byzantium and the arabs in the fifth century- shahid 1989

8/10/2019 Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fifth Century- Shahid 1989

1/35

Pre Islamic Sources

Byzantine and Persia

Irfan Shahid. Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fifth Century.

Dumbarton Oaks Research ibrary! "ashin#ton! D.C. $%&%. Be#innin# 'ith (#. )*&.+ll. B,-A/IIS0 AD ARABIS01 I/2RAC/IO

Of the three constituents of Byzantinism 33 the Roman! the 4reek! and theChristian 33it 'as the last that affected! influenced! and sometimes e5encontrolled the li5es of those Arabs 'ho mo5ed in the Byzantine orbit. Some3 thin#has been said on this influence in the fourth century! and these conclu3 sions maybe refined and enlar#ed 'ith ne' data for the fifth.

$. Christianity (resented the Arabs 'ith ne' human ty(es unkno'n to them fromtheir (a#an and Peninsular life 33 the (riest! the bisho(! the martyr! the saint!and the monk 33 and the Arab community in Oriens! both Rhomaic and federate!counted all of them amon# its members. In the fourth century! it contributed onesaint to the uni5ersal Church 33 0oses! 'hose feast falls on the se5enth ofFebruary 33 and in the Roman (eriod it had contributed Cosmas and Damian. In the

fifth century the Arab e(isco(ate #re' in number! both Rhomaic and federate! as isclear from conciliar lists and from the number of Arab bisho(s com(ared to thoseof the fourth century. As a result! the Arab ecclesiastical 5oice 'as audible inchurch councils! and 'as at its most articulate at 2(hesus in defense of CyrillianOrthodo6y.

*. /he (riesthood and the e(isco(ate sub7ected the Arabs to a ne' form ofauthority and disci(line to 'hich they had not been accustomed. It 'as a s(iritualform of authority! to 'hich e5en the (o'erful federate (hylarchs and kin#s 'eresub7ect! and it thus induced in the Christian Arabs a ne' sense of loyalty 'hich'as su(ra3tribal! related not to tribal chau5inism but to the Christian ecclesia./his ne' loyalty 'as to find e6(ression on the battlefield. /he federate troo(sunder their belie5in# (hylarchs fou#ht the fire3'orshi(in# Persians and the (a#an

akhmids 'ith a crusadin# zeal! and they (robably considered those 'ho fell insuch battles martyrs of the Christian faith.

8. Christianity influenced the literary life of the Arabs in the fifth century asit had done in the fourth. /he conclusions on this are mainly inferential! butless so for (oetry than for (rose. If there 'as an Arabic litur#y and a biblicallectionary in the fifth century! the chances are that this 'ould ha5e influencedthe de5elo(ment of Arabic literary life! as it in5ariably influenced that of theother (eo(les of the Christian Orient. It is (ossible to detect such influences inthe scanty fra#ments of Arabic (oetry and trace the refinin# influence of the ne'faith on sentiments. oan'ords from Christianity in Arabic are easier to document!and they are elo9uent testimony to the (ermanence of that influence in much thesame 'ay that other loan'ords testify to the influence of the Roman im(erim.

:. By far the most (otent influence of Christianity on the Arabs 'as that ofmonasticism. /he ne' ty(e of Christian hero after the saint and the martyr! themonk 'ho renounced the 'orld and came to li5e in 'hat the Arabs considered theirnatural homeland! the desert! es(ecially a((ealed to the Arabs and 'as the ob7ectof much 5eneration. /he monasteries (enetrated dee( in the heart of Arabia! intore#ions to 'hich the church could not (enetrate. /hus the monastery turned out tobe more influential than the church in the s(iritual life of the Arabs! es(eciallyin the s(here of indirect Byzantine influence in the Peninsula. /he monastery 'asalso the meetin# (lace of t'o ideals 33 Christian (hilanthro(ia and Arabhos(itality. Accordin# to 0uslim tradition! the Pro(het 0uhammad met the


2/35

mysterious monk Bahlra in one of these Byzantine monasteries.

). /he Christian mission to the Arabs! es(ecially if it entailed the trans3 lationof some books of the Bible such as the Pentateuch! must ha5e ac9uainted the Arabs'ith the biblical conce(t of their descent from Ishmael. /his marked them as abiblical (eo(le! #a5e them a ne' identity! and! 'hat is more! affiliated them 'iththe first (atriarch himself! Abraham. /his 'as not an unmi6ed blessin# to theChristian Arabs! since it carried 'ith it the im(lication that they 'ere ;outside

the (romise.;


3/35


4/35

E* /heir careers reflect the (rofound metamor(hosis that each of them e6(eriencedas a result of the Byzantine connection. Perha(s that of As(ebetos is the mostremarkable1 from a (a#an chief to a Byzantine (hylarch! to a ba(tized one! to abisho( of the Parembole! to a (artici(ant at the Council of 2(hesus and a dele#ateto estorius e6(ressin# the stron# 5oice of Arab Orthodo6y. /hus his careerre(resents the hi#hest de#ree of assimilation that a federate Arab coulde6(erience.

IG. /


5/35

$. erome! 'ho inherited his ima#e of the Arabs from 2usebius! continued to 'riteabout them as unredeemed Ishamelites! a conce(t from 'hich! as a biblical scholarand e6e#ete! he could not liberate himself. /here 'as another reason behinderome?s fulminations a#ainst the Arabs.


6/35

5ictory at ine5eh.

8. /his bri#ht ima#e in the secular sources 'as some'hat dimmed later in thecentury 'hen 0alchus of Philadel(hia! himself most (robably a Rhomaic Arab! 'roteand almost neutralized 'hat Synesius had said about the Arabs. In a lon# anddetailed fra#ment on the em(eror eo in the (enultimate year of his rei#n! 0alchusrelentlessly criticized the em(eror for his relations 'ith the Arab chiefAmorkesos! and by im(lication #a5e an uncom(limentary (icture of the Arabs e5en

thou#h they became foederati of the em(ire.

/he back#round of this attack on the Arabs! es(ecially as it 'as 5oiced by one ofthem! is as com(le6 as that 'hich ins(ired Synesius to dra' his (icture of theArabs in bri#ht colors. Four main reasons may be detected behind 0alchus? hostileattitude. First and foremost comes =aiserkritik. /he historian 'as not an admirerof the em(eror! and e6(ressed his disa((ro5al of eo?s administration bycriticizin# his Arab (olicy. 0alchus also 'rote as a concerned Rho3naios and ananalyst of Roman decline. For him! the barbarians had brou#ht about the do'nfallof the em(ire in the "est in :>. eo had de(ended on another #rou( of barbarians!the Isaurians! and no' he 'as also em(loyin# the ser5ices of the Arabs!re(resented by Amorkesos. 0alchus 'rote not in his nati5e Pro5incia Arabia! but inConstantino(le and under Anastasius.


