Sasanian Empire: Alliance of Religion and Politics

By Taraneh Farhid Student Number: 990631731   \        NMC348 Essay: History of : Prof. Maria Subtelny TA: Usman Hamid

Date of Submission: Nov 6, 2013

 : Alliance of Religion and Politics Taraneh Farhid

The relationship between the Sasanian Kings and the religious practices within their vast and multi-cultural empire, was indeed a complex and inconsistent one. Accordingly, reaching a thorough understanding of the role of religion in the Sasanian political culture, is a challenging task. While the strong link between the religion and the state politics, has shadowed the entire

Sasanian period, however, there are a few questions that yet call for convincing answers. For example: was theology the main drive shaping the Sasanian political culture? Or instead, was it indeed the state politics itself that tailored the state religion? To this end, this paper investigates the nature of the connection between the Zoroastrian priesthood and the Sasanian political culture, in light of historic evidences, religious texts, rock reliefs, as well as work done by other scholars. Based on the findings of my analysis, the alliance of religions and politics first was instigated during the Sasanian period, during which there are inconsistencies as far as the state treatment towards foreign or alternative religions. There are instances that can demonstrate a fair and respectful treatment of other religions by the state, while there are other occasions that can present intolerance and tension. However, although Zoroastrian priests were cynical towards non-Zoroastrian faiths, but in general, the followers of other religions were tolerated, unless they laid a threat against the state authority or conspired with the enemy.1 To this end, this paper

argues that the main drive behind the of non-Zoroastrian minorities under the

Sasanian kings, was more based on political grounds, than religious intolerance. Throughout the

text, I analyzed various evidences and examples which can clearly confirm this argument. As an

example, Shapur II, was tolerant of most religious groups who stood a neutral position, including

the Jewish minorities, but at the same time, he was hostile to Christians, who showed sympathy

towards the Iranian arch enemies, namely “the Romans.”

1 1 Arthur Christensen, “Sassanid Persia”, The Cambridge Ancient History, (Vol XII, The Imperial Crisis and Recovery, A.D. 193 -324 Chapter IV), 122 Page 1

Sasanian Empire: Alliance of Religion and Politics Taraneh Farhid

In general, the link between the divine authority and the dynastic sovereignty was not a new concept instigated by the Sasanian kings. In fact, based on the ancient Iranian classics, the royal authorities could only be legitimized by the virtue of Farrah,2 which was assumed to be a

God given quality.3 Although this concept would directly link the divine and “padeshah,”4 but in

practice, the religious institutions or priesthood did not significantly influence the political

affairs, until the emergence of the Sasanian period. This is evident, during the Achaemenian

period, that the political establishment was not driven by the religious institutions and no official

state religion was present, although the majority of Iranians were Zoroastrians.

In fact the concept of state religion was first materialized by the Sasanian rulers, who

established the state sponsorship of , and assumed high political roles for the

Zoroastrian priests. (180-242 CE), the founder of the Sassanid dynasty, was also

known to be the first one who established the alliance of religion and state in Iran, before the

arrival of Islam. He was the ruler of Estakhr since 206, and then Province since 212, and

finally "Kings of Sasanian Empire" in 224 CE, after the overthrow of the . Based

on Tabari narratives, Ardashir’s father, “Pabag,” and his ancestor, “Sasan”, were high

Zoroastrian priests at Estakhr's Anahid Temple.5 Once Ardashir gained the throne, he would want to base his state authority and political power on the Zoroastrianism, to buy legitimacy for his reign. Ardashir I appointed a high clerical official, “Tansar,” as his chief assistant to facilitate the Zoroastrian church institution, and to collect the scattered texts of and reproduce a new authorized edition of it.6 To this end, it is evident that Tansar’s main task was to justify the overthrow of Arsacids using religion as an instrument.

2Farra Kiani, Farr i izadi, or the God-given glory or splendor 3 Gherardo Gnoli, FARR(AH), Encyclopedia Iranica, (1999) 4 Persian term for the king 5 Tabari, The History of Al-Tabar¯ı, translated by C.E. Bosworth, 1999, 4. 6 , Zoroastrians, Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1979), 102. Page 2

Sasanian Empire: Alliance of Religion and Politics Taraneh Farhid

Similar trends that religion is being used to legitimize the ruling power, can also be verified using rock relief evidences in the Behistun and the Naqsh-i Rustam inscriptions. As described by , in Paikuli inscription it is suggested that “the enemies of the rightful king “” (follower of Truth), were followers of Lie (Demon).”7 This case clearly demonstrates the polarized opposition as the general trend of the Sasanian monarchs and how

Zoroastrianism was used to demonize the king’s enemies.

However, Ardashir’s interest and promotion of Zoroastrianism as the official state religion, did not mean restriction of other religions, given that expansion of the sate without some sorts of religious tolerance was not possible, especially in the early Sassanid era.8 It is evident from many

sources that Shabur I (241 to 271 CE), showed a great amount of tolerance towards other

religions and thoughts.9 Mani lived during Shabur’s reign and presented his faith to Shabur and got permission to propagate his religion. The vast and prolonged growth of Manichaeism within the Sassanid territory, perhaps owes to Shabur’s spirit of tolerance. After Shabur, Hormuz I (272 to 273 CE) also showed support and affection towards Mani. Also among the Sasanian Kings who exercised friendly tolerance towards other religions were Yazdgerd I, Narseh and Qubad I

(Kavadh I) .10 On the contrary, Shahbur II and Khosrow Anoshirvan were the ones who highly

promoted Zoroastrianism to ensure the unity of the country and to fight against various elements.

