Arabs and Iranians in the Islamic Conquest Narrative

Arabs and Iranians in the Islamic Conquest Narrative analyzes how early Muslim historians merged the pre- Islamic histories of the Arab and Iranian peoples into a didactic narrative culminating with the Arab conquest of Iran. This book provides an in-depth examination of Islamic historical accounts of the encounters between representatives of these two peoples that took place in the centuries prior to the coming of Islam. By doing this, it uncovers anachronis- tic projections of dynamic identity and political discourses within the contempo- raneous Islamic world. It shows how the formulaic placement of such embellishment within the context of the narrative served to justify the Arabs’ rise to power, whilst also explaining the fall of the Iranian Sasanian empire. The objective of this book is not simply to mine Islamic historical chronicles for the factual data they contain about the pre-Islamic period, but rather to understand how the authors of these works thought about this era. By investigating the intersection between early Islamic memory, identity con- struction, and power discourses, this book will benet researchers and students of Islamic history and literature and Middle Eastern Studies.

Scott Savran obtained his PhD from the University of Wisconsin in 2011. Dr Savran’s research focuses on identity-based discourses in early Islamic historiography. Culture and Civilization in the Middle East General Editor: Ian Richard Netton Professor of Islamic Studies, University of Exeter

This series studies the Middle East through the twin foci of its diverse cultures and civilisations. Comprising original monographs as well as scholarly surveys, it covers topics in the elds of Middle Eastern literature, archaeology, law, history, philosophy, science, folklore, art, architecture and language. While there is a plurality of views, the series presents serious scholarship in a lucid and stimulating fashion.

For a full list of books in the series, please go to: www.routledge.com/middle eaststudies/series/SE0363

51 Eastern Rome and the Rise of 55 Ibn al- Haytham’s Geometrical Islam Methods and the Philosophy of History and Prophecy Mathematics Olof Heilo A History of Arabic Sciences and Mathematics, Volume 5 52 Literature and the Islamic Roshdi Rashed Court Cultural Life under al-ৡƗত ib 56 New Horizons in Qur’anic Ibn ޏAbbƗd Linguistics Erez Naaman A Grammatical, Semantic, and Stylistic Analysis 53 Women and Leadership in Hussein Abdul- Raof Islamic Law A Critical Analysis of Classical 57 Arabs and Iranians in the Legal Texts Islamic Conquest Narrative David Jalajel Memory and Identity Construction in Islamic Historiography, 54 Orthodoxy and Islam 750–1050 Theology and Muslim–Christian Scott Savran Relations in Modern Greece and Turkey Archimandrite Nikodemos Anagnostopoulos Arabs and Iranians in the Islamic Conquest Narrative Memory and Identity Construction in Islamic Historiography, 750–1050

Scott Savran First published 2018 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2018 Scott Savran The right of Scott Savran to be identied as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identication and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Names: Savran, Scott, author. Title: Arabs and Iranians in the Islamic conquest narrative : memory and identity construction in Islamic historiography, 750-1050 / Scott Savran. Other titles: Culture and civilisation in the Middle East ; 57. Description: Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2018. | Series: Culture and civilization in the Middle East ; 57 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identiers: LCCN 2017016187| ISBN 9780415749688 (hbk) | ISBN 9781315795959 (ebk) Subjects: LCSH: Iran–History–640-1256–Historiography. | Islamic Empire–History–750-1258–Historiography. | Arabs. | Iranians. | Sassanids. Classication: LCC DS288.3 .S28 2018 | DDC 955/.02–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017016187

ISBN: 978-0-415-74968-8 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-79595-9 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Wearset Ltd, Boldon, Tyne and Wear Every effort has been made to contact copyright holders for their permission to reprint material in this book. The publishers would be grateful to hear from any copyright holder who is not here acknowledged and will undertake to rectify any errors or omissions in future editions of this book. For my father

Contents

Preface viii List of abbreviations x

1 Introduction 1

2 Shifting patterns of identity and early Islamic historiography in context 25

3 The opening of the drama: ShƗpnjr and the Sheikh 59

4 BahrƗm V Gnjr, the Lakhmids, and the Hephthalite disaster 81

5 The twilight of Sasanian power: Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn and the saga of ণimyar 102

6 The buildup to the confrontation: Khusraw II ParvƯz and the rise of the Arabs 128

7 The climax: the Islamic victory over the Sasanians 156

8 Conclusion 202

Bibliography 207 Index 241 Preface

This book is based on my dissertation which I completed at the University of Wisconsin in 2011. My idea for this study rst came about during the summer of 2004, during which time I spent in Damascus reading Arabic chronicles. Though I was originally a student of Mamlnjk studies, my colleague, Martyn Smith, con- vinced me that we read together al-Mas‘ njdƯ’s Murnjj al-dhahab wa-ma‘ Ɨdin al- jawhar, and that we focus on the section of pre- Islamic antiquities. I was drawn to this author’s chapter on the Sasanian empire, which cites pre- Islamic Persian texts. Whose “voice” was speaking to us, I wondered, al-Mas‘ njdƯ or the com- posers of these ancient texts? Furthermore, what did the Sasanian era mean for al- Mas‘njdƯ, and how did other Muslim historians, living in different times and places, think about the pre- Islamic period? These questions led me down the path of this current study, which analyzes early Islamic historiography on the relation- ship between the Sasanian empire and the tribes and states of the Arabian pen- insula and Iraq through the lens of contemporaneous discourses and processes. Many people have helped and supported me through the course of this project. While space limitations prevent me from mentioning everyone by name, there are several individuals whom I would particularly like to acknowledge. I would rst like to thank my graduate and undergraduate advisors, David Morgan and Rudi Lindner, who have supported and inspired me throughout my education and in writing this book. From the University of Wisconsin, Uli Schamiloglu has also been a supportive gure throughout my career. Next, I would like to express my gratitude towards Tayeb El- Hibri, who kindly read a draft of my introduc- tion, and provided invaluable advice. Sarah Savant, Greg Fisher, Conor Whately, Michael Bates, and Ignacio Sánchez graciously shared their scholarship with me, which I found most helpful. Likewise, the faculty and students participating in the History Reading Circle at Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan, provided a much welcome assessment of my early chapters. While writing both my disser- tation and this book, I beneted from my communication with Boaz Shoshan, Mahmoud Omidsalar, Parvaneh Pourshariati, Shaul Shaked, Reuven Amitai, Julia Rubanovich, Michael Morony, Elizabeth Urban, D. Gershon Lewental, and the late Patricia Crone, who gave me useful feedback on my dissertation. Furthermore, I would like to thank my teaching assistants from opposite sides of the globe, Nurlan Kabdylkhak and Jay Coman, for providing me invaluable Preface ix assistance and friendship during very busy times. Other friends and colleagues I would like to thank include John Bragg, Don Leggett, Daniel Beben, Zbigniew Wojnowski, Alexander Morrison, Beatrice Penati, Brendan Pietsch, Matthew Wilhite, Daniel Scarborough, Siegfried Van Duffel, Philip Enns, Soa An, Brian Ulrich, Mark Barrow, Trudy Harrington Becker, William Ochsenwald, Daniel Geiger, Elizabeth Bouldin, Eren Tasar, Natalia Bwallerstero, Austin Hollar, and Elsaid Mohammed. My own family and my spouse’s family have been bastions of support during this process as well. Finally and most importantly, I could not have completed this book without the support of my wife Hannah. From proof- reading drafts of chapters, to following me to Kazakhstan, and back to the United States, this book is as much hers as it is mine. Abbreviations

BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies CHALAB Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles-Lettres CHALUP Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period CHI Cambridge History of Iran EI Encyclopaedia of Islam EIr Encyclopaedia Iranica IJMES International Journal of Middle East Studies JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society JESHO Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society PSAS Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 1 Introduction