7/35

embarrasses the Arabs throu#h certain biblical associations but a re5ered ancestorof 'hom they are (roud. /his ima#e became a most im(ortant element in Arabreli#ious life in the se5enth century! 'hich 'itnessed an e5en more com(leterehabilitaion of Ishmael. In the =oran! Ishmael a((ears not as the (ater e(onymousof the Arabs but as the son of the First Patriacrh Ahraham! and a (ro(het. /he(recious (assa#e in the $H! durin# the (eriod of much ecli(se for the 4hassanids! 'hen the(o'er of the Sallhids may ha5e been re5i5ed or at least made inde(endent of the

former! since one of their (hylarchs a((ears fi#htin# 'ith the Byzantines in )&>durin# the sie#e of 0ardm. ot much is kno'n about them after this (eriod untilthey a((ear fi#htin# to#ether 'ith the other federates a#ainst the 0uslim Arabs./he last mention of them durin# the 0uslim Con9uest of Oriens occurs in connection'ith the ca(itulation of Chalcis. /he 0uslim commander asks them to acce(t Islam!but they refuse.

@nlike other federate #rou(s such as the Iyadis! the Salihids remained staunchChristians throu#hout the 0uslim (eriod. /his e6(lains 'hy they attained no(rominence in Islamic times. @sama ibn -ayd 'as the e6ce(tion1 he ser5ed four@mayyad cali(hs in im(ortant administrati5e roles! his durabil3 ity in their


8/35

ser5ice bein# testimony to his talent. After him the sources are silent on theSallhids! 'ho dis(ersed in 5arious (arts of the Fertile 4escent and (ossiblyaffiliated themsel5es 'ith other tribes. /hey a((ear in one of the 5erses ofIslamic times as an e6am(le of dis(ersion and e5anescence 'orthy of the classicallament of the Arab (oet1 ;ubi snt 9i ante nos in mundo fereK;

/he other tribes of the federate shield took (art in the defense of the limesorientalis and in the Persian "ars. /hey also (rotected the cara5ans that mo5ed

alon# the arteries of international trade in north and north'estern Arabia. /heSallhids did not control these tribes as the 4hassanids 'ere to do in the si6thcentury. /he Arabic sources record feuds amon# these federate tribes. /'o of them!=alb and amir! united a#ainst the dominant #rou( Sallh! brou#ht about thedo'nfall of the Sallhid kin# Da'ud! and must ha5e 'eakened the (o'er of Sallh!thus contributin# ultimately to the 5ictory of the 4hassanids o5er them and theemer#ence of a ne' federate su(remacy! the 4hassanid! 'hich controlled most or allof the other tribes of the federate shield in Oriens for almost half a century.

In addition to their military role! these federate tribes made some im(or3 tantcontributions to Arabic culture in (re3lslamic times. /he names of Iyad! =alb! and?@dra stand out in connection 'ith the rise of the Arabic scri(t in Oriens in thefifth century and of a ne' ty(e of lo5e and lo5e (oetry! called ?@drite in Arabic!

'hich re(resented the confluence of the (re3lslamic chi5alrous attitude 'ithChristian ideals of chastity and continence.

All these federate tribes fou#ht on the side of Byzantium in the (eriod of theArab Con9uests. After the crushin# defeat at ,armuk in >8>! they dis(ersed andtheir history as foederati came to an end. Some of them emi#rated to Anatolia!some stayed on in Oriens! no' Arab Bilad al3Sham! and formed (art of the @mayyada7nad system. "hile the Sallhids remained staunchly Christian! some of the otherfederate tribes acce(ted Islam! 'hich enabled them to (artici(ate acti5ely in thesha(in# of Islamic history.

Before they made their Byzantine connection! these tribes had mo5ed in therestricted and closed orbit of the Arabian Peninsula. In all (robability they

'ould ha5e continued to mo5e in that orbit! and history 'ould not ha5e takennotice of them and their achie5ements. It 'as the Byzantine connection that dre'them into the 'orld of the 0editerranean and #a5e an international dimension totheir history. One of the three constituents of Byantium! Christianity! termmatedtheir isolation and (eninsulailsm by makin# them members of the lar#e 'orld ofChristendom and its uni5ersal ecclesia.

Islam 'as to do 'hat Byzantium had done but in a more substantial 'ay. It made thetribes assume a more acti5e role in sha(in# the history of the 0editerranean 'orldin both 2ast and "est. In the 2ast they formed (art of the a7nad! (artici(ated inthe annual e6(editions a#ainst the Byzantine heartland! Anatolia! and took (art inmany sie#es of Constantino(le. In the "est some of them settled on 2uro(ean soil!but their more im(ortant role in S(ain 'as cultural. One of these tribes! Iyad!

(roduced the talented family of the -uhrids! kno'n to medie5al 2uro(e as(hysicians and to Arabic scholars as com(osers of stro(hic odes. /he influence ofanother! ?@dra! crossed the Pyrenees! and either #a5e rise to! or formed onein#redient in! the rise of that attracti5e ty(e of lo5e kno'n to medie5alists asamour courtois. Fe' readers of the medie5al literary 'orks that this ty(e of lo5eins(ired realize that they are o'ed to an Arabian tribe 'hich in the fifth centurydefended the southern a((roaches to the limes orientalis of Byzantium as a tribeof the outer shield. And it is mainly to the 'ell3kno'n Iyric of the 4erman3e'ish(oet 'ith its hauntin# cou(let that modern 2uro(e o'es its 5a#ue recollection ofthat Arab tribe of the fifth century 'hich ins(ired the rise of this lo5e and#ifted it 'ith its o'n name1


9/35

@nd mein Stamm sind 7ene Asra!

"elche sterben! 'enn sie lieben.

Richard Frye. /he


10/35

of the last Arsacids! ho'e5er! confuse the matter! so much that a lon# 7oint ruleof +olo#eses + E*H3**K and Artabanus + E*$83**:K has been (ro(osed 'ith theson of Artabanus! Arta5asdes! rulin# one year **>3**. Inasmuch! ho'e5er! asArsacid resistance did not end 'ith the death of Artabanus one mi#ht su((ose thatcoins of the last Arsacids 'ere minted in his name e5en after the 5ictory ofArdashir 'hich may be dated from 5arious sources (robably as A(ril **:.

In the titulary of the royal Sasanian inscri(tions one may see the e6(ansion of

the state. Sasan! as noted! is referred to merely as ?lord? 'hile Pa(ak is ?kin#?.Ardashir is ?kin# or kin#s of Iran? and Sha(ur is ?kin# of kin#s of Iran and non3Iran?. An indication of ho' one mi#ht be misled in inter(retin# an inscri(tion! isthe a((ellation ?#od? Eb#y for Pa(ak in =-! but ?0azda 'orshi((in# #od? forArdashir and Sha(ur. /his mi#ht induce one to assume that Pa(ak held a different(osition or faith in reli#ion than his son and #randson. ,et the same formulaa((ears on later inscri(tions in /a93i Bustan! and one cannot conclude anythin#from the (ractice of omittin# ?mazda3yasnian? from the name of a #randfather. /he(hrase ?'hose seed Eor ori#in is from the #ods?! ho'e5er! is a continuation of aSeleucid if not Achaemenid formula 'hile the term ?#od? a((lied to the ruler had(robably by this time assumed the si#nificance of ?your ma7esty? in (rotocol.

For the datin# 'e fortunately ha5e an inscri(tion 'ritten in the Parthian and

Sasanian 0iddle Persian lan#ua#es on a (illar in Bisha(ur. /he te6t says1 ?in themonth of Fra5ardin of the year )&! forty years of the fire of Ardashir! t'enty3four years of the fire of Sha(ur! E'hich is the kin# of fires?. On the re5ersesof Sasanian coins 'e ha5e Aramaic "R? -, ?fire of3? until Sha(ur II then 'e ha5ethe Iranian ?t'r y until ,azda#ird II E:8%3:) after 'hom it disa((ears. 2achkin# a((arently had his o'n fire! li#hted at the be#innin# of his rei#n! and thisfire 'as on a (ortable fire altar similar to those on the coins! as one 'ould#ather from Sebeos the Armenian 'riter! from Ammianus 0arcellinus and from others.Sha(ur?s fire 'as caled the kin# of fires (ossibly because it 'as identified 'iththe 4ushnas( fire of the 'arriors! 'hich 'as later desi#nated ?the 5ictorious kin#of fires?! but the te6t is not clear! or maybe the kin#?s fire 'as called thekin# of fires sim(ly as a manner of s(eakin#. /he date of accession and the dateof the cro'nin# of a kin# ha5e usually differed in the ancient Orient! and these

dates are not (recisely kno'n in re#ard to Ardashir and Sha(ur. From theinscri(tion of Bisha(ur 'e 'ould ha5e three dates! the be#innin# of the Sasanianera! the accession of Ardashir and the accession of Sha(ur. 4reat contro5ersy hasra#ed o5er the date of Sha(ur?s accession and cro'nin#! but his first year mustbe#in either at the end of *8% or *:$. /he coins of Artabanus + and +olo#eses!mentioned abo5e! 'ould tend to fa5our the year *:$ but they are not decisi5e.

If Pa(ak had been the director of the Anahita shrine at Istakhr before he becamekin#! after'ards he and es(ecially his son 'ere busy 'ith other affairs! e5enthou#h both may ha5e retained the di#nity as head of the tem(le. Pa(ak had a smallcourt! the most (rominent members of 'hich are named in Sha(ur?s #reat trilin#ualinscri(tion. /here is only one title! the ma7or domo Ednyk! mentioned and noreli#ious desi#nations! so one should assume that Pa(ak?s court 'as that of a

small (rinci(ality 'ith no bureaucratic tradition. After Ardashir became the kin#of kin#s of Iran! the successor of the Parthians! the situation chan#ed. Ardashirinherited the feudal or#anisation of the Arsacids 'hich is clearly seen in theinscri(tion. At the ne' court 'e find an order of (rotocol be#innin# 'ith four(o'erful eastern kin#s! three of 'hom oddly ha5e the same name as Ardashir. /hefirst on the list is the kin# of =hurasan! the u((er country and homeland of thedefeated Parthians! 'hile the second is the kin# of 0er5 'ho is called Ardashir.It 'ould be natural to su((ose that relati5es or close friends of Ardashir 'erea((ointed to offices in the ne' em(ire! es(ecially in the im(ortant (osts ineastern Iran! but 'e do not kno' the relationshi( of these rulers to the kin# ofkin#s. /he ne6t t'o kin#s of Seistan and =irman are also both called Ardashir! the


11/35


12/35

Ardashir had much fi#htin# to do to consolidate his rule! es(ecially in Armenia'here resistance 'as stron#. /he fact that in inscri(tions Ardashir is called thekin# of kin#s of Iran! but not of non3Iran! 'ould im(ly that he did nota((reciably ad5ance his boundaries outside of 2ranshahr 'hich! of course! included0eso(otamia but not Armenia Eaccordin# to the Paikuli inscri(tion! line & and(robably not the =ushan em(ire in the east. On the other hand /abari says that thekin#s of the =ushans! of /uran and 0akran came to Ardashir! after his 5ictories inthe east! and offered their submission. It is (ossible that under Ardashir they

stood only in a 5assal relationshi( to him 'hile under Sha(ur the =ushan kin#domand other areas 'ere really included in the em(ire. /his further im(lies 'ars bySha(ur of 'hich 'e ha5e no e5idence. /he he#emony of Ardashir may ha5e been li#ht!based on a fe' 5ictories o5er the allies of the Arsacids rather than actualcon9uest after'ards.

/he Im(erialism of Sha(ur

/he Sasanian kin#s #reatly fa5oured urbanism! a trait not in such e5idence amon#their (redecessors. /he first t'o so5erei#ns of the house of Sasan 'ere the#reatest city founders of the line and most of the cities 'ith royal names in them'ere founded or renamed by Ardashir or Sha(ur. /he confusion of ancient nati5e!H and can be follo'ed in literary sources. /hesecond cam(ai#n (resents (roblems in datin# and identification because of thee6ca5ations at Dura32uro(os. /he e5idence from Dura su##ests that this Romanout(ost on the 2u(hrates 'as ca(tured by the Persians in *)8 'ho held it for a fe'months and then a#ain in *)> 'hen the city 'as stormed and destroyed by Sha(ur./he 9uestion arises! 'hich of the dates belon# to Sha(ur?s second cam(ai#n.4enerall5 s(eakin# a ?cam(ai#n? in the ear 2ast from ancient times has meant ane6(edition of one year. It is (ossible that the second e6(edition of Sha(ur lasteda number of years! includin# *)8 and *)>! as I ha5e su##ested else'here. 0orestudy has con5inced me that this is unlikely and that *)> is the date of the


13/35

second cam(ai#n 'hile *)8 'as a minor raidin# e6(edition not mentioned in =-.

/he ca(ture of +alerian 'as an un(aralleled e5ent in history and Sha(ur madecertain that the 'orld kne' about it throu#h his inscri(tion and rock reliefs atBisha(ur and a9sh3i Rustam. Althou#h the inter(retation of these reliefs is5aried and dis(uted it may be true that they are a kind of counter(art in (icturesof the inscri(tion and the three Romans at Bisha(ur re(resent the three Romanem(erors mentioned in the inscri(tion! 4ordian! Phili( and +alerian. /he (risoners

ca(tured by Sha(ur in his 'ars 'ith the Romans included many technicians and fromAntioch the bisho( of the city 'ho! 'ith many of his flock! 'as settled in=huzistan. /he city of 4undesha(ur E?the better Antioch of Sha(ur? 'as settled'ith Roman (risoners and the Caesar?s dam at Shustar 'as one of theirconstructions. Prisoners 'ere set led in Fars! Parthia! =huzistan and else'hereand they (robably (ro5ided the basis of the later Christian communities in Iran.

/he fortress to'n of


14/35

(robably states 'ith their centres (rimarily and res(ecti5ely in the -arafshan andFer#hana 5alleys. In other 'ords the boundaries of the =ushanshahr in theory! ifnot in (ractice! included the mountainous area of (art of the Pamirs and (resent3day /a7ikistan. /he scanty archaeolo#ical and Chinese literary e5idence 'ould notcontradict this 5ie'.

/hus in the north3east Ardashir andor Sha(ur secured the sub3 mission of the=ushan state. A #ood #uess 'ould (ut the first defeat and submission of the

=ushans under Ardashir 'hile the incor(oration of the =ushanshahr in the Sasanianem(ire 'ould date from Sha(ur?s rei#n. In all (robability the oasis state of 0er5marked the military out(ost of direct Sasanian rule under Sha(ur as it did later.In the eyes of the Persians 'hat 'as beyond 'as no lon#er Iran but non3Iran. /hearchaeolo#ical e5idence for the destruction of the city of =a(isa Ehodie Be#ramnorth of =abul can be neither attributed nor denied to Sha(ur! but is (robablyearlier.

/he e6tent of Sha(ur?s he#emony in the east! on the 'hole! is no' kno'n from hisinscri(tion. From Sha(ur?s inscri(tion =- 'e see that most of /ranscaucasia 'asincluded in his em(ire! and from the inscri(tion of =artir at the same site 'elearn ?the land of Armenia! 4eor#ia! Albania and Balasa#an! u( to the 4ate of theAlbanians! Sha(ur the kin# of kin#s 'ith his horseEs and men (illa#ed! bumed and

de5astated?. /his indicates that Sha(ur did not inherit these lands from hisfather but had to con9uer them! and for =artir these are lands of non3Ian EAniran. Sha(ur re3created the Achaemenid em(ire and the Persians a#ain ruled o5er non3Iranians. ,et Sha(ur 'as not the #reat inno5atorL or or#aniser that Darius 'as!since he continued for the most (art in the (ath he had inherited! the le#acy ofthe Parthians. A ne' feature! ho'e5er! 'as the state church 'hich 'ill bediscussed belo'.

/he list of notables at the court of Sha(ur in =- is both lon#er and more5arie#ated than that of his father. From this and other inscri(tions! the (rotocoland the social stratification of the Sasanian court are re5ealed. In the bilin#ualEParthian and 0iddle Persian inscri(tion of


15/35

As the em(ire e6(anded so the bureaucracy also must ha5e #ro'n! but a#ain the oldtraditions continued. "e kno' from se5eral sources that the royal seals 'ere not(ersonal seals! but 'ere used by 5arious officials of the kin# as had been trueearlier. ust as in Seleucid times Sasanian official seals carried only le#ends ormono#rams but no fi#ures. Re(resentations of deities! (ersonal (ortraits oranimals 'ere (ictured on (ri5ate seals. /he official seals seem to ha5e beenim(ortant (rero#ati5es of office! and later 'e find many seal im(ressions ofmobads and other reli#ious di#nitaries as 'ell as ci5il officials. Seals 'ere used

for all kinds of business and for reli#ious affairs seals should be mentioned theinsi#nia! coats3of3arms or emblems 'hich 'ere used by noble families as theirsi#ns of identification. 0any of them 'ere really stylised mono#rams orabbre5iations! but Sasanian heraldry is a com(licated sub7ect 'hich has beenlittle studied. Insi#nia already e6isted in Parthian times and there is aninterestin# (arallel bet'een the si#ns or coats3of3arms on the head#ear of =ushannotables on scul(tures from 0athura! India and the si#ns on the helmets of thenotables of Sha(ur?s retinue (ictured on the rocks of a9sh3i Ra7ab nearPerse(olis. /he (roliferation of titles and honorifics in the course of Sasanianhistory 'as a tendency 'hich lasted do'n to the t'entieth century and theconfusion of (ersonal names! offices or titles! and honorifics 'as a (roblem forByzantine 'riters in their day as it 'as for more contem(orary forei#n authors'ritin# about Iran.

Social structure under the early Sasanians a#ain most (robably 'as an inheritancefrom Arsacid times. Di5isions in society 'ere normal in the ear 2ast and by nomeans restricted to the caste3conscious Indians or the -oroastrian Iranians. Fore6am(le! Strabo s(eaks of four ?castes? amon# the 4eor#ians1 the rulers! (riests!soldiers and the common (eo(le! and the im(ortance of families 'here (ossessions'ere held in common. "hen the -oroastrian church became firmly established in Iranit contributed to the fi6in# of social classes in accordance 'ith reli#ioustradition. As is 'ell kno'n society 'as later di5ided into four classes! the(riests! 'arriors! scribes and common folk. /he e6tended family has remained thebasic unit of alle#iance! trust and authority in Iran do'n to the (resent day! and'hile the centralisation of #o5ernment in Sasanian Iran 'as a feature 'hichdistin#uished it from Arsacid times! none the less the family remained (aramount.

Sha(ur 'as kno'n for his liberal s(irit and in reli#ion! if no'here else! hisliberalism a((arently 'as in contrast to the (olicy of his successors. It issi#nificant! I think! that the successor of Sha(ur!


16/35

and (resumably a modus 5i5endi bet'een the #reat feudal lords and the kin# ofkin#s had been for#ed in such a 'ay that a ne' alle#iance to the house of Sasan'as acce(ted by all.


17/35

Of #reat im(ortance 'as the acti5ity of =artir outside of Iran in tryin# toestablish both fire tem(les and orthodo6y amon# the of Paikuli the name ?=artir! the mobad of Ahura 0azda?a((ears! but because of lacunae in the in3 scri(tion one cannot say 'hether he isa foe or friend of arseh.


18/35

(resent better kno'n than before the disco5ery of ori#inal 0anichaean 'ritin#s inCo(tic! Parthian! So#dian and other lan#ua#es. /he 0anichaeans suffered the samefate in Iran as in the Christian 'orld in both the arch3heretics 'ere al'as0anichaeans and they 'ere accordin#ly (ersecuted se5erely. After arseh! ho'e5er!0anichaean cornmunities continued to e6ist in Iran! es(ecially in eastern Iran!and later! as is 'ell kno'n! 0anichaean missionaries reached as far as China.

Perha(s the most strikin# de5elo(ment of 0anichaeism 'as the social and economic

mo5ement led by 0azdak at the 5ery end of the fifth century! about 'hom much hasbeen 'ritten of late. It 'ould seem that royal o((osition to the nobility andtheir (o'er 'as an im(ortant reason for the su((ort of 0azdak by =in# =a5ad. /he0azdakites (reached a form of communism! the di5ision of 'ealth includin# 'i5esand concubines! 'hich found su((ort amon# the (oor! but our sources are not clearand are contradictory about the course of e5ents of this re5olution. /he0azdakites! ho'e5er! met the same fate the 0anichaeans had suffered at the handsof =artir and =in# +arahran. It ha((ened at the end of =a5ad?s Esecond rei#n! andthe Cro'n Prince Chosroes Anoshar5an 'as the chief insti#ator of the massacre ofthe 0azdakites circa )*&. /he death of their leaders! of course! did not end the0azdakites as a sect but sent them under#round. But a ne' (e7orati5e had beencoined and henceforth any social or reli#ious reformer 'as usually branded as a0azdakite by his o((onents! and this lasted lon# into Islamic times 'hen many

Iranian re5olts a#ainst the cali(hate or the rule of the Arabs 'ere desi#nated as0azdakite mo5ements. /he 0azdakite mo5ement 'as kno'n to such Islamic authors asizam al30ulk in his Siyasatname.

Already! from the be#innin# of the Sasanian (eriod! 'e are in a ne' reli#ious'orld. /he cults of the old 0eso(otamian #ods 'ere lon# since dead and in their(laces ne' #nostic and ritualistic sects had arisen side by side 'ithChristianity! udaism and -oroastrianism. Cabalistic beliefs and (ractices seem toha5e been 'ides(read! and in the 5ie's of most 4reek and Roman authors thePersians 'ere the chief belie5ers in ma#ic and unusual reli#ious (ractices.-oroastrianism for the classical 'riters 'as the e(itome of the mysterious!Oriental cult. ,et =artir and his follo'ers laid the basis for -oroastrian ortho3do6y 'hich (robably o((osed ma#ic! demon 'orshi(! and the like as much as did

Christian orthodo6y in the em(ire of the Caesars.

Belief in di5ine re5elation and the recordin# of that re5elation in books 'as inthe air! and the Christians! of course! 'ere the most 'ides(read (ro(a#ators ofthe idea of ?


19/35

From Christian authors 'ritin# in Syriac and Armenian it 'ould seem that theSasanians (rimarily follo'ed -ur5anism! a -oroastrian heresy 'hich! after theIslamic con9uest! 5anished in fa5our of ortho3 do6y. I belie5e! as sho'nelse'here! that -ur5anism 'as not a full3 fled#ed heresy 'ith doctrines! rites anda ?church? or#anisation se(arate from the -oroastrian fold! but rather a mo5ementto be com(ared (erha(s 'ith the 0u?tazilites of Islamic times. /here 'erebasically t'o features of -ur5anism 'hich ha5e been (reser5ed for us! times(eculation Eeternity! etc. and the myth of the birth of both Ohrmizd EAhura

0azda and Ahriman from their father -ur5an. /he first 'as 'ides(read andcertainly by itself 'ould not form the basis for a se(arate sect. /he -ur5an birthstory can be (aralleled by the story of Chronos in 4reek mytholo#y and a#ain! inmy o(inion! 'ould not lead to the formation of a sect. @ndoubtedly the -ur5anbirth story 'as 'ides(read amon# ?orthodo? -oroastrians in Sasanian times! butafter the Islamic con9uest 'hen -oroastrians 'ithdre' into ti#htly knitcommunities! -ur5anite elements 'ere eliminated from the ne' orthodo6y 'hich 'asconcrned 'ith ?orthodo6y? as 'ell as ?ortho(ra6y?. In Sasanian times a -oroastrianheretic 'as more one 'ho broke a'ay from ortho(ra6y and e5en became a Christian or0anichaean! 'hile in Islamic times a -oroastrian heretic 'as (rimarily a (erson'ho also broke 'ith orthodo6y as! for e6am(le! Abalish Eor ?AbdallahK a-oroastrian 'ho became a heretic in the time of the cali(h al 30a?mun in the ninthcentury! and may ha5e ado(ted 0ani3 chaean beliefs. Any kind of social heresy! of

course! 'ould be the concern of the rulin# cali(h.

From the acts of the Christian martyrs 'e learn much es(ecially about theestorian communities in the Sasanian em(ire. In effect the consolidation and#ro'th of the -oroastrian church in Iran 'as (aralleled by the #ro'th of theChristian church and of the 0anichaean communities. @ndoubtedly the influ6 ofChristian (risoners in Iran in the 'ake of both Sha(urs? con9uests #a5e a stron#im(etus to the s(read of Christianity! but the reli#ion naturally s(read in0eso(otamia amon# the Semitic (eo(les. /he first #reat (ersecution of Christiansoccurred under Sha(ur II! be#innin# about 88%! and seems to ha5e had (oliticalmoti5ation since it be#an after Constantine had made Christianity the reli#ion ofthe Roman 2m(ire. ater there 'ere (eriods of tolerance follo'ed by more(ersecution! but after the break a'ay of the estorians from other Christians at

the end of the fifth century! the condition of Christians in Iran im(ro5ed. /heestorians elected a catholicos 'ho had his seat in Ctesi(hon and synods usuallymet there in decidin# church (roblems. /he ecclesiastical #eo#ra(hy of theestorian bisho(rics is also of im(ortance for the ci5il #eo#ra(hy of the Sasanianem(ire since the Church usually follo'ed ci5il boundaries thus 'e #ain somekno'led#e of ci5il administrati5e di5isions from the acts of the martyrs.

/he Christianisation of Armenia and /ranscaucasia in the fourth century (ro5ided asource of conflict bet'en Armenia and the Sasanians e5en more than the stru##lefor influence in those areas bet'een Romans and Persians. In the east! too!Christian missionaries made con5erts amon# the


20/35

?Abbas.


21/35

Central Asian horde to con9uer the =ushan realm. Se5eral attem(ts to date a ruler=idara ha5e not been con5incin# and 'e may only hazard a #uess that such a rei#n'as in the fourth century.

Another name from eastern Iran or Central Asia seems to indicate a mi#ration orin5asion from the orth. /he ne'comers are called Chionites in classical sources.In 8)% the kin# of the Chionites! 4rumbates! is mentioned by Ammianus as an ally'ith Sha(ur II and his army before the 'alls of Amida. It is #enerally belie5ed

that the Chionites! 'ith the form OIOON


22/35

/he far reachin# reform of ta6ation under Chosroes has been discussed by se5eralscholars! notably F. Altheim! 'hose merit 'as to sho' re(eatedly that the modelfor the ne' system of ta6ation 'as the system in force in the eastern Roman 2m(ire'hich in turn had been built on the reforms of Diocletian. /he unrest and socialchan#es of the 0azdakite (eriod made a ne' assessment of (ro(erty and of ta6esnecessary! but 'e cannot say 'ith certainty 'hat the situation 'as beforeChosroes. "hat is re(orted by later authors of Sasanian times refers to the (ost3

Chosroes (eriod. "e may assume that Chosroes 'anted stability! and in terms ofta6ation! of course (rinci(ally on the land! a fi6ed sum rather than a yearly5ariation accordin# to the yield! 'hich seems to ha5e been the old system. Asur5ey of the land 'as made includin# a census and a countin# of date (alms andoli5e trees. /he land ta6 of the later Roman em(ire 'as based on the land unit theiu#um! but the amount of ta6ation 'as already determined by the indictio anddi5ided amon# the 5arious (lots of land. /his became the system of Sasanian Iran!of course 'ith many different details into 'hich 'e cannot #o. /he Sasanian headta6! like the Roman ca(itatio! 'as under Chosroes assessed in a number of fi6edcate#ories accordin# to the (roducti5e ca(acity of a man. In both em(ires stateem(loyees 'ere e6em(t from (ayin# the head ta6! and in Iran the 0a#i! soldiers andthe hi#h nobility 'ere e6em(t as 'ell. Certain details of the ta6ation aredis(uted but the main lines are clear Chosroes sou#ht stability and a fi6ed

income for #o5ernment coffers.

From the /almud 'e learn that ancient (ractices in re#ard to the (ayment of ta6esstill continued under Chosroes. If one could not (ay his land ta6 and another (aidit! the latter recei5ed the land. By (ayin# the land ta6 of someone 'ho could not(ay! one could obtain the debtor as a bondsman or sla5e. Accordin# to one source!if a e' declared he 'as a -oroastrian he could esca(e the head ta6. /his 'asrather a s(ecial ta6! or a hea5ier head ta6! (laced on e's! Christians and otherminorities. /he bisho( for the Christians and the head of the e's for the e'ishcommunities collected ta6es from their follo'ers. /his continuity of ta6 (racticesin Iran continued into Islamic times. /he Sasanian system (ro5ided the back#roundof the 'ell3kno'n but also in (art different and com(licated system of the Islamickhara7 and 7izya.

In addition to a ta6 and financial reform! there 'as a social and bureaucraticre5olution! but a#ain many details esca(e us or are sub7ect to 5ariousinter(retations. Certain inno5ations may be the 'ork of Chosroes? (redecessors!but one may say that after him they a((ear as a characteristic feature of SasanianIran. /he most im(ortant 'as (erha(s the #ro'th of the lo'er nobility or thedih9ans Eliterally 5illa#e lord as the Arab con9uerors called that backbone ofPersian (ro5incial and local administration. /his lo'er nobility really (ossessedand ruled the land at the end of the Sasanian em(ire and it 'ould seem that theyo'ed their (ositions to the ruler and 'ere an effecti5e counter3'ei#ht to the fe'#reat families 'ho became (ro#ressi5ely less im(ortant. In line 'ith his (olicy ofstability Chosroes may ha5e sou#ht reli#ious su((ort for a social stratificationof four classes or castes! 'hich! ho'e5er! may ha5e de5elo(ed throu#hout earlier

Iranian history so that by the time of Chosroes it 'as full3fled#ed.

/here is considerable material in Islamic 'orks! such as the =itab al3/a7 ofahiz! and countless anecdotes and stories 'hich refer to the acti5ities ofChosroes I. /he sources a#ree in their assessment of the em(ire of the Sasaniansafter Chosroes as a ti#htly or#anised structure 'ith the kin# su(reme at the to(of the hierarchy. /he ?mysti9ue? of the kin# of kin#s 'as reinforced! and books of(rotocol! mirrors of (rinces and other 'ritin#s! laid do'n the duties of monarchsto their sub7ects and sub7ects to their ruler. It 'ould seem that there 'as aconsiderable acti5ity in fi6in# rules of beha5iour! (rero#ati5es and obli#a3 tionsfor 5arious classes of society in this (eriod. /he ofices of mobadan3mobad or


23/35

chief of the cler#y! dabiran3debir! or chief of the scribes! and similar titles!in imitation of the kin# of kin#s! indicate the orderin# of society by im(erialand reli#ious sanction. /he fascinatin# (icture of society under the laterSasanians is one of a (eo(le 'ho ha5e seemin#ly reached a social and reli#iousstability in reli#ion! class structure and #eneral culture but continuin# 'ith theseeds of decay in the resultant sta#nation.

/he a#e of Chosroes 'as one of con9uest too. Antioch 'as briefly ca(tured in ):H

and in the east the


24/35


25/35

onslau#ht 'hile the em(ire 'ent do'n in ashes. ocal self3interest and fierceindi5idualism ha5e been both the bane and the #lory of Iran throu#hout itshistory! but throu#h trium(h and defeat the culture and the 'ay of life of thePersians ha5e unified the (o(ulation of the country more than (olitical or e5enreli#ious forms unless they too 'ere inte#rated into the herita#e of Persia.

Richard Frye. /he


26/35

(re5ious (ractice of the #reat feudal lords (ro5idin# their o'n e9ui(ment andbrin#in# their follo'ers and retainers into the field! to another system 'ith ane' force of dehkans or ?kni#hts!? (aid and e9ui((ed by the central #o5ernment. Itis interestin# to note that both the number! as 'ell as the die 9uality! of coinsof Chosroes I increases and im(ro5es #reatly com(ared to earlier issues! and theicono#ra(hy of the coins becomes more stereoty(ed. Also! it should be remarkedthat the army reor#anization under Chosroes 'as concentrated on or#anization andon trainin#! rather than any ne' 'ea(ons or technical ad5ances! and as (re5iously

the hea5ily3armed ca5alry remained the dominant force 'ith archers less im(ortant./he masses! as usual! 'ere still cam( follo'ers and little more than a rabblelookin# for booty! but a ne' nobility of ser5ice 'as created 'hich became moreinfluential than the landed nobility. Since (ayment in s(ecie or e5en in kind didnot suffice to recom(ense the ?kni#hts!? 5illa#es 'ere #ranted to them in fief!and a lar#e class of small lando'ners came into e6istence. /he ruler also di5idedthe kin#dom into four military districts 'ith a s(ahbad or #eneral in char#e offorces in each (art 'ith the (rimary task of defendin# Iran from e6ternal foes."alls and forts 'ere also built on the frontiers! but in this (olicy Chosroes 'asonly continuin# the (olicy of his (redecessors! 'hile ne' roads! brid#es and manybuildin#s ha5e been attributed to Chosroes! 'hether true or not.

/he army 'as tested in the resum(tion of hostilities 'ith Byzantium! and

fortunately 'e ha5e a detailed account of the 'ar from Proco(ius. /he reasons fora ne' 'ar 'ere many! not the least of 'hich 'ere embassies from the Ostro#oths inItaly! 'ho 'ere con9uered by ustinian! and (ressure from some Armenians andArabs! both ea#er for 'ar. So Chosroes broke the (eace and in5aded Syria in ):Hmo5in# south of the usual (ath of armies. ! and it 'as (oorly defended makin#con9uest easy for the Persians. Chosroes (illa#ed and burned the city takin# manyca(ti5es! after 'hich (eace 'as made 'ith ustinian 'ho (aid the Persians a lar#eindemnity. On his return! ho'e5er! Chosroes obtained ransom from a number ofByzantine cities on his 'ay. Because of these acti5ities ustinian renounced thetruce 7ust concluded and (re(ared to send Belisarius! 'ho had been successful inItaly and orth Africa! a#ainst the Sasanians.

After returnin#! Chosroes built a ne' city! strictly follo'in# the model ofAntioch! near Ctesi(hon! and he settled his ca(ti5es from Antioch in it callin# itthe (resum(tious title "eh Antiok =husrau EBetter than Antioch hasJ Chosroesbuilt thisJ! but it 'as called Ruma#an! ?to'n of the 4reeks? by the localinhabitants! and al3 Rumiyya by the Arabs.


27/35

trade of the silk route to China and the sea 'ay to India! as indicated by hisinter5entions later 'ith the /urks and in ,emen! then the Byzantine authors mayha5e correctly discerned the far3reachin# (lans of the Persians. In the azic 'arChosroes finally lost! and ne#otiations 'ere be#un 'ith Byzantium in ))> 'hich ledto a fifty3year (eace treaty si#ned in )>$! by 'hich the Persians e5acuated azicafor an annual (ayment of #old. /he treaty and a descri(tion of the sealin# of thedocuments can be found in 0enander Protector! #i5in# an insi#ht into contem(orarydi(lomatic (rotocol.

In the east a ne' force had a((eared in Central Asia! the /urks! 'ho attacked the) the em(eror ustinian died and 'as succeeded by ustin II! 'ho resol5ed tosto( subsidies to Arab chieftains to restrain them from raidin# Byzantineterritory in Syria. A year earlier the Sasanian #o5ernor of Armenia! of the Surenfamily! built a fire tem(le at D5in near modern 2re5an! and he (ut to death aninfluential member of the 0amikonian family! 'hich touched off a re5olt 'hich ledto the massacre of the Persian #o5ernor and his #uard in )$. ustin II tookad5anta#e of the Armenian re5olt to sto( his yearly (ayments to Chosroes for thedefense of the Caucasus (asses. /he Armenians 'ere 'elcomed as allies! and an army'as sent into Sasanian territory 'hich besie#ed isibis in )*! but dissensionamon# the Byzantine #enerals not only led to an abandonment of the sie#e! but theyin turn 'ere besie#ed in the city of Dara! 'hich 'as taken by the Persians! 'ho


28/35

then ra5a#ed Syria and caused ustin to sue for (eace. ustin 'as succeeded by/iberius! a hi#h Byzantine officer! in ): 'ho made a truce 'ith Chosroes! but it'as not concluded! and in the follo'in# year the Persians in5aded Armenia 'herethey 'ere at first successful. /hen! as so fre9uently in the 'ars bet'een the t'oem(ires! fortune chan#ed! and the Byzantines #ained many local successes. Attem(tsto ne#otiate a (eace in )> failed after a #reat Sasanian 5ictory o5er theByzantines in Armenia. In )& a ne' Byzantine commander 0aurice ca(tured se5eralSasanian stron#holds! but the Armenian re5olt came to an end 'ith a #eneral

amnesty from Chosroes! 'hich brou#ht Armenia back into the Sasanian 2m(ire! and(eace ne#otiations bet'een the t'o #reat (o'ers 'ere under 'ay 'hen Chosroes diedin )%.

It is im(ossible to do more than summarize the achie5ements of Chosroes and tolist the 5arious de5elo(ments in (olitical! social and cultural matters durin# hisrei#n. So much is ascribed to Chosroes in later Islamic 'ritin#s that it isdiflficult to determine ho' much is fact or fable. Certainly much that 'e find instate or#anization! ta6es and the like! in Islamic times had their ori#ins in thestate reforms under Chosroes! or in chan#es 'hich occurred durin# his rei#n! andthe tendency of (easants in Iran today to assi#n any ob5iously (re3lslamic brid#e!cara5anserai or other structure to Chosroes ?of the immortal soul? is testimony ofthe im(ression he made on his contem(oraries. 25en forei#n 'riters inimical to

Chosroes 'ere some'hat a'ed by the im(osin# fi#ure of the Sasanian ruler! crueland hard but 'orthy of res(ect.

Althou#h history! es(ecially in Iran! has been limited to urban! elite #rou(s! thebasis of su((ort of an Iranian #o5ernment or culture 'as the rural (easantry! anddurin# the 0azdakite u(hea5al! e5en the (easantry influenced e5ents. It may bee6a##erated to say that Iran 'as chan#ed from a feudal land into an em(ire afterChosroes! for castes continued! 'ith the scribes or bureaucracy added to thetraditional Indo3lranian three3caste system of (riests! 'arriors and common folk.In a sense the lando'nin# elite #a5e 'ay in influence to a bureaucratic elite tiedto the cro'n. /he direct ta6es le5ied on the land and on the (easants #reatlyreduced the ?middle3man? role of the landed nobility bet'een common folk and thecourt. Althou#h 'e ha5e no statistics and only fra#ments of data! one may

s(eculate that in the lon# run the reforms of Chosroes caused (roblems for the(easants! because a substantial shift in (easant settlement (atterns from oldirri#ated lands to ne' dry3farmin# lands seems to ha5e occurred. /he massi5eirri#ation systems of Chosroes on the (lains! aided by dams and canals! may ha5eat first aided an e6(ansion of a#riculture! but the centralization (erha(s robbedthe local (eo(le of initiati5e 'ith the result of a decline in (o(ulation on the(lains 'ith a conse9uent #ro'th of to'ns. On the (lateau 'e ha5e no informationbut urban de5elo(ment 'as certainly much smaller than in 0eso(otamia. Also0eso(otamia and =huzistan 'ere easier to administer by the central #o5ernment.

/he urban de5elo(ment in =huzistan can be linked to the #reat e6(ansion of tradeunder Chosroes I. /he state no' tended to'ard mono(olistic control of the trade'ith lu6ury #oods assumin# a far #reater role in the trade than heretofore! and

the #reat acti5ity in buildin# of (orts! cara5anserais! brid#es! and the like 'aslinked to trade and to urbanization. /he Persians dominated international trade!both in the Indian Ocean and in Central Asia and South Russia in the time ofChosroes! althou#h com(etition 'ith the Byzantines 'as at times intense. Sasaniansettlements in Oman and ,emen testify to the im(ortance of the trade 'ith India!but the silk trade 'ith China! as 'e shall see! 'as mainly in the hands of theSo#dians.

For trade or defense reasons Chosroes (racticed the ancient transfer of(o(ulations from one (art of the em(ire to another as one can see by the additionof bisho(rics to the realm of eastern Christianity! as 'ell as by many notices of


29/35

such shifts in the sources.


30/35

One branch of Sasanian art 'hich 'as 'ides(read amon# the (o(ulace but 'hich alsodis(layed the royal motifs mentioned abo5e! and has re(ercussions in other areas!is that of s(hra#istics! for in anti9uity (eo(le used seals instead of si#natures.On many thousands of Sasanian seals or seal im(ressions on clay! 'e find a lar#ere(ertolre of motifs includin# fi#ures or busts! as 'ell as official seals only'ith 'ritin#s. For Sasanian onomastica the seals are in5aluable! and 'e find(ersonal names such as 0ihr Bokht or -ur5andad! 'hich! ho'e5er! do not mean that

those 'ho held these names 'ere follo'ers of a se(arate reli#ion of 0ithraism or-er5anism but they 'ere sim(ly -oroastrians. Others 'ere named after a firetem(le! a day of the month! or for rnany other reasons. Perha(s more im(ortantthan (ri5ate seals! 'hich usually #i5e us only a symbol or desi#n but sometirnesthe name and title of the o'ner and rarely other information! 'ere the ?official?seals 'ith 'ritin# alone 'hich tell us about administrati5e di5isions of (ro5incesas 'ell as titles! and no (ersonal names! since they 'ere seals of offices not of(ersons. /he 5ast ma7ority of these seals date from the time of Chosroes I orlater! and 'e ha5e an interestin# (assa#e from the 0ati#an 'hich substantiates thee5idence of the seals and sealin#s themsel5es It #oes as follo's1 ;Furthermore!thus! the seal of usa#e Eofficial seal of the mobads and of the hamarkarEofficial of finances 'as first Eintroduced by order of =a5ad son of Peroz andthat of the 7ud#e Edata5ar first by order of Chosroes son of =a5ad. "hen the

seals of the mobads of Fars 'ere car5ed! it 'as 'ritten not the mobad in the nameof his mobad 9uality! but in the name of the ?ad5ocate of the (oor!? and for thisreason it 'as car5ed on the seal of the mobad of Fars in this manner. Seals! ofcourse! 'ere ancient in the ear 2ast and seem to ha5e been the (redecessors of'ritin#. In Babylonia the 5ast ma7ority of clay sealin#s 'ere economic in nature!and (ersons res(onsible for commercial transactions (ut their seal mark on #oodsand records of dell5eries of #oods. Priests (artici(ated in transactions and incontrol o5er trade and both sealin#s and cuneiform tablets relatin# to trade andle#al matters ha5e been found in tem(les in ancient 0eso(otamia. Since theSasanians 'ere (art of a tradition of conser5atism it should cause no sur(rise tofind (riests actin# as 'itnesses and as ud#es and custodians of records in 5arioustransactions of a 5illa#e! city or a (ro5ince in Sasanian Iran. /he t'ostorehouses 'here Sasanian clay sealin#s ha5e been found in a room of the fire

tem(le at /akht3e Sulaiman in Azerbai7an and at asr3e Abu asr or old Shiraz!held records of 5arious transactions in the form of clay sealin#s! co5erin# a times(an of se5eral #enerations at the end of the Sasanian (eriod One contro5ersystill unresol5ed is to 'hat 'ere the clay sealin#s ori#inally attached before they'ere (laced m their archi5esK One 5ie' is that they 'ere attached to rolleddocuments! 'hile another is that they 'ere attached to oods before bein# remo5edto the archi5es. In the archi5es these sealin#s may ha5e had ta#s or e5endocuments attached to them for identification! but it is difficult to belie5e thatonly documents 'ere ori#inally attached to these sometimes lar#e and hea5y (iecesof clay of so many different forms.

From sealin#s! as 'ell as from later Arabic sources! one may reconstruct the(ro5incial subdi5isions of Sasanian Iran after Chosroes! under the four military

di5isions. /he (ro5ince 'as subdi5ided into kura Efrom 4reek 65(aK also calledosan! 'hich in turn 'ere di5ided into rostak EArdbic rusta9 or tasu#. /hisdi5ision! as 'ell as the nomenclature! 'as not at all uniform throu#hout theem(ire and o5er time desi#nations chan#ed! 7ust as the dehkan! once a noble!became a (easant today. ike'ise! the administration! loyal to the court andcentral #o5ernment! 'as im(osed on the lando'nin# caste system! and sometimes thet'o clashed in the e6ercise of (o'er and authority. /he difficulty of determinin#(ro5incial subdi5isions in Sasanian times! es(ecially in the lo'lands of =huzistanand 0eso(otamia! is com(ounded by chan#es in boundaries and in names made by5arious Sasanian rulers at the end of the dynasty. "e may assume that theinformation (ro5ided by Arabic sources relates mainly to the situation after


31/35

Chosroes II Par5iz. /he di5ision of the em(ire into four (arts! after the (ointsof the com(ass! by Chosroes I 'as more for military or defense (ur(oses than forci5il administration! althou#h it must be admitted that 'e are not informed aboutthe ci5il or#anization 'hich 'as formed beside the military #o5ernor Es(ahbad andhis assistant EK E(ad#os(an. /o #o into details on administrati5e #eo#ra(hy'ould far e6ceed the limits of this book! and 'e must restrict oursel5es in briefto Iran (ro(er.

Fars (ro5ince! the Sasanian homeland! 'as (robably a model for the rest of theem(ire! and 'e kno' there 'ere fi5e kuras! desi#nated by the ma7or cities in them!Istakhr! Arra7an! Bisha(ur! Ardashir =h'arreh and Darab#ird. /he first! 'here the#o5ernor resided! and the lar#est! e6tended east to ,azd. Arra7an 'as called "ehaz Amid =a5ad ?better than Amida has =a5ad Ebuilt this? or "am9ubad in Arabic orBizam9ubad on coins. Ardashir =h'arreh 'as also called 4ur! (resent Firuzabad. /hedi5isions of =huzistan (ro5ince are unclear! for different Arabic sources #i5e5arious (ro5incial subdi5isions! but there 'ere at least se5en! since =huzistan!althou#h much smaller than Fars! 'as richer a#riculturally and 'as more hea5ily(o(ulated. /he lar#est kura 'as


32/35

intert'ined 'ith the deeds of Bahram that it is difficult to tell fact fromfiction! and furthermore stories about Bahram Chobin and Bahram 4or are e6chan#edin the tales about both Bahrams. It is unlikely that the ruler killed by Bahram inthe east 'as the kin# of the "estern /urks! but more likely a subordinate ruler."hether the /urkish attack on Iran 'as a 'ell3coordinated (lan to#ether 'ithByzantine and Arab di5ersions in the 'est 'ith the aim of endin# a Sasanianmono(oly on east3'est trade is (ossible but mere surmise. /he (o(ular #eneral 'asthen sent to the Caucasus area! and althou#h /heo(ylactus says that the Persians

'ere the a##ressors! the hostilities bet'een the t'o em(ires had not beenresol5ed! and Bahram?s initial success 'as a continuation of the stru##le. But ina minor en#a#ement Bahram 'as defeated by the Byzantines! and this led to hisre5olt in Iran.


33/35

of the throne in Constantino(le by Phokas! an officer! in >H* chan#ed thesituation. Chosroes used this as a (rete6t for o(enin# hostilities and! 'hen anemissary from the ne' Byzantine em(eror arri5ed! he 'as im(risoned. Phokas 'asfaced 'ith re5olts all o5er the em(ire! and 2dessa! 'hich had re(laced Antioch asthe most im(ortant city in the #eneral area of northern Syria! 'as besie#ed by anarmy sent by Phokas. Chosroes in >H: sent an army a#ainst the forces besie#in#2dessa 'ho 'ere defeated! and the Persians briefly occu(ied the city. Dara alsofell after a sie#e in >H)! and Chosroes resol5ed to carry the 'ar into the heart

of enemy territory. One army sent into Armenia 'as com(letely successful andcontinued 'est'ard in5adin# Ca((adocia! 'hile in >H a rene'ed Sasanian in5asionof the 'est ca(tured more to'ns. In >$H Phokas 'as o5erthro'n and killed! and$ the kin# of the A5ars a((earedbefore the land 'alls of the Byzantine ca(ital. 2m(eror *&. Shiroetook the name =a5ad and ascended the throne as =a5ad II.


34/35

Shahrbaraz himself 'as murdered after less than t'o months? rule. Since no son ofChosroes 'as ali5e! the nobles raised his dau#hter Boran to the throne! but shedied after rulin# little more than a year. A succession of rulers follo'ed! eachrulin# only a fe' months! includin# Azarmedukht! sister of Boran! Peroz II!)$. /hus the Sasanian 2m(ire 'enton the same road as the Achaemenid! and to the outside obser5er! remo5ed from bothby many centuries! the similarities in their final years strike one more than thedifferences. Details of the fall of the Sasanian 2m(ire ho'e5er! belon# to thehistory of Islam and the Arab con9uests! of 'hich 'e ha5e a 5eritable (lethora ofsources in com(arison 'ith Sasanian history.

/he last century of the em(ire sa' an increase in con5erts to Christianity! andthe e6(ansion of bisho(rics to the east can be found in the acts of the estoriansynods. ot only did the richest (art of the em(ire! the lo'lands of the /i#ris32u(hrates become (redominantly Christian! 'ith 0ono(hysites #ainin# #round a#ainst

the estorians at the end of the em(ire! but the (lateau too sa' an increase inchurches. /hls does not mean! ho'e5er! that the Sasanian state 'as becomin#Christian 7ust before the Islamic era! as some ha5e su##ested. /he state reli#ion'as still u(held by all of the rulers! e5en thou#h it had become a faith (rimarilyof rituals and taboos. It had a #reat disad5anta#e in com(arison to Christianityand Islam in that it 'as not an oecumenical reli#ion acti5ely seekin# con5erts!and it 'as bound too closely to the Sasanian state and its fortunes. One mi#ht saythat in the later years of the Sasanian 2m(ire the state dominated the church!'hereas in the 'est the re5erse seems more true! or (erha(s one could say ?used?rather than ?dominated? in both cases. /he or#anization of minority reli#ions inthe Sasanian 2m(ire ser5ed to (rotect -oroastrianism after the Arab con9uest! 'hen


35/35

byzantium and the arabs in the fifth century- shahid 1989

Documents