In general, after Ardeshir I, a major shift is evident regarding the treatment of other religions,

especially during the time of the high priest called “Kerdir,” who lived during six Sassanid kings,

from Ardashir I to Nerseh.

Kerdir’s approach toward the followers of other religions was confrontational and harsh,

7 Touraj Daryaee, Sasanian Persia, The Rise and Fall of an Empire (I.B.Tauris & Co. Ltd, London, New York, 2009), 13. 8 Arthur Christensen, Sassanid Persia, The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol XII, The Imperial Crisis and Recovery, A.D. 193 -324 Chapter IV, 112. 9 Christensen, Sassanid Persia, 122 10 A. Shapur Shahbazi, Sasanian Dynasty, Encyclopaedia Iranica, (July 20, 2005). Page 3

Sasanian Empire: Alliance of Religion and Politics Taraneh Farhid

as during his time a series of major prosecutions and aggressions took place, which were

targeting the non-Zoroastrian population. It was in fact during Kerdir, that prophet Mani11 was

executed. Kerdir openly reveals his harshness and intolerance towards other faiths as part of his

inscription in Kerdir’s inscription at Kaba‐I Zardusht (Naqsh‐I Rustam).12

To this end, one way to explain this apparent change of religious policies during the

Sasanian era, would be the intention of Sasanian kings to inhibit and offset the increasing influence of the priesthood. For example the fact that prophet Mani was kindly treated by

Shapur, can be attributed to Shapur’s policy to reduce the control and power of the Zoroastrian priests.

Another explanation for the discrepancies observed in the state treatment of non-

Zoroastrian faiths, can be protection of the national security in confrontation with the enemies.

As an example the unfriendly treatment of Iranian-Christians by Shapur II (309 to 379 CE), right after Christianity became the official religion of the Roman empire, that made the roman emperor gain some followers within the Iranian territory. It is understood that when was trying to engage a war with Rome, the Christian citizens of Iran, showed sentiment in favor of the Roman Caesar.13 This situation, would naturally turn Christianity, which up to that point, was just treated as a faith among others, as the religion of the enemy. To that end, the policy of persecution and intolerance, which was forgotten since “Kirtir,” was revived again. But unlike the priests, however, Shapur treated the problems with the Christians as a political issue, given that he tolerated the Iranian Jews who stood a neutral position.

On the other hand, Yazdgerd I (399 to 420 CE) was very receptive towards the Christians and Jewish (who were politically neutral) communities, which was due to political purposes.

11 For more information on Prophet Mani and Manichaeism, refer to: Boyce, Zoroastrians, 111. 12 For more information refer to: Kerdir’s inscription at Kaba-I Zardusht (Naqsh-I Rustam). 13 A. Zarrinkoob, Tarikh Ejtemaayi Mardom Iran, (Amir Kabir, Tehran, 1364), 450 Page 4

Sasanian Empire: Alliance of Religion and Politics Taraneh Farhid

However, later Yazdegerd, also changed his policy towards the Christians as a result of the

excessive zeal of the Christian bishop of , Abdaas, who provoked a reaction when he

tried to burn the Great of Ctesiphon, Yazdegerd ordered the bishop to restore and

repair the building at his own expense. However, upon Abdas' refusal, Yazdegerd I turned

against the Christians and ordered the destruction of the churches.14 Later in order to solve the

problem with Christians and at the same time offset the Byzantine influence that could threat the

national security, Yazdegerd actively promoted Nestorianism Christianity, which was an Iranian-

based church and would create a religious buffer between the Church of Rome and the Persian

Church.

Furthermore, it is evident that Khosrow Anoshirvan’s restrictive approach towards

Christianity, also had a political edge and was less of religious matter. He was not genuinely against Christianity but because he saw the Christians as a vessel in the Romans service, he was suspicious and watchful about them. This is evident knowing that he actually was supportive of the Roman Christians who escaped the Roman Empire and taken refuge in Iran. The Nestorians who were chased and had taken refuge in the Iranian court, were treated kindly by Anoshirvan.15

Given the above analysis, it is clear that the key reason behind the temperamental shift from leniency to hostility towards non-Zoroastrian religious minorities under the Sasanian reign, was to guard against the enemy’s influence in Iranian realm and to maintain national security.

Unlike the Achaemanian era, whose power was unchallenged as they were the sole major world power of their time, the Sasanians on the other hand, were constantly challenged by another mighty empire. This perhaps can explain the lenient religious policy during the Achaemanians and the lack of state religion versus the Sasanian era.

14 Theodoret, History of the Medieval World, by Susan Wise Bauer, 85-87. 15 Daryaee, Sasanian, 27 Page 5

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Christensen, Arthur, Sassanid Persia, The Cambridge Ancient History, Vol XII, The Imperial Crisis and Recovery, A.D. 193 -324 Chapter IV.

Gnoli, Gherardo, FARR(AH), Encyclopedia Iranica, (1999).

Tabari, The History of Al-Tabar¯ ı, translated by C.E. Bosworth, 1999.

Boyce, Mary. Zoroastrians, Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1979.

Daryaee, Touraj. Sasanian Persia, The Rise and Fall of an Empire. London: I.B.Tauris & Co. Ltd, 2009.

Rose, Jenny. Zoroastrianism: An Introduction. London: I. B. Tauris, 2011.

Zarrinkoob, A, Tarikh Ejtemaayi Mardom Iran. Tehran: Amir Kabir, 1364

Shahbazi, Shapur, Sasanian Dynasty, Encyclopaedia Iranica, (2005).

Theodoret, v. History of the Medieval World, by Susan Wise Bauer.