The Battle of al- QƗdisiyya (AD 636) was the decisive victory for the Muslim- Arabs over the Sasanian empire, opening up Iran for conquest and resulting in the eradication of the Sasanian dynasty. In his historical chronicle, Ta’rƯkh al- rusul wa’l-mulnjk, Abnj Ja‘far Muতammad b. JarƯr al-৫ abarƯ (d. 923) details numerous reports (akhbƗr) of the embassies which the Arabs sent to the Persian1 camp in the days prior to this battle. His main source for these accounts is Sayf b. ‘Umar (d. 809), a Kufan transmitter of traditions who has been noted for his literary embellishment and questionable reliability.2 Each of these meetings pro- ceeds roughly as follows: The Arab ambassador, entering the Sasanian camp alone, is presented as the imago Bedouin warrior. He wears tattered clothes, bears ramshackle weapons, and is generally unkempt. The Iranians, in contrast, are arrayed in full ceremonial formation. The soldiers display their glistening armor and impressive weaponry, and the nobles don their nest brocades and diadems. At the end of a spread carpet lined with cushions, the Sasanian general Rustam sits atop a golden throne. The Arab, however, pays no heed to the Irani- ans’ display of pomp and proceeds to approach Rustam. Rustam then begins the dialogue by disparaging the Arabs for their poverty and offers to give them some meager provisions if they would return to their land. The Arab ambassador, however, remains composed and dignied despite this treatment, and eloquently responds by chastising the Persians for their decadence, proclaiming the message of the Prophet Muতammad, and offering them the ultimatum of conversion, paying the jizya (poll tax), or facing open war.3 These reports’ formulaic emphasis on the contrast between the Arabs’ poverty and the Iranians’ imperial splendor renders their veracity suspect. What is fur- thermore intriguing is the fact that al-৫ abarƯ affords far less coverage to the Arab- Muslims’ early campaigns against the Roman (Byzantine) empire than he gives to the conquest of Iran. This is unusual considering the wealth of conquest on the Arabs’ Western campaigns to which al-৫ abarƯ would (ۊliterature (futnj have had access. These works exhibit similar tropes of contrast in their portray- als of encounters between Arabs and representatives of Roman empire.4 Why therefore did al-৫ abarƯ devote so much attention to Sayf ’s dubious rendition of the al- QƗdisiyya embassies, and the conquest of Iran in general? How might the social and political circumstances in which he lived have shaped his attitude 2 Introduction towards these events? What messages, if any, was he trying to convey to his reader through his portrayal of these embassies, and how might we compare his agenda, or the angle he approached this history, with that of his sources? Al- ৫abarƯ’s chronicle belongs to a genre of Islamic historiography consisting of comprehensive world histories composed between the late ninth and early eleventh centuries.5 These works vary in their coverage of the civilizations of the pre- Islamic world, yet on the whole, the lion’s share of their focus is on two groups: the Arabs and the Iranians. Across this genre, the great civilizations of Greece and Rome, India, and China are frankly not afforded the same depth of coverage in terms of their internal dynamics as the Arabs and the Iranians.6 Con- sidering the fact that Islam was born in the Arabian peninsula, it is of course, natural that Arab history should be afforded a prominent position in any Islamic historical work. As far as the Iranian orientation of these texts is concerned, this is a reection of these historians’ social context. Most of the universal chronog- raphers were of Iranian origin. (Al- ৫abarƯ hailed from the region of ৫abaristƗn, south of the Caspian Sea). Moreover, they were writing in an era witnessing the dominance in the central and eastern Islamic lands of Iranian political enterprises and a concomitant wide-scale resurgence of Iranian traditions and culture. The universal chronicles of this era therefore evince an attempt to merge the histories of the pre- Islamic Arab and Iranian peoples into a universal cycle of aggregate accounts culminating with the rise of Islam. As a watershed moment bringing these two civilizations together, it is no wonder then why the events surrounding the seminal Battle of al- QƗdisiyya receive so much attention in these works in comparison to their depiction of the Byzantine conquests. Yet, this streaming of two distinct traditions into a single historical consciousness was no easy task, especially considering that the transmitters these historians relied upon lived in a different social and political context from theirs and, no doubt, thought about these events differently. So for example, while Iranian culture certainly exercised a strong inuence on the early ‘Abbasid Iraq of Sayf b. ‘Umar, and the Arab genealogist and antiquarian HishƗm b. al- KalbƯ (d. 819), it had not yet reached the same degree of dominance there and elsewhere in the DƗr al-Isl Ɨm (Abode of Islam) as it had by the time we arrive at the universal chronographers’ era. How then did Muslim writers of history, living in different times and in different contexts, come to terms with and give meaning to the Arab conquest of Iran? The present study addresses this question.

Approach: collective memory, identity construction, and historical narrative The main analytical frame of this book is that of historical “memory” and the way early Muslim scholars living between 750 and 1050 remembered the pre- Islamic Arabs and Iranians, as well as the Muslim conquest of Iran. This study further investigates the ways in which this recollection reects their own social context. In approaching this topic, the modern historian can benet from social scientic scholarship on memory without forcing theoretical judgments on the Introduction 3 case of Islamic history. I hope that the insights scholars of memory have to offer can better rene an approach for assessing how early Muslim historians made sense of the past. The idea of studying memory as a sociological phenomenon that is distinct from history originates with Maurice Halbwachs, though his ideas are strongly inuenced by Émile Durkheim’s notion that knowledge itself is a social construct. Halbwachs coined the term “collective memory,” which he argues is the means by which a social group (such as a family, religious organ- ization, profession, socio- economic class, political faction, etc.) becomes aware of itself and how individuals dene their membership to that group. To this end, groups construct a past which demonstrates their continuity and cohesion through time, thus validating the group’s collective identity.7 Halbwachs’ conception of a socially constructed collective memory has been developed in recent cross- disciplinary scholarship approaching the subject of memory from various angles. Combining sociological and historical approaches, the work of the Egyptologist Jan Assmann is among the most prominent. Assmann builds on Halbwachs’ idea that memory is an essential ingredient for identity construction and group belonging. He argues that:

Memory is the faculty that enables us to form an awareness of selfhood (identity), both on the personal and on the collective level. Identity, in its turn, is related to time. This synthesis of time and identity is effectuated by memory. Remembering is a realization of belonging, even a social obligation. One has to remember in order to belong.8

What Assmann refers to as “cultural memory” (memory which “preserves the store of knowledge from which a group derives an awareness of its unity and peculiarity” and which is generally dened by wide temporal horizons) is reex- ive, in that groups project their ideal self- image, values, and sense of unity into a past that they construct. Assmann also underlines the uidity of cultural memory, arguing that it is in a continuous state of being reconstructed according to chang- ing social conditions and historical circumstances.9 Furthermore, rather than distinguishing between history and memory as does Halbwachs, Assmann articulates a historiographical approach to the study of memory which asks not just what is being remembered, but rather seeks to con- textualize how the past is remembered. The objective of this method, which he refers to as “mnemohistory,” is to uncover what a society’s memory can reveal about its own circumstances, concerns, and biases. To this end, in assessing textual historiographical data, mnemohistory seeks to uncover the “hidden agenda” of the author/transmitter.10 The trend of analyzing Islamic historiography as a product of constructed memory has its roots in the “source-critical” tradition of modern Western scholarship on Islam. Around the turn of the twentieth century, Julius Well- hausen devised a classication scheme grouping early Muslim historians into regional “schools.” He was highly critical of the members of the Iraqi school (particularly Sayf b. ‘Umar) for their alleged sloppy chronologies, propensity to 4 Introduction weave romantic tales, and for the telltale signs of tribal and partisan biases which their works exhibit.11 Yet, whereas Wellhausen was interested in distinguishing between “good” versus “bad” sources for the purpose of reconstructing actual adƯth (traditions) revealedۊ events, Ignaz Goldziher aimed to uncover what the retrospectively about the later generations of religious scholars who compiled -adƯth (including the orthodox canoniۊ them. Goldziher argued that most of the cal traditions) are anachronistic fabrications, since they reect political and reli- gious discourses circulating among Muslim scholars, which had been projected onto the time of the Prophet.12 The “skeptical” approach to Islamic historiography peaked in the 1970s with the appearance of studies challenging the entire corpus of Islamic historiography and religious texts, including the Qur’an itself. By comparing non-Muslim texts with Islamic sources, scholars like John Wansbrough, Patricia Crone, and Michael Cook boldly argued that “Islam” itself was a later fabrication of the early ‘Abbasid era projected upon what was, in actuality, an Arabian monotheis- tic movement of the seventh century which did not see itself as a distinct reli- gion.13 While the skeptical view continues to be expressed by some scholars,14 the general trend in recent decades has been towards a measured approach, accepting that there is, in most cases a “kernel” of recoverable historical truth in early Islamic sources on the formative period.15 Concomitant with the recent boom in memory studies scholarship, the past few decades have witnessed a proliferation of research analyzing the theme of memory in early Islamic society from a variety of angles. Some recent studies on this subject are general in scope, encompassing a range of topics related to Islamic historical memory.16 Others have continued the trend of studying the origins and development of Islamic historiography, asking what were the key themes, discourses, and concerns shaping how early Muslim authors thought and wrote about the past.17 A recent trend among some scholars in this regard is to approach Islamic historiography on the Prophet, the formative community, the early conquests, and historical events that reach to the mid-ninth century as a multi-layered and allusive construct. By so doing, they have revealed the poten- tial of literary/textual analysis for unlocking social and cultural meaning con- tained within the texts that is not readily discernable through a positivist reading of them. (More will be said on this approach below). Similarly, various recent studies have examined the formative Islamic period as a polemical ground for messages that served social and cultural anxieties of a later Islamic society.18 However, for all this scholarship centered on the topic of “representation” in Islamic history, there has been little attention given to examining what the early chroniclers say about the pre- Islamic era (particularly that of Iran), and what the accounts of this period reveal about the social contexts and political circum- stances of early Islamic society. A signicant exception to this is Sarah Bowen Savant’s recent monograph which analyzes how early Iranian historians assimilated the history and tradi- tions of pre- Islamic Iran into the canon of Islamic historiography by selectively “remembering” and “forgetting” their own peoples’ past. Savant charts the Introduction 5 process over several centuries whereby Iranian history was gradually incorpor- ated and given meaning in a broader Islamic context. The purpose of this was to validate an Iranian-Islamic identity.19 This book contributes to recent scholarship on Islamic memory by analyzing what early Islamic historiographical perspectives of the pre- and formative Islamic period can tell us about the ways in which identity and alterity were con- structed in the early Islamic world in different times and places. Identity is a widely analyzed term in modern social scientic scholarship, with sundry con- notations. The rubric of “identity” proposed by this book examines the intersec- tions of ethnic, cultural, tribal, and religious awareness. Yet we leave our denition loose, so as to not overstep our bounds in imposing modern concepts of belonging onto our sources. For it would be foolhardy to imagine that the ways in which individuals in our authors’ milieu understood terms such as ‘Arab (Arabs), a‘rƗb (Bedouin), Furs (Persia/Persians), qawm/ahl (both translate as “people” and are applied in different contexts), and umma (nation) t perfectly into the categories created by social scientists in the last 50 years. At the same time, while I am careful in my application of modern social scientic terminol- ogy, I also accept certain ubiquitous axioms regarding identity that have with- stood the test of scrutiny and analysis across the board in a variety of research settings. The rst is the intimate connection between memory and identity, as we noted above.20 The second commonly held theory regarding identity postulates that groups tend to dene themselves in bifurcating terms of centrality and nor- mality in stark contrast to the “Other,” i.e., the inferior, subaltern, or rival con- stituency. “Othering” is a power process to the extent that the representing group assumes the normative position and reserves the right to represent or “create knowledge” about the other group. To this end, the dominant group (or group claiming superiority at least) will often dene the “Other” as the embodiment of those strange, negative characteristics which it seeks to distance itself from; its “shadow” in the Jungian sense.21 Stuart Hall, whose denition of identity derives from Derrida’s concept of différance, describes the process of “othering” in identity formation:

Identities are constructed through, not outside, difference. This entails the radically disturbing recognition that it is only through the relation to the Other, the relation to what it is not, to precisely what it lacks, to what has been called its constitutive outside that the “positive” meaning of any term – and thus it its “identity” – can be constructed. Throughout their careers, identities can function as points of identication and attachment only because of their capacity to exclude, to leave out, to render “outside”, abjected.22

Finally, as they are differential, identities are never xed, but like collective memory, are uid, changing over time in accordance with different social and political circumstances.23 In what follows, I outline how these features of identity come into play in early Islamic historians’ portrayals of the pre- Islamic Arab and 6 Introduction Iranian peoples. Before doing so, I will rst describe the vehicle which brings identity and memory together, and by which these historians operated – narrative.

The Islamic conquest narrative A key contribution of Savant’s study lies in its depth, rst demonstrating how Muslim historians integrated a range of antecedent traditions (bibilical, Arab and Iranian legend, epic), and then examining Islamic memory of more recent events and themes occurring around the time of the Arab conquest of Iran. This book focuses more directly on memory of the Sasanian period as a whole. My argu- ment for a Sasanian focus is based on reading this ancient period as a critical transition in the overall drift of Islamic historiography, and the move from the end of the biblical/legendary era and the rise of Islam. “With the Sasanians we emerge into historical time,” writes Julie Meisami, alluding to the fact that what came earlier in the Iranian-Islamic historiographical tradition is the stuff of myth, an elliptically portrayed era occupied by legendary kings like JamshƯd and AfrƯdnjn, and their respective dynasties—the PƯshdƗdians, the KayƗnians, and the AshkƗnians. Whereas when we arrive at the Sasanian period in the chronicles, we are dealing with real historical events, still tinged with myth, but nonetheless more clearly focused in the minds of our historians.24 Echoing Meisami, ‘IrfƗn ShahƯd writes that this period

was the most recent pre- Islamic past and, unlike the remoter world of the Parthians and the Achaemenids, was still fairly vivid and alive in the minds and the records of the Persians and Arabs of early Islamic times when al- ৫abarƯ wrote his TƗrƯkh.25

Indeed, in Islamic memory, events occurring during this time are causally related in a direct way with the rise of Islam. To this end, Muslim historians depicted the Sasanians as having a fate that was intimately intertwined with that of the Arab peoples. This can particularly be seen in the historiographical emphasis on the interdependency between the Sasanians and their client state, the Lakhmids, as I shall demonstrate later in this study. This book’s main theme is that the Sasanian era, as it is portrayed in Islamic histories, witnessed the unfolding of a didactic narrative, which I have termed the “Islamic Conquest Narrative.” I hope to show that Islamic chronicles depict the Arab conquest of Iran in the seventh century as the climax of a drama between Arab and Iranian civilizations that starts in earnest with the rise of the Sasanian dynasty. A narrative is a “discourse that conveys a story.” That is, it does not just refer to the story itself, but the interactive process of how that story is conveyed, which involves a discourse between the narrator and the receiver/ interpreter. In terms of structure, narratives tie together events into a causal sequence. Events in narratives are interrelated, occurring as a consequence of previous events, and “gaps” are lled in between them to create a coherent con- tinuous ow. To this end, narratives have their own time, which is determined Introduction 7 by the sequential relationship of events in them. Narrative time speeds up or slows down depending on the level of “density,” i.e., the amount of attention afforded to representing an event, topic, setting, character, etc. Density, in turn, is usually proportional to the relative importance of what is being described to the overall purpose of the story. For all narratives have meaning. They exhibit a conspicuous trajectory whose purpose is to validate (or invalidate, depending on the perspective of the narrator), solve a problem, or provide an explanation.26 This book’s conceptual basis depends largely on Hayden White’s theory of narrativization, which emphasizes the ctionalizing component in historical writing. For White, all history writing is essentially an act of storytelling. He argues that historical narratives “are as much invented as found” by historical narrators who employ techniques of ctional writing to construct a story which blends “historic” with “mythic” elements. According to White’s theory, events within historical narratives are “emplotted” into a story-like format, organized into dramatic stages and conforming to a plotline, replete with characters playing archetypical roles, emphasis on particular semiotic motifs, use of rhetorical and literary devices (wordplay, metaphor, foreshadowing, irony, etc.), and variation in tone and density of descriptions in accordance with the plot’s demands. Through this ctional representation, historical narratives provide their readers with hermeneutic signposts guiding them on how the story will unfold and how they should interpret the events and processes within them.27 White provides the example to elucidate his argument that no event is intrinsically tragic, comedic, instructional, etc., but it is rather the historian who congures an event to be this way by weaving it into a narrative that relies upon telltale ctional- literary tech- niques and plots that are culturally conditioned, making them readily recogniz- able to the intended audience.28 From this angle, narrativization is thus a process that gives meaning to historical events and helps groups and individuals make sense of their past. Scholars of memory have, moreover, theorized that narrative is the bridge linking collective memory and identity construction, to the extent that narrative serves as the vehicle by which a group imagines its history. That is, groups con- struct their identity by assembling memories of their past into the form of a “master narrative.” Master narratives structure collective memory by providing it with order. They tell the story of the group by explaining its origins, its pro- gression through time as a distinct social entity, and in some cases foreshadow the group’s future. They furthermore adhere to a plot, in which key events in the group’s history are transformed into formative episodes, and historical reality “intermingles” with legend and fantasy. To this end, master narratives make use of ctional devices to project contemporaneous ideologies into the group’s history, thus creating a dialogue between past and present. Finally, just like memory and identity, the master narrative itself is an ever evolving organism, changing to meet the social needs of the group and to reect its current circum- stances. The purpose of the master narrative is thus to provide members of a group with a sense of a shared past and to aid them in delineating their group’s boundaries by dening what their group is about, and what it is not.29 8 Introduction I referenced above the trend analyzing Islamic historiographical memory and representation from a narrativist perspective. It is therefore suitable to briey outline this scholarship in order to situate my analysis and approach within the framework of these studies. Recent studies applying literary analyses to early Islamic historiography are indebted to the seminal study of Albrecht Noth. His work identies and classies common schemata and themes within the texts, which he argues were back projections that clearly reect the contemporaneous ideologies, interests, and literary styles of the historians and their respective milieus.30 For her part, Marilyn Waldman applies speech- act analysis to Abnj’l- FaĪl BayhaqƯ’s (d. 1077) TƗrƯkh-i BayhaqƯ (also known as the TƗrƯkh-i Mas‘njdƯ) to uncover the “unconscious patterning” of the text, which itself reveals a layer of meaning transcending the author’s deliberate intentions.31 The past two decades has witnessed a diverse array of scholarship analyzing the literary nature of narratives of the Prophet and the early conquests, asking what literary and rhetorical strategies did Muslim historians employ to project commonplace ideo- logical stances of their own contexts in their representations of the formative period.32 On a theoretical level, a current discussion among scholars assesses the ctional dimension of various forms of early Islamic writing, including histori- ography (ta’rƯkh), religious texts, and adab, which is roughly equivalent to the belles- lettres genre in Western literature.33 However, the most prominent representation of narrative methodology in recent years lies in Tayeb El- Hibri’s works on the historiography of the Rash- idun and early ‘Abbasid Caliphates. El-Hibri shows how Islamic historical sources portray both periods as part of an ongoing divinely regulated drama, whose conspicuous narrative-literary structure, weaving together various plots and subplots of Islamic socio-historical discourse, serves both stylistic and didactic ends. From this angle, the narrative of the Caliphates is as much of an edifying, moralizing drama as it is a work of history.34 As an inquiry into the Islamic narrative of the pre- Islamic period, I humbly hope that this book will uncover a prequel to the narratives El- Hibri analyzes by elucidating themes of distant memory, which were formative in shaping the discourse among early Muslims on how the umma came to be, and what its future trajectories are. To this end, in what follows, I will outline the major themes of the Islamic conquest narrative. The rst important feature to recognize about the narrative this book analyzes is that it is marked by watershed moments, each signaling a critical transition in the plot, ultimately leading to the nale, the victory at al-Q Ɨdisiyya and the sub- sequent Arab conquest of Iran. For our story, the critical turning points occur in the context of encounters between the Arabs and Sasanians.35 This book ana- lyzes reports of key meetings between representatives of these two groups. These are often portrayed as being interconnected, resulting from previous encounters. Moreover, they conform to formulaic patterns, which I shall describe in detail below. To this end, I intend to show that the plot unfolds in such a way as to make the nal encounter, the Arab conquest of the Sasanians, appear inev- itable and even necessary to the contemporaneous Muslim reader. How this was Introduction 9 achieved as well as what these encounters looked like is a matter of the second dening characteristic of our narrative, its didactic function. The purpose of the Islamic conquest narrative was to relate a lesson (‘ibra). Throughout this introduction, I have referenced a wide body of scholarship ana- lyzing, in one form or another, how early Muslim chroniclers fashioned histor- ical narratives of the formative period in such a way as to lend validation to contemporaneous agendas and ideologies. These studies make manifest the indelible kerygmatic or teleological quality of Islamic historiography, demon- strating that early Muslim historians portrayed the polities of late antiquity, the prophecy of Muতammad, the emergence of the umma, and the latter’s early military successes, culminating with the major conquests of other nations as interconnected, and part of God’s plan. The purpose in so doing was to legiti- mize current Muslim hegemony by projecting its inevitable rise to supremacy into the past.36 The Islamic conquest narrative is therefore teleological, in that it forecasts the fall of the Sasanian dynasty and its replacement by Islam as the unfolding of the divine plan. At the same time, it is moralizing to the extent that the dramatis personae in our drama play an active role in bringing about the fate of their respective civilization by acting in a way that is either pleasing or displeasing to God. This is where the didactic retrojection of anachronistic Islamic values comes in—the Muslim-Arab conquest of Iran serves as an ethical lesson for the contemporaneous reader. To this end, we may note some pervasive themes and patterns of a moralizing quality that convey the inevitability of this transition to the reader. All such themes are rooted in the differential character of the Islamic con- quest narrative. In the chronicles, Arab and Iranian civilizations are presented in Manichean terms to be the stark contrast of each other, each one dening itself by a set of values which the other rejects. The conception of “Arab” and “Persian” as diametrically opposed, culturally homogenous units is a projection from the Islamic period, as I shall discuss in the following chapter. Iranian civili- zation is portrayed as the embodiment of imperial splendor, social stratication, and high culture; whereas the Arab tribes and states of the JƗhiliyya are equated with the Spartan life of the desert and the rugged, egalitarian values of the Bedouin.37 In the context of encounters between these two peoples, the Arabs appear as the protagonists whereas the Sasanians come off as the villains. For example, in the Sasanians’ treatment of the Arabs, they are depicted as stingy tyrants. One commonplace trope is reports that describe how, in response to the Arabs’ migrating into the fertile regions of Iraq and southern Iran, the Persians would either offer them some triing gifts to return to their lands, or go on cruel campaigns against them, punishing the Arabs excessively. Another theme is their haughty treatment of Arab ambassadors, whom they disparaged, often assaulted, and to whom they made pompous displays of their ceremonial and grandeur. Still another is the Sasanians’ overcondence in battle with the Arabs, relying on their numbers, sophisticated weaponry and tactics, and then the ironic aftermath of their defeat when their luxuries cannot save them. 10 Introduction Such defaming stereotypes of the Iranians are set in stark contrast with positive images of the Arabs. The chronicles tend to highlight the Arabs’ straitened circumstances as a source of virtue and steadfastness, whereas the Per- sians’ excessive wealth brings about their moral decay. The Arabs are both municent and brave, as can be seen in depictions of their battles with the mighty Sasanians. At the same time, the cultural achievements of the Arabs are emphasized. In this respect, their eloquence (balƗgha) is a pervasive trope. For example, in accounts of Arab embassies to the Sasanian kings and ofcials, the Arab ambassadors are portrayed remaining composed in front of the Sasanians’ intimidating ceremonial and dismissive treatment of them, and impressing the latter with their wit. Finally, laudatory descriptions of the kingdoms of the Yemen and the Lakhmids of al-ণƯ ra, whose cultural accomplishments are often set in comparison to that of the Iranians, achieve a similar affect. The overarching pattern of our narrative’s plotline becomes clear with each successive encounter, as the Arabs become ever more condent in their dealings with the Iranians, while the discrepancy in morality between the two peoples become increasingly stark. By the time we arrive at the time of the conquest of the Sasanian empire, the Arab warrior- tribesmen (muqƗtilnjn) are depicted as paragons of moral perfection, combining the quintessential toughness of the Bedouin with the Islamic values of piety and religious devotion, showing a will- ingness to sacrice their lives for God’s cause. By embodying such virtues, they appear as religious heroes, in many respects heritors of the simplicitas exempli- ed by the desert dwelling ascetics and martyrs of the late antique Near Eastern faith tradition, who likewise lived an austere lifestyle and stood up for their faith against a tyrannical, worldly power.38 At the same time, the processes causing the Sasanian house’s degeneration were at this point irreversible, and the moral depravity besmirching the once proud royal family becomes acute at this point in the narrative, making the Sasanians’ fall to a morally superior enterprise appear natural. Like any aesthetically pleasing narrative, ours is enhanced by literary and hermeneutic devices. On the one hand, devices like detailed descriptions of physical settings, peoples’ appearances, feelings, gestures, and of various other minutiae; along with verbatim dialogules and monologues are utilized by our chroniclers for their mimetic quality, giving their reports the pretension of reality, putting the reader into the position of a personal observer of the histor- ical situations they are reporting.39 But there are also tropes whose specic func- tion is to point the reader in the direction of the narrative’s plotline, aiding him/ her to comprehend its underlying message. For instance, underscoring the ubi- quitous theme of contrast in the setting of the encounters are illustrations of Iranian royal paraphernalia and markers of the Iranians’ wealth, particularly thrones, cushions, and brocades, craftily juxtaposed with stereotypical images of the Arabs’ desert life, such as their turbans, camels, their simple sustenance, and their crude weaponry. To this end, we may imagine the chroniclers’ portrayal of Khusraw II ParvƯz, enthroned with his hanging crown,40 receiving Arab emis- saries; or of Rib‘Ư b. ‘Ɩmir, with his shoddy weapons, eloquently replying to Introduction 11 Rustam’s taunts41 as lieux de mémoire, to the extent that they are symbolic images representing, in condensed form, a broader historical process and its con- stitutive lesson, etched into Islamic collective memory through the instrument of narrative.42 The device of foreshadowing likewise pervades our narrative, in which one encounters visions and omens heralding the rise of Islam and the Arab conquest of Iran.43 There are even several instances in the texts where the Sasanians cryp- tically acknowledge their fall to the Arabs. Conversely, one witnesses in these reports pagan Arabs of the JƗhiliyya who display an uncanny familiarity with monotheism and Qur’anic precepts, and conform to a mode of behavior that betrays indelible Islamic ideals. At the same time, the chroniclers’ emphasis of contrast between the noble, rugged Arabs and the haughty Iranian rulers and ofcials, conveys a sense of irony in the unfolding of history, in as much as these humble, yet dignied inhabitants of the desert, not the mighty kings of any of the ‘ajamƯ (non-Arab) civilizations, should be honored to receive the seal of the prophets and the mandate for the conquest of the world.44 The sum effect of this and other forms of literary embellishment that I shall analyze throughout this book produces a mood of predetermination for these two peoples so inextricably linked by fate. Indeed, it is as if the outcome is already known before the con- quest. The stereotypical, if not predictable, patterns of the encounters in our nar- rative show that the Sasanians’ forfeiting of power to the Arabs is the outcome of their own hubristic behavior. Because of their pompous displays of wealth and luxury, and because of their maltreatment of the Arabs, their ultimate fall appears both inevitable and justied to the reader. In this way, the Arabs’ con- quest of the Sasanian empire serves as a moralizing lesson against imperial hubris, excessive wealth, and tyranny. At the same time, portrayals underlining the Arabs’ piety, toughness, cultural achievements, and their longevity as a people serve to justify their rise to rule over neighbors who possessed a glorious imperial tradition and sophisticated culture. Yet, also like any other narrative, ours is more than just a story, as it also involves a discourse between narrator and receiver. In this regard, the nal important aspect to note about the Islamic conquest narrative is its intertextual layering. For, as we’ve discussed, just as a group’s cultural memory and identity are subject to continuous reconstruction, so too does its master narrative develop between and sometimes within generations. The changing dynamics of a group’s self- awareness and social conditions are reected in the stratigraphy (to use archaeological language) of its master narrative, and if available, can be charted by the intertextuality of its historical sources, be they oral or written.45 The stratigraphy of the early Islamic historiographical tradition has long been a topic of interest among students of Islamic history for the reason that no specimen of the earliest generations of Islamic historiography remains extant, forcing scholars to rely on what is cited in the chronicles dating from no earlier than the ninth century. Thus, when we read al-৫ abarƯ’s history, we are not just reading “al-৫ abarƯ” but rather a composite of those chains of transmitters (isnƗds) and sources he cites. In an effort to reconstruct these earliest layers, some historians 12 Introduction have devised classication schemes dividing Islamic historiography temporally into stages,46 and geographically into schools representing different cities.47 Some scholars, particularly those focusing on apologetic memory, have analyzed how a specic historical subject or episode has been interpreted from generation to generation.48 Others have concentrated on the theme of transmission itself, asking by what means early Muslim scholars preserved and passed on know- ledge to successive generations.49 Such analyses must rst assess the level of “agency,” asking whether an author/narrator could (and to what degree) shape the material attributed to him, or was he simply a passive transmitter of older material. They must then differ- entiate between the intentions of the author (if applicable), how his work would have been received/interpreted by readers in his own social context, and then how readers living both in different areas as well as among later generations might have interpreted that particular work, all the while taking account any potential affect on transmission and reception stemming from changing social circumstances. Older material could be preserved, altered, or recombined with new material in succeeding generations. Reecting on the intersection between collective memory and hermeneutics, Eviatar Zerubavel remarks:

The extent to which our social environment affects the way we remember the past becomes clearer when we realize that much of what we “remember” is actually ltered (and therefore initially distorted) through a process of interpretation that usually takes place within particular social surroundings. Such distortion affects the actual facts we recall as well as the particular “tone” in which we recall them.50

With this in mind, we may then ask how does the angle, interest or tone (to use Zeruvabel’s words) evolve across these early generations of Islamic historians in their portrayals of the Islamic conquest narrative? What were Muতammad b. IsতƗq’s (d. 761) or Sayf b. ‘Umar’s major concerns when they wrote about the conquests, and what factors inuenced the direction of their narrative? More- over, how was their work received by later generations of historians, and how might their “re-emplotment” of these previous transmitters’ material reect their own diverse social contexts and personal interests? The following chapter is devoted to addressing these questions.

Chapter outline This study opens with a contextual chapter whose aim is to uncover the over- arching hermeneutical processes shaping the Islamic conquest narrative by describing the dynamic social, political, cultural and religious contexts and dis- courses that would have affected how our historians wrote about Arab-Sasanian relations. I hope to show that one witnesses a shift in perspective mirroring the concomitant eastward moving pattern of identity and political power in the early Islamic world occurring between 750 and 1050. During the early ‘Abbasid era, Introduction 13 when an Arab- Islamic identity crystallized, and when intercultural agonism was rife among intellectuals and elites from Egypt to KhurƗsƗn, akhbƗrƯs approached these events primarily from an Arabo- centric perspective, aiming to put the Arabs on the historical map of civilizations and justify their rise over other peoples pos- sessing a longstanding imperial heritage. Yet the universal historians whose works start to appear later in the ninth century provide a more inclusive repres- entation, giving more depth to the Iranian role in this narrative. To this end, I plan to show that for these chroniclers, the Islamic conquest narrative represented the preliminary stage of a broader process of “salvation history” in which the people of Iran (particularly of KhurƗsƗn) would ultimately be redeemed.51 How then, did Muslim historians justify the fall of the Sasanians and legiti- mize the Arabs as being worthy to take their place as rulers of a world empire? Chapters 3 through 7 offer an interpretative analysis of the Islamic conquest nar- rative in order to address this question. These ve chapters are organized accord- ing to the chronological scheme of the narrative. Chapter 3 deals with the opening of the drama, analyzing accounts describing the rise of the Sasanians and their treatment of the tribes that had settled in or near their territory. It focuses on the Sasanian sovereign ShƗpnjr II’s (r. 307–379) punitive expedition against the Arabian tribes and two similar reports (in the chronicles of al- Mas‘njdƯ and al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ respectively) of a clearly apocryphal, yet highly sym- bolic, dialogue between ShƗpnjr and an Arab elder, which portends the Islamic conquests. At this point in the drama, we are dealing with a situation where the Sasanian empire is in the heyday of its power while the Arabs are in a state of disarray. Yet, ShƗpnjr’s meeting with the Arab sheikh(a) serves as a foreshadow- ing device in the narrative, alluding to a changing tide of fortune (dawla), which was still centuries off. Chapter 4 brings the Lakhmids of al- ণƯra into the discussion, examining the narrative’s emphasis on the “Arab” upbringing of the Sasanian king BahrƗm V Gnjr (r. 420–438) as a source of his rement and bravery, as well as the role played by BahrƗm’s guardian, the Lakhmid sovereign al- Mundhir I in assisting him in regaining his throne. This chapter also examines accounts of the disas- trous defeat of PƯrnjz I (r. 459–484) at the hands of the Hephthalites (al- HayƗܒila), arguing that though they were not Arabs, the Hephthalites’ routing of the Sasanian army serves our narrative as a portentous precursor for later battles between the Iranians and the Arabs. Chapter 5 analyzes portrayals of QubƗdh I (r. 488–496, 498 or 499–531) and Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn’s (r. 531–579) dealings with the Arabs, highlighting the absorption of memory of the South Arabian ণimyarite rulers into the context of the Islamic conquest narrative. Both of these chapters make clear a plot development, in which the Sasanians are beginning to show signs of decay, while the Arabs are becoming increasingly assertive in their affairs. Furthermore, with the reign of Khusraw I, we enter into the horizon of the SƯra of the Prophet. The narrative’s turning point comes with the reign of Khusraw II ParvƯz (r. 591–628), which is the subject of Chapter 6. I argue that the Islamic conquest narrative portrays Khusraw II as the model of royal decadence and tyranny. The 14 Introduction degeneration of his character is underlined in his dealings with the Arabs. Signi- cant themes to be dealt with in this chapter include ParvƯz’s rescue by the IyƗd tribe early in his reign, the saga leading up to his liquidation of the Lakhmid dynasty and the narrative of the epic Sasanian defeat at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr, which serves as a precursor in Islamic historical memory to the Arab conquest of Iran. I also analyze accounts of ominous events pervading Khusraw’s nal days that presage the fall of his dynasty and the rise of Islam. Chapter 7 analyzes the climax of the narrative, the Islamic conquest and liquidation of the Sasanian dynasty, and the ignominious murder of the last Sasanian ruler, Yazdagird III (r. 632–651). I provide a detailed analysis of the reports of both the pre- battle embassies (as described above) that the Muslims sent to the Sasanians, where the Arab ambassadors are made to enunciate the didactic message of the nar- rative, and of the epic battles themselves. This chapter also examines Islamic accounts of the Muslims’ dealings with the Christian Roman empire from a com- parative perspective. A nal point to make regarding this book’s approach is that I am not con- cerned with the kerygmatic question of how early Muslim scholars sought to legitimize their faith by proving its provenance in the Abrahamic tradition. The ways in which both Judaism and Christianity have been depicted in the Islamic religious and historical traditions as forecasting the rise of Islam has already been studied in detail in other scholarship.52 The primary focus of this study, however, centers on historical depiction across a range of sources as we examine the portrayal of the conquest of Iran by Muslim historians and the vicissitudes of Arab– Iranian dialogue from a vantage point of a later time.

Sources In this section, I provide an overview of our most important reporters of the Islamic conquest narrative. I reserve a more detailed discussion of our historians and their respective contexts for the following chapter. The types of sources employed in this book’s analysis include annalistic chronographies, conquest narratives, prophetic biographies, biographical dictionaries, and adab. Non- Muslim sources and archaeological data are also utilized for comparative pur- poses. My goal in doing so is to provide to the extent possible an accurate historical setting against which to contextualize the processes and events related by the Islamic conquest narrative. For the early ‘Abbasid period, our earliest akhbƗrƯ is the Medinan Muতammad b. IsতƗq (d. 767), who under the aegis of the caliph al-Man ৢnjr (r. 754–775), composed a three- part historical chronicle. The rst part (KitƗb al-Mubtada’ ) contained information on creation, biblical history, and pre- Islamic Arabia; the second section is the biography of the Prophet (SƯrat Rasnjl AllƗh); and the third is a history of the caliphs (Ta’rƯkh al- khulafƗ’). Ibn IsতƗq’s biography of the Prophet survives through the redaction of Ibn HishƗm (d. 828),53 but also appears through a different redaction along with his now lost in large sections of al- ৫abarƯ’s chronicle and ۊconquest narrative, KitƗb al- Futnj in fragments elsewhere. Introduction 15 The aforementioned Sayf b. ‘Umar is our main source for the Muslim annex- ation of Iraq and Iran, and the liquidation of the Sasanian state. Sayf composed a monograph on the ridda wars and the early Islamic conquests, titled KitƗb al- al- kabƯr wa’l-ridda, which only exists in fragments.54 It serves as a major ۊFutnj source in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle, though al-৫ abarƯ does not refer to this title. HishƗm b. Muতammad, better known as Ibn al- KalbƯ (d. 819), a Kufan geneal- ogist and historian specializing in Arabian antiquities, is our chief source for the Lakhmids of al-ণƯ ra. However, he also wrote about non- Arab civilizations as well. Of his prolic scholarship, his Ta’rƯkh, which contains valuable informa- tion on the pre-Islamic Arabs and Iranians is of particular interest to us.55 Other historians I take into account from this era include the Basran genealogist and philologist Abnj ‘Ubayda (d. 825), who along with Ibn al- KalbƯ is our prime source for the ayyƗm al-‘Arab (battle days) genre, and nally, the secretary Muতammad b. Sa‘d (d. 845), whose biographical dictionary is of paramount importance in constructing the life of the Iranian companion of the Prophet, SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ.56 Our earliest, extant world histories appear in the late ninth century. Of these, the Iraqi historian and geographer Aতmad b. AbƯ Ya‘qnjb al- Ya‘qnjbƯ’s (d. 897) Ta’rƯkh reects a distinctively adab- style humanist interest in world civilizations and a conspicuous Shi‘ite bias. Appearing around the same time is the AkhbƗr al-ܒ iwal of the polymath Abnj ণanƯfa al- DƯnawarƯ (d. 895).57 Al- DƯnawarƯ was the son of an Iranian convert. With his work’s attempt to synchronize biblical- Islamic with Iranian legendary history, and its description of Iranian traditions like the Nawrnjz and MihrjƗn festivals, the AkhbƗr al-ܒ iwƗl serves as a prime early example of an Iran- centered genre of world history writing that became especially prominent in the following century. From this period, I will also con- of Aতmad b. YaতyƗ al-Bal ƗdhurƯ (d. 892), a (ۊsider the conquest narrative (futnj mid- level bureaucrat in the ‘Abbasid court and boon companion (nadƯm) of the Caliph al- Mutawakkil (r. 847–861).58 Finally, we have the NihƗyat al-irab fƯ akhbƗr al-Furs wa’l-‘Arab, an anonymous chronicle attributed to the philologist ‘Abd al- MƗlik al-A ৢma‘Ư (d. 828), which is a valuable source for pre-Islamic Iranian and Arab history.59 Our most important source, appearing in the tenth century, is al- ৫abarƯ’s Ta’rƯkh, a massive compendium which focuses largely on the dynamic relation- ship between Iraq (particularly Baghdad) and Iran. Al-৫ abarƯ was a privately supported Muslim legal scholar and theologian. Originally from Ɩmul, he traveled throughout the Islamic world for his scholarship, but eventually settled in Baghdad where he founded his own madhhab (school of Islamic jurispru- adƯth-styleۊ dence). Reective of his jurisprudential background, al-৫ abarƯ’s approach to historical writing was to provide multiple and often contradictory akhbƗr on one subject, sometimes analyzing their respective accuracy through his own deduction. Yet, for all his judicious analysis of isnƗd-based akhbƗr, al- ৫abarƯ was not above weaving fantastic legends and incorporating moralizing tales for didactic ends, especially when it came to the themes foreshadowing the rise of Islamic hegemony.60 16 Introduction Next to al-৫ abarƯ, the most prominent historian of the early- mid tenth century is the traveler Abnj’l-ণasan al-Mas‘ njdƯ (d. 956), a Shi‘ite Arab belonging to the HudhƗyl tribe. His Murnjj al- Dhahab and his slightly shorter work, KitƗb al- TanbƯh wa’l-ashrƗf reect the humanist interests of the author, providing a wealth of information on the civilizations of the world.61 Appearing shortly later under the Buyid emirate, we have the chronicles of ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ (d. 961) and Aতmad b. Muতammad Miskawayh (d. 1030), which both focus heavily on the history and culture of pre-Islamic Iran.62 The tenth century witnessed the publication of the rst major Islamic histories in Persian under the aegis of the Samanid dynasty. The amƯr Manৢnjr b. Nnjh (r. 961–976) commissioned the head vizier Abnj ‘AlƯ Muতammad Bal‘amƯ (d. 974) to compose a Dari translation of al-৫ abarƯ’s Ta’rƯkh. It is not as compre- hensive as al-৫ abarƯ’s history, but contains independent material and relies on outside texts, making it a very useful source in its own right.63 It was also during the Samanid era that the dihqƗn (landed magnate) Abnj’l-QƗsim FirdawsƯ (d. 1020) composed his ShƗhnƗma (Book of Kings), an epic poem recounting the history of Iran from its mythical beginnings until the Arab conquest.64 However, the book was dedicated upon its completion to the new suzerain, Maতmnjd of GhaznƗ (r. 998–1030). FirdawsƯ’s ShƗhnƗma was not the rst, as there is evidence of several such named works composed in both prose in verse under the Samanids. For example, FirdawsƯ incorporates about 1,000 verses from the poet Abnj Manৢnjr DaqƯqƯ (d. 977) on the topic of Zoroaster. DaqƯqƯ was commissioned by Nnjh II b. Manৢnjr (r. 976–997) to compose a ShƗhnƗma, though his murder prevented its completion. Moreover, FirdawsƯ claims that he based his work on a prose ShƗhnƗma composed by the Samanid minister Abnj Manৢnjr Ma’marƯ.65 However on this point, some modern scholars express the view that FirdawsƯ relied primary on an oral tradition of transmission whose roots lie deep in Iranian antiquity.66 Appearing slightly after FirdawsƯ’s work, we have the Arabic chronicle of the pre- Islamic Iranian dynasties, Ghurar akhbƗr mulnjk al- Furs wa- siyarihim, com- posed by the litterateur ‘Abd al- Malik b. Muতammad al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ (d. 1038), which constitutes one of our most important sources. Like FirdawsƯ, al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ lived under both Samanid and Ghaznavid rule, dedicating his Ghurar to al- Naৢr, the brother of Maতmnjd of Ghazna. The points of similarity between these two historians’ texts indicate that they share a common source, possibly Abnj Manৢnjr’s prose ShƗhnƗma.67 I have reserved a separate description for works belonging to the category of adab. Adab is a diverse concept with sundry connotations, ranging from good breeding and cultivation, to applied knowledge, to a genre of pre- modern Islamic literature comprising literary miscellanies which “combined poetry and prov- erbs, maxims and anecdotes, and sayings of all sorts by all kinds of different people to form edicatory and entertaining anthologies.”68 These works reect the diversity and spirit of humanistic inquiry pervading early Islamic civiliza- tion, as they incorporate literature, history, and legends stemming from the Arab, Iranian, Greek, Indian, and other traditions. Our adab authors of the ninth Introduction 17 century include the litterateurs ‘Amr b. Baতr al- JƗতi਌ (d. 868–869)69 and Muslim b. Qutayba (d. 889).70 These scholars’ writings stand out in their analysis of the pertinent discourses of their era regarding identity, ethnicity, and culture, while serving as an excellent source for pre- Islamic history as well. From the tenth century, we have the Spanish poet Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih (d. 940), whose KitƗb al-‘Iqd al- farƯd is a fundamental source detailing pre- Islamic Arabian history, particularly the ‘ayyƗm al-‘Arab accounts. Despite Rabbih’s background, his work is clearly oriented around Iraq and the eastern Islamic world.71 Finally, appearing slightly later is Abnj’l-Faraj al- IৢfahƗnƯ (d. 966), a student of al-৫ abarƯ who thrived at the Buyid court. His KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ is a masterful adab com- pendium which provides historical anecdotes and poetry of the pre- and form- ative Islamic Arabs, but is also a revealing source concerning the author’s contemporaneous milieu.72

Notes 1 In this study, I use the terms “Persian” and “Iranian” interchangeably (i.e., when referring to a people as opposed to the Persian language.) Jamsheed Choksy has con- vincingly shown that “Iran” is more accurate since it possesses a long- standing tradi- tion as the “Iranian” peoples’ own native term of self- reference, unlike “Persian,” which was conceived by outsiders like the Arabs, who noticed that in pre- Islamic times, the ruling dynasty came from FƗrs (Middle Persian: PƗrs), which is southwest Iran. See Conict and Cooperation: Zoroastrian Subalterns and Muslim Elites in Medieval Iranian Society (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997), 8–9. However, this study does not aim to recreate a positivistic picture of the pre- Islamic Iranians, but rather seeks to understand how these people were imagined in Islamic collective memory (see below). To this end, al- Furs (the Persians) is the most common identier of the Persian/Iranian people in early Islamic chronicles. Yet Muslim historians were also cognizant of and utlized the terms “Iran/Iranian” to describe that people/civilization as well. 2 On Sayf b. ‘Umar, see pp. 15, 161–162. 3 Ta’rƯkh al- rusul wa’l-mulnjk or Annales quos scripsit Abu Djafar Mohammed Ibn Djarir at- Tabari (15 vols. in 3 series) (Leiden: Brill, 1879–1901), I, 2267–2285. 4 See pp. 186–190 for an analysis of these works. 5 On this genre, see Chase Robinson, Islamic Historiography (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), XIV, 74–79; Bernd Radkte, “Towards a Typology of Abbasid Universal Chronicles,” in Occasional Papers of the School of Abbasid Studies, vol. 3, eds. D. Jackson, W. Heinrichs, P. M. Holt, H. N. Kennedy, and L. Richter- Bernburg, 1–18 (St. Andrews: University of St. Andrews Press, 1991). 6 Aতmad b. AbƯ Ya‘qnjb al-Ya‘q njbƯ’s balanced survey of world history, Ta’rƯkh al- Ya‘qnjbƯ (2 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- ৡƗdir, 1960) constitutes the only notable exception. However, even this historian expressed in his geographical work a clear preference for Iraq, which he sees as the center of the world, and where as he notes, once stood Ctesiphon (Arabic: al- MadƗ’in), the historic capital of the Sasanian empire. See KitƗb al- BuldƗn (Leiden: Brill, 1892), 233–235. Abnj’l-ণasan al- Mas‘njdƯ (d. 956) similarly states that one of the points of honor in the favor of the pre-Islamic Persian kings was their control of the region of Iraq. He also ranks Graeco-Roman civilization behind Iran in terms of grandeur. See KitƗb al- TanbƯh wa’l-ishrƗf, trans. B. Carra de Vaux as Le Livre de l’avertissement et de la revision (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1896), 9. Likewise, in his world history, al-Mas‘ njdƯ’s coverage of pre-Islamic Byzantine civilization is conspicuously one- dimensional as compared with that of Iran, as it 18 Introduction essentially covers ecclesiastical history and Christological controversies. See Murnjj al- dhahab wa- ma‘Ɨdin al- jawhar (4 vols.) (Beirut: Dar IতyƗ’ al-Tur Ɨth al-‘ArabƯ, 2002), I, 212–218; Nadia El Cheikh, Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004), 187. 7 Maurice Halbwachs, On Collective Memory, ed. Lewis Coser (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992). Coser’s work provides selections from Halbwach’s The Social Frameworks of Memory and The Legendary Gospels of the Holy Land. 8 “Communicative and Cultural Memory,” in A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies, eds. Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nünning, 109, 114 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010). The intimate connection between memory and identity is a commonly expressed axiom in modern social scientic scholarship. See, in the same volume, Astrid Erll, “Cultural Memory Studies: An Introduction,” 1–15; and Alon Conno, “Memory and the History of Mentalities,” 77–84. See further Kathryn Woodward, Identity and Dif- ference (London: SAGE Publications, 1997), 15–20ff.; Kobena Mercer, “Welcome to the Jungle: Identity and Diversity in Postmodern Politics,” in Identity: Community, Culture, Difference, ed. Jonathan Rutherford, 43–71 (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1990); Allan Megill, “History, Memory, Identity,” History of the Human Sciences 11, 3 (1998): 37–62; Jeremy Schott, “Identity Politics in the Later Roman Empire,” in Christianity, Empire, and the Making of Religion in Late Antiquity (Philadelphia: Uni- versity of Pennsylvania Press, 2008), 1–14. 9 “Collective Memory and Cultural Identity,” New German Critique 65 (1995): 125–133. Assmann distinguishes between “cultural memory” and “communicative memory” which comprises images resulting from everyday interactions and which is lacking in cultural content. 10 “Mnemohistory and the Construction of Egypt,” in Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997), 1–22. Similarly, James Fentress and C. J. Wickham propose that the researcher should approach the text as a guide to determine the questions he/she should ask, since the way a society remembers and records its past ultimately reects contemporary atti- tudes and the issues which it faces. Through this approach, one may thus utilize the sources to comprehend the “mentalités” of that particular society. See Social Memory: New Perspectives on the Past (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992). 11 Prolegomena zur ältesten Geschichte des Islams, in Julius Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten (6 vols.) (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1884–1899), VI, 4–7; The Arab Kingdom and its Fall, trans. Margaret Weir (Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1927), VII–XV. 12 Muslim Studies (2 vols.), trans. S. M. Stern and C. R. Barber (London: Allen and Unwin, 1967–1971), II, 15–274. 13 Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World (Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976); John Wansbrough, Qur’anic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977); The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978). 14 Yehuda Nevo and Judith Koren, Crossroads to Islam: The Origins of the Arab Reli- gion and the Arab State (Amherst: Prometheus Books, 2003). 15 The most prominent defenses of the “kernel of truth” approach include Albrecht Noth and Lawrence Conrad, The Early Arabic Historical Tradition: A Source- Critical Study, trans. Michael Bonner (Princeton: Darwin, 1994); Gregor Schoeler, The Biog- ammad: Nature and Authenticity, trans. Uwe Vagelpohl, ed. Jamesۊraphy of Mu Montgomery (London: Routledge, 2010). 16 Jacob Lassner, The Middle East Remembered: Forged Identities, Competing Narrat- ives, Contested Spaces (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000); Farhad Daftary and Josef Meri eds., Culture and Memory in Medieval Islam: Essays in Honour of Wilferd Madelung (London: I. B. Tauris, 2003); Angelika Neuwirth and Introduction 19 Andreas Pitsch eds., Crisis and Memory in Islamic Societies (Beirut: Ergon Verlag Würzburg in Kommission, 2001). 17 Seminal studies, in addition to Noth’s work (The Early Arabic Historical Tradition), include Robinson, Islamic Historiography; Fred Donner, Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing (Princeton: Darwin, 1998); Tarif Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought in the Classical Period (Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1994). On Persian historiography, see Julie Meisami, Persian Historiography: To the End of the Twelfth Century (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1999); and Charles Meville ed., Persian Historiography, vol. 10 of A History of Persian Literature, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London: I. B. Tauris, 2012). 18 Heather Keaney, Medieval Islamic Historiography: Remembering Rebellion (London: Routledge, 2013); Antoine Borrut, Entre mémoire et pouvoir: L’espace syrien sous les derniers Omeyyades et les premiers Abbassides (v. 72–193/692–809) (Leiden: Brill, 2011); Fred Donner, Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010); El Cheikh, Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs; Jacob Lassner, Islamic Revolution and Historical Memory: An Inquiry into the Art of ‘AbbƗsid Apologetics (New Haven, Eisenbrauns, 1986); Tayeb El-Hibri, “The Redemption of Umayyad Memory by the ‘AbbƗsids,” JNES, 61, 4 (2002): 241–265; Rudolf Sellheim, “Prophet, Chalif, und Geschichte: die Muhammed- Biographie des Ibn Isতâq,” Oriens 18–19 (1965–1966): 33–91. 19 Sarah Bowen Savant, The New Muslims of Post-Conquest Iran: Tradition, Memory, and Conversion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013). 20 See above pp. 2–3 on scholarship demonstrating that groups tend to construct a past which legitimizes their identity by showing their cohesion and continuity through time 21 On the process of “othering,” see the following note and Abdul JanMohamed, “The Economy of Manichean Allegory,” in The Post- Colonial Studies Reader, eds. Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Grifths, and Helen Tifn, 18–23 (London: Routledge, 1995); “Other/other” and “Othering” in Post- Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts, eds. Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Grifths, and Helen Tifn, 169–173 (London: Routledge, 2000). On the connection between othering and the articulation of power, see Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, 2nd ed., trans. Alan Sheridan (New York: Random House, 1995). Finally, on Carl Jung’s concept of the “shadow,” see his Man and his Symbols (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964), 72–74. 22 “Introduction: Who needs Identity?” in Questions of Cultural Identity, eds. Stuart Hall and Paul du Gay, 4–5 (London: Sage, 1996). 23 E. Hobsbawm, Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 8. 24 Julie Meisami, “The Past in Service of the Present: Two Views of History in Medi- eval Persia,” Poetics Today 14, 2 (1993): 254. On this idea, see also following note and R. N. Frye, The Heritage of Persia (New York: World Publishing Co., 1963), 198. 25 ‘IrfƗn ShahƯd, “Theodor Nöldeke’s ‘Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden’: An Evaluation,” IJMES 8, 1 (1977): 118. 26 This description is derived from Marie- Laure Ryan, “Toward a Denition of Nar- rative,” in The Cambridge Companion to Narrative, ed. David Herman, 22–35 (Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007); H. Porter Abbott, “Narrative and Life” and “Dening Narrative,” in The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative, 2nd ed. (Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 1–27. On time and narrative, see Paul Ricoeur, Time and Narrative (3 vols.), trans. K. McLaughlin and D. Pellauer (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990), I, 3. 27 Hayden White, The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Repres- entation (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987); Tropics of Discourse: Essays in Cultural Criticism (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978). 20 Introduction On the narrative character of historical discourse, see further Louis Mink, “Narrative Form as a Cognitive Instrument,” in The Writing of History: Literary Form and Historical Understanding, eds. Robert Canary and Henry Kozicki, 129–149 (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1978). 28 The Content of the Form, 44. 29 On master narratives (masterplots, metanarratives, ctions of memory, etc.), see Assmann, Moses the Egyptian, 14–15; Abbott, The Cambridge Introduction to Nar- rative, 46–49; Yael Zerubavel, “The Dynamics of Collective Remembering,” in Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 3–12; Birgit Neumann, “The Literary Representations of Memory,” in A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies, eds. A. Erll and A. Nünning, 333–343 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010); Erinnerung- Identität- Narration: Gattungstypologie und Funktionen kanadischer “Fictions of Memory” (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2005). Donner (Narratives, 129–139) likewise makes use of this terminology. He denes master narratives as the “historical agenda” or “story line” that governs the make-up of the historical text. 30 The Early Arabic Historical Tradition. 31 Toward a Theory of Historical Narrative: A Case Study in Perso- Islamicate History (Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 1980). 32 Standing at the forefront of these is Donner’s comprehensive study (Narratives of Islamic Origins) of the formation of Islamic historiography, which describes the legit- imizing discourses shaping early Islamic historical writing as well as the major themes and contours of this tradition. See also Uri Rubin, The Eye of the Beholder: The Life :ammad as Viewed by the Early Muslims, A Textual Analysis (Princetonۊof Mu Darwin, 1995); Thomas Sizgorich, “ ‘Horsemen by Day and Monks by Night’: Nar- rative and Community in Islamic Late Antiquity,” in Violence and Belief in Late Antiquity: Militant Devotion in Christianity and Islam (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009), 144–167; “Narrative and Community in Islamic Late Antiquity,” Past and Present 185 (2004): 9–42; “ ‘Do Prophets Come with a Sword?’ Conquest, Empire, and Historical Narrative in the Early Islamic World,” American Historical Review 112, 4 (2007): 993–1015; Nancy Khalek, Damascus after the Muslim Conquest: Text and Image in Early Islam (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). See especially the rst chapter “Narrative and Early Islamic History,” 3–38. Nicola Clarke, The Muslim Conquest of Iberia: Medieval Arabic Narratives (London: Routledge, 2012). 33 See the relevant studies in Stefan Leder ed., Story- telling in the Framework of non- Fictional Arabic Literature (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998); Philip Kennedy ed., On Fiction and Adab in Medieval Arabic Literature (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2005); Sebastian Günther ed., Ideas, Images, and Methods of Portrayal: Insights into Classi- cal Arabic Literature and Islam (Leiden: Brill, 2005); Angelika Neuwirth, Birgit Embaló, Sebastian Günther, and Maher Jarrar eds., Myths, Historical Archetypes and Symbolic Figures in Arabic Literature: Towards a New Hermeneutic Approach (Stutt- gart: F. Steiner, 1999). Recent literary analyses focusing specically on the Qur’an are likewise manifold, and too numerous to list in this note. Stefan Leder is the chief proponent of the view that Islamic historical writing may be classied as ction. He makes the case that Muslim historians employed the device of narration to pass ctional material off as real, or non- ctional. See “Conventions of Fictional Narration,” in Story- telling in the Framework of non- Fictional Arabic Liter- ature, 34–60; “The Use of Composite Form in the Making of the Islamic Historical Tradition,” in On Fiction and Adab in Medieval Arabic Literature, 125–148; “Fea- tures of the Novel in Early Historiography: The Downfall of XƗlid al- QasrƯ,” Oriens 32 (1990): 72–96; “The Paradigmatic Character of MadƗ’inƯ’s ‘shnjrƗ-Narration’,” Studia Islamica 88 (1998): 35–54; “The Literary Use of Khabar: A Basic Form of Historical Writing,” in The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 1: Problems Introduction 21 in the Literary Source Material, eds. Averil Cameron and Lawrence Conrad, 277–315 (Princeton: Darwin, 1992). He is challenged on this point by Julie Meisami, who argues that an aesthetic literary style and narrative framework are not necessarily indicative of ction. She stresses rather the rhetorical function of Islamic histories, pointing out that their intended readership would have regarded them as true to the extent that their factuality lies in the moralizing lesson which they conveyed. More- over, Muslim historians did not manufacture “facts” (as novelists do), but rather, “turned them into something meaningful. A good story yes; a deliberate ction, no.” See “Mas‘njdƯ and the Reign of al- AmƯn,” in On Fiction and Adab in Medieval Arabic Literature, 149–176; “History as Literature,” in Persian Historiography, ed. Charles Melville, 1–55 (London: I. B. Tauris, 2012). 34 Parable and Politics in Early Islamic History: The Rashidun Caliphs (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010); Reinterpreting Islamic Historiography: HƗrnjn al- RashƯd and the Narrative of the ‘AbbƗsid Caliphate (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1999). 35 On “turning points” in master narratives, see Zerubavel, Recovered Roots, 9–10. 36 On the theme of “kerygma,” see especially Savant, New Muslims, 91–95; Lawrence Conrad, “Heraclius in Early Islamic Kerygma,” in The Reign of Heraclius (610–641): Crisis and Confrontation, eds. Gerrit Reinink and Bernard Stolte, 113–156 (Leuven: Peeters, 2002). 37 On the contrast between settled civilization and Bedouin culture as a trope in Arabic literature, see Joseph Sadan, “The ‘Nomad versus Sedentary’ Framework in Arabic Literature,” Fabula 15, 1–2 (1974): 59–86; “An Admirable and Ridiculous Hero: Some Notes on the Bedouin in Medieval Arabic Belles Lettres, on a Chapter of Adab by al-Râghib al- Isfahânî, and on a Literary Model in which Admiration and Mockery Coexist,” Poetics Today 10, 3 (1989): 471–492. literature, see ۊOn the circulation of late antique ideals of religious heroism in the futnj 38 Sizgorich, “Horsemen by Day and Monks by Night”; “Narrative and Community in Islamic Late Antiquity,” 29–38. On simplicitas, see Averil Cameron, Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire: The Development of Christian Discourse (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), 120–188; Claudia Rapp, Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity: The Nature of Christian Leadership in an Age of Transition (Berkeley: University of Cali- fornia Press, 2005), 137–155; Peter Brown, Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1992), 71–78. 39 On mimesis in al- ৫abarƯ’s Ta’rƯkh, see “Tropes of Mimesis,” in Boaz Shoshan, Poetics of Islamic Historiography: Deconstructing ܑabarƯ’s History (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 3–60. 40 Khusraw (Arabic: KisrƗ) was the name/title of several Sasanian sovereigns starting with Khusraw I AnnjhsirvƗn (r. 531–579). It was also the name of a Sasanian nobleman who competed with BahrƗm V Gnjr (r. 420–438) for the throne (see p. 85), the name of the legendary KayƗnian ruler Kay Khusraw, and according to ‘Abd al-Malik b. Muতammad al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, an AskhƗnian (Parthian) ruler as well. See KitƗb Ghurar akhbƗr mulnjk al-Furs wa-siyarihim, H. Zotenberg ed. and trans. as Histoire des rois des Perses (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1900), 470. Both AnnjshirvƗn and ParvƯz are attributed with donning crowns so heavy that they had to be suspended by chains to relieve their weight. See Elsie Peck, “Crown II: From the Seleucids to the Islamic Conquest,” EIr, 1993; Richard Ettinghausen, From Byzan- tium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic World: Three Modes of Artistic Inuence (Leiden: Brill, 1972), 28–29; Arthur Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides (Osna- brück: Otto Zeller, 1971; repr. of 1936 ed.), 397–398; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 946, 1009; a l -T h a ‘ ƗlibƯ, 699–700. 41 He is one of the Arab ambassadors described above on p. 1. On Rib‘Ư’s exchange with Rustam, see al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2270–2273. 42 Pierre Nora, “Between Memory and History: Les lieux de mémoire,” trans. Marc Roudebush, Representations 26 (1989): 7–21. 22 Introduction 43 On the legitimizing role of dreams in early Islamic historiography and literature, see Leah Kinberg, “Literal Dreams and Prophetic ণadƯth in Classical Islam: A Comparison of Two Ways of Legitimation,” Der Islam 70 (1993): 279–300; Nile Green, “The Religious and Cultural Roles of Dreams and Visions in Islam,” JRAS 13, 3 (2003): 287–313. 44 The term “ ‘ajam” is an appellation denoting non- Arabs, but was most commonly associated with the Iranians. See C. E. Bosworth, “ ‘Ajam,” EIr, 1984; Ignaz Goldzi- her, “ ‘Arab and ‘Ajam,” in Muslim Studies, trans. S. M. Stern and C. R. Barber (New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction, 2006; repr. of vol. 1), 98–136. 45 On intertexuality and group identity, see Renate Lachmann, “Mnemonic and Inter- textual Aspects of Literature,” in A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies, 301–310. 46 Robinson, Islamic Historiography, 18–38; Donner, Narratives, 275–282. 47 Wellhausen’s theory of regional “schools” (see above, pp. 3–4) is further developed by ‘Abd al-‘AzƯz al-D njrƯ, The Rise of Historical Writing among the Arabs, ed. Fred Donner, trans. Lawrence Conrad (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983); “The Iraq School of History to the Ninth Century: A Sketch,” in Historians of the Middle East, ed. Bernard Lewis, 46–53 (London: Oxford University Press, 1962); and with a critical eye by Donner, Narratives, 214–228. 48 Lassner discusses the issues related to textual stratication in both his study of ‘Abbasid apologetics (Islamic Revolution and Historical Memory, 30–36) and in his more general survey of historical memory in the Middle East (The Middle East Remembered, 45–59). Antoine Borrut (Entre mémoire et pouvoir) similarly analyzes the strands of narrative composition on eighth-century Syria, arguing that an ofcial “Abbasid vulgate” appeared around the turn of the tenth century. Heather Keaney (Medieval Islamