the Fihrist among the\nbooks of Ibn al Mukaffa could hardly have comprised what has been quoted\nin _Uyunal akhbar_. The materials at our disposal are too scanty to\nestablish its relation with the Sasanian _Book of Taj_.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: The supposition (Zotenberg, Thaalibi XLI,) according to\nwhich Firdausi saw an illustrated \"Book of Kings\" rests on a\nmisunderstanding. The fact is that certain verses have been incorrectly\ntranslated by Mohl (IV, 700-701, Verses 4071-4075).\n\nMohl translated the passage as follows: \"There was an aged man named\nAzad Serw who lived at Merv in the house of Ahmad son of Sahl; _he\npossessed a book of kings in which were to be found the portraits and\nfigures of the Pehlwans_. He was a man with a heart replete with wisdom\nand a head full of eloquence, and a tongue nourished with ancient\ntradition; he traced his origin to Sam, son of Nariman, and he knew well\nthe affairs regarding the fights of Rustam.\"\n\nA more correct translation would be: \"There was a certain old man by\nname of Azad Serw living in Merv with Ahmad son of Sahl. _He had a Book\nof Kings. In figure and face he was a warrior_; his heart was full of\nwisdom, his head full of eloquence, and in his mouth there ever were\nstories of the ancient times. He traced his origin back to Sam, son of\nNariman, and preserved in his memory many a tale of the battles of\nRustam.\"]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nThe list of the translators from Persian into Arabic as given in the\nFihrist, (244, 25-245, 6) 75\n\nThe different categories of these translators\n\nOmar ibn al Farrukhan of Tabaristan (Fihrist 273, 14-18) and his _Kitab\nal Mahasin_ 79\n\nOther authors of books of analogous titles in the first centuries of\nIslam,--the relation of these books to the books of \"Virtues and\nVices\" (cf. Baihaqi, pseudo-Jahiz) and the connection of these books\nwith the Parsi religious idea of the licit and the illicit,--_Al Mahasin\nwal Masavi_, and the _Shayast la Shayast_. 83\n\n\n_TRANSLATORS FROM PAHLAVI_.\n\nIn the Fihrist (244, 25-245, 6) are stated a number of names of the\nprincipal translators from the Persian into the Arabic language.\nAssuredly this list is far from complete. The author names only a few\ncalling attention to only particular translators. The passage in\nquestion in the Fihrist has been more than once utilised. The entire\nsection has not been exhaustively examined. We believe that from it we\ncan infer the general character of the contents of those translations\nwhich were prepared from Persian into Arabic and can gather some further\nindices regarding this list of names.\n\nTo examine the list of translators in order. First of all as may be\nexpected is mentioned Ibn al Muqaffa about whom the Fihrist speaks in\ndetail at another place. Then follow the family of Naubakht; Musa and\nYusuf, the sons of Khalid; Abul Hasan Ali ibn Zyad at Tamimi--of his\nprincipal translations is mentioned \"the Tables of Shahriyar;\" Hasan ibn\nSahal mentioned at the head of astronomers; Balazuri; Jabala ibn Salem,\nsecretary of Hisham; Ishak ibn Yazid, translator of the Persian history\nentitled _Khuday Nameh_; Muhammad ibn al Jahm al Barmaki; Hisham ibn al\nKasim; Musa ibn Isa al Kisravi; Zaduya ibn Shahuya al Isfahani; Muhammad\nibn Behram al Isfahani; Behram ibn Mardanshah, Mobed mobedan of the City\nof Sabur in Fars; Umar ibn al Farrukhan of whom special mention is made\nby the author of the Fihrist.\n\nAn examination of the aforesaid names of translators in order would, it\nseems to us, afford material for the solution of the problem regarding\nthe different varieties of Persian literary tradition in the first\ncenturies of Islam. Ibn al Muqaffa stands in the first place belonging\nto him by right. He was a genuine encyclopaedic translator familiar with\nthe Arab society with all its influence of spiritual Sasanian life of\nPersia finding expression in its literature. He translated scientific,\nepico-historical, and ethico-didactic books. Hence we can understand\nthat in the Fihrist has been assigned to him a special notice as noted\nby us above.\n\nThe family of Naubakht, mentioned next, represents a group of scholars\nmentioned separately in the Fihrist.[1] The head of the Naubakhts, was\nan astronomer to the Khalif Mansur and his son Abu Sahl succeeded to his\nfather's occupation. The grandsons of Naubakht wrote books on astronomy\nas well as jurisprudence. Persian literary tradition is earliest\nrecognised in the astronomical works of the grandsons of Naubakht. The\nauthor of the Fihrist places this Hasan ibn Sahl, as already indicated\nby Flugel, at the head of astronomers. And the same scientific character\nno doubt was attached to the activities of Musa and Yusuf,[2] the sons\nof Khalid mentioned there as well as at Tamimi, the author of the\nastronomical tables _Zichash Shahriyar_. In this manner these\ntranslators mentioned after Ibn al Mukaffa constituted in a manner a\npeculiar group of scholars who prepared translations from Pahlavi into\nArabic.\n\n[Footnote 1: 176, 20-177, 9; 177, 9-19; 274, 7-13; 275, 25-6. See Ibn al\nKifti 165, 1-5 and 409, 3-14.]\n\n[Footnote 2: See Ibn al Kifti, 1711, 10-11.]\n\nBalazuri and Jabala ibn Salem have already been mentioned above. The\nfirst translated into verse a Book of the Counsels of Ardeshir and the\nsecond the Book of Rustam and Isfandiyar as well as the romance of\nBehram Chobin. In this way the themes handled by these writers may be\ncalled epico-historical and ethico-didactic. Purely historical questions\ninterested the seven succeeding translators from Ishaq ibn Yazid to\nMobed Behram. These persons are sufficiently known in their special\ndepartments of literature. They were the translators into the Arabic\nlanguage of the _Khuday Nameh_.[1] Accordingly we may group them in a\nclass by themselves.\n\n[Footnote 1: Compare the essay of Rosen mentioned above _On the\nquestion of the Arabic translations of the Khuday Nameh_, 173-176, and\n182-186.]\n\nThe next author mentioned at this place in the Fihrist as a translator\nstands by himself,--Umar ibn al Farrukhan. He is altogether unknown as a\ntranslator of historical works. Hence he was not included in the group\nof persons mentioned before. On the other hand, had he been set down in\nthis passage of the Fihrist as a translator of scientific works he would\nhave been assigned a place not at the close of the list but in the\nmiddle of the translators of this class of books, that is, after Ibn\nMuqaffa and in the midst of the descendants of Naubakht and other\npersons mentioned above. Therefore we think that Umar ibn Farrukhan was\na translator of another species of work or, may be, works. In support of\nour assumption we must call attention to that place in the Fihrist where\nare enumerated the books of this author and to which an-Nadhin himself\nrefers in the analysis of the number of translators from Persian into\nArabic.\n\nBesides this place in the Fihrist, Umar ibn Farrukhan of Tabaristan has\nbeen mentioned in two other places. Once briefly,[1] (268, 25-26) as the\nannotator of the astronomical book of Dorotheya Sidonia and in another\nplace (277, 14-18) in a few lines[2] specially devoted to him. Here he\nis mentioned as the annotator of Ptolemy as translated by Batrik Yahuya\nibn al Batrik and as the author of two books, one of astronomical\ncontents and the other entitled _Kitab al Mahasin_, that is the book of\ngood qualities and manners.[3] This latter book demands a few lines from\nus.\n\n[Footnote 1: Ibn al Qifti 184, 9--10.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Ibn al Kifti 241, 20-242, 12. (This has been pointed out in\nthe Fihrist Vol. II, 110-111, and in ZDMG XXV, 1871, 413--415.) Further\nmention of him in the same book 98, 9 and 184, 10.]\n\n[Footnote 3: An account of the literary activity of this author was\ngiven in the work of H. Suter, _Die Mathematiker und Astronomen der\nAraber und ihre Werke_, Abhandiungen Zur Geschichte der mathematischer\nWissenschaften Supplement zum, 45 Jahrgang der Zeitschrift fur\nMathematik und Physik, Leipzig, 1900, 7-8. Haji Khalfa cites only the\nastrological books of Omar Ibn Farrukhan I, 198 and V, 35, 386. See also\nJusti _Namenbuch_ 95, Nos. 15 and 19.]\n\nUmar ibn Farrukhan is mentioned in the section of books on astronomy,\nmathematics, physics, mechanics, and music. In this group are mentioned\na number of writers who composed works on these sciences, beginning with\nEuclid and ending with the contemporary authors of an-Nadhin. In the\nmidst of them, an-Nadhin has also mentioned the grandsons of Naubakht.\nNot one of them wrote any _Kitab al Mahasin_ which appears, therefore,\nto be the independent work of Umar ibn Farrukhan. This book, further,\ncould not have been of a scientific astronomical, or mathematical nature\nas is obvious from its subject-matter which related to good manners and\nconduct. This book has been mentioned in this group only because here\nare enumerated the works of Umar ibn Farrukhan. And good manners and\nconduct constituted, as we saw above, a favourite theme of Parsi\nliterature: wherefor the book heads the list. Similar to it are the\ncontents not only of _Andarzes_ and _Pand Namehs_ but of a series of\ntracts on religious subjects. Hence we think that it was mainly owing to\nthis book that Umar ibn Farrukhan was included among the number of\nprincipal translators from Persian into Arabic and came to be enumerated\namong the translators to whom is ascribed a certain amount of\nspeciality. For he was the solitary representative of his category of\ntranslators of ethicodidactic books intimately connected with the\nproblems of the Paris religion. Possibly Umar ibn Farrukhan was the\nfirst to introduce this species of literature into Arabic, and we must\nadd, employed for his material as well as ideas Parsi tracts. Originally\nfrom Tabaristan, he, in the words of Ibn al Qifti, was introduced to Abu\nMaashar al Balkhi, stood well with Jaffer the Barmecide, and\nsubsequently with Fazl ibn Sahl, the Wazir who recommended him to his\nsovereign al-Mamum. And for this Khalif Mamun he prepared a number of\ntranslations. The sympathy of these persons for the Persian literary\ntradition could not have been confined to the translation of scientific\nworks, but must have extended to the preservation of Persian\nethico-didactic tradition in literature.\n\nBooks with the title of _Kitab al Mahasin_ are to be met with in the\nFihrist, if not often, several times. A book with this title (77, 21)\nhas been ascribed to the celebrated Ibn Qutaiba. It was composed\ndoubtless after the book of Umar ibn Farrukhan, for Qutaiba flourished\nat the close of the reign of Mamun and his literary activities could be\nreferred to the ninth century. Qutaiba undoubtedly interested himself in\nPersian literary materials. Hence it can be concluded that his _Kitab al\nMahasin_ was not foreign to the materials and in form could be the first\nimitation of Farrukhan. Further it is interesting to note that books\nwith this title were attributed especially to Shia authors such as Abu\nNadar Muhamed ibn Masud al Ayashi who wrote _Kitab al Mahasin al Akhlak_\nor a book of good morals (195, 10) and Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Khallid\nal Barki who wrote _Kitab al Mahasin_ (2213-4, also 7-9). And the\ninterest of Shia authors in Persian tradition was unquestionable. A book\nwith the same title of _Kitab al Mahasin_ is ascribed to a certain Ibn\nal Harun, (148, 17) an author who has been assigned in the Fihrist a\nplace among the writers on Adab and as responsible for a book called\n_Kitab al Adab_. Now the discussion of Adab as we said above is\nintimately connected with Persian tradition. And this tradition probably\nsurvived in the books which had for their theme \"the good qualities of\nAdab.\"[1] We believe that all these books were devoted to Persian\nliterary tradition, in close relation to which stands the book on \"good\nqualities and manners\" mentioned in the Fihrist as translated from the\nPersian language into Arabic by the man from Tabaristan, Umar ibn al\nFarrukhan.\n\n[Footnote 1: For instance, _Mahasin al Adab of Ispahani_, see\nBrockelmann, _Geschichte der Arabischen Litterature_ I. 351.]\n\nCo-related with these books on \"good qualities\" stand, in our opinion,\nthe books on \"good morals and their opposite,\" or \"goodness and\nwickedness,\" _Kutub al Mahasin wal Azdad_, or _Kutub al Mahasin wal\nMasawi_. Although in the Fihrist we do not come across books with this\ntitle, we have a book so named from the beginning of the tenth century\nwhose author was Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al Baihaki.[1] Under the title of\n_Kitab al Mahasin wal Azdad_ we likewise possess a work ascribed to\nJahiz.[2] Both these books evidently go to a common origin.[3] It is\nquite possible that antithesis was originally not excluded from these\n_Kutub al-Mahasin_, from which were developed a special species of\neducative treatises,--those on \"good qualities and their opposites.\"\nContinuing our comparison with the Parsi literature, we notice that a\nsimilar kind of antithesis is most commonly employed there.\n\n[Footnote 1: Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al Baihaki, _Kitab al-Mahasin val\nmasavi_, herausgegeben von Dr. F. Schwally, Geissen 1902.]\n\n[Footnote 2: _Le livre des beautes et des antithesis attribue a Abu\nOthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Djakiz_, texte arabe publie par G. Van Vloten\nLeyde; 1898.]\n\n[Footnote 3: See the review by Barbier de Meynard of the edition of\n_Mahasin wal Azdad_ in the Revue Citique, 1900, 276.]\n\nIn the Parsi ecclesiastical literature of an ethical nature we find\ndefinitely settled what is \"proper\" and, on the other hand, what is\n\"improper.\"[1] It is well known that books under this title,--\"the\nproper and the improper\" or \"the licit and the illicit\"--are to be found\namong the Pahlavi tracts the time of whose composition can be fixed\nsomewhere between the seventh and the ninth centuries A.D.[2] Comparing\nthe Pahlavi tracts with reference to these questions with Arabic books\non good and bad qualities and manners, we have to bear in mind the\ngeneral features, general outline, as well as the conditions of\ncivilisation of the period when these books were written, in other\nwords, the circumstances of their intimate relation generally of a\ncultural nature, particularly of a literary form obtaining between the\nArab and Persian nations, and between Islam and Parsism. Not only in\ndetail, but also in their nature these books must be differentiated in\nproportion as were different the clergy who wrote these ethical tracts\nfrom didactic works of a strong legendary element belonging to the pen\nof secular people. These literary monuments must be differentiated quite\nas much as their authors and with reference to them we may institute the\nsame parallel which we suggested above between the Parsi clergy and the\nIranophile party of the Shuubiya.\n\n[Footnote 1: Shayed-na-shayed.]\n\n[Footnote 2: _Shayast la-shayast_ West Pahlavi Texts, Part I, 1880.\nSacred Books of the East, Vol. V. 237-407.]\n\nFurthermore, associated with these literary features was also that class\nof Arabic books, so well known and the period of which interests us, the\nbooks on _Questions and Answers._[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Kitab al Masael wa Jawabat.]\n\nAnd this is precisely the form in which some of the better known of the\nParsi books have been cast, for instance, the _Minog-i-Khrad_[1] and the\n_Dadistan_[2] The second of these books decidedly belongs to the ninth\ncentury. Its contents no doubt, were strongly divergent from others\nowing to its dependence on altered conditions.\n\n[Footnote 1: Sacred Books of the East, Vol. XXIV, 1-15.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Sacred Books of the East XVIII, 1-277.]\n\nWe have already indicated the importance of the citations in early\nArabic anthologies incorporated from Persian historical works.[1] This\nnature of quotations are to be found also in books on \"good and bad\nmorals and conduct.\" Further we find embedded in Arabic works a\nconsiderable amount of matter of great importance, a circumstance of\nvital moment for the investigation of the survival of Persian literary\ntradition. A number of passages similar to those found in these books\nare undoubtedly embodied in various Arabic anthologies. We give below\nfrom the two works _al Mahasin wal Masavi_ and _al Mahasin wal Azdad_\nextracts bearing on Persian subjects.[2]\n\n[Footnote 1: See Noeldeke \"National Epos\" 13.]\n\n[Footnote 2: See Part II.]\n\nThe list of Persian subjects comprised in these Arabic books afford us a\nsufficient idea of the wealth and variety of the material on these\npoints to be recovered from Arabic discourses on manners and morals.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nThe Book of Ali Ibn Ubaida ar Raihani\n\n\n_PAHLAVI RUSHNAI NAMEH_.\n\nWe spoke above about the Arabic writer Ali ibn Ubayd ar Rayhani who was\nprone to Persian cultural tradition in general and to the literary\ntradition in particular. Besides the ethico-didactic book, _Mehr Adar\nJushnas_, he is the reputed author of a book on Adab which has a Persian\ntitle (Fihrist 1, 119, 22 and II, 52),[1] and also another book the\ntitle of which could not be deciphered by Flugel when he edited the text\nof the Fihrist, (Fih. 119, 21). The title consists of two words which\ncan be read conjecturally as _Rushna nibik_.[2] Such a name of a book we\nknow to exist in Middle Persian literature.[3]\n\n[Footnote 1: _Kitab Adab Jawanshir_].\n\n[Footnote 2: As regards the mutilation of Persian proper names in the\nFihrist, such comparatively wellknown books as _Khuday_ Nameh appear in\nsome of the manuscripts of the Fihrist as Baktiyar Nameh instead of\n_bakhuday Nameh_; see Rosen's essay on the Translations of the Khuday\nNameh, 177.]\n\n[Footnote 3: West; Sacred Books of the East Vol. V. page 241, note 1,\nand Sacred Books of the East Vol. III, 169. [The first authority is not\nquite clear to me. The second authority is evident: \"writing which the\nglorified Roshna, son of Atur-frobag, prepared--for which he appointed\nthe name of the _Roshan Nipik_.\" Tr.] _Re_ the name of Rushen see Justi\n_Namenbuch_ 262 under the word Rozanis.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nBooks of this title in Pahlavi literature related to a variety of\nreligious problems and treated of ethicodidactic themes. The same title,\nfurther, we find in the Middle Persian literature. This is the title of\nthe wellknown book of Nasir-i-Khusrao, namely, _Rushnai Nameh_, a\nconsiderable portion of which manifests Shia and Sufistic influences and\nwhich by its nature must have been connected with ethico-didactic\nliterature.[1] It is quite possible that Ar Rayhani interested himself\nin Persian of ethics and morality literature and in Persian _Adab_ and\ngave his book the name of the 'Book Light' which treated of questions of\nthis nature. This book formed, as no doubt its author did, the uniting\nlink between the didactic Parsi clerical writings and the ethical\nliterature of Islam.\n\n[Footnote 1: GIPh Vol. II, 280.]\n\nNow reading as Rushana Nibik the title of the book of Ar Rayhani\noccurring in the Fihrist, we establish a historical fact in literature.\nNot only redactions of Persian historical books like _Khuday Nameh_ and\nthe _Ain Nameh_, not only diverse monuments of Persian ethico-didactic\nliterature but also books with Pahlavi titles appear in the index of the\nbooks of the flourishing period of Arabic literature in Fihrist. This is\na phenomenon of outstanding importance for the appreciation of the\nsignificance of Persian literary tradition in the first centuries of\nIslam.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX I\n\n_INDEPENDENT ZOROASTRIAN PRINCES OF TABARISTAN._\n\n\nIn the mountains to the south of the Caspian Sea the Persians defended\nthemselves longer than in the rest of the Empire against the Arab\ninvasion. Here the Arsacide princes had permitted the local tribes to\nrule, for these tribes were probably from the first almost independent\nand only acknowledged their paramountcy and paid tribute. They had the\ntitle of Spadhapati or in modern language _Ispehbed_ which was turned\ninto the Arabic _Isfehbed_. One of them, Gushnasp Shah, is named as a\ncontemporary of Ardashir I. It was only so late as in the time of Kawadh\nthat this king succeeded in establishing a Sasanian prince, his son\nKeyus, as Shah of Tabaristan in 530. At the death of his father he\ncontested the throne with Khusrow I, and was therefore slain by the\nlatter in 537. His son Shapur remained in Persia, and a prince of the\nArsacide house of Qaren, named Zarmihr, son of Sokhra was appointed\ngovernor. The administration of Rae, Derbend and a portion of Armenia\nwas before now entrusted to Jamasp, a son of Peroz, who was succeeded by\nhis son Narsi, while another son, Behvat, father of Surkhab became the\nancestor of the kings of Shirvan who were known as Shirvan Shahs.\nNarsi's son was Peroz, the father of Farrukhan Gilanshah, whose capital\naccordingly was Gilan and who in 643 concluded a peace with the Arabs.\n\nGil Gaubareh, the son of this prince, united, with the consent of\nYezgird the III, who could not prevent him, Gilan with Tabaristan, where\nthe dynasty of Zarmihr had come to an end. It cannot be doubted that\nSasanian princes became the governors of these territories. The sons of\nGaubareh were Daboe (660-676) and Patospan, in Pahlavi Patkospan or\ngovernor, in modern Persian Baduspan. Daboe was succeeded by his brother\nKhurshed (676-709). We possess coins struck by him in the years 706-709.\nThen came Daboe's son Ferkhan more correctly Farrukhan, the Great\n(709-722); he defeated several attempts on the part of the Moslems to\npenetrate the country. Our authorities are Tabari (vol. 2 p. 1321);\nKitaboloyun (22-8); Zahireddin (45, 10.273, 14); Mordtmann (ZDMG 19,\n494). His son Dad-Burzmihr died according to Zahireddin in 748, still\nhis son Khurshed II already struck in 734 his first coin. He was\ndefeated by the Arabs and took poison which he used to carry in his\nsignet ring in 759.\n\nThe Masmoghan or the \"priest-prince,\" the successor of Zarathustrotema\nof Ragha or modern Rai, who had his seat in the city of Demawend or the\nCastle of Ustunavend, and who was the son-in-law of the Ispehbed, was\ndefeated and the daughters of both the princes were married to members\nof the house of Abbas.\n\nThe descendants of the Badusepan, whom Zahireddin carefully traces in\nall the branches of the family, ruled over Ruyan, Rustamdar, Nur and\nKujur, down to the year 1453, when they divided themselves into two\nbranches which continued to reign till 1567, and 1576.\n\nAnother dynasty was the mountain rulers of Qaren, which is named after\nits founder. The first Qaren was the son of Sokhra, the brother of\nZarmihr. These princes were also styled _Ispehbeds_. A descendant of\nQaren was Vindad-Hormizd, who in conjunction with Shervin I of the house\nof Bavend, and with the Badusepan, Shahriyar I, conquered the Arabs in\n783, but subsequently surrendered himself to Hadi and went to Baghdad\ntill the latter became Khalif in 785. There is some confusion in the\nchronology of this dynasty also. A few rulers appear to be wanting\nbecause between the beginning of the dynasty in 565 to its close in 839\nthe average reign of the six princes would come to 45 or 46 years.\nMaziyar, son of Qaren, and grandson of Vindad-Hurmizd was at first\ndefeated by Shahryar the son of Shervin of the Bavend dynasty and took\nrefuge with the Khalif Mamun in 816-17, and returned after the victory\nover Musa Ibn Hafs in 825 but was himself worsened by the Arabs in 839\nand executed. Thereupon Tabaristan came into the power of the Tahirides,\nthe nominal governors of the Khalif in Khorasan. Our authorities are\nBeladhori 134, 14; Masudi 7, 137; Kitab ol Oyun 399, 6; Yaqut 3, 284, 4.\n506, 10; Abulfida 2, 212, 2.\n\nThe Bavend dynasty is a continuation of the Masmughans. Their original\nancestor Bav who is characterised as son of Shahpur, son of Kayos,\nreceived from Khusraw II the governorship of Istakhr, Adharbaijan and\nTabaristan, but retired himself into a fire-temple in the time of queen\nAzarmidukht. When the Arabs in 655 had advanced to the vicinity of Amul,\nthe Mazenderanis invited him to lead them and he was the founder of the\nBavend dynasty called after him. Now Bav was killed by Valash in 679,\nwho did not belong to the dynasty and it was only 8 years later on that\nthe son of Bav, Suhrab, more correctly Surkhab, came to the throne. With\nthe last potentate of this first line of the Bavends was united by\nmarriage the house of Ziyar which produced two celebrated princes of\nGurgan, Vashmgir and Qabus. The other line, the \"mountain kings\" proper,\nsprang from a son of the last prince of the first line and was\nextinguished with the murder of Rustum by Sayed Husain in 1210. A third\noffshoot originating from a collateral branch of the second enjoyed\nprincely power from 1237-1349.\n\nThe Arabs had their governors in Tabaristan who in the first period\nminted coins with Sasanian impress and with Pahlavi legends; they were,\nhowever, from time to time expelled by the people. These coins struck by\nthe Arabs after the model of the Pahlavi mintage were first deciphered\nby Olshausen. Ibn Khaldun is compelled to admit that \"the Arabs are of\nall the people the least capable to govern a country.\"\n\n[Translated from Justi's contribution to _Grunddrisder der iranischen\nPhilologie_. Vol. II, p. 547 seq.--G.K.N.]\n\nTo the above concise sketch of the history of Tabaristan for the period\nwhich concerns us, which I have translated from Justi, one of the most\nsympathetic writers on Iran, a few paras may be added from the\nfascinating history of _Ibn-Isfandiyar_ which professor Browne has made\naccessible to us.\n\nLong after the Sasanian dynasty had fallen, and the rest of Persia had\nbeen subdued by the Arabs the Ispahabeds continued to strike their\nPahlavi coinage and maintained the religion of Zoroaster in the\nmountains and forests of Tabaristan; and their struggles with the Arabs\nonly ended about A.D. 838 by the capture and cruel execution of the\ngallant Maziyar, son of Qaren, son of Wanda-Hurmuz. For a vivid\nportrayal of the last days of this unfortunate scion of the lost empire\nof the Iranians the reader is referred to the vivid page of this English\nauthority, who has reproduced the story of Zoroastrian aggressions in\nall its original spirit. And nothing less could be expected from a\nprofound and sympathetic scholar to whom \"All that concerns Maziyar is\nof supreme interest because it stands for the old Persian national and\nreligious ideal\". (p. XII). Those who still hold in the teeth of\nhistorical fact that the empire and religion of Iran were overturned at\none fell stroke by the ferocious Arabs may be referred to the alliance\nbetween the Ispahbed Shirvin and Windad-Hurmuz which brought it about\nthat from one end to the other of a large track of country, \"without\ntheir permission no one dared enter the highlands from the plains, and\nall the highlands were under their control. _And when a Moslem died they\nwould not suffer him to be buried in that country_\". (p. 131). [italics\nmine, G.K.N.]\n\nI will not further quote at length from this volume as it is in\nEnglish but I cannot resist the temptation to call attention to page\n146, which supplies a typical instance of conversion by persuasion and\nnot persecution. Further note that the Khalif Mamun had a Zoroastrian\nastrologer whose Zoroastrian name the Khalif arabicised into Yahya ibn\nMansur (p. 146). Though Maziyar outwardly embraced Islam he was probably\nin secret a Zoroastrian inasmuch as he continued to have a large Magian\nfollowing and \"conferred various offices and distinctions on Babak,\nMazdak, and other Magians _who ordered the Muhammadan mosque to be\ndestroyed and all trace of Islam to be removed_.\" (p. 152-3). [Italics\nmine, G.K.N.] The Khalif Al-Muatasim was no less lenient in matters\nreligious than some of the _Khulfa i rashidin._ In the year 854-55 he\ndeputed one of his nobles to bid a Zoroastrian chieftain \"break his\nMagian girdle and embrace Islam, which he did and thereupon received a\nrobe of honour from the Khalif.\" (p. 157). At page 157 we notice the\nextortionate practices of a Magian.\n\nPARSI PRINCES DURING KHALIFAT.\n\n\"In the time of the Arabs we find an actual principality whose ruler\nbore the title of _Masimogan_ or the elder of the Magians. To him also\nbelonged the cities of Wima and Shalamba (Istakhri 209; Ibn Khurdadbeh\n118; Ibn-al Faqih 284) as well as the territory of Khwar. [Magian\nprinces during Khalifat (Tabari 12,656).]\n\n\"The first definite mention of the _Masmoghan_ occurs in the year 131\nA.H., in which Abu Muslim called upon the former to surrender and as he\ndeclined despatched Musa Ibn Kaab against him who however failed to\neffect anything against him. (Ibn al Athir vol. 5,304). It was only\nunder Mamun that the mountainous country of the _Masmoghan_ was\nsubjugated. The last prince, whose brother Aparwez fought on side of the\nArabs, was taken prisoner and confined with his two daughters in the\nmountain fastness of Ustunawand in 141 A.H. (Tabari Vol. 2, 137).\n\n\"The exact time of the rise of this principality is unknown. For the\n_Masmoghan_ Mardanshah who is mentioned by Saif in a treaty with Suwaid\nMukarrin under Omar (Tabari 1, 2656), belongs positively to the time of\nMuhallab, 98 A.H. I surmise, however, that the Dynasty of the Magian\nBaw, the father of the renegade Mahgundat, whose Christian name was\nAnstasious, who became a martyr to Christianity in 628, originated from\nthe village of Warznin in the territory of Rai (Acta Anstasii Persae, p.\n26 & 56), and is connected with the Bawend dynasty which appeared just\nat this place in 167, and is definitely traced to the Magian Baw. (The\nauthorities for the above are Tabari vol. 3, 1295 and Zahirud-din 205,\nsee also ZDMG 49, 661.)\n\n\"Baw is a pure Magian name and is a transcription of the Avesta _Bangha_\n(Yesht 13,124). Another transliteration of the same word is Bohak, a\nname borne by a hero of Ispahan who with his six sons and an army joined\nArdeshir (_Karnamak_ 4, 3, p. 22-19; Neoleke 46). It was also the name\nof a son of Hobakht, the chief _Mobed_ under Shapur II. Bahak, son of\nFredon, was the ancestor of Aturpat Mahraspand (Bundahesh 33; West\nPahlavi Texts 1, 145). Another form of the same name is B[=a]we, who was\nthe _Astabed_ or _magister officiorum_ of the Persians (Josua Stylite\ned. Wright 59). The first ruler of the Bawend dynasty who enters history\nis Sharwin ibn Surkhab (Tabari 3, 519). By the Arabs he was at first\nmade a vassal controlling the slopes of the Alburz (Ibn al Faqih 304;\nYakut 3, 283), and probably assumed the title _Padashkhwargar-shah_\nwhich his descendants continued to hold in the time of al Beruni\n(_Chronology,_ p. XL, No. 7). In Yakubi (vol. 2, 479) he even bears the\ntitle of King of Tokharistaxi. After him is named Mount Sherwin on the\nboundary of Komish (Tabari 3, 1275; Ibn al Fakih 305; Belazuri 339, 7).\nIn the year 201, that is, A.D. 816-17, however, the governor of\nTabaristan, Abdallah Ibn Khurdadbeh, the father of the historian and\ngeographer, invaded Larijan and Sarijan and annexed them to the empire\nof Islam. He likewise conquered the mountain land of Tabaristan and\ncompelled Shahryar, the son of Sherwin, to surrender (Tabari 3, 1014).\n\n\"But after the death of Shahryar, in 825-26, Maziyar Ibn Qaren contested\nthe kingdom with his son Shapur and in alliance with the Moslems invaded\nMount Sherwin, captured the sons of Shahryar and put them to death.\n(Tabari 3, 1093, Belazuri 339 and Ibn al Fakih 309.) However, a son of\nShahryar named Qaren who had been detained at the court of Maziyar later\non joined the Arabs and after the fall of Maziyar was restored to his\npaternal estate.\n\n\"As regards the Avesta expression _Ragha Zarathushtrish_ in the Yasna 9,\n18, it refers to political conditions of a much anterior age not yet\nreached by our historical investigations.\"\n\n[Translated from Marquarts, _Eranshahr_, p. 127 _seq_-G.K.N.]\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX II\n\n_IRANIAN MATERIAL IN MAHASIN WAL MASAVI AND MAHASIN WAL AZDAD_.\n\n\nProfessor Inostranzev gives a list of passages of Iranian interest which\nare to be found in the _Mahasin-wal masawi_ and in the _Mahasin wal\nazdad_ giving references to pages in the European editions.\nUnfortunately I have not been able to procure the latter and cannot\nverify the allusions. I, however, reproduce below the Iranian subjects\ntouched upon in these two Arabic books on _adab_ in the Cairo editions.\n\nIranian material from the Mahasin-wal masawi, Part I, p. 1. A dictum of\nBuzarjmahir.\n\nP. 82, A story of King Kobad.\n\nP. 96, A story of Anushirwan, \"the wisest of men of his time in Persia\".\n\nP. 110, A story of King Ardeshir.\n\nP. 122, Reference to a custom of the Persian kings and a story of\nYazdajard.\n\nIranian material from the Mahasin-wal masawi Part II.\n\nP. 62, A story about Shiruya, son of Aberwez.\n\nP. 74, A dictum of the Persians on eloquence.\n\nP. 75, A story about Buzarjmahir.\n\nP. 123, A story about Anushirwan.\n\nP. 125, A story about King Kobad and a MOBED.\n\nP. 131, A story of Anushirwan.\n\nP. 133, A dictum of Buzarjmahir.\n\nP. 154, A story of Hurmuz, son of Anushirwan.\n\nP. 155, A story of Bahramgor.\n\nP. 155, A story of the sense of justice of King Anushirwan.\n\nP. 166, A story of Anushirwan.\n\nP. 169, Reference to a ZAND book in connection with Islam.\n\nP. 170, A story of an Arab who acted as interpreter in Arabic to a\nPersian King.\n\nP. 178, A story as narrated by Kisrawi about Kisra, son of Hormuz.\n\nP. 178, Reference to a Majus or Zoroastrian.\n\nP. 194, A story of Shiruya, son of Kisra.\n\nP, 199, A quotation from Ibn-ul Muqaffa.\n\nP. 203, The story of Sabur-zul-aktaf.\n\nIRANIAN MATERIAL IN THE MAHASIN-WAL-AZDAD.\n\nP. 14, Story of King Abarwez.\n\nP. 17, Story of the Kisra.\n\nP. 35, Quotation from al Kisrawi, relating a story about Kisra, son of\nHormuz. In this story the unfortunate general Afshin, the governor of\nAshrushna, is plainly designated a _Majus_ or Zoroastrian.\n\nP. 51, A dictum of Bahramgor.\n\nP. 51, The conversation between the MOBEDAN MOBED and King Aberwez.\n\nP. 51, Reference to the book of \"our\" (Zoroastrian) religion _(Kitab\ndin-na)._\n\nP. 110, Reference to an inscription on a stone slab discovered in the\ntreasury of a Persian king.\n\nP. 163, The story of Balash as narrated by Kisrawi, (on this story Baron\nRosen bases his investigation of the Pahlavi _Khodaynama_.)\n\nP. 168, An anecdote of King Aberwez.\n\nProfessor Inostranzev finds the following Iranian material in the\nMahasin-wal masavi and the Mahasin-wal azdad (MM=Mahasin-wal Masavi, and\nMA=Mahasin wal-azdad):\n\nMA, 21,  4 to 10--MM, 490,  2 to  7.\nMA, 37, 12 to 14--MM, 128, 11 to 12.\nMA, 53, 14 to 16--MM, 571,  1 to  3.\nMA, 78,  5 to  9--MM, 202,  2 to  5.\nMA, 79,  2 to  6--MM, 202, 14 to 16.\nMA, 79,  6 to 11--MM, 202, 16 to 203, 2.\nMA, 168,20 to  3--MM, 310, 16 to 18.\nMA, 170, 2 to  3--MM, 313,  7 to  8.\nMA, 173, 8 to 16--MM, 372, 11 to 18.\n\n\nIn connection with the importance of Kisrawi as regards the Persian\nliterary material, these are the extracts from him in the two Arabic\nworks:\n\nMA, 168, 20 to 269, 3--MM, 310, 16 to 18.\nMA,  53, 14 to     16--MM, 571,  1 to  3.\nMA, 359, 13 to 364, 6--MM, 376,  1 to  9.\n\nIn view of the remarks by Browne (_Literary History_,471 to 475)\nregarding the significance of Persian words and expressions in the\nancient Arabic literary works for the history of the Persian language,\nof particular importance are the excerpts from Kisrawi, MA 168,20 to\n269, 3--MM, 310, 16 to 18, where occur Persian phrases from the maxims\nof Anushirwan \"which as I think have been handed down to us in pure\nPahlavi.\" Interesting is the interpretation of the Persian word _Mihman_\nat another place in the same Arabic books, _viz_:--MA, 79, 6 to 11=MM,\n202, 16 to 203, 2.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX III\n\n[Translation of Noeldeke's _Burzoe's Einleitung zu dem Buche Kalila wa\nDimna_.]\n\n_BURZOE'S INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF KALILA WA DIMNA._\n\n\n[Sidenote: Burzoe's Introduction not fabricated.]\n\nThe Arabic redaction of the Indian tales which we know under the name of\n_Kalila wa Dimna_ had two unquestionably genuine Introductions, that of\nthe compilator Ibn Moqaffa himself who died in 142 A.H., and that of\nBurzoe who in the time of King Khusrow I, (A.D. 531 to 579) brought the\nbook from India and translated it into the written Persian language of\nthe time, the Pehlevi. The circumstances regarding the mission of Burzoe\nto India are still not clear. At any rate Ibn Moqaffa did not write as\nwe read them now.\n\nNevertheless it is by no means improbable that he had affixed to his\nbook a report which, however, wan subsequently mutilated, of necessity,\nin diverse ways. The preface by Ala-ibn-Shah or Behbod, which has also\nbeen printed by de Sacy, which is found in a few manuscripts and which\nis not known to the ancient translations is a later and entirely\nvalueless excrescence.\n\nThe Introduction of Burzoe stood in the Pehlevi work which Ibn Moqaffa\nhad before him. According to certain manuscripts this Introduction has\nbeen compiled--or however we translate the ambiguous term _tarjuma_--by\nBurzgmihir, the prime minister of Khusrow, much better known in polite\nliterature than in history.\n\n[Naturally I do not deny altogether that Burzgmihir was a historical\npersonage but he possessed by no means the importance which the\ntradition in question ascribes to him. The ascription is purely an\nerroneous inference from the above-mentioned report of the\ncircumstances touching the mission of Burzoe, has not the slightest\ninherent probability, and is besides wanting not only in other\nmanuscripts but also in all the older translations.]\n\nWe cannot question the fact that this section of the Arabic work in the\nmain reproduces the Introduction composed by the Chief physician Burzoe\nhimself to the book translated by him into Pehlevi from an Indian\nlanguage. That language as Hertel has shown was Sanskrit, which fact,\nhowever, does not preclude the possibility of an Indian interpreter\ntranslating the original text to the Persian who spoke a modern Indian\ntongue. Several passages speak to the fact that the author of the\nIntroduction is the physician. Why should Ibn Moqaffa pretend that\nBurzoe earnestly studied medicine and practised it? Moreover, the\nsection is familiar with those principles of Indian medicine of which\nIbn Moqaffa could otherwise know little and the exposition of which he\nhad no call to deal with. The entire situation seems to me to harmonise\nwith the circumstances of the Persian physician. Specially noteworthy is\nthe encomium on the Persian sovereign.\n\n[Sidenote: Ibn Moqaffa took liberties with the Pehlevi.]\n\nThis is, however, not equivalent to saying that the Arabic text is an\nexact replica, down to details, of the original of Burzoe. In the first\nplace it has to be observed that Ibn Moqaffa was no pure translator at\nall but a regular redactor of his model. His object was to prepare a\nwork suitable to the taste of his highly educated readers and at the\nsame time entertaining and instructive. He proceeded, therefore, not\nonly with a tolerably free hand as an artist in words but added good\nmany things of his own. Above all here we have to bear in mind the trial\nof Dimna. That this chapter is an addition by a Muslim who would not let\npass in silence the acknowledgement of clever but demeaning intrigue was\nalready recognised by Benfey and we need not doubt but that it\noriginated with Ibn Moqaffa. I would also claim, for Ibn Moqaffa the\nsomewhat unimportant history of the anchorite and his guest. The manner\nof his narrative we learn from his own preface. It is especially to be\nnoted that here also as in the trial of Dimna he recounts anecdotes\nafter the Indian fashion.\n\n[Sidenote: Ibn Moqaffa's religious scepticism.]\n\nIt is accordingly not impossible that in our Burzoe chapter there are a\nfew things which have originated not with the Persian physician of old\nbut with Ibn Moqaffa; and this, I presume, as I showed long ago,\nspecially from the disquisition on enquiry into the uncertainty of\nreligions. It appears much more to fit in with Ibn Moqaffa than Burzoe.\n\nIbn Moqaffa exchanged the religion of his Persian fathers for Islam only\nin his mature years,--certainly not because he saw in the latter perfect\nverity but because probably he was not satisfied with Zoroastrianism\nwith which he was intimately familiar or with any of the other religions\nwhich in his time flourished openly or in secret in Iraq which was \"the\nheart of the Empire\". To such a man the scepticism of our section is\nnatural, a fact which does not make it impossible that certain\nprinciples which were common to all the religions intimately known to\nthe author remained also self-evident to Ibn Moqaffa,--such as God as\nthe Creator, and the next world with its reward and penalties. Had Ibn\nMoqaffa, in his own name confessed to such religious doubts publicly no\npatron could have saved him from capital punishment. On the other hand\nhe ran no risk in ascribing the questionable exposition to the Persian\nlong since dead, who, however, supposing that he harboured such doubts\ncould not have given expression to them as a physician attached to the\nImperial Court of Persia. The belief in an inexorable fate which is\nevident in this chapter as well as in the entire portion attributable to\nIbn Moqaffa could have been cherished, no doubt, also by a Mazdyasnian.\nThis doctrine, therefore, speaks neither for nor against the authorship\nof Ibn Moqaffa. Equally far from decisive is the exhortation to pure\nmorality which finds expression there.\n\nI am confirmed in my view that the passage on the unconvincing nature of\nreligions proceeded from Ibn Moqaffa by a few couplets in the\n_Shahnama_. (Mohl vol. 5, 53 ff; Macan 1293). The king of India called\nKaid has several dreams which are interpreted to him by the sage Mihran.\nThe third dream, about four men pulling at a fine piece of cloth, each\ntowards himself, without tearing it, is thus explained by him:\n\n\"Know that the piece of cloth is the religion divine end that the four\nmen who pull at it have come to preserve it. One of the religions is\nthat of the Dihkans, the fire-worshippers, who may not take in hand the\nBarsom without pronouncing the prayer formula.\n\n\"[The Dihkans were properly speaking the small landed nobility of the\nSasanian times and as such were representatives of the ancient Persian\nreligion; _barsom_ and the prayer formula or _baz_ are well-known\ncomponents of their ritual.]\n\n\"Another religion is that of Moses, which is called the Jewish religion,\nmaintaining that none besides itself is worthy of praise; the third\nreligion is of Greece, belongs to men of piety and brings equity to the\nheart of princes (this is Christianity). The fourth is the pure faith of\nthe Arab which raises the head of the intelligent out of dust. Thus they\nstruggle for the preservation of their religion and pull the cloth\ntowards the four sides away from each other and become enemies for the\nsake of religion.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Ibn Moqaffa no sincere Muslim]\n\nThis passage the basic principle of which accords with the reflections\non religion in our chapter I would now with greater positiveness than\nbefore trace to Ibn Moqaffa (ZDMG 59, 803). It did not find a place in\nthe old Pehlevi \"_Book of Kings_\" because the latter could recognise\nonly the national religion as the right one and could not have taken\ninto consideration Islam, even supposing that the last redaction of the\nofficial Sasanian history took place at a time when Muhammadanism had\nalready come into existence. But Firdausi did not at all invent the\nmaterial of his narrative. He merely compiled it and the major portion\nof the compilation goes back to the shape which Ibn Moqaffa had given to\nthe ancient tradition (see what I have to say on this in my National\nEpic of Iran, _Grundriss der iran philogie_). In actuality Ibn Moqaffa\nwas not believed to be a sincere Muslim. He is frequently stigmatised as\nZindik or heretic (See _Aghani_ 13.81, 18 ff. 18, 200, 25 ff. Ibn\nQotaiba, _Uyun_ 71, 9; further Ibn Khallikan 186, p. 125.)\n\n[The term zindiq probably originally denoted a certain rank among the\nManichaeians or a similar religion and was then applied to suit a\nvariety of infidels. The etemology, Aramaic Zaddiqy, has been recognised\nby Bevan.]\n\nAgain the passage does not fit in with the tenor of the entire section.\nFor Burzoe who was at a loss with regard to the physician's art, the\nmain question is, whether he should or should not become an ascetic,--a\nquestion which must concern Ibn Moqaffa but little. The suitability of\nthe addenda hardly admits of proof but we may state that Ibn Moqaffa did\nnot simply interpolate but wove them artfully in his text and he might\nhave omitted something here and there.\n\n[Sidenote: Burzoe influenced by Buddhism]\n\nIt seems to me highly probable that Burzoe allowed himself to be\ninfluenced by the Buddhist romance, the original of which has perished\nand the best representative of which, is preserved to us in the Arabic\n_Bilauhar wa Budasf_ (See _Barlaam und Joasaph_ by E. Kuhn). Many a\npassage of our chapter is strongly reminiscent of the sentences of the\nromance, for instance, the dangers to the body remind one of those\nrelated at p. 53; the four principles or _akhalat_ appear at p. 9, and\nthe parable of the man in the well is common to both. The parable which\nstands at the close of the chapter is, unless one is greatly mistaken,\ndirectly taken from the romance with little modification. It stands in\nthe whole of _Kalila wa Dimna_ isolated, deviates in manner and tendency\nentirely from the story and also from what has issued from Ibn Moqaffa\nbut is consistent with the monastic predilections of Burzoe. And his\nappraisement of the life of the recluse does not appear spontaneous but\nsomething to which he has laboriously compelled himself. One may surmise\nthat it was really alive only in India. How far it was practised in\nactual life must remain unproved. We must not omit to mention that\nBurzoe points out that for an ideal physician his art earns also rich\nearthly profits.\n\n[Sidenote: English translation of the Introduction a desideratum.]\n\nSo far as I know, of this chapter there is no translation in a European\nlanguage except in the English by Knatchbull which appeared in 1819,\nwhich reproduced the imperfect text of de Sacy and is otherwise\ndefective. Wolff did well to omit it in his German translation of\n_Kalila wa Dimna_ of 1837, for he could not have produced a correct\nrendering of de Sacy's text which was not completed till 1873 by Guidi.\n\n[Sidenote: Difficulties of translation.]\n\nEven now it is impossible to make a translation of Burzoe's Introduction\nwhich can stand the test of philology. We must first see whether with\nthe use of all available manuscripts and a careful collation of other\ntext sources we cannot arrive at a tolerably settled Arabic text. And\nthat is, so far as I can conclude from my not quite insignificant\nmaterial, not very probable. At all events a searching examination of\nall the manuscripts in the great Paris library is essential. The various\ntexts of the book are considerably divergent. Arbitrariness and\ncarelessness of transcriber have disfigured Ibn Moqaffa's work of art\njust because it presently became a favourite book of entertainment. The\nlanguage at all events remains approximately correct in the manuscripts.\n\nGrammatical mistakes easy of correction are not seldom met with but pure\nvulgarisms occur only in a few copies like that of Berlin. The\nnumberless variants have not much significance for the translator when\nit is only a question of synonyms, since for them the same European\nexpression can do duty. And though it is not certain whether in the case\nof a multitude of non-essential or wholly analogous expressions the\nshorter or the extended text is the original one, that does not\nsubstantially affect the translation. There is scarcely any harm in\ncurtailing the frequent tautology of this chapter. We should be well\nadvised in case of successive synonymous abstract nouns and verbs such\nas occur frequently in Arabic to translate by a simple expression with\nan emphatic adjective or adverb. But not seldom the difference becomes\ngreat. It is a difficult situation when we are uncertain whether the\npassage which is found in several manuscripts and not in others is the\noriginal one. As a rule we have to decide in favour of the majority but\nas sometimes we do come across actual interpolations in some, so their\nexistence is not impossible in others, although we can not be positive\non the subject.\n\n[Sidenote: A monumental piece of literature.]\n\nThe matter would have been less troublesome for me had I been able\nstraight way to declare as the best the tradition of any of the\nmanuscripts familiarly known to me or any old translation. That,\nhowever, is not so. I have to judge each case by itself and to proceed\neclectically as much as my philological conscience permits. Finally, by\nmeans of my rendering I believe I have reproduced the import of this\nmonumental piece of literature without showing absolute partiality to\nthe Arabic document. My rendering is wanting doubtless in the elegance\nwith which Ibn Moqaffa handles the language which in his time had\nacquired the capacity of treating even abstract subjects with lucidity.\nMay a later hand improve upon my translation!\n\nOnly those who attempt it can appreciate how difficult it is to make a\ntolerable European translation even of an easily intelligible Arabic\ntext. A literal translation would be wooden. We have often to alter the\nentire construction and to insert all manner of words foreign to the\nArabic to make the context clear. On the other hand the translator must\navoid employing the same expression in rapid succession, a procedure\nwhich is common in Arabic even if we make allowance for the _figura\netymologica_ and the like.\n\n[Sidenote: Ibn Qutaiba and Ibn Moqaffa.]\n\nI only know two passages in this chapter which are quoted by Arabic\nauthors. Brockelmann informs me that no quotation from our chapter\noccurs in the unpublished portion of the _Uyun_ of Ibn Qutaiba. Unless I\nam mistaken the excerpts in this book from _Kalila wa Dimna_ are not\nalways correct. Ibn Qutaiba was concerned more with the sense than with\nthe phraseology of Ibn Moqaffa.\n\n\n\n\nTHE STATEMENT OF BURZOE THE PERSIAN PHYSICIAN IN CHIEF,\n\nWho undertook to transcribe and translate this Indian Book (Kalila wa\nDimna).\n\n\n[Sidenote: Autobiographical.]\n\nMy father belonged to the Warrior class, my mother came of an eminent\npriestly family. One of the earliest boons which the Lord conferred on\nme was that I was the most favourite child of my parents and that they\nexerted themselves more for my education than for my brothers. So when I\nwas seven years old they sent me to a children's school.\n\n[This was required to be mentioned in his case inasmuch as it could not\nhave been necessary or usual for a child of distinguished parentage in\nearly Persia to be educated in a public school.]\n\nWhen I had learnt the ordinary writing I was thankful to my parents and\nperceived something in knowledge.\n\n[In spite of the wide divergence in the Arabic texts and translations\nthe sense of the original is clear. Note the reference to the difficult\nnature of the Pehlevi syllabary. Only the Spanish version has a good\ndeal more about the schooling.]\n\n[Sidenote: Appreciation of the healing art.]\n\nAnd the first branch of science to which I felt inclination was\nmedicine. It had a great attraction for me because I recognised its\nexcellence and the more I acquired it the more I loved it and the more\nearnestly I studied it. Now when I had progressed sufficiently far to\nthink of treating invalids I took counsel with myself and reflected in\nthe following manner on the four objects for which mankind so earnestly\nstrive. \"Which of them shall I seek to acquire with the help of my art,\nmoney, prosperity, fame, or reward in the next world\"? In the choice of\nmy calling the decisive factor was my experience that men of\nunderstanding praise medicine and that the adherents of no religion\ncensure it. I found, however, in medical literature that the best\nphysician is he who by his devotion to his vocation strives only after a\nreward in the next world; and I resolved to act accordingly and not to\nthink of worldly gain, so that I may not be likened to the merchant who\nsold for a worthless bead a ruby by which he could have acquired a world\nof wealth. On the other hand, I found in the books of the ancients that\nwhen a physician strives after the reward in the next world by means of\nhis art he thereby forfeits no fraction of his worldly guerdon but that\ntherein he is to be compared with the peasant who carefully sows his\nplot of ground to acquire corn and who subsequently without further\neffort gets along with the harvest all manner of vegetation.\n\n[The cultivator along with the harvest gets grass and vegetation which\nmay serve as a pasture for cattle.]\n\n[Sidenote: Burzoe starts practice.]\n\nI, therefore, directed my attention to the hope of securing recompense\nin the next world by curing the sick and was at considerable pains in\nthe treatment of all the deceased whom I hoped to cure and even such as\nwere past all such hopes, whose suffering I endeavoured at least to\nalleviate. I personally attended those I could; but where this was not\npossible I gave the patients the necessary instructions and also sent\nmedicine. And from none of those whom I so treated did I demand payment\nor other return. I was jealous of none of my colleagues who was my\nequal in knowledge and who excelled me in repute and riches; although as\na matter of fact he was lacking in equity and good manners. When,\nhowever, my soul felt inclined to impel me to be jealous of such and to\nbe covetous of a situation like his I met it with severity in the\nfollowing manner:--\n\n[Sidenote: Burzoe addresses his own soul. The physician's arduous\ncalling.]\n\n[Sidenote: A simile.]\n\nO soul, dost not thou differentiate between what is useful and what is\ninjurious to thee? Dost thou not cease wishing for the acquisition of\nthat which secures for every one a small gain but which entails severe\nexertion and privation and which, when he must at last relinquish it,\nprocures him much sorrow and severe punishment in the next world? O\nsoul, thinkest thou not of that which succeeds this life and forgettest\nit because of thy avarice for the things of this world? Art thou not\nashamed to live the evanescent terrestrial life in the company of men of\nfeeble intellect and fools? It belongs not to him even who has something\nof it in his hand: it does not endure with him and only the infatuated\nand the negligent depend upon it. Desist from this irrationality and\nbend all thy might, so long as in thee lies, to exert thyself for the\ngood and for divine recompense. Beware of procrastination. Reflect on\nthe fact that our body is destined to all manner of unhappiness and\npermeated with the four perishable and impure principles which are\nenclosed in it, which struggle against each other, defeating each other\nby turn, and thus support life which itself is transient. Life is like a\nstatue with several limbs. When properly adjusted each in its right\nplace, they hold themselves together on a single pivot but which, when\nthe latter is taken off, fall to pieces. O soul, do not deceive thyself\nowing to intercourse with friends and companions and do not strain\nthyself after it, inasmuch as this intercourse brings no doubt joy but\nalso much hardship and tribulation and finally ends in separation. It is\nlike a ladle which men use for hot soup, so long as it is new but when\nit breaks they have done with it--burn it. O soul, allow not thyself to\nbe moved by family and relations to amass property for them so that\nthyself should perish. Thou shouldst, then, be like fragrant incense\nwhich is burnt only for the enjoyment of others. They are like a hair\nwhich men cherish so long as it remains on the head but cast it off as\nimpure as soon as it falls. O soul, be steadfast in treating the\ndiseased and give it not up because thou findest that the physician's\nprofession is arduous and people do not recognise its uses and high\nvalue. Judge only thyself whether a man who cures in another a disease\nmaking him feel once more fresh and whole is not worthy of a great\nreward and handsome remuneration. This is the case with one who has\nsolicitude for a single individual; how much more then is this so in the\ncase of a medicineman who for meed in the next world thus acts towards\na, large number of men, so that they after torturing pains and maladies,\nwhich shut them out from the enjoyment of the world, from food and\ndrink, wife and child, feel once more as well as ever before. Who indeed\nmerits larger reward and nobler retribution? O soul, do not put away\nfrom thy sight things of the next world because thou hungerest after\npassing life. For thou, in thy haste to acquire a triviality\nsurrenderest the valuable; and such people are in the position of the\nmerchant who had a house full of aloe wood and who said, \"If I were to\nsell this by weight it would take me too long\" and therefore gave it\naway wholesale for a trifling price.\n\n[Sidenote: Autobiographical]\n\nAfter thus I had replied to my soul and thereby explained matters to it\nand guided it aright it could not deviate from truth, yielded to\nrighteousness and abandoned what it was inclined to. Accordingly I\ncontinued to treat the sick for the sake of my reward in the next world.\nThis, however, by no means prevented my acquiring a rich portion of\nearthly goods before my journey to India as well as after my return from\nthe kings, and that was more than I was ambitious of or had hoped for,\nfor a man in my position and my calling.\n\n[Sidenote: Limitations of the healing art.]\n\nThereafter I again reflected on the healing art and found that the\nphysician can employ no remedy for a suffering patient which so\ncompletely cures his disease that it does not attack him again or that\nhe is immune from a worse disorder. While, therefore, I was unaware how\nI could effect a perfect cure secure against the recurrence of a\ndisease, I saw that on the other hand acknowledge of the next world was\na permanent absolute protection against all distempers. Accordingly I\nconceived a contempt for the healing art and a longing for religious\nknowledge.\n\n[Sidenote: Uncertainty of religious Verity.]\n\n[Sidenote: Burzoe inquires of religious heads on matters divine: his\ndisappointment.]\n\nWhen, however, this occurred to my mind it was not clear to me how\nmatters stood with reference to religion. I found nothing in the\nwritings on pharmacy which indicated to me the truest religion. So far\nas I saw there were many religions and creeds and their adherents were\nagain disunited. Some inherit their religion from their fathers; others\nare compelled to adhere to it by fear and pressure; others again aim at\nworldly advantages, enjoyments and renown. Everyone claims for himself\nthe possession of the true and right faith and denounces that of others\nas false and erroneous. Their views on the world and other problems are\nentirely conflicting yet each despises the other, is inimical to and\ncensures every other creed. I then resolved to turn to the learned and\nleaders of every religions community with a view to examining their\ndoctrines and precepts in order possibly to learn to distinguish between\nverity and nullity and implicity to give my adhesion to the former\nwithout altogether accepting as true what I did not understand. So I\nanalysed, investigated and observed, but I found that all those people\nonly held before me traditional notions. Each landed his faith and\nreviled that of others. It was, therefore, evident to me that their\nconclusions rested on mere imagination and that they did not speak with\nimpartiality. In none did I find such fairness and integrity that\nreasonable people could accept their dicta and declare themselves\nsatisfied with them. When I perceived this it was impossible for me to\nfollow any one of the religions and recognised that if I put faith in\none of them of which I knew nothing I should fare like the betrayed\nbeliever in the following story.\n\n[Sidenote: Anecdote of the credulous burglar.]\n\nOnce upon a time a thief set out at night and along with his companions\ngot up on to the roof of the house of a man of opulence. As they entered\nthey awoke the owner who noticed them and perceived that at that hour\nthey were on the roof with evil intent. He awoke his wife and gently\nsaid to her, \"I see that up on the top of our roof there are thieves. I\nwill pretend to sleep, wake me up in a voice loud enough to be heard by\nthose on the roof and say to me, 'My husband, do tell me how you came by\nso much wealth and property.' When I make no reply whatever ask me very\npressingly again.\" The woman accordingly asked him as she was ordered so\nthat the house-breakers heard it all. The man replied, \"My wife, luck\nhas led you to great prosperity, so eat and drink, keep quiet and do not\nask about it, because if I told it to you, some one would easily hear it\nand get something by it, which neither of us would like.\" She, however,\npersisted, \"But my husband, do tell me, surely there is no one here to\noverhear us.\" \"Well then, I will tell you that I have acquired all this\nwealth and goods by theft.\" \"How did you manage it, when in the eye of\nthe people you are still irreproachably honest and no one suspects you?\"\n\"By means of an artifice in the science of thieving: it is so handy and\neasy that no one can have any suspicion whatever.\" \"How so?\" \"I used to\nmanage this way: On a moonlight night I would go out with my companions,\nget up to the roof of the house of the person I wanted to rob as far as\nthe sky light through which the moon shone and then uttered seven times\nthe charm _Sholam Sholam Sholam_. I would then embrace the rays and\nslide down into the house without any body noticing my intrusion. Then\nat the other extremity of the moon-beams I again would seven times\nrepeat the magic word and all the money and treasures in the house\nbecame visible to me. I could take of them whatever I would. Once more I\nwould embrace the beams and rehearsing again seven times the magic word\nmount up to my companions and load them with all I had. Next we stole\naway unscathed.\"\n\nWhen the robbers overheard this they rejoiced exceedingly and said: \"In\nthis house we have got a spoil which is more valuable to us than the\ngold which we can get there; we have acquired a means by which God\ndelivers us from fear and we are secure against the authorities.\" So\nthey watched for a long time and when they had made sure that the master\nof the house and his wife had gone to sleep the leader of the robbers\nstepped up to the spot where the light streamed through the hole, spoke\nSholam Sholam seven times, clasped the rays with the intention of\ndropping down along them and fell head foremost on the floor. The\nhusband sprang to his feet with a club and thrashed him to a jelly\nasking him, \"Who are you?\" And he replied, \"The deceived believer: this\nis the fruit of blind faith.\"\n\n[Sidenote: More religious investigation and more despair.]\n\n[Sidenote: A dilemma.]\n\nAccordingly, after I had grown sufficiently circumspect not to credit\nwhat might probably lead to my perdition, I started again investigating\nreligions to discover the true one. But I again found no reply whenever\nI put questions to any one and when a doctrine was propounded to me I\nfound nothing which in my judgment merited belief or served me as a\nguiding principle. Then I said, \"The most reasonable course is to cling\nto the religion in which I found my fathers.\" Yet when I sought\njustification for this course I found none and said to myself, \"If that\nbe justification then the sorcerer also had one who found his\nprogenitors to be wizards.\" And I thought of the man who ate indecently\nand when he was rebuked for it he excused himself by saying that his\nancestors used to feed in the same gross way. Since, therefore, it was\nimpossible for me to keep to the religion of my forbears and since I\ncould find no justification for it, I desired once more earnestly to\nbestir myself and most carefully to examine the various religions and to\nconsider minutely what they had to offer us. But then suddenly the idea\nstruck me that the end was near and that the world would presently come\nto a close for me. Thereupon I pondered as follows:--\n\n[Sidenote: Meditation of despair.]\n\nPerhaps the hour of my departure has already arrived before I could\nwring my hands. My deeds were once still such that I could hope they\nwere meritorious. Now perhaps the prolonged hesitation over my search\nand investigation would turn me away from the good deeds which I\npractised formerly, so that my end would not be such as I strove for,\nand owing to my wavering and vacillation the fate of the man in the\nfollowing anecdote would overtake me.\n\n[Sidenote: An anecdote: fatal hesitation.]\n\nA certain man had a love affair with a married woman. She had made for\nhim a subterraneous passage opening into the street and its entrance was\nconstructed close by a water jar. This she did for fear lest her husband\nor some one else should surprise her. Now one day when her paramour was\nwith her word was brought that the husband was standing at the door. The\nlover hastened to get behind the jar but it had been removed by some one\nso he came to the woman and said, \"I went to the passage but the jar of\nwhich you spoke was not there.\" To which the woman, said \"You fool, what\nhave you got to do with the jar? I mentioned it to point to you the way\nto the passage.\" \"I could not be sure, since the jar was not near the\npassage, you should not have spoken of it to me and misled me.\" \"Now\nsave yourself, enough of your stupidity and hesitation.\" \"But how shall\nI go since you spoke to me of the jar and even now confuse me?\" Thus he\nremained there till the master of the house came up and seized hold of\nand belaboured him, and handed him over to the authorities.\n\n[Sidenote: Burzoe follows good principles common to all creeds.]\n\n[Sidenote: The properties of righteousness.]\n\nSince I was apprehensive of the risks of shilly-shallying I resolved not\nto expose myself to the danger and to confine myself entirely to such\nworks as all men regard as benevolent and which are consonant with all\nthe religions. I refrained, therefore, from assault, murder and robbery,\nand guarded myself against incontinence and my tongue from falsehood and\nall utterance calculated to harm any one, avoided the smallest\ndeception, indecency of language, falsehood, calumny and ridicule and\ntook pains that my heart wished ill of no one and that I did not\ndisbelieve in resurrection and retribution and punishment in the next\nworld. I turned away my mind from wickedness and adhered energetically\nto good, perceived that there is no better associate or friend than\nrighteousness and that it is easy to acquire it with the help of God. I\nfound that it has more tender solicitude for us than father and mother\nthat it leads to good and gives true counsel like one friend to another,\nthat use does not diminish but rather multiplies it, and that when\nemployed it does not wear out, but is constantly renewed, and becomes\nmore beautiful; that we need not fear that the authorities will snatch\nit from us, the enemy will rob or miscreants disfigure it, or water\ndrown or fire will consume it, wild beasts attack it or that any thing\nuntoward will happen to it. He who contemns righteousness and its\nconsequences in the next world and permits himself to be seduced from it\nby a fraction of the sweets of this passing world, he who passes his\ndays with things which do not permit piety to approach him, fares as\ndid to my knowledge the merchant in the following story.\n\n[Sidenote: The careless Jeweller.]\n\nA merchant had many precious stones. To bore a hole through them he\nhired a man for a hundred pieces of gold a day and went with him to his\nhouse. As soon however, as he set to work, there was a lute and the\nworkman turned his eyes towards it. And upon the merchant questioning\nhim whether he could play upon it he replied, \"Yes, right well.\" For he\nwas indeed proficient in the art. \"Then take it\" said the merchant. He\ntherefore took it and played for the merchant the whole day beautiful\nmelodies in proper tune so that the jeweller left the caset with the\nprecious stones in it and filled with joy kept time, nodding his head\nand waving his hand. In the evening he said to the jeweller, \"Let me\nhave my wages,\" And when the latter said, \"Have you done anything to\ndeserve the wage?\" he replied, \"You have hired me and I have done what\nyou ordered me to do.\" So he pressed him till he received his hundred\npieces without any deduction, while the gems remained unbored.\n\n[Sidenote: Aversion to pleasures of the world: Buddhistic pessimism.]\n\nThe more I reflected upon the world and its joys the deeper grew my\naversion towards them. Then I made up my mind entirely to devote myself\nto the life of the blessed and the anchorite. For I saw that asceticism\nis a garden the hedge of which keeps off at a distance eternal evils,\nand the door through which man attains to everlasting felicity. And I\nfound that a divine tranquility comes over the ascetic when he is\nabsorbed in meditation; for he is still, contented, unambitious,\nsatisfied, free from cares, has renounced the world, has escaped from\nevils, is devoid of greed, is pure, independent, protected against\nsorrow, above jealousy, manifests pure love, has abandoned all that is\ntransitory, has acquired perfect understanding, has seen the recompense\nof the next world, is secure against remorse, fears no man, does none\nany harm and remains himself unmolested. And the more I pondered over\nasceticism the more I yearned for it so that at last I earnestly thought\nof becoming an ascetic.\n\n[Sidenote: The trials of an anchorite: the greedy dog.]\n\nBut then apprehension came upon me that I should not be able to support\nthe life of a hermit and that the ordinary way in which I had grown up\nwould prove an hindrance. I was not sure that, should I renounce the\nworld and adopt asceticism, I should not prove too feeble for it.\nMoreover, should I give up such good works as I had previously performed\nin the hope of salvation, I should be in the position of the dog who\nwith the bone in his mouth was going along a river. He saw his\nreflection in the water, suddenly dashed forward to seize it and\nconsequently let fall what he had in the mouth without securing what he\nwanted to get. So I grew uneasy regarding the recluse's life and was\nafraid lest I should fail to bear it and thought therefore rather to\ncontinue the career of my life.\n\n[Sidenote: Worldly Monastic life.]\n\n[Sidenote: A series of similes.]\n\nHowever, it occurred to me to compare the discomforts and straits of\nmonasticism, which I feared I should be unable to support, with the\nwants of those who remain in the world. Then it became clear to me that\nall the joys and pleasures of the world turn to discomforts and bring\nsorrow. For the world is like salt water. The more one drinks of it the\nmore thirsty one becomes; like a bone found by a dog on which he still\nsniffs the flavour of flesh, he bites to get at it but only to tear the\nflesh of his teeth and make his mouth bleed and the more he struggles\nthe more he makes it bleed; like the vulture that has found a piece of\nflesh, it attracts other birds in a flock so that for a long time it is\nin trouble and flies till at last, quite exhausted, it drops its prey;\nlike a pot filled with honey and with poison at the bottom, he who eats\nof it has a short enjoyment but at last death by venom; like a dream\nwhich rejoices the sleeper who finds when he awakes his joy vanished;\nlike lightning that brings brilliance for a moment but quickly\ndisappears, he who builds his hope upon it abides in darkness; like the\nsilk worm the more it spins itself into the silk the more impossible it\nfinds to come out.\n\n[Sidenote: More internal struggle.]\n\nAfter I had pondered thus I once more proposed to my soul to elect\nasceticism and had yearning for it. Nevertheless I opposed it with: It\nwill not do that I should seek refuge from the world in asceticism when\nI think of the evils of the world and then again seek refuge in the\nworld from asceticism when I consider the privations and discomforts of\nthe latter. I continued in a state of prolonged vacillation without firm\ndetermination like the Kazi of Merv who at first heard one party and\ndecided in his favour and against the other and then heard the other and\ngave judgment in favour of the latter as against the first. And when\nagain I reflected upon the frightful discomforts and straits of\nmonasticism I said, How trifling it is all in comparison with eternal\npeace. And then once more thinking of the joys of the world I exclaimed,\nHow bitter and pernicious they are which lead to perpetual perdition and\nits horrors; how can a man not regard as sweet the little bitterness\nwhich is succeeded by sweet that endures and how can a man not regard as\nbitter a bit of sweet that ends in greater and abiding bitterness? If it\nwas offered to a man that he should live a hundred years but that every\nday he should be hacked to pieces and should be called to life again the\nfollowing day and so on, provided that at the close of the century he\nshould be delivered from the torture and pain and be in security and\ndelight, he would account as nothing the whole years. How can a man then\nnot bear the few days of asceticism, the inconveniences of which are\nsucceeded by much that is beautiful? And we know that the entire world\nbears privation and torment and that man from his origin as foetus till\nthe end of his days is subject to one suffering after another. Moreover,\nwe find the following in books of medicine.\n\n[Sidenote: Man in embryo: his torments till and after death.]\n\n[Sidenote: Tribulations of human existence.]\n\nWhen the liquid, of which the perfect child is to be built, enters the\nuterus of the woman, and mixes itself with her liquid substance and her\nblood it becomes thick and pulpy. Next the liquid is stirred by a wind\nand becomes like sour milk and later on hard like curdled milk. After a\ncertain number of days the individual members become separate. If it is\na man child its face is turned to the back of the mother; if it is a\nfemale it is turned towards the belly. In the foetus the hands are on\nthe cheeks and the chin is on the knee. It is all bundled up in the\nfoetus as if it was thrust into a pouch. It breathes through a narrow\nopening. Each member is bound by a chord. Above it is the heat and the\npressure of the mother's womb; below are darkness and constriction. It\nis tied with a piece of its navel to that of its mother, sucks through\nit and lives upon her food and drink. In this position it remains in\ngloom and confinement till the day of birth. When that day comes a wind\nacquires control of the womb, that child acquires strength to rise,\nturns the head towards the opening and experiences in this confinement\nthe pain of one forced into a distressing torture. Should it fall to the\nground or be touched only by a breath of wind or should it come in\ncontact with one's hands it feels greater pain, than a person that is\nflayed alive. The new born babe then suffers all manner of torment. When\nit is hungry it cannot ask for food; thirsty, for drink; when in pain it\ncannot call for help. Besides it is lifted up, laid down, wrapped up,\nswathed, washed and rubbed. When it is laid to sleep on the back it\ncannot turn. Again so long as it is given the suck it is subjected to\nall manner of other tortures. When it is finally delivered from these,\nit is liable to those of education and has then to suffer a great deal,\nthe brusqueness of the teacher, the unpleasantness of the instruction,\nthe disgust at writing. Next he has his rich portion of medicine, diet,\naches and illnesses. When he has outgrown these, he is troubled with\nwife, child and property and is pulled about by covetuous ambition and\nis exposed to the peril of longing and desires. All this while he is\nmenaced by his four internal enemies, gall, blood, bile and wind; and\nfurthermore, mortal poison, snakes that bite, animals of prey and\nreptiles, the alternation of heat and cold, rain and storm as well as\nfinally the various plagues of age, if at all he survives those. But\nshould he have nothing to fear from all this and were he secure with\nregard to these calamities, when he thinks of the moment when death must\ncome and he musk give up the world, what a miserable plight is his, at\nthe thought of the hour he has to separate himself from family,\nfriends, and relations and all that is precious on the earth, and when\nhe reflects that there is in store for him after death fearful horrors?\nThen must he be considered of feeble intellect, neglectful and a suitor\nfor misfortune should he do nothing for his soul, should he not employ\nall art in behalf of the soul, and should he not renounce altogether the\npleasures and errors of the world which till then had seduced him.\n\n[Sidenote: Eulogy of the reigning Monarch.]\n\n[Sidenote: Fallen on evil days.]\n\n[Sidenote: How the world's misery outweighs its joys.]\n\nBut this holds especially good of modern times which have become worn\nout and fragile, which appear pure but are turbid. God has given the\nking good fortune and success. He is equally circumspect, mighty,\nmagnanimous, profound examiner, upright, humane, liberal, a lover of\ntruth, grateful, of broad comprehension, mindful of right and duty,\nindefatigable, strenuous, with insight, helpful, serene of mind,\nintelligent, thoughtful, gentle, sympathetic, kind, one who knows man\nand things, friend of learning and the learned, of the good and of\nbenevolent people, but severe to the oppressor, not timid, nor backward,\ndexterous in granting in abundance to his subjects what they desire and\naverting from them what they do not like. Yet we see that our days are\nretrogressive in every way. It is as if man were divested of truth, as\nif that should be absent which one sadly misses and as if the harmful\nwere there, as if the good were withering and the evil flourishing, as\nif the sinners were proceeding with a smile and the righteous receding\nin tears; as if knowledge was entombed and irrationality propagated, as\nif wretched intent was spreading and nobility of thought restricted; as\nif love was cut off and malice and hatred had become favourites; as if\nrectitude were divested of prosperity which had betaken itself to the\nmalefactor; as if craftiness were awake and truth were asleep; as if\nmendacity were fruitful and veracity was left in the cold; as if those\nin power held before them the duty to act according to their own\ninclinations and to violate law, as if the oppressed were in dejection\nand made way for the tyrant; as if greediness on all sides had opened\nits jaws and swallowed all that was far and near; as if there was no\ntrace left of contentment; as if the wicked had exalted themselves to\nHeaven and had made the good sink into the ground; as if nobility of\nmind were thrown from the loftiest pinnacle to most abysmal depths, as\nif turpitude were in honour and authority and as if sovereignty had been\ntransferred from the exalted to the mean--in fact as if the world in the\nfullness of its joy were crying, \"I have concealed the good and brought\nthe evil to light.\" When, however, I reflected on the world and its\ncondition and on the fact that man, although he is the noblest and\nforemost of creatures in it, is still in spite of his eminent position,\nsubject to one misery after another and that this is his notorious\npeculiarity so that whoever has even a tittle of reason must be\nconvinced that a human being is unable to help himself and to exert for\nhis salvation,--this greatly astonished me, as further consideration\ntold me that he is debarred from salvation only because of the small\nmiserable enjoyments of smell, taste, sight, hearing and feeling of\nwhich he may receive a fraction or enjoy a particle but which is\ninsignificant being so transient. He is, however, so much taken up with\nit that on its account he does not trouble himself for the salvation of\nhis soul.\n\nThen I looked for a similitude for this behaviour of human beings and\nfound the following:\n\nA certain person was fleeing from a danger into a well and suspended\nhimself by clinging to two branches which grew on its edge, his feet\nstriking against something which supported them. When he looked round\nthere were four serpents which were projecting their heads from their\nholes. As he looked into the bottom of the well he noticed a dragon with\nits jaws open expecting him to fall his prey. And as he turned his head\nup to the branches he observed at their roots a black and a white mouse\nwhich were ceaselessly gnawing at both. While he was contemplating the\nsituation and casting about for a means of escape he descried near him a\nhollow with bees that had made some honey. This he tasted and he was so\nmuch absorbed in its deliciousness that he no more thought of the\ncondition he was in and that he must devise some contrivance of escape.\nHe became oblivious of the fact that his feet rested against four\nserpents and that he did not know which would attack him first, forgot\nthat the two mice were without cessation nibbling at the boughs by which\nhe was hanging, and that as soon as they had gnawed them through he\nwould drop into the jaws of the dragon. And so in his heedlessness he\nyielded to the enjoyment of the meed till he perished.\n\nI compared the well with the world which is brimful of all manner of\nharm and terrible perils, the four snakes with the four humours which\nconstitute the physical basis of man, but which, should they be excited,\nprove mortal poison; the branches to life, the black and white mice to\nnight and day which in perpetual alternation consume our lifetime; the\ndragon with death inevitable; the honey to the particle of joy which man\nderives from his senses of smell, taste, sight, hearing and feeling, but\nwhich makes him oblivious of himself and all his circumstances and decoy\naway from the path to emancipation. So circumstanced I found myself, and\nendeavoured to conduct myself with as much rectitude as possible in the\nhope once again to experience a time when I should acquire a guide for\nmyself and help for my cause. I remained in this stage till I returned\nfrom India to my homeland after I had made a copy of this book and a\nfew more.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX IV\n\n_THE TRIAL OF AFSHIN._.\n\n_A DISGUISED ZOROASTRIAN GENERAL_.\n\n\n[Afshin was a Zoroastrian at heart. His trial and condemnation are\nreferred to by Browne, _Literary History of Persia._ I take the account\ndirect from Tabari. It is to be found also in Ibn Athir and Ibn Khaldun.\nThe legal procedure reveals prominently the condition under which\nprofessed non-Moslems lived--religious liberty was granted to them. Note\nthat it was possible to chastise ecclesiastical officers like Imams and\nMuezzins because of their interference with the religious practices of\nnon-Moslems. Observe the part played by a Mobed at a criminal trial\nconducted according to Muhammadan usages. The Zoroastrian priest, who\nsubsequently embraced Islam, comes forward to give evidence against the\nmost puissant but covert co-religionist of his times.]\n\nIt has been related by Harun son of Isa, son of Mansur as follows:--I\nwas present in the house of Muatisim and there were there Ahmad bin Ali\nDawud and Ishaq bin Ibrahim son of Masab and Muhammad bin Abdal Maliq al\nZayyad. They then brought Afshin who was yet not in rigorous\nimprisonment, and there were present people who were prepared to cause\nAfshin to shed tears. There was nobody in the house belonging to any\nhigh position except the sons of Mansur, for, the people had left. Those\npresent were Muhammad bin Abdal Maliq al Zayyad and there were Mazyar,\nthe ruler of Tabaristan, the Mobed, and the Marzban son of Urkesh, one\nof the chieftains of Sughd, and two people from among the Sughdians.\nThen Muhammad Ibn Abdal Maliq called the two people whose clothes were\ntorn and asked them how they were. They then uncovered their backs which\nwere torn of the flesh. Muhammad turning to Afshin asked \"Do you know\nthese?\" \"Yes, this man is the Mauzzin and this, one is the Imam who made\na mosque at Ashrushana, and I struck each of them a thousand lashes, and\nthat was because there was a covenant between myself and the kings of\nSughd including a clause to the effect that I should leave each\ncommunity to its own religion. But these two people attacked a shrine\nwhich had images in it, a shrine which was at Ashrushna, and they took\nout the images and turned the shrine into a mosque. I therefore struck\nthem one thousand lashes for this transgression of theirs.\"\n\nThen Muhammad asked Afshin, \"What is the book which you have got which\nyou have adorned with gold and gems and brocade? Its contents are\nimpious with reference to God?\" Afshin replied, \"This is a book which I\nhave inherited from my father and it contains the manners of the\nPersians, and as regards the impiety to which you refer I take advantage\nof the book in so far as the manners are concerned and I leave all the\nrest. And I found it bejewelled and as there was no occasion for me to\ntake off the gems I left it as it was just as you have left with\nyourself the book _Kalileh and Dimneh_ and the _Book of Mazdak_ in your\nhouse. For I don't think the book would make me lose my Islam.\"\n\nThen came forward the Mobed and referring to Afshin said, \"This man is\nused to eating animals that have been strangled and he suggested the\neating of it to me alleging that the flesh was more fresh than the flesh\nof slaughtered animals. And he used to kill a black goat every Wednesday\nand tearing it up with his sword he would pass through the two halves,\nand he would then eat the flesh. And one day he told me, 'I have entered\nthis community [Islam] with reference to every detail of theirs which I\nhate so that I have eaten of olive oil, have ridden on camels, have put\non the Arabian shoes, but although I have gone to this extent I have not\nin any way been injured and no harm has come to me: nor have I had\nmyself circumcised.'\"\n\nThen Afshin said \"Let me know as regards this man who is speaking these\nwords whether he is a staunch believer in his own religion.\" Now the\nMobed was a Magian who subsequently received Islam at the instance of\nthe Khalif Mutawakkil and repented of his previous belief. They replied,\n\"No.\"\n\nAfshin then said, \"What is the meaning of your adducing the evidence of\na man who is not firm in his own faith?\" Then turning to the Mobed\nAfshin said, \"Was there between your house and my house any door or any\nhole through which you could look at me and learn my movements?\"\n\n\"No,\" said the Mobed.\n\nAfshin then asked, \"Was I not then introducing you into my private\naffairs and informing you regarding my Persian nationality and my\ninclination towards it and towards the people of the race?\"\n\n\"Yes,\" said the Mobed.\n\nSaid Afshin, \"Now you are not firm in your own religion, and you are not\nfaithful to your promise when you have revealed the secret confided by\nme to you.\"\n\nThen the Mobed withdrew and the Marzban turned up. Afshin was asked\nwhether he knew him, and said \"No.\"\n\nThen the Marzban was asked whether he knew Afshin and said \"Yes. This is\nAfshin.\"\n\nAfshin was then told that this was the Marzban and the Marzban turning\nto Afshin said; \"Oh cutthroat, why do you prevaricate and shuffle?\"\n\nAfshin said, \"Oh you long-bearded one, what are you talking?\"\n\nThe Marzban said \"How do people under your jurisdiction address you when\nthey write to you?\"\n\nAfshin replied; \"Just in the way they used to write to my father and\ngrandfather.\"\n\n\"Then tell us the way.\"\n\n\"No, I won't.\"\n\n\"Do not the people of Ashrushna write to you in such and such a way?\"\n\n\"Now, does this not mean in Arabic, 'to the high God from his slave so\nand so?'\"\n\n[Ibn Khaldun is here clearer than Tabari. The term used was _Khoday_\nwhich in Persian meant Lord, applicable equally to God and any high\ndignitary. The original 'Pahlavi' title of the Shahnameh was\nKhodaynameh.]\n\n\"Yes.\"\n\nMuhammad Ibn Abdal Maliq asked upon this, \"Do they tolerate such a\nthing? For what greater blasphemy would be left to Pharaoh to commit who\nsuggested to his people 'I am your God the Highest.'?\"\n\nAfshin replied, \"This was the custom of the people in my father's and\ngrandfather's times and it was also the custom with me before I embraced\nIslam. And then I did not like that I should lower myself before them.\nFor then I should have lost their allegiance and the obedience that they\nowed me.\"\n\nUpon this Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Musab said, \"Fie, fie on you, Hyder.\"\n\n[Afshin is sometimes referred to as Hyder.]\n\nThen turned up Mazyar the chief of Tabaristan and Afshin was asked\nwhether he knew him. He said \"No.\"\n\nMazyar was asked if he knew Afshin.\n\nThen they told him that this was Mazyar.\n\n\"Yes, I know him now.\"\n\n\"Did you ever have correspondence with him? No.\"\n\nThen turning to the Marzban they asked, \"Did he ever write to you?\"\n\n\"Yes,\" said Mazyar, \"His brother Khash used to write to my brother\nQuhyar to the effect that this splendid religion of theirs will have\nhelp from nobody except himself, Quhyar and Babak.\"\n\n[In the sequel Tabari relates how when Afshin's house was searched,\nafter he was starved to death, among other incriminating articles a book\nwas discovered sumptuously bound and bedecked with gems which related,\nto the old faith of Iran.]\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX V\n\n_NOELDEKE'S INTRODUCTION TO TABARI_.\n\n\n[The Arabs have long been credited with maintaining learning and\ncivilisation in general when Europe was slumbering in its dark ages.\nHistory as a science was rarely known even to the gifted Hindus. The\nArabs cultivated it with peculiar enthusiasm. Wustenfeld has collected\nthe lives of 590 historians, the first of whom died in the year 50, and\nthe last was born in 1061 A.H. But it is now proved beyond all doubt\nthat many of these writers were Persians who employed the Arabic\nlanguage and that the art of Arab annalists had its root in the archives\nof the Sasanians. We owe this discovery to Goldziher and Von Kremmer in\nthe first instance, and to Brockelmann, Browne, Blochet and Huart who\nhave done ample justice to the Iranian element in Arab culture. One of\nthe best of these histories is by Tabari. Noeldeke translated in 1879,\nthe portion relating to the Sasanians into German, and added footnotes\nto his translation, which are a mine of information on pre-Moslem\nPersia. The introduction which he wrote to his translation is equally\nvaluable especially for the light it throws on the sources of Firdausi.\nThe following is a translation of that German introduction by Noeldeke.\n\nTabari was a most prolific author and is reported to have written daily\nforty sheets for forty years. He was of pure Iranian descent G.K.N.]\n\n[Sidenote: Tabari's method.]\n\nAbu Jafar Muhammed bin Jarir born in the winter of 839 at Amul not far\nfrom the Caspian Sea in the Persian Province of Tabaristan, hence called\nTabari, and who died in Baghdad on the 17th February 923, wrote many,\npartly very large, works in the Arabic language, among them an extremely\nvoluminous chronicle, which reaches from the creation down to nearly the\nclose of his life. Tabari, mainly occupied with theological tradition,\nwas no man of original research or of historical acumen even in the\nsense applied to a few other Persian scholars in those centuries. His\nannals are a compilation, a mass of rich material put together with\nextraordinary industry. He does not work into unity the various versions\nin his divergent sources, but simply brings them up in order one after\nanother. But it is just this circumstance which considerably enhances in\nour eyes the value of the work; for in this way the older reports\nthemselves are preserved more faithfully than if the chronicler had\nlaboured to reconcile them one with the other.\n\n[Sidenote: Abounds in extracts from Arab and Iranian predecessors, but\ndoes not mention his sources.]\n\nThe principal value of Tabari's compilation consists in the extremely\nexhaustive presentation of the history of Islam from the first\nappearance of the Prophet; no other Arabic work in this respect can\ncompare with his. The pre-Islamic history comprises, may be, a twentieth\nportion of the whole work and gives a very groat deal of what we would\nrather be without. Of the highest moment, however, is the tolerably\ndetailed section on the history of the Sasanides and their times\nembodied in it, and whose German translation forms the text of our book.\nThis section goes back partly to good Arabic records and mostly, at\nleast mediately, to very important ancient Persian sources. But the\nstories from the mythological and historical traditions which appear\nscattered in Tabari in proceeding sections have a cognate origin. If the\ncriticism of the sources is here very much facilitated on the one hand,\nbecause these orientals where they excerpt love to adhere, as far as\npossible, to the letter of their models or sources, it is on the other,\nrendered difficult because Tabari does not mention his immediate\nauthorities. Only in reports of theological interest, to which the whole\nof the history of the growth of Islam belongs, he proceeds to indicate\nhis sources with precision; otherwise he cites at the best an old\nauthority come down to him only obliquely, and in most cases none at\nall. Throughout the Persian history he never names an authority, barring\nHisham, whom he quotes here and there and who was an acknowledged\nauthority in another province of tradition.\n\n[Sidenote: Story of Persia based on indigenous original work.]\n\n[Sidenote: Occasional identity of Firdausi and Tabari.]\n\nThe story of Persia from the first mythical Kings to the last of the\nSasanides exhibits in Tabari, as in allied Arabic works, a certain\nsimilarity of conception and presentation which leads to the assumption\nof an indigenous original work at least respecting a very large portion.\nNow the Shahnameh of the great poet Firdausi, a national epic of the\nkind which no other people possess, while it on one hand, apart from the\npoetic license indulged in by Firdausi, contains much that is either not\nfound at all or is essentially differently related in Arab writers; on\nthe other, considerably accords with those Arab annalists in the order,\nin the whole structure, and in the details of the narrative. Indeed the\npoet often reproduces almost the identical phraseology of the historian.\nBut now since according to both tradition and internal grounds\nFirdausi's bases were not Arabic books, the coincidence must be\nexplained from a common ultimate source. The original work has been\nreflected to us in Tabari and other Arabs as well as Firdausi through a\nseries of intermediate texts. To judge by the express statements and\nsuggestions as also by various features in style and phraseology and\nfurther by all that we are aware of touching the circumstances of the\nliterature we can say with certainty that, that original work like all\nother Persian narrative productions of the Sasanides and of the period\nof Arab conquest was composed in the written, language of this period,\nthe Pahlavi. The most important connected presentment of Persian history\nin Pahlavi to which our reports go back is no doubt the _Khoday Nameh,\ni.e.,_ the \"Book of Lords\" a title which answers to the subsequent Shah\nNameh or \"Book of Kings.\"\n\nHamza mentions that name. The prose introduction to Ferdausi says that\nthe \"Book of Kings\" was written first of all at the instance of Khushrau\nI Anoshirwan, but that the complete story was compiled only under\nYazdegerd III by the Dihkan Danishwar. This work which it would not be\ntoo bold to identify with the _Koday Nameh_ began with the primeval\nking, Gayomarth, and reached down to the termination of the reign of\nKhushrau II, surnamed Parwez. Although this introduction to Ferdausi\ndates but from the fifteenth century, and as for details is disfigured\nby inaccuracies and fictions, I attach weight to what it indicates\nrespecting the time of its composition. In fact the concord of the\nnarrative in the various sources reaches down to the death of Parwez and\nthen abruptly ceases; while there are no vestiges to demonstrate that\nthe completion of the original work was brought about subsequent to the\nvictory of the Arabs. And the legitimistic nature of the story Is\nespecially in keeping with the times when usurpation and insurrections\nof all sorts had run their course, and when the people looked forward\nwith, the inauguration of the rule of the youthful grandson, of Parwez,\nwho was crowned at the sacred place where the dynasty took its rise, to\nan era of prosperity to the ancient monarchy,--a hope which was\nfearfully crushed with the loss of the battle of Kadisiya towards the\nclose of 637. Again the replies made by the imprisoned king which have\nbeen reproduced in different sources suit the times of the Yezegerd who\ndescended from Khusrau II and not Sheroe, Khusrau's brilliant career\ndespite its shady side strongly contrasted with the period ushered in by\nthe patricide. A small piece of writing which depicts the first stormy\nyears of Khusrau's domination in a romantic fashion seems to have arisen\nabout the same time.\n\nI am less certain about the name Danishwar. It was probably an adjective\nsignifying \"possessed of knowledge.\" It was easy for anyone who knew\nfrom Firdausi that the landed nobility called the Dihkan constituted the\npeculiar custodians of national lore to name a \"learned Dihkan\" as the\ncollector of the stones of kings.\n\nThe compilation prepared at the time had undoubtedly drawn upon written\ndocuments without which It would have been impossible to give minute\nparticulars of a long by-gone past. Besides the brief notices\ncommunicated by the Syrian Sergius to Agathias from the _Basilika\napomnemoneiumata_ are in the main in unison with our Arabo-Persian\nstories. Thus then in Khushro's time there existed a general survey of\nthe history of Persia more or less in an official version. But otherwise\nthere is no need to lay stress on the mention of Khushrau here, for all\nmanner of things beneficial and good are ascribed to this king.\n\n[Sidenote: Nature of the Khoday Nameh.]\n\nThe book of kings contains, as we said, the story of Persia from the\ncreation of the world to the fall of the last purely national\ndomination. It made no distinction between wholly mythical,\nsemi-fabulous, and fully historical dynasts, so that the Arabs and\nPersians who drew upon it never suspected that e.g., Hoshang and Rustam\nare not such historical persons as Shahpur I and Bahram Chobin. But in\nthe material itself we notice a conspicuous difference. The mythical\ntales which in their crude nascent forms were already there at the\nperiod of the Avesta were in course of time richly developed and under\nthe Sasanides were no doubt universally known. To these were joined\necclesiastical speculation and traditions concerning the genesis of the\nworld, civilisation and the legislation of Zoroaster. There were also\nseveral genealogical trees. In all these at the most a few proper names\nwere historical. Of the empires of the Medes and of Persians proper this\ntradition had no knowledge. It is doubtful if it contained even quite a\nfeeble reflex of the last days of the Achaeminides. On to this ancient\nautochthonous tradition was immediately joined the story of the last\nDarius and Alexander emanating from a foreign source, the Greek romance\nof Alexander. Not more than a few names was all that was preserved of\nthe long period covering the Macedonian and the Parthian supremacy. With\nthe Sasanides the national reminiscences became clearer. Round the\nfounder of the dynasty were accreted, on the one hand, legends wholly\nfabulous and on the other, such as embodied excellent historical data.\nBut the latter seem to be inadequately represented in the main work, the\nKhodayname. Again very few particulars were known of the reigns of the\nsucceeding sovereigns down to Yezdegerd I. In the chapters which\ncorrespond to those of the old Book of Kings just this want of actual\ninformation, it seems, the compilers strove to veil behind rhetorical\naccounts of scenes of homage done to the rulers, imperial speeches from\nthe throne, etc. For the following ages on there was, in general, good,\npartly very authentic information. But this entire presentment did not\nconcern itself solely with veracity. The Iranians who from very remote\nantiquity extravagantly lauded truth, had in reality never any great\nsense of it. The _Khoday Nameh_ and kindred productions were unfairly\nbiassed and rhetorical. The ornamental and figurative ingredients are\nindicated even by the Arabic reproductions, though the latter are\ngreatly condensed. A classic testimony to it has been kindly\ncommunicated to me by Baron Von Rosen which is a passage from a\nPetersberg manuscript of _Albayan Wattabyin_ of Jahiz in which the\nShuubiya or the Persians, who, though Muslims placed their nation above\nthe Arabs say: \"And he who is interested in reason, fine culture,\nknowledge of ranks, examples and penalties, in elegant expressions and\nsuperlative thoughts, let him cast a glance at the _History (more\nproperly the Vitae) of Kings.\"_ History of the Kings, _Siyar-ul Muluk_,\nis the title of the Arabic rendering of the Book of Kings in Pahlavi.\nCompare likewise Hamza's remarks on the works on Persian history. I have\nlaboured to show the partiality of the Persian tradition in the\nfootnotes. The narrative is conceived in a monarchical and legitimistic\nspirit, but equally all along from the view point of the superior\nnobility and the clergy. Add to this the exertions to cry up as much as\npossible the glory of Persia which sometimes produces a strange effect.\nMoreover, there must have been no lack of contradictions as to facts as\nwell as respecting estimates of personal character which was inevitable\nowing to the employment of varying sources. Nevertheless a work like\nthis written under the Sasanides and familiar with the state of things\nobtaining in the empire and more or less of an official nature, must\nhave been an admirable fount of history. There was hardly ever a better\npresentment of the story of this house than the _Khoday-Nameh_.\n\n[I have translated the entire passage from the since printed text. See\np. 170.--G.K.N.]\n\nSince, barring the small book treating of Ardeshir's adventures, no\noriginal Pahlavi document in the domain of historical or romantic\nliterature has descended to us and even the Arabic recensions made\ndirectly from the original general history in Pahlavi have perished, we\nare altogether left in uncertainty touching many most important points.\nWe cannot, for instance, ascertain whether alongside of the\n_Khoday-Nameh_ there existed also other general continuous narrations or\nwhether the deviations, which are for the most part trifling, in some\ncases of great moment, already existed in the Pahlavi work or are\ntraceable to various recensions of that book. It would not be rash, to\nassume that some copies of the work contained additional matter taken\nfrom other Pahlavi books like the Romance of Bahram. Bahram the high\npriest of the city of Shapur collected, according to Hamza, more than 20\nmanuscripts of the _Khoday-Nameh_ and from their divergence made out\nanother independent recension. Musa Ibn Isa Kesravi complains of the\nvariants in the copies of the work; the latter author who speaks of\ndefects in translation has in view only the Arabic redactions. The text,\nhowever, of Tabari, at all events and more so a comparison of Tabari and\nother Arabs with one another and with Firdausi exhibits that entire\nsections of the History of Kings were already in the Pahlavi original in\nessentially different shapes. Otherwise, it would not be possible, for\ninstance, that where Tabari offers two different versions, one should\nharmonise with Eutychius and Ibn Kotaiba (derived from the translation\nof Ibn Mukaffa) and the other should agree with the Arab Yakubi and\noften with Firdausi, who goes back to the Pahlavi text not directly but\nmediately through compositions in modern Persian. It is very important\nfor a knowledge of the history that thus we have at our command all\nmanner of dissonant reports about the Sasanide epoch. But we have to\nobserve all the same that the character and the tendency of the several\nversions are almost all along consistent and further more that often we\nhave more recensions than one which differ but little and which have one\nand the same ground-work or prototype. The question whether this\ndifference is older or younger than the _Khoday-Nameh_ has more literary\nthan historical significance.\n\n[Sidenote: Translation of _Khoday-Nameh_ into Arabic. Its general\nfidelity to the original.]\n\n[Sidenote: The Arabic translation may be pieced together from various\nsources.]\n\nWe should decide all this with much more certainty did we possess but\none direct rendering made from the Pahlavi into Arabic. Above all we\nhave to deplore the loss of Ibn Mukaffa's history of Persian Kings which\nis always assigned the first place among translations of the Persian\nBook of Kings by Hamza and other authorities. This distinguished man who\nonly late in life exchanged the faith of his forbears for that of Islam,\nand who never professed the latter with over much zeal, translated a\nseries of Pahlavi writings into Arabic including the _Khoday-Nameh_. He\nwas a courtier, and passed for a good Arabic poet and one of the best\nrhetorical writers of his time. The famous Wazir Ibn Mukla counted him\namong \"the ten most eloquent men.\" He must consequently have striven to\nsuit his rendering of the book of Persian kings to the taste of his\ncontemporaries. But we have no sufficient grounds to assume that he\nintroduced arbitrary and material alterations into his translations or\neven that he greatly elaborated the rhetorical passages of the original\ntext or invested them with an altogether different garb. Such a\nsuspicion is contradicted by the coincidences with other sources which,\nlike Firdausi, are independent of him. There is little probability of\nIbn Mukaffa's work being again brought to light in its entirety. But on\nthe other hand, it will indeed be possible to gather together in course\nof time more and more stray passages belonging to the book; though it is\nto be feared, unfortunately that these fragments will prove more to be\npreserved as efforts of rhetoric than because of their intrinsic value.\nA few extracts of this nature we find in Ibn Kotaiba's _Oyun-al Akhbar_.\nAmong these citations which I owe to the goodness of Rosen, there is one\ntolerably long on the death of Peroz. Now the same fragment, little\ncurtailed, is in the chronicle of Said bin Batrik or Eutychius, the\npatriarch of Alexandria. We should, therefore, be inclined from the\nfirst to derive other information in Eutychius on the Sasanides from Ibn\nMukaffa. And our predisposition is supported by the circumstance that\nthe history of the dynasty as given in a manual by the same Ibn Kotaiba\nand which is styled _Kitab al Maarif_, brief as it is, betrays as in the\ninstance of the reign of Peroz, all through such an harmony with\nEutychius that here two independent authors must necessarily have drawn\nupon one and the same original; and that original source can be no other\nthan the production of Ibn Mukaffa. The abstract in Eutychius is very\nunequal being in some parts exhaustive, in others much abridged. The\nnarrations as preserved in Tabari, which correspond to the statements in\nEutychius and Ibn Kotaiba and which consequently go back to Ibn Mukaffa,\nare of a similar nature though Tabari gives in addition other parallel\nreports. Tabari, however, did not himself use Ibn Mukaffa's work, but\nfor the History of Persia, among other authorities, employed by\npreference a younger work which represented another version together\nwith excerts from the former. This can be inferred from the fact that\nthe anonymous Codex Sprengers 30, which and Tabari are mutually\nindependent, shows quite the same combination of two main sources and so\nfar as the section in question goes, can be utilised and treated as a\nnew manuscript of Tabari. Both have relied almost to the letter upon the\npresentment which emanated partly from Ibn Mukaffa and partly from\nanother translator with the only difference that the anonymous writer is\noftener more concise than Tabari. Again the version which does not\nproceed from Ibn Mukaffa is for the most part in accord with the epitome\nof the story of the Sasanides in the introduction to Yakubi's History of\nthe Abbasides; there the excellent author occasionally subjoins\nextraneous information. More often than not this presentment is in touch\nwith Ferdausi. I am unable to aver from whom has originated this other\nrecension of the story of the Sasanides. We know indeed the names of a\nnumber of persons who redacted the History of Persia, originally in\nPahlavi, for Arab readers. But though we can collect a few notices of\nsome of the authors mentioned, we know nothing in particular about them\nand are completely in the dark about the special nature of their work.\nAll that we can postulate as established is that they wrote posterior to\nIbn Mukaffa. The latter is always mentioned in the first place. Muhammad\nbin Jahm who is regularly cited next after him and bears the surname of\nBermaki, was a client of the Barmecides, who came to power a long while\nafter the death of Ibn Mukaffa. Ifc may be supposed that they all laid\nunder contribution the production of their celebrated predecessor. How\nthey individually set about their work, whether perhaps some of them\ntapped non-Persian tradition; also, how far one or other of them\nutilized the novels of which there were probably many in Pahlavi--this\nwe are no longer in a position to determine. Again this too remains a\nmystery whence Tabari came by most of the accounts touching the\nPersians, which are conspicuous by their absence in the anonymous Codex.\nTo clear this whole ground it would appear to be expedient in the first\nplace to set apart all that for which Ibn Mukaffa directly or indirectly\nis responsible. This I have done in the footnotes but an advance is\npossible in this direction. On the other hand, we must keep Ferdausi\nsteadily before our eyes. Whatever in Tabari and other Chroniclers does\nnot issue from Ibn Mukaffa and is not represented in Ferdausi likewise\nmerits special study.\n\n[Sidenote: Direct Sources of Ferdausi.]\n\n[Sidenote: The Persian prose Shahname was not derived from Arabic but\nPahlavi.]\n\nA superficial reading of Firdausi would engender the view that he\nobtained his material partly from Pahlavi books direct and partly from\nthe oral communication of competent renconteurs. That this is only a\ndeceptive illusion we conclude at once from his strong resemblance not\nonly in the main features but also in the details and the order, with\nArab writers some of whom were much anterior to him. Firdausi positively\nknew no Pahlavi and as for Arabic he knew next to nothing. He did employ\nwritten sources preponderatingly if not exclusively and these were in\nmodern Persian. His principal authority was, according to the\nintroduction mentioned above, a translation of the old Book of Kings\nwhich was prepared by Abu Mansur bin Abdar Razzak bin Abdullah bin\nFerrukh. So far our information is surely trustworthy. For, Biruni\ntestifies to a Shahname by Abu Mansur bin Abdar Razzak of Tus. According\nto the introduction, this man was a minister of Yakub bin Laith Saffar,\nwho was commissioned with the work which he accomplished through a\ncertain Sund bin Mansur Mamari with the help of four competent people\nfrom Khorasan and Sagistan in 360 A.H. The chronological impossibility\ninvolved in the figure is removed by Mohl who emends it to 260. Yakub\nibn Laith got a foothold in Khorasan in 253 A.H. and reigned till 265.\nStill this report involves much that is incorrect. That the uncouth\nwarrior Yakub who was perpetually camping in the battle fields should\nhave possessed a sense for such a literary undertaking is extremely\nimprobable, though not altogether inconceivable. May be, he was actuated\nby a political design, but Abu Mansur bin Abdar Razzak did not live\nunder Yakub but flourished two or three generations later. For he is\neither a brother of Muhammad bin Abdar Razzak of Tus or Muhammad\nhimself. The first surmise has the weight of greater likelihood in that\nthe Strasburg manuscript calls him once Abu Mansur Ahmed and Muhammad\nhad in fact a brother named Ahmed who participated in his political\nmanouvres. Muhammad was the lord of Tus. We hear much about him--how he\nin the years A.D. 945-960 stood up now for the Samanides, his proper\noverlords, now for their powerful antagonist Ruknaddin, the Buide, whose\ncapital lay in dangerous proximity to his territory. In those days when\nan enthusiasm for Modern Persian was strongly awakened the enterprize\nmay most appropriately have been taken in hand. Immediately after the\nPrinces of Khorasan planned to cast this prose work into poetry; and\nthis task was first inaugurated by Dakiki for the Samanides and brought\nto conclusion by Ferdausi of Tus, countryman of Abu Mansur bin Abdar\nRazzak, for Mahamud of Ghazna. The name of the four people who executed\nthe work for the son of Abdar Razzak are all genuinely Persian; which\nindicates that they were all adherents of the ancient religion and that\nthey had actully a Pahlavi original before them. To transfer an Arabic\nversion into Modern Persian would not have required four men. Moreover,\nFirdausi's poem occasionally betrays that his sources had not flowed to\nhim through Arabic. Of those men one only is met with again, Shahzan son\nof Barzin. He is mentioned by Firdausi at the head of his account of the\ngenesis of KALILA WA DIMNA: \"Listen to what Shahzan, son of Barzin has\nsaid when he revealed the secret.\" Because this section is an episode\nwhich assuredly did not appear in the KHODAY-NAMEH, we may conclude that\nthe prose Shahname on which this Shahzan collaborated, embodied all\nmanner of similar episodes, though Firdausi may have taken several from\nelsewhere. It is an interesting circumstance that the potentate who had\nthis work prepared by Abu Mansur bin Abdar Razzak, had inserted--so\nBiruni tell us--a fictitious genealogical tree in it which led up his\nancestors to Minochihr. Such things were in those times very common\namong new men of Persian origin who attained power. We are compensated\nfor the loss of this prose work by at least the epos of Ferdausi which\nhas issued from it.\n\n[Sidenote: Dinawari.]\n\nAs the most important of extant Arabic representations of the\n_Khoday-Nameh_ and the cognate literature we must regard at any rate\nTabari I have already touched upon Eutychius, Ibn Kotaiba, and Yakubi.\nAnother old chronicler Abu Hanifa Ahmed bin Daud Dinawari greatly\naccords with Tabari but presents also much that is peculiar to himself.\nA closer examination would no doubt reveal that he draws considerably\nupon romances directly or indirectly and that he is not particularly\naccurate. Tabari reproduces the conflicting versions of the same\nincident separately one after another; Dinawari works them up into a\nsingle unified narrative.\n\n[Sidenote: Hamza.]\n\nThe small book which Hamza Ispahani wrote in 961, contains in brief much\nindependent information on the Sasanides. Hamza treats his materials in\na spirit of much more freedom and independence than Tabari, but to us\nthe compiling process of Tabari is far more convenient.\n\n[Sidenote: Masudi.]\n\nMasudi in his \"Meadows of Gold\" affords us many a supplement to Tabari's\nnarratives derived from reliable Persian sources. But Masudi works very\nunequally, accepts a good deal that is suspicious provided only it is\nentertaining, and as regards detail he is by no means over exact.\n\nAs an historical authority, the Persian redaction of Tabari, so\nremarkable in many of its aspects, and achieved by Muhammad Belami or by\nothers under his guidance, has but little value. I designate this work\nas \"Persian Tabari\" and have used it in the splendid Gotha manuscript\nand in Zotenberg's French translation. I have also consulted the Turkish\nversion of Belami in a Gotha Manuscript.\n\n[Sidenote: Tabari more valuable than Firdausi.]\n\nAll these writers and others present us collectively a tolerably rich\nand vivid portrait of Persian tradition of the Sasanide times. But the\nbest comprehensive statement of the story of the Sasanides on the basis\nof this tradition is furnished us by Tabari, all his shortcomings\nnotwithstanding and despite the pre-eminence which Firdausi's poem\npossesses as such.\n\n[Sidenote: Ibn Kelbi.]\n\nBut in his narrative of this period Tabari had laid under contribution\nreports which were not of Persian origin. For the history of the Arab\nprinces of Hira, which is so intimately related to that of the Persian\nempire, Tabari's chief authority was Hisham bin Muhammad called Ibn\nKelbi a man who, like his father Muhammad bin Saib Kelbi before him, has\nrendered, however often modern criticism may take exception to the\nunscientific system of both the writers, the greatest service in\nconnection with the collection of the scattered information on the\nhistory of ancient Arabs. We know of a few of the numerous writings,\nlarge and small, of Ibn Kelbi which are enumerated for us in the\n_Fihrist_ and which probably are at the root of Tabari's chapters. It is\nquite possible that Tabari borrows many of the secondary sources of Ibn\nKelbi. It is surprising that the latter is cited as an authority on the\nPersian history itself, on the reigns of Ardeshir, Peroz, Khosrau I,\nHarmizd IV, Khosrau II, and Yazdegerd III. We are not cognisant of any\nwork of his on the History of Persia. But it may be conjectured that\noccasionally in his history of Arabia he supplied minuter details\ntouching contemporary Persia. An amanuensis of his, Jabala bin Salim, is\nnoticed in the _Fihrist_ as one of the translators from Persian. Ho\nprovided his master with material from Pahlavi books.\n\nFor the History of the Arabs of that period Tabari has used a variety of\nother sources, most prominent among them being Muhammad Ibn Ishak who is\nbetter known as the biographer of the prophet. In this section of\nTabari's great work mediately or immediately a large amount of diverse\ninformation has been brought together.\n\nIt is certainly desirable and to be hoped that the criticism of the\nsources in this domain would make substantial progress. But the point of\ngreatest moment even here is to test every incident or piece of\ninformation according to its origin and credibility as I have\nendeavoured to do in the footnotes.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX VI\n\n_LETTER OF TANSAR TO THE KING OF TABARISTAN._\n\n\nChristensen, by the following reasoning, comes to the conclusion, that\nit was written somewhere between 557 and 570.\n\nAmong the sources of our knowledge of the Sasanian institutions, one of\nthe most important is the letter of Tansar to the king of Tabaristan\npublished and translated by Darmesteter in the _Journal Asiatique_\n(1894). The information which it gives on points where we can verify it\nis so exact that we cannot doubt that the letter was composed in the\ntime of the Sasanians. On the other hand, on the first reading of the\nepistle I formed the impression that it was a literary fiction dating\nfrom the time of Khusro when the tradition made of Ardeshir the model of\npolitical sagacity and the founder of the entire organisation of the\nempire. The letter impressed me as a historical, theological, political\nand moral dissertation which in the shape of a correspondence between\nthe grand Herbed Tansar and the king of Tabaristan, ill-informed\nregarding the new state of affairs and hesitating to submit himself to\nArdeshir, was calculated to instruct contemporaries. It, therefore, fits\nin with the entire literature of the _Andarz_ type, which was developed\nunder Khusro and the object of it was the moral instruction of the\npeople. A more minute examination has confirmed me in this view and now\nI think I am able to affirm positively that the letter was composed\nunder Khusro I. Tansar relates that Ardeshir softened the penalties for\ncrimes against the religion. Formerly, \"they used to put to death\nwithout hesitation those who set aside the religion of the State. But\nArdeshir has directed that the accused shall be arrested and shall be\ncatechised during a year and only if that proves of no effect he shall\nbe killed.\" As a matter of fact, the rigorous ordinance which awarded\nthe punishment of death for apostacy could not have existed before\nParsism became with Ardeshir the State religion. The relaxation of\npunishment, on the other hand, dates from a much later period, when the\nstandpoint of greater humanity began to be prevalent and when it was\nattempted to give greater authority to these views by attributing them\nto the celebrated founder of the dynasty. And we can say the same thing\nwith reference to the less severe punishment for crimes committed\nagainst the State and in respect of other things mentioned in the\nletter. Besides, the tolerance in matters religious and the humanity of\nKhusro I are well-known.\n\nNow let us look at the incident of succession. According to the letter\nArdeshir did not like to choose his successor lest the latter should\nwish for his death. So, he arranged for the succession in the following\nmanner. The king only left in his royal letters a few counsels or\ninstructions to the grand _Mobed_, the commander-in-chief, and the\nprincipal secretary, and after the decease of the king the latter were\nto proceed to elect a successor from among the royal princes. If they\nall were not of the same mind the choice should rest with the grand\n_mobed_ alone. But Aideshir had made a formal notes that he was not\ngoing to establish a president thereby, and that \"in another age a\nmanner of looking at things different from ours may appear the proper\none.\" In the first place such an arrangement accords ill with the nature\nof a statesmen like Ardeshir, for we know from Tabari who follows the\nofficial chronicle of the times of the Sasanians, that Ardeshir as well\nas Shapur I and II themselves chose their respective successors. But in\nthe times between Ardeshir II and Kawadh the election of the king was\ngenerally in the hands of the noblemen, and the system mentioned by\nTansar may well have suited this period and been in harmony with the\nsingular expression ascribed to Ardeshir that the system in question was\nnot a definite one, and that in other periods, other manners might be\nmore convenient. It seems to us that the letter of Tansar was composed\nat a period when the memory of the system of Ardeshir was still living\nalthough it had already been abolished. In other words, it was the time\nwhen the kings had gained the power to nominate their successors during\ntheir life-time, which brings us to the period between Kawadh and Hormum\nIV.\n\nThe letter makes Ardeshir say \"None but the subject kings who do not\nbelong to our House can assume the title of king barring the wardens of\nthe marches of the territory of the Allans and the districts in the west\nand of Khwarzm.\" By the oppression 'the warden of the matches' we must\nunderstand no doubt the _marzbans_ of the countries established by\nKhusro.\n\nFinally, the geographical notices permit us to determine in a more exact\nfashion the time of the origin of the letter.... The letter was\nconsequently, composed after the march of Khusro I towards the East by\nthe destruction of the Hephthahtes, but before the capture of Yemen.\nthat is to say, between 557-570.\n\nChristensen finally notes that Marquart has arrived at the same\nconclusion, by another way, namely, that the letter is a fiction of the\ntime of Khusro I. (See _Eranshahr_ page 30, note 2).\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX VII\n\n_Some Arabic authors and the Iranian material they preserve._\n\n\n_IRANIAN MATERIAL IN THE UYUNAL AKBHAR OF IBN QOTAIBA_.\n\n[_Note,_--Brockelmann's edition of the _Uyunal Akhbar_ is not accessible\nto me in India. I have carefully examined the first volume of the Cairo\nEdition and the following will show the wealth of Iranian material\ncomprised in the book.--G.K.N.]\n\n\nWhen the Kisra died this was reported to the Prophet who inquired who\nwas going to succeed the dead emperor and when he was told his daughter,\nthe princess Buran, the Prophet declared that the nation could not\nprosper inasmuch as its affairs depended upon a woman. (p. 11).\n\n[Sidenote: Next-of-kin marriage.]\n\nI have read in the _Book of the Persians_ an epistle written by\nArdeshir, son of Babak to his subjects declaring that the ecclesiastical\nauthorities were the upholders of the religion and that the warriors\nwere the bearers of the casque and literature, and were ornaments of the\nempire and that the agriculturists were pillars of the country. (p. 15).\n[In the course of the epistle there is a reference to marriage of next\nof kin, the king exhorting his subjects to _tazauwa-ju-fil qarabayn_.]\n\n[Sidenote: _Kitab Ain_ or the Pahlavi _Ain-nameh._]\n\n[Sidenote: Anushirwan's rule.]\n\nI have read in the _Ain_ that a king of Persia said in his address to\nhis people: \"I am only the ruler of people's bodies, not their minds;\nand I govern with justice, not according to my pleasure; and I safeguard\npeople's property, not their secrets.\" Furthermore, the Persians say the\nmost efficient of rulers is he who draws the bodies of his subjects to\nfealty to him through their hearts. When Anushirwan appointed a person\nto an office he directed his secretary to leave out in the appointment\norder a space of four lines so that he may fill it up with his own hand,\nand when the appointment order was brought to him he would write in it\n\"govern the good people by love, and for the common people mix liberty\nwith awe and govern the proletariat with levity.\" (p. 15).\n\nAnd it is said in the _Book of the Persians_ that the hearts of the\npeople are the treasuries of the king, so that whatever is put there\nshould be made known to him. (p 17).\n\n[Sidenote: The _Taj._]\n\nAnd I have read in the _Taj_; Said Aberwez to his son Shiruya who had\nput him into prison, [and here follow some views relating to the\ntreatment of soldiers.]\n\nAnd in one of the _Books of the Persians_ it is stated that Ardeshir\nsaid to his son, \"Oh, my son, the empire and the religion are two\nbrothers which cannot do the one without the other. For the religion is\nthe foundation and the empire is the guardian and whatever has no\nfoundation falls and whatever has no guardian to look after it goes to\nwaste\" [And then proceeds to advise him as to the treatment of the\nnobles, warriors, the clergy, etc. Then are described the five qualities\nessential in a man occupying a post in the imperial government]\n\nAnd it is said in the _Taj_ that Aberwez wrote to his son Shiruya from\nhis prison.... (p. 20)\n\nAnd I have read in the letter ... Aberwez wrote to his son Shiruya, [and\nhere follow instructions regarding the three qualifications necessary in\na revenue officer.] (p. 21)\n\n[Sidenote: The _Taj._]\n\nI have read in the _Taj_ that one of the kings of Persia took counsel\nwith his _Wazirs,_ [and here follows a discussion about the necessity of\nconfiding one's secret to one man only and not more.] (p. 25)\n\n[Sidenote: Epistle of Aberwez.]\n\nI have read in the Epistle of Aberwez to his son Shiruya who was\nimprisoned by him,[here follows the advisability of taking counsel with\na certain class of people.] (p. 30).\n\n[Sidenote: Marzbans.]\n\nOne of the kings of Persia, when he consulted the Marzbans and they did\nnot give their opinion in a proper way, summoned those who were\nentrusted with provisioning the Marzbans and punished them. The latter\ncomplained that the error was on the part of the Marzbans whereas the\npunishment was awarded to them and the king replied that was so, and\nthat the Marzbans would not have committed the error unless their minds\nwere not dependent upon their food.\n\n[Sidenote: Buzurjamaher.]\n\n[Sidenote: Books of the Persians.]\n\n[Sidenote: Ideal Persian Secretary]\n\nSays Buzurjamaher, \"When you are in doubt as to the propriety of doing\none of two things then look out for the one which is nearest to your\ndesires and relinquish it.\" (p. 23). And it is said in the _Books of the\nPersians_, [and here follows one of the most frequently repeated\ninjunctions about the strict guarding of one's secrets.] (p. 40.) The\nPersians were in the habit of saying that the person would be deficient\nas a writer who was not conversant with the nature of flowing waters,\nwith the digging of canals, with mirage, with the length of days as to\nparticular seasons, with the rising of the new moon, and its effects,\nwith weights and measures, with mensuration, triangles, squares, and\nmeasurements of areas involving various angles, with the preparation of\nchannels and bridges and water mills, with the implements of artisans,\nand with the intricacies of mathematics. (p. 43).\n\n[Sidenote: Mobedan-Mobed]\n\nI have read in one of the _Books of the Persians_ that the\n_Mobedan-Mobed_ in eulogising the art of writing said etc ... (p. 47).\n\n[Sidenote: Epistle of Aberwez.]\n\nI have read in the Epistle of Aberwez to his son Shiruya. [Then follows\nan advice about severely punishing even a small piece of dishonesty.]\n(p, 58).\n\n[Sidenote: The _Taj_.]\n\nI have read in the _Taj_ that Aberwez said to the treasurer [here\nfollows some observations on integrity.]\n\n[Sidenote: Persian sense of justice and equity.]\n\nI have read in the _Ain_ that it behoves the ruler to understand the\njurisdiction of rightful justice, of justice which is not equity, of\nequity which is not justice, and to use his judgment with regard to\nevidence and eyewitnesses, and to refrain from doubtful matters. Since\nit is both justice and equity to kill a person for the slaughter of a\nperson, and it is justice without equity to kill a master for the\nslaughter of a slave, and it is equity without justice to award the same\npunishment for a crime committed by a sane man as to one who was not in\nhis senses. (p. 88).\n\nAnd I have read in the _Taj_: Said Aberwez to his chamberlain; [and here\nfollow very interesting instructions regarding the treatment which the\nchamberlain was to give to the various persons seeking an audience of\nthe king.] (p. 74).\n\nI have read in the _Taj_ [here follows an address of a secretary to a\nking.]\n\n[Sidenote: Speech from the throne.]\n\nI have read in the _Siyaral Ajam_ [one of the Arabic versions of _Shah\nNameh_] that Ardeshir, when he was firmly established on the throne,\ngathered together his subjects and addressed them with eloquence\nexhorting them to love and obedience to himself, and warning them\nagainst sin and dividing the people into four classes, upon which those\npresent made obeisance and their spokesman addressed the king as\nfollows. [Here follows one of those typical speeches of which we have so\nmany in _Shah Nameh_, and which leaves no doubt that the originals of\nthem were composed in Pahlavi and that they were almost literally\ntranslated.]\n\n\n_JAHIZ._\n\n_KITAB-AL-BAYAN VA-AL-TABAYYIN._\n\n_(Egyptian Edition.)_\n\n\nPART I.\n\nThe dictum of BUZURJAMEHR: Buzurg, son of Bokhtagan was asked, \"Which is\nthe thing which covers indolence.\" \"Aye\" he said, \"Wisdom, which gives\nbeauty to it.\" They said, \"If a person has got no wisdom?\" He said,\n\"Then property, which will cover it.\" They said, \"But if there is no\nproperty?\" He said, \"His friends will earn respect for him.\" They said,\n\"But if he has got no friends to earn respect for him?\" He said, \"If a\nperson is indolent then he must preserve silence\" They said, \"But if he\ndoes not observe silence?\" He said, \"Then sudden death is better for him\nthan that he should remain, in the world of the living.\" This passage\nhas been repeated at page 123 with a slight difference. There the\ninterrogator is Kisra Anushirvan, and the question is, which thing is\nthe best for a man who is indolent. Buzurg replies, \"Wisdom, with which\nhe may be happy.\" (p, 4.)\n\nThere is mention of several authors and books similar to _Kalileh wa\nDimneh_ with the names of their authors including Sahal Ibn Harun, Ibn\nRayhani, Al Katib. (p. 30.)\n\nSays Ismai: In the alphabet of the Romans there is no _zad_ and among\nthe Persians there is no _tha_. (p. 36)\n\nA longish definition and description of oratory by Ibn ul Mukaffa. (p.\n64.)\n\nIbn Mukaffa again referred to. (p. 65.)\n\nInstances of Arabic poetry in which Persian words and phrases are\nintermingled _e.g., garden_ for _unuk_ (neck); _av sard_ for cold water,\n&c. (p. 79.)\n\n[There are several other instances where the Persian words are there,\nbut the copyist and possibly also the editor, do not seem to have\nunderstood the Kasida and the editor observes in a marginal note that,\nthe text is corrupt, G.K.N.]\n\n\nPART II.\n\nMention of Sahal Ibn Harun. (p. 37.)\n\nMention of Persia, (p. 53.)\n\nMention of Abdallah Ibn Mukaffa. (p. 84.)\n\nMention of Persia, (p. 92.)\n\nDicta of Ibn al Mukatia on the dignity of kings and of nobles, (p. 104.)\n\nReference to Khalid al Kisravi. (p. 105.)\n\nReference to Ibn al Mukaffa. (p. 109.)\n\nKhalid al Kisrawi. (p. 112.)\n\nAl Hurmuzan. (p. 139.)\n\nOn the service of kings. (p. 176.)\n\n\nPART III.\n\nThe ways of the Shuubiya. (p. 2.)\n\nReference to Persia. (p. 5.)\n\nPersia and Arabia compared. (p. 7.)\n\nArabia and Persia compared. (p. 12.)\n\nArabia and Persia contrasted. The prophets of Ajam. (p, 13.)\n\nReference to Persia. (p. 44.)\n\nThe Persian throne. (p. 77.)\n\nDicta of Mukaffa. (p. 87.)\n\nKhalid al Barmaki. (p. 110.)\n\nDicta on Adab of Mukaffa. (p. 135.)\n\nReference to Barmaki. (p. 174.)\n\nReference to Barmaki. (p. 170.)\n\nSahal Ibn-Harun. (p. 185.)\n\nDictum of Buzurja Meher. (p. 217.)\n\nMadaini quoted. (p. 233.)\n\nPersia referred to. (p. 234.)\n\n\nPART III., PAGE 5.\n\n[Sidenote: Value of Zoroastrian literature.]\n\nAnd we note that the persons most superior with, regard to preaching our\nsermons are the Persians. And among the Persians the most clever in this\nrespect are the people of Fars, and they are the sweetest in words, and\ntheir pronunciation is the most correct. And the most difficult in this\nrespect are the people of Merv. The most eloquent dialect of Persia is\nthe Dari. As regards the Pahlavi idiom, of the people of the country of\nAhwaz are the best. And as regards the chantings of the HERBEDS and the\nsongs of the MOBEDS the superiority in this respect lies with the\nannotators of the Zemzema. And it is said that he who desires to acquire\nproficiency in the art of eloquence, and to be acquainted with rare\nexpressions, and to be profoundly versed in vocabulary should read the\nbook of Karwand. Moreover, if it is necessary to acquire sagacity and\ngood manners and knowledge of the various interpretations of terms, a\nknowledge of pleasing expression and agreeable interpretation, one\nshould study the LIVES OF KINGS, since for the Persians this book\ncontains essays and sermons and fine expressions.\n\n\nHAMZA ISPAHANI.\n\n[Sidenote: Why no authentic history of Iran has survived.]\n\n[Sidenote: A clear reference to the ambiguous Pahlavi script and to the\ngreat difficulty of translating from it:]\n\n[Sidenote: Enumeration of the sources of Iranian history.]\n\nThere are four dynasties among the kings of Persia and their enumeration\nis given alone and without any history of the events of their time or\nthe characteristics of the kings of Persia during the protracted period\nof their sovereignty. They were divided into four groups called the\nFeshdadiya, the Kayaniya, the Ashghaniya, and the Sasaniya. Their entire\nchronology is dubious and not certain since it was translated after 150\nyears from one language into another and from one equivocal set of\nsymbols for figures into another set of symbols, so that there remained\nnothing for me with reference to a narrative, in these chapters except\nto bring together the doubtful transcripts. I succeeded in finding eight\ntranscripts and these were the following:--The Book of the Reigns of the\nKings of Persia translated by Ibn al Mukaffa, the Book of the Reigns of\nthe Kings of Persia translated by Muhammad Ibn al Jaham al Barmak, the\nBook of the History of the Kings of Persia which was taken out of the\ntreasury of the Khalif Mamun; the Book of the Reigns of the Kings of\nPersia which was translated by Zaduya son of Shahuya of Ispahan; the\nBook of the Reigns of the Kings of Persia which was translated or\ncompiled by Muhammad Ibn al Behram Ibn Mutyan of Ispahan; the Book of\nthe Chronology of the Kings of Persia which was translated or compiled\nby Heshan Ibn Kasum of Ispahan, the Book of the Chronology of the Kings\nof the Sasanian Dynasty which was improved upon by Behram son of Mardan\nShah, Mobed of the district of Shabur in the country of Fars. And when I\nhad collected together all these works, I compared one with the others\nand then acquired what was necessary for the writing of this chapter.\n\n[Sidenote: Incorrect translations from Pahlavi.]\n\nAnd says Abu Mashar, the astronomer:--The majority of their [Iranian]\nhistories are interpolated and corrupt, and there is the corruption\nbecause they have come down from a great many years ago and because they\nhave been translated from one writing into another and from one tongue\ninto another and hence there have been mistakes of either excess or\ndefect.\n\n\"And the Persians start their assertion from the Book which was brought\nto them by Zaradusht and which was called Avesta. This is the Book of\ntheir religion. It alleges that there have elapsed since the reign of\nKayumarth, the father of mankind, down to the reign of king Yazdegerd,\n4182 years, 10 months, and 19 days.\"\n\n[Sidenote: Corrupt texts and faulty translations.]\n\nSays Musa Ibn Isa al Kesravi in his book: I saw the Book which is called\nthe _Khoday Nameh_ and which is the Book which when it was translated\nfrom Persian into Arabic was entitled _Kitab al Muluk al Fars._ I\ncarefully examined the copies of this Book and looked through the\nnarratives in them, and I found them in disagreement with each other so\nthat I could not find even two copies which agreed with each other, and\nthis was on account of the doubts in the minds of the translators who\nturned from one writing into another.\n\n[Sidenote: Mobed Behram the historian.]\n\nAnd turning back to what I have related in the previous chapter as\nregards the chronology [of the Persians], I relate what has been stated\nby Behram son of Mardanshah, _Mobed_ of the district of Shabur in the\nprovince of Fars. Says Behram the mobed: I collected together a little\nover twenty copies of the book called _Khoday Nameh_ and I put together\nproperly the chronology of the kings of Persia from the times of\nKayumarth, the father of mankind, till the last days when the empire was\ntransferred from them to the Arabs.\n\n[Hamza describes the dress of the kings according to a book in which\nthey were depicted just before their death. And he gives the buildings\nwhich each of them erected, especially the fire-temples they established\nalong with the villages on the produce of which they were to be\nmaintained.]\n\n[Sidenote: Avesta.]\n\n\"I have read in the book which has been translated from one of their\nbooks called _Avesta_,\" and so on Hamza proceeds regarding the beginning\nof creation.\n\n\nTABARI.\n\n(1st Series, Vol. 2, page 675.)\n\n[Sidenote: Fire-temples in India.]\n\nIt is related by historians versed in the antiquities of Arabia and\nPersia that Bhishtasb, son of Kay Loharasb, when he assumed the crown,\nsaid:--To-day we have become sovereign and we shall employ our thoughts,\nour action, and our knowledge for the acquisition of the good. And it is\nsaid that he built in Fars a city called Fasa and he built fire-temples\nin India, etc., and appointed _herbeds_ to the same. He assigned several\ndignities to seven of his noblemen in his dominions and appointed each\nof them to the charge of a district.\n\n[Sidenote: The appearance of Zoroaster.]\n\n[Sidenote: Wars of Iran and Turan.]\n\nZaradusht son of Isfayman appeared in the thirtieth year of his reign\nand laid claim to apostleship and endeavoured that his religion might be\naccepted by the king. The latter refused and then Zaradusht satisfied\nhim. Upon which the king accepted his claim. And he brought to him a\nWriting which he claimed was a revelation. And the said Writing was\ninscribed on 12,000 cow hides and they were embellished with gold, and\nBishtasp deposited the same in a place in Istakhar called Darbesht and\nhe appointed _herbeds_ in that connection. He prohibited the teaching of\nit to ordinary people.... [Here follows a passage which is not very\nclear regarding the difference that arose between the king of Iran and\nthe king of the Turks relating to this new religion which Bishtasb had\nadopted. The name of the Turk sovereign is given as Khurzasaf.] Now when\nthe messenger arrived with the epistle to Bishtasb there were gathered\ntogether the Ahl-bayat[1] and the noblemen of the empire, including\nJamasaf the Wise, and Zarrin son of Loharasaf. Then Bishtasb wrote to\nthe king of the Turks a strongly worded reply challenging him to a war\nand expressing his determination not to withdraw the step that he had\ntaken and saying that that even if he refrained from fighting there\nwould be all the people on both sides who would continue the struggle.\nOn that day there were in the council of Bishtasb his brother Zarrin,\nand Nastur son of Zarrin, and Isfandiyar and Beshotan, the sons of\nBishtasb and all the progeny of Loharasb. On the side of Khorasaf there\nwere Ju Hormaz, and Hudarman his brother, and the Ahl-bayat and\nBaidarafsh, the magician. In the battle Zarrin was killed which was a\nheavy blow to Bishtasb and a great booty was taken by his son\nIsfandiyar, and Baidaraf was killed which was a calamity to the Turks.\nThere was a huge slaughter and Khorsasaf fled. Thereupon Bishtasb\nreturned to Balkh. Now when a number of years had passed after this war\na person called Karzam attacked Isfandiyar. There was also an\nestrangement between Bishtasb and Isfandiyar. Order was issued for his\nimprisonment in a castle in which there were ladies, Bishtasb then\nproceeded in the direction of Kerman and Sagistan and proceeded towards\na mountain called Tamdar. [The various manuscripts write the word\ndifferently and the editors have printed it without the diacritical\nmarks so that it can be read in a variety of ways], for the purpose of\nteaching the religion and of spreading it there. And he left behind him\nhis father Loharasaf in the city of Balkh and the treasures and the\nproperties along with the harem including Khatus, his queen, were also\nleft with the old man. [As the Editor points out Khatus is the Hutaosa\nof _Gosh Yast_ 26, and _Ram Yast_ 36[2]]. Now this fact was conveyed by\nthe spies to Khorasaf and when he learnt it he collected an innumerable\narmy and proceeded from his country towards Balkh and Khorasaf thought\nthat this was an opportunity of attacking Bishtasb and his country. Thus\nwhen he approached Takhun he sent forward Ju Hormaz, his brother, with a\nlarge army and directed him to continue his march till he reached the\ncentre of Bishtasb's country and to invade it and attack the people and\nthe cities. And this was done by Ju Hormaz who shed a large amount of\nblood and carried off incalculable booty. And Khorasaf followed him and\nset fire to the archives and slew Lohorasaf and the _herbeds_ and\ndestroyed the fire-temples, _(buyut-an-niran)_ and he took possession of\nthe properties and the treasuries and took two of the daughters of\nLohorasaf prisoner and one of them was called Khumay and the other\nBazafreh. [This of course is according to Firdousi Beh Afrid]. He\ncaptured a great standard which was called Dirafsh Kabyan and he pursued\nBishtasb who was fleeing from him.\n\n[Footnote 1: Ahl-bayat, or people of the house, is the Arabic equivalent\nof the Iranian Visputhra and was applied by Arabs to the superior\nPersian noblemen.]\n\n[Footnote 2: Here is evidence, on the one hand, that the Arab historians\nhad Iranian histories at their disposal and on the other, that the\nlatter are still reflected in the _yasht_ literature.]\n\n[The historian narrates how Isfandiyar went into the heart of the\nkingdom of the Turk and reached his capital which was called \"Dez Ruin\"\nand he proceeds to say \"and being interpreted in Arabic it means the\npalace of copper.\" There is further reference to the canals and castles\nwhich we can trace to the BUNDEHESH. The struggle between Rustum and\nIsfandiyar is also described. This is followed by a curious passage\nregarding Zoroaster.]\n\n\nDINAWARI.\n\nPAGE 26, CAIRO EDITION.\n\nTHE CALL OF ZARADUSHT.\n\n[Sidenote: Rustam and Isfandiyar.]\n\nAnd it is said that Zaradusht the head of the Magians came to Bishtasb\nthe king and told him, \"I am the Apostle of God to you\", and gave him\nthe Book which the Magians possess. Then Bishtasb believed in him and\naccepted his religion which is that of the Magians and exhorted the\npeople of his kingdom to the same and they also accepted it _nolence\nvolence._ And Rustam the Strong, was at that time the Governor of\nSagistan and Khorasan, and he was powerful of body and possessed of\ngreat vigour. And when this happened it was reported to Kaykobad the\nking, this, about the admittance of Bishtasb into the Magian religion\nand his abandoning the religion of their forefathers. Kaykobad became\nexceedingly angry at this, and said that this was forsaking of the\nreligion of their forefathers who had inherited it from one generation\nto another. Then the people of Sagistan were gathered together and they\nwore incited to destroy Bishtasb. And they revolted against him. Upon\nthis Bishtasb called upon Isfandiyar who was the strongest man of his\ntime and said to him, \"Oh son, the kingdom will be entrusted to you. But\nthe affairs will not improve except by killing Rustam, and you know his\nstrength and vigour. But you are his match in power and prowess. So do\nyou choose from the army whomever you like and then proceed against\nhim.\" So Isfandiyar selected 12,000 Persian knights from the forces of\nhis father, and marched against Rustam. And Rustam proceeded towards him\nbetween the boundaries or Sagistan and Khorasan. Isfandiyar suggested to\nRustam that their armies should be excused from attacking each other,\nbut that they two should engage in single combat and that whoever killed\nthe other should be held to be the victor. Rustam agreed to the proposal\nand the covenant. Then the two armies stood abide and the two warriors\nengaged in a duel. Now the Persians have a good deal to say in this\nmatter and that it was Rustam who killed Isfandiyar and that the\nlatter's army returned to Bishtasb and informed him of what had happened\nto his son Isfandiyar. The king was overwhelmed with grief fell ill and\ndied. And the kingdom, came to the grandson Bahman, son of Isfandiyar,\nand it is related that soon after Rustam returned to his residence in\nSagistan, he died.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Note that Dinawari had obviously before him Iranian\ntraditional materials for his history.]\n\nDINAWARI TREATS OF THE FOLLOWING IRANIAN SUBJECTS IN HIS CLEAR AND\nSUCCINCT FASHION.\n\nThe reign of Baywarasaf, Farasiyab; Dhahak, the end of the reign of\nMinosher and the beginning of the reign of Farasiyab, the reign of Zab\nson of Budkan and Kaykohad Zab; the reign of Kaykawuys son of Kaykobad,\nthe reign of Kai Khosro, the reign of Lohrasf and the invasion of Bukht\nNasar; the reign of Bhishtasb in Persia; the call of Zaradusht, the\nreign of Bahman Ibn Isfandiyar in Persia and the emancipation of the\nJews, the reign of Khumani (Humay) the queen of Bahman; the reign of\nDara Ibn Bahman; the war of Dara with Greece; the reign of Darayush; the\norigin of Alexander; the invasion of Alexander against Dara; the reign\nof Ardwan; One para. is devoted to the Muluk ut Tawaef, and then\nregularly follow all the Sasanian kings beginning with Shahan Shah\nArdeshir.\n\n\nIBN AL ATHIR\n\n(Vol. I., PAGE 110 CAIRO EDITION.)\n\n_Account of King Loharasp and his son Bishtasb and the appearance of\nZaradusht_.\n\n[Sidenote: Zend and Pazend.]\n\nAnd we have related that Kai Khosrou, when he was at the point of death,\nbequeathed the crown to the son of his uncle Loharasp; and when he\nacquired the sovereignty he got possession of the throne of gold adorned\nwith jewels. For him was built in Khorasan the city of Balkh which was\ncalled Husna (charming). He established archives and strengthened the\nempire by the selection of soldiers and by advancing agriculture. He\ntook taxes for the purpose of wages for his soldiers. At that time the\nTurks were in great strength and he went down to Balkh to fight them,\nand he was a favourite with his people and strong in overpowering his\nvigourous enemies, kind to his well-wishers, and of great intrepidity.\nHe raised great buildings and cut a number of canals, built cities. The\nkings of India and China and the occident used to pay tribute to him and\naddressed him in their despatches as their 'Lord' out of fear and\nrespect for him. Subsequently he abdicated the empire and throne and\nengaged himself in devotion, appointing in succession to him his son\nBishtasb to be king. And his reign endured for 120 years. After him\nBishtasb became king and in his days appeared Zaradusht son of Sakiman\n[it should be Safiman, the difference being only that of a dot] who\nclaimed to prophesy and the Magians followed him. And according to what\nis stated by writers, Zaradusht belonged to Palestine and was a personal\nservant to one of the disciples of Armaya, the prophet. He was\nunfaithful to him and told him a lie so that God cursed him and he was\nafflicted with leprosy and went away to the country of Azarbayjan and\nthere started the religion of Magians. And it is also stated by others\nthat he was a Persian and that he composed a Book and went about with it\nin the world. But no one knew its meaning. And it was alleged that it\nwas in a heavenly language and was called as such. It was entitled Ashta\n[this is clearly a misformation of Avesta]. Then he left Azarbayjan and\nproceeded towards Fars. No one knew what was in the book and no one\naccepted it. Then he went to India and produced it before the kings\nthere. Next he went to China and Turkey. But no one acknowledged it, and\nhe was driven out from their countries, and started for Farghana whose\nking prepared to slay him so that he fled from there and bent his steps\ntowards Bhishtasb son of Loharasp; who ordered his imprisonment and he\nwas consequently in captivity for a time. Now Zaradusht wrote a\ncommentary on his Book called the Zend which means interpretation. Next\nhe commented upon the Zend in a book called Bazand, that is,\ninterpretation of interpretation, and therein are various sciences like\nastrology, astronomy, medicine, etc., with reference to the history of\npast ages, and the books of the prophets. And in his book is\nstated,--\"Adhere to what I have brought you till the time when there\nwill come to you the man of the red camel,\" which means Muhammad the\nProphet. This was at the beginning of the year 1600 and it was on this\naccount that there has been enmity between the Magians and the Arabs and\nit has been mentioned in the history of Sabur Dhul Aktaf that this was\none of the reasons justifying the raids on the Arabs. But God knows the\nbest.\n\n[Sidenote: The Eternal fire.]\n\n[Sidenote: Royal archives forbidden to the Vulgar.]\n\nThen Bishtasb caused Zaradusht to present himself before him since he\nwas in Balkh. And when he came to him he commenced with his religion.\nBishtasb admired it, followed it, and forced his people to embrace it,\nand slew a large number of them till the rest adopted it. But the\nMagians assert that he was by origin from Azarbayjan and that he came to\nthe king from the roof of his palace and that there was in his hand a\ncube of fire with which he played without its injuring him; that whoever\ntook it from his hand did so without hurting himself. He caused the king\nto follow him and to accept his creed. And he built fire temples in the\ncountry and lighted them with that fire. For it is stated that the fires\nwhich are in their fire-temples are burning from that fire to this day.\nBut they are telling an untruth since the fire of the Magians was\nextinguished in all their temples when God sent Muhammad down as his\napostle as we shall describe, God willing, in the sequel, as well as the\nappearance of Zaradusht after thirty years of the reign of Bishtasb. And\nZaradusht brought a writing which is alleged to be revelation from God\nand is inscribed on 12,000 cow hides inlaid with gold. Bishtasb\ndeposited them in a place in Istakhar and forbade the teaching of thorn\nto the vulgar.\n\n\nMASUDI.\n\n_Kitab-at-tanbih._\n\n[Sidenote: The Kohan Nameh and the Ain Nameh.]\n\nThe Persians have a book called the _Kohan Nameh_ in which are mentioned\nall the officers of the Persian monarch amounting to 600 and classed\naccording to their respective ranks. This book formed part of the _Ain\nNameh._[1] The meaning of Ain Nameh is the 'Book of regulations'. It is\na book containing several thousands of leaves and no one can find a copy\nof it anywhere except among the _mobeds_ and others invested with\nauthority. The mobed of the Persians at the moment of writing this\nhistory, that is in the year 364, for the country of Jabal in Iraq and\nfor the countries of Ajam, is Ammad son of Ashwahisht. Before him these\ncountries had for their mobed Isfandiyar, son of Adarbad, son of Anmid,\nwho was killed by Radi at Baghdad in 325.\n\n[Footnote 1: A remarkable passage from this Pahlavi treatise has been\nembodied in a close Arabic version in Ibn Kutayha's _Uyun-al-Akhbar._\nThe credit of discovering and translating this unique passage into a\nEuropean language belongs to M.K. Inostranzev.]\n\nI have seen in the city of Istakhar in Fars in the year 303 in the\nhouse of a high noble Persian, a large book in which were set out along\nwith the descriptions of several sciences the histories of the\nkings of Persia, their reigns and the monuments which they had\nerected,--fragments which I have not been able to find anywhere else in\nPersian books, neither in the _Khoday Nameh_, nor in the _Ain Nameh_ nor\nin the _Kohan Nameh_ or anywhere else.\n\n[Sidenote: Portrait of Sasanian kings taken just before their demise.]\n\n[Sidenote: Persian Imperial archives: Translation into Arabic.]\n\nIn this book were pictures of the kings of Persia belonging to the house\nof Sasan, twenty seven in number, twenty five men and two women. Each of\nthem was represented as at the moment of death, whether old or young\nwith the royal ornaments, with the tiara, hair, beard, and all the\nfeatures of his face. This dynasty reigned over the country for 433\nyears one month and seven days. When one of these kings died his\nportrait was painted and it was deposited in the treasury in order that\nthe living princes may know the features of the dead kings. The\nrepresentation of every king who was painted as a warrior was in a\nstanding posture; that of every king who was occupied with government\naffairs was in the sitting posture. To it was joined the biography of\neach, of them detailing his public and private life together with the\nimportant events and facts concerning the most interesting incidents of\nhis reign. The book which I saw was redacted according to the documents\nfound in the treasuries of the kings of Persia and it was completed in\nthe middle of the second Jamada of the year 113. It was translated for\nHisham son of Abdal Malik son of Merwan from Persian into Arabic. The\nfirst of the kings of this dynasty whom one sees there is Ardeshir. The\ndistinctive colour in his portrait was of a brilliant red. His trousers\nwere of sky-blue and the mitre was green on gold. He held a lance in the\nhand and he was standing. The last was that of Yezdegerd, son of\nShahariyar, son of Kesra Abarvez. His distinctive colour was green. His\ntrousers were sky-blue and his mitre vermillion. He held in his hand a\nlance and rested the other hand on his sabre. This painting was made\nwith Persian colours which are no longer to be found now-a-days and of\ngold and silver dissolved and of pulverised copper. The leaves of the\nbook were of a purple colour and of a marvellous tint. It was so\nbeautiful and prepared with such care that I do not know whether it was\npaper or whether it was thin parchment. (P. 250.)\n\n[Which stands for Pahlavi and not modern Persian.]\n\n[Sidenote: Zoroaster, Avesta, and Avesta Script.]\n\nZaradusht brought to the king the book of _Avesta_, the name of which in\nArabic has received a final _kaf_ and has thus become _Abestak_. The\nnumber of chapters of book is twenty one, each chapter comprising 200\nleaves. In this book we find a total of sixty vowels and consonants each\nwith a distinct character. Some of these characters are found elsewhere\nand others have fallen into disseutude. For this script is not confined\nto the language of the Avesta.\n\n[Sidenote: Extent of Avesta.]\n\n[Sidenote: Persian translation of Avesta.]\n\n[Sidenote: Contents of Avesta.]\n\nZoroaster invented this writing which the Magians have called Sin\nDabireh, that is to say, the 'sacred writing'. He incised his writing\ninto 12,000 cow skins and filled it with gold. It was in the ancient\nlanguage of Persia of which no one has any knowledge to-day. Only a few\nportions of its chapters have been translated into the modern Persian.\nIt is this Persian translation which they have in their hands when, they\nsay their prayers. The translation contains fragments like the Ashtad,\nthe Chitrasht, the Aban Yasht, the Hadukht, and other chapters. In the\nChitrasht are found the recitals of the origin and the end of the world.\nHadukht comprises exhortations.\n\n[Sidenote: commentaries on Avesta.]\n\nZoroaster composed the commentary on the Avesta which he called the\nZend, and which in the eyes of his followers was revealed to him by God.\nHe subsequently translated it from Pahlavi into Persian. Zoroaster,\nfurther, prepared a commentary on the Zend and called it Bazend.\n\n[Sidenote: Their destruction.]\n\nThe Mobeds and the Herbeds, learned in the science of religion,\ncommented in their turn on this commentary and their work was called the\nBarideh, and, by others, the Akradeh. After he had conquered the Persian\nEmpire and put to death Dara son of Dara, Alexander burnt them....\n\n[Sidenote: Synopsis of Zoroastrian beliefs.]\n\nBesides the two modes of writing which they owe to Zoroaster, the\nPersians have five other methods in many of which Nabatian words have\nbeen introduced. We have explained all these in our books already cited\nwith quotations of portions regarding the miracles of Zoroaster, the\nmarks and the proof of his revelation, the belief in the five eternal\nprinciples which are Ormazd or God, Ahriman which is the same as Satan,\nthe wicked, Kah or time, Jay or space, Homa or the good spirituous\nliquor, the grounds on which they support these doctrines, the reasons\nwhy they render homage to the two luminaries and to other heavenly\nlights, the distinction which they make between fire and light, their\ndiscourses regarding the origin of the human species, on Mashya son of\nGayomert, and Mashyana his daughter, and how the Persians trace their\ngeneologies back to these two personages, and finally, other things\nconnected with the exercise of their religion, the practice of their\ncult and the various places where they have established their fire\nsanctuaries.\n\n[Sidenote: Confutation of prejudice Moslem theologians.]\n\nCertain Musalman theologians and authors of books on various sects, and\nseveral authors who have set before them the task at different times of\nrefuting Zoroastrianism have alleged that it is believed in their\nreligion that from the reflexion of God on himself has issued an evil\nspirit or the devil and that God, indulgent towards him, has accorded\nhim a certain time during which to tempt mankind. These authors further\ncite as appertaining to this religion propositions which the Magians\nthemselves have always rejected. I believe that they must have heard\nthese particulars from ordinary people and that they have recorded them\nas the authentic expression of the followers of the religion of\nZoroaster.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Our celebrated Arab polyhistor not only does not malign the\nfaith of Zoroaster but proceeds to confute his prejudiced\nco-religionists who pretended to refute the old faith of Iran.]\n\n\nSHAHARASTANI.\n\nKITAB AL MILAL VAL NIHAL.\n\n(_Page 112, Bombay Edition. Compare also page 83 of the Egyptian Edition\non the margin of Ibn Hazm._)\n\nTHE MAGIANS.\n\nThese people believe in two Principles as we have already stated; only,\nthat the original Magians were of the belief that it was not possible\nthat there should be two Principles eternal and without beginning, but\nthat the light was without beginning and darkness was only produced; and\nthey were of different views as regards the origin of its rise,--whether\nit arose from light, since light cannot bring something that was partly\nevil. How then could the principle of evil or anything else arise since\nthere was nothing at first which participated with light in its\nproduction and in its being eternal? Here the error of the Magians\nbecomes apparent. They also assert that the first of persons was\nKayumarth, though they sometimes say that he was Zarwan the great, and\nthat the last of the prophets was Zaradusht. The Kayumarthiya assert\nthat Kayumarth was Adam; Kayumarth appears as Adam in the histories of\nIndia and Persia. But all the histories are against this.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: I have constantly referred to Haarbrucker's German\ntranslation and to the German passages cited by Gottiel in the Drisseler\nVolume which was very kindly presented to me by our Prof. A.V.W.\nJackson. Gottiel has omitted the sections regarding the Kayumarthiya.]\n\n\nTHE ZARADUSHTIYA.\n\nThese are the followers of Zaradusht, son of Budashab who appeared in\nthe time of Bishtasb, son of Lohrasb, the king. His father came from\nAzarbayjan and his mother from Ray and her name was Doghd. They assert\nthat they had prophets and kings and that they had Kayumarth who was the\nfirst king on the earth and that his residence was at Istakhar, that\nafter him came Haushanj, son of Farawal, who descended on India. After\nhim came his son Jam; the king. Then followed prophets and kings among\nwhom was Minochehr. He proceeded to Babel and settled there, and it is\nrelated that Musa, (may peace be on him!) appeared in his time. Things\ncontinued like this till the sovereignty came to Bishtasb, son of\nLohrasb. In his time appeared Zaradusht al Hakim or the Wise....\n\n[Sidenote: Miracles of Zoroaster.]\n\n[Sidenote: Essence of his teachings.]\n\n[Sidenote: His Cosmogony.]\n\nThen the child [Zaradusht] laughed a great laugh which was noticed by\nall those present, and people contrived so as to put Zaradusht in the\nway of cattle and the way of horses and in the way of wolves. But each\nof them stood up to protect him from its own kind. After he had attained\nto an age of thirty God sent him as his prophet and apostle to his\ncreation, and he turned himself with his calling to king Bishtasb and\nthe latter accepted his creed. His creed consisted in the reverence of\nGod and the non-reverence of Satan, in the obedience to good and in the\nprohibition of the evil, and in abstaining from unclean things. He said\nthat light and darkness were two original principles which opposed each\nother antagonistically, and so were Yazdan and Ahriman and that both\nwere the beginning of the created things in the world. That the\ncomposition of it was the product of the co-mingling and that the\nvariety of forms were given rise to by means of the various unions, but\nthat God was the creator of light and darkness and of both the prime\norigins. He was one without a companion, without an opponent, and\nwithout anyone who was his like, and that it was not possible to trace\nto him the existence of darkness in the way in which the Zarwanites\ntrace it, but that good and evil, pure and impure, holy and unholy, were\nbrought forth only by the co-mingling of light and darkness, and had not\nthe two fore-gathered the world would not have come into existence. They\nwere pitched each against the other and they fight each other till light\nshall overcome darkness, and good evil. And then the good will be\nliberated and come to its own, and the evil will be hurled down to its\nown world and that will be the cause of the emancipation. God, the\nAlmighty, however, has in his wisdom compounded and co-mingled them.\nSometimes they make out that light is the original principle and express\nthemselves thus: The existence of light is a real existence. Darkness,\nhowever, is only a consequence like the shadow of a person. It was\nalleged that darkness was a thing produced though not created in\nreality, and that God had produced light and that darkness had come out\nas a consequence, because contrast was a matter of necessity in\nexistence. Hence the existence of darkness was also essential. And thus\nit had become a thing created although not as in the first view, as\nbrought out with reference to a man's shadow.\n\n[Sidenote: Zend Ave-ta.]\n\nHe [Zaradusht] also had composed a book about which people said that it\nwas revealed to him, namely, the _Zand Awasta_ which divides the world\ninto two parts, Mino or the spiritual and Geti or the corporeal; that is\nto say, into spiritual and corporeal worlds, or in other words, into\nmental and physical. And just as the creation is divided into two\nworlds, so according to him, all that was in the world was again divided\ninto two, namely, _Bakhshis_ [Haarbrucker translates _Bakhshis_ by\n_gnade_ or favour, but the original Arabic expression is _takdir_ which\nmeans _destiny_, and _kunish_ or _deed_, by which are meant\npre-destination By God and human action.]\n\n[Sidenote: Zoroastrian Ethics.]\n\nFurther, he discussed the duties relating to the religious law and these\nhave reference to the movements of man. He divided them into three parts\n_Manish, Guyish_ and _Kunish_, meaning thereby belief, speech, and act,\nand these comprehended all the duties. When in this a man is wanting he\nis out of obedience and out of creed. But if he conducts himself in\nthese three movements according to the standard of the law and the\nordinance he attains to the highest good.[1]\n\n[Footnote 1: Here is an instance where the Arab philosopher and writer\nhands down to posterity the spirit of Zoroastrianism without prejudice\nand with precision.]\n\n[Sidenote: Some Miracles explained.]\n\nThe Zaradashtiya ascribed to Zaradusht a number of miracles including\nthat while Zaradusht was thrown into prison the forefeet of the horse of\nBishtasb entered into its body. When he was set at liberty, the feet of\nthe animal came out. Next, it is said that he happened to pass a blind\nman at Dinawar and to have told him, \"Take the herb\", which he described\nto him \"and press its juice into your eye and you will be able to see\".\nThis was done and the blind man was restored to his sight. This,\nhowever, is to be attributed to his knowledge of the properties of the\nherb and so it is in no wise a miracle. (Here Gotthiel omits one section\non the Saisaniya and the Bihafridiya[1]).\n\n[Footnote 1: The Bihafridiya formed a heresy from Zoroastrianism in the\ntime of the Moslems. The sect furnishes the strongest proof that there\nwas no persecution worth the name in Persia at the time. Not only in\nthose days were the Zoroastrians permitted to follow their own faith but\nhere is a curious pars from Al Biruni which proves that both the\noriginal Zoroastrians and the heresy were permitted to flourish side by\nside under the Khalifs:--\"When Abu Moslem came to Nishapur the _mobeds_\nand _herbeds_ assembled before him telling him that this man [the\nfounder of the Bihafridi sect] had infected Islam as well as their own\n[Zoroastrian] religion. So he sent Abdalla to fetch him. He met him in\nthe mountain at Badjeh and brought him before Abu Moslem to put him to\ndeath together with such of his followers as he could capture. His\nfollowers called the Bihafridians still keep the institutes of their\nfounder and strongly resemble the Zam-Zamis among the Magians.\"\nShaharastani adds that they were the most hostile of God's creatures to\nthe Zamzami Magians. The entire chapter on the Iranian sects in\nShaharastani is worthy of careful and deep study. It explains the\ndivergence between the prescriptions of the _Vendidad_ and the practice\nof the bulk of the Iranians. The _Vendidad_ was, it would appear, the\nauthoritative scripture of one of the sects of Zoroastrianism. At any\nrate it is not too extravagant to deduce from the careful studies of the\nIranian religion by Arab writers that as the teachings of Sakya Muni\ndeveloped into more Buddhisms than one so there were several creeds with\nthe common designation of Zoroastrianism.]\n\n[Sidenote: The dignity of Mobedan Mobed.]\n\nThe Magians and the followers of the Two Principles and the followers of\nMani and the other sects which are related to the Magians are known as\nthe adherents of the Great creed or the Great religion. All the kings of\nPersia were the followers of the religion of Ibrahim, subjects and all\nthose who belonged to the country among them during the reign of each of\nthem followed the religion of their rulers. But these latter relied upon\nthe chief of the ecclesiastics, _Mobed Mobedan_, the sage of sages, and\nthe wisest of men according to whose instructions the kings conducted\nthemselves and without whose judgment they undertook nothing; to him\nthey showed reverence such as is shown to the Khalif of the time.\n\n\nIBN HAZM.\n\nKITAB AL FASAL FIL MILAL WAL HAWA WAL NAHAL.\n\n(PAGE 112, VOL. 1, EGYPTIAN ED.)\n\nAs regards the Magians they believed in the prophetship of Zaradasht....\n\nAnd as regards Zaradasht it is said that the majority of Moslems\nbelieved in his prophetship....\n\n[Sidenote: \"Majority of Moslems believed in the Prophetship of\nZoroaster.\"]\n\nAnd the Book of the Magians and their religious Law were for a long time\nduring their sovereignty in the possession of the _mobeds and_ 23\n_herbeds_. Each of the herbeds had a volume which was individual and\nseparate. In it was associated none of the other herbeds and no outsider\nhad any concern with it. Subsequently there was a break on account of\nAlexander setting fire to their books at the time when he invaded Dara,\nson of Dara, and they admit with unanimity that a portion of their\nscriptures to the extent of a third has perished. This has been\nmentioned by Bashir and Nasik and others of their men of learning....\n\n[Sidenote: History of Zoroastrian Sacred literature.]\n\nAnd Magians compiled all the scriptures (ayat) regarding the miracles of\nZoroaster such as that of the brass which was spread over and melted on\nhis chest and which did not injure him, and the feet of the horse which\nhad penetrated his belly and which were drawn out by him, etc.\n\n[Sidenote: Zoroastrians are _Kitabis_.]\n\nAnd among those who assert that the Magians are _Ahal Kitab_ are Ali Ibn\nTalib and Khuzayfa, may God be pleased on these two, and Said Bin Al\nMusib and Karadah and Abu Thaur and the whole of the sect of the\nZahurites. And we have set out the arguments of the validity of this\nstatement in our book entitled the _Isal_ in the chapters on Jehad,\nCeremonial Slaughter, and Nikah. And therein is sufficiently proved the\nvalidity of the acceptance of Jaziya by the prophet of God from them.\nFor in the clear statement of the Qoran in the last verses of the\nchapter of _Burat_, God has declared unlawful the acceptance of the\nJaziya from _non-Kitabis_....\n\nNow as regards the Magians they admit that the books of theirs in which\nis incorporated their religion were destroyed by fire by Alexander when\nhe slew Dara son of Dara,--that more than two-thirds of them have\nperished the remnants being less than a third,--that their religious law\nwas comprised in what has disappeared. Now since this is the condition\nof their religion, then their claims are void altogether became of the\ndisappearance of the majority of their books; since God does not held\nresponsible any person with reference to anything that has not been\nentrusted to him.\n\n[Sidenote: Zoroastrians extant scriptures are corrupt.]\n\nAnd among their books there is one entitled the _Khudhay_ to which they\npay great reverence, in which it is related that king Anushirwan\nprohibited the teaching of their religion in any one of the cities\nexcept Ardeshir Khurrah and the religion spread from Datjird. Before\nthis time it was not taught anywhere except Istakhar and it was not\nproper for anyone to engage in its study except a special class of\npeople. And of the books which remained after the conflagration by\nAlexander there were 23 volumes and there were appointed 23 _herbeds_,\none _herbed_ for each volume. And no herbed transgressed upon the volume\nof another. And the MOBED MOBEDAN was the superintendent of the whole of\nthose scriptures. Now whatever is in this condition has its contents\naltered and modified and each of the transcripts is in this state. Hence\nthey are corrupt and do not deserve to be regarded as authentic. Thus\nwhatever is in their books cannot be held to be authentic except by\nreason of faith alone since there are evident falsehoods in them like\nthe statement that their king mounted on Iblis and rode on him wherever\nhe willed, that man in the beginning originated from a vegetable like\ngrass called Sharaliya, and the birth of Bayarawan Siyawush son of Kay\nKawash who built a city called Kangdez between the earth and the heaven\nand settled therein 80,000 men belonging to the _people of family_, that\nthey are there to this day, and that when Behram Hamawand manifests\nhimself on his bull to restore to them their sovereignty that city will\ndescend to earth and will help him to restore their religion and Empire.\nSays Abu Muhammed, may God be pleased with him. And every book in which\nis incorporated a falsehood is invalid and fictitious. It does not come\nfrom God. Thus there is corruption in the religion of the Magians just\nas there is in the religion of the Jews and the Christians to an equal\ndegree.\n\n\nIBN HAUKAL.\n\nIbn Haukal has been edited in the _Bibliotheca Geogra phorum Arabicorum_\nby De Goege, but as the text is not available the following excerpts\nfrom a translation of it made over a century ago by Sir William Ouseley\nwill indicate its importance. He flourished in the middle of the 11th\ncentury.\n\n[Sidenote: Fire Temples.]\n\n\"There is not any district nor any town of Fars without a fire temple.\nThese are held in high veneration. We shall hereafter minutely describe\nthem. Also throughout Fars there are castles one stronger than another.\n\n[Sidenote: Nirang.]\n\n\"There is not any district of this province nor any without a fire\ntemple. One near Shapur they call Kunbud Kaush.... And in the religion\nof the Guebres it is ordained that 'Omnis Foemina quae tempore gravid it\nat is aut tempore menstruorum, fornicationem seu adultarium fecerit,\npura non erit, donec ad Pyraeum (seu templum Ignicolarum) accesserit\n(et) coram Heirbed (sacerdote) nuda ferit et urina vaccae se laverit.'\n\n\"In the province of Fars, they have three languages--the PARSI, which\nthey use in speaking one to another, though there may be some\nvariations of dialects in different districts yet it is in fact all the\nsame and they all understand the languages of each other and none of\ntheir expressions or words are unintelligible; the Pahlavi language\nwhich was formerly used in writings; this language now requires a\ncommentary or explanatory treatise; and the Arabic language which at\npresent is used in the Divans or royal courts of justice and revenue,\netc.\n\n[Sidenote: Maritime commerce.]\n\n\"As to the manners of the people in Fars those who are the chief men and\noccupy the higher offices in the service of the sovereign are polite and\ncourteous. They have fine palaces and are very hospitable. The people in\ngeneral, are kind and civil in their manners. The merchants are\nremarkably covetous and desirous of wealth. I have heard that there was\na certain man of Siraj who had forty years at sea never leaving his ship\nduring this time. Whenever he came to a port he sent some of his people\non shore to transact his commercial affairs, and when the business was\nfinished he sailed on to some other place. The inhabitants of Siraj\ndevoted their whole time to commerce and merchandise. I myself saw at\nthis place several persons who possessed 4,000 thousand dinars and there\nwere some who had still more and their clothes were those of labourers.\n\n[Sidenote: Parsis in Fars.]\n\n\"In Fars there are fire worshippers, Guebres, and Christians and some\nJews. And the practices of the Guebres, their fire temples, and their\ncustoms and ceremonies and Guebreism or Magism, still continue among the\npeople of Fars and there are not in, any country of Islam so many\nGuebres as in the land of Fars. It has been their capital or residence.\"\n\n[Like all other Arab authors Ibn Haukal mentions the celebrated men\nbelonging to each of the provinces he describes. Among the celebrities\nof Fars are reckoned Hormuz, \"Guebre\", who in the time of Omar was taken\nby Abdulla Ibn Omar and put to death; and Salman Farsi who was one of\nthe illustrious men. His piety is celebrated throughout the world. He\nsought the truth of religion in all quarters only to find it at Medina\nwith the Prophet. In consequence of this Selman became a true believer.\nAbdulla Ibn Mukaffa also belonged to Fars. In the territory of Istakhar\nis a great building with statuettes carved in stone and there also are\ninscriptions and paintings.]\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX VIII\n\nIBN KHALLIKAN\n\nBIOGRAPHICAL DICTIONARY\n\n\nTRANSLATED BY DE SLANE, VOL, I.\n\n_Dehkan_ is a Persian word signifying both a farmer and a historian. It\nis generally used to designate a person of ancient Persian family\npossessing hereditary landed property. (P. 77).\n\n_Ispeh Salar._ This word signifies commander of the troops. (P. 228).\nKATIBS or writers were the persons employed in public offices: the\ndirectors, clerks and secretaries in government service were all called\nkatib.\n\n[Sidenote: Nauruz in Baghdad.]\n\n_Khalifs' Nauruz._--This another name for Nauruz Khasa \"New Year's day\nproper,\" in which it was customary to offer presents to the sovereign.\nThis festival was held on the sixth day of the month of Ferwardin (end\nof Marob). The old Persian custom of celebrating Nauruz existed at\nBaghdad under the Abbaside Khalifs. (See P. 203 of this work, see also\nan anecdote of Ahmed Ibn Yusuf al Khatif in his life of Al Mubarad.) (P.\n340).\n\n\"In the year 499 Ak Sunkur was directed by the sultan Muhamed to lay\nsiege to Tikrit which was then in the possession of Kaikobad Ibn\nHazarasb (about 1125).\" (P. 227.)\n\n[Sidenote: Ibn Mukaffa.]\n\nIbn Khallikan has devoted seven pages to the life of Ibn Mukaffa who is\ncalled _the Katib_ and was renowned for the elegance of his style. He\nwas the author of admirable epistles. He was a native of Fars and a\nMagian. But he was led to the profession of Islam by the uncle of the\ntwo first Abbaside Al Safar and Al Mansur. He then became a secretary\nand was admitted into intimacy. It was related that Mukaffa went to Isa\nIbn Ali and said that he was persuaded of the truth of Islam and wished\nto make a profession of that faith. Isa answered, \"Let it be done in the\npresence of the leaders and chiefs of the people who come here\nto-morrow.\" On the evening of that very day he went to dine with Isa,\nand having sat down he began to eat and to mutter according to the\ncustom of the Magian, \"How\" said Isa, \"he mutters like the Magian\nalthough resolved to embrace Islam?\" To this Makaffa replied: \"I do not\nwish to pass a single night without some religion.\" The next morning he\nmade to Isa his solemn profession of Islam. Notwithstanding the eminent\nmerit of Mukaffa he was suspected of infidelity and Al Jahiz states that\nhis religious sincerity was doubted (P. 431). Ibn Kallikan says, \"It was\nMukaffa who composed the book entitled _Kalileh Wa-Dimneh_. But some\nstate that he is not the author of the work which they say was in\nPahlavi, and he translated it into Arabic, and put it in an elegant\nstyle. But the discourse at the beginning of the work is by him.\"\n\n\nVOLUME II.\n\nAhmed Ibn Yusuf addressed to Al-Mamun a verse with a present of an\nembroidered robe on the day of Nauruz. (P. 32).\n\nAl-Marzubani received his surname of Al-Marzubani because one of his\nancestors bore the name of Al-Marzuban, a designation applied by\nPersians to great and powerful men only. This word signifies guardian of\nthe frontier, as we learn from Ibn al Jawaliki's work called Al-muarrab.\n(P. 68).\n\nA reference to the game of chess which originated in India, and the game\nof Nerd as invented by the Persian king Ardeshir.\n\nWe often come across names like Dhia-ad-Din Abu Said Bahrain Ibn\nal-Khidr, just as we have Paul Pakiam indicating the bearer of the name\nwas originally Hindu but had adopted subsequently Christianity. (P.\n296).\n\n[Sidenote: Nominal converts.]\n\nAbl-Hasan Mihyar Ibn Mirzawaih, a native of Dadam and secretary for\nPersian language was a Fire-worshipper, but afterwards adopted the\nMoslem faith. It is said that he made his profession to Sharif ar-Rida\nwho was his professor and under whom he made his poetical studies. It\nseems, however, the conversion of Mihyar was only nominal. Ibn al-Athir\nal-Jazari says in his Annals that one Ibn Burhan said to him. \"Mihyar,\nby becoming a Musalman you have merely passed from one corner of hell to\nanother.\" \"How so?\" said Mihyar. Ibn Burhan replied: \"Because you were\nformerly a fire-worshipper and now you revile the companions of our\nblessed Prophet in your verses.\" (P. 517.)\n\nIbn Khallikan adds that \"Mihyar and Mirzawaith are both Persian names.\nTheir signification is unknown to me.\"\n\n\nVOLUME III.\n\nInstances of hybrid compound names, the Iranian component being\nretained.\n\nIzz ad-Din Kaikaus son of Ghiath ad-Din Kaikhosru. (P. 487).\n\nAla ad-Din Kaikobad. (P. 489).\n\nAbu Mahfuz Ibn Firuz. (P. 384).\n\nAbu Manzur Al Muzaffar Ibn Abi I-Husain Ardeshir. (P. 365).\n\nAbu Mansur-Sheherdar Ibn Shiruyah. (P. 11).\n\nSultan ad-Dawlat, Fanakhrosru (which is no doubt equivalent to Panah\nKhurso.) (P. 278).\n\nThe word _abna_ signifies _sons_. It was generally employed to designate\npersons one of whose parents was an Arab and the other of a foreign\nrace. At the time of Mahomed and afterwards there was in Yeman a great\nnumber of _Abna_ whose fathers were Persians and whose mothers were\nArabs. (P. 334).\n\nDress of the Ulema. (P. 273).\n\nYahya Ibn al Munajjim whose real name was Abban Hasis, the son of Kad,\nthe son of Mahavindad, the son of Farrukhdad, the son of Asad, the son\nof Mihr, the son of Yezdigerd, the last of the Sasanian kings of Persia.\n\nStory of the onagar with the inscription on its ear written by Bahramgor\nin the Kufic character. Ibn Khallikan quotes Al Khawarezmi's\n_Mafatih-al-Ulum._ (P. 85).\n\n[Sidenote: Old castles.]\n\nIstakhri refers to the castle of Jiss in the district of Arrajan about\nwhich we have a more exhaustive notice by other writers. \"Here lived the\nMagians,\" says Istakhri, \"and here also are to be found memorials of the\npast of Persia. The place is strongly fortified. The castle of Iraj is\nalso strongly fortified. The fastnesses which cannot be subjugated are\nso many that it is not possible to detail them.\"\n\nDescribing the city of Jur Istakhri says that it was built by Ardeshir.\n\"It is said that here water used to be collected as in a lake. The king\nhad taken a vow to build a city and to erect a fire temple at the place\nwhere he had defeated his enemy. He had the place drained, and when it\nwas dried he built the city of Jur on the site. The city in its extent\nis like Istakhr, Sabur, and Darabgird. It had mud walls and moats and\nmany gates, the eastern one being called the gate of Mihr, the western\nthe gate of Bahram, the northern the gate of Hormuz, and the southern\nthe gate of Ardeshir. In the centre of the city is a building with a\ncupola built by Ardeshir. It is said that it is so high that it commands\na view of the city and its surroundings. _High at its top is a fire\naltar_.[1]\" (P. 56).\n\n[Sidenote: Languages of Iran.]\n\nIn another portion of his book Istakhri describes the inhabitants as\nthin, with little growth of hair and of brown colour. \"In the colder\ntracts,\" he continues, \"the people are of a taller stature with a thick\ngrowth of hair and very fair. They speak three languages,--the Parsi,\nwhich everybody speaks and which is employed in their letters and their\nliterature; the Magians who dwell among them use the Pahlavi in their\nwritings, but it needs for a thorough understanding an explanation in\nParsi; and Arabic which is the language used in the correspondence of\nthe Sultan, the Government Boards, the grandees and the Amirs.\" (P. 67).\n\n[Footnote 1: This goes to confirm the hypothesis of Sir John Marshall\nthat the curious structure with probably a fire-altar at the top\nexcavated by him at Taxila near Rawal Pindi is a Zoroastrian\n_atash-kadeh_.]\n\n[Sidenote: Tardy Converts.]\n\nIn the same place he makes mention of a numerous settlement of the\nMagians. \"Here are,\" he says, \"a goodly number of Magians in the\nneighbourhood of Istakhr. There is a large stone building with carvings\nand pillars about which the Persians relate that it is the mosque of\nSolomon; the son of David, and that it is the work of genii. In bulk it\nis comparable to the buildings in Syria and Egypt\" \"In the neighborhood\nof Sabur is a mountain on which the representations of all the kings,\ngovernors, servitors of temples and grand mobeds who were celebrated in\nthe times of the Persian monarchy are to be found. On the pedestals of\nthese figures are engraved the events in connection with and the deeds\nof these personages.\" Describing the Karen mountains Itakhri says, \"The\nmountainous region is inaccessible and the inhabitants hold commerce\nwith no one outside. During the Omayad period they persisted in their\nadherence to Zoroastrianism, and they could not be subjugated, and were\nworse than the inhabitants of the Koz mountain. But when the Abbasides\ncame to power they embraced Islam. These Magians were extraordinarily\nbrave. Yakub and Amru the sons of Leith, commenced their rule and power\nhere and drew their supporters from these hills.\" \"Mokan,\" says\nIstakhri, \"contains many villages which are inhabited by the Magians.\"\n(P. 71.)\n\n\nMESOPOTAMIA AND PERSIA IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY.\n\nIN THE NUZHAT AL KULUB OF HAMD-ALLAH\n\nMUSTAWFI\n\nBY G. Lestrange.\n\nThe following fire-temples are mentioned:--At [Transcriber's note: word\nunreadable] there was an ancient fire temple called Ardahish. (P. 56)\n\nA dragon was slain by king Kaikaushro who then built on the spot a fire\ntemple afterwards known as Dayr Kushid. (P. 69).\n\nTurshid was the chief city of the Kohistan province and near it was the\nvillage Kishwaz famous for the great cypress trees planted by Zoroaster\nas related by Firdausi in the Shah Nameh, (Turner, 1. Macar Vol. 4, line\n1061). Near Tushiz were four famous castles one of which was called\nArthush Gah or the Fire temple. (P. 80).\n\nHerat was watered by the canals of the river Hari Rud. It had a famous\ncastle called Sham Iram built over the ruins of an ancient Fire temple\non a mountain two leagues distant from the city. Mustawfi adds a long\naccount of the town, its markets and its shrines, giving the names of\nthe various canals derived from the Hari Rud. (P. 85).\n\n\nAL MUQADASI.\n\n(BIBLIOTHECA INDICA)\n\n[Sidenote: Zoroastrians are treated like Jews and Christians.]\n\nThe religious bodies which enjoy rights of subjects under the protection\nof law are four,--the Jews, the Christians, the Majus, and the Sabiah.\n(P. 67-69).\n\n[Sidenote: Nauruz and Miherjan.]\n\nThe worshippers of idols in Sind are not of the Dhimma, nor those under\nthe protection of Islam; it is on this account that they are exempted\nfrom the poll tax. _The Majus are counted with the Dhimma; for Omar\nordered them to be treated in the same way as the people of the book\n(the Jews and Christians;_) the fact that we call the followers of one\nand the same code of doctrines by two names, one of praise and one of\nblame, does not arise from eulogising or reviling on our part; our\nobject is merely to shew what others think of any sect, and by what\nnames they call them. (P. 7).\n\n\nTHAALIBI.\n\nEDITED AND TRANSLATED BY H. ZOTENBERG.\n\nAnd Behram was matchless among kings, perfect in manners and facile of\ntongue. For he used to converse on the days of public assemblies and\ncourtly meetings in Arabic and in matters of receiving petitions and\ngranting of the gifts in Persian, and when giving public audiences he\nused the Dari language, and when playing polo he used Pahlavi, and\nTurkish while at war, and when out hunting the language of Zabulistan\nand in legal matters Hebrew, in questions of medicine the Indian\nlanguage, in Astronomy the language of the Greeks, and while on voyage\nhe used the Nabatian language and while speaking with women he used the\nspeech of Herat. (P. 555).\n\nThat Thaalibi knew the correct distinction between Pahlavi and Persian\ncan be seen from the fact that he says at p. 633 of his history with\nreference to the book of _Kalileh wa Dimna_ as follows:--When Burzuyeh\narrived at the court and presented himself before Anushirwan he\nrecounted to him what had happened to him and announced to him as a\nhappy event that he was in possession of the book. Then he made a\npresent of it to the king. (Anushirwan was charmed with it and he gave\nthe order to translate the book into Pahlavi.) Burzuyeh requested and\ngot from the king the permission to place at the head of the first\nchapter the king's name, and a notice of his life. And the book remained\ncarefully guarded with the kings of Persia until Ibn Muquaffa translated\nit into Arabic and Rudaki at the command of Amir Nasr Ibn Ahmad turned\nit into Persian verse.\n\nReference to _Kitab al Ain_. (P. 14.)\n\nReference to the murder and burial of the last Sasanian king, (P. 748.)","title":"Iranian Influence on Moslem Literature, Part I","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":47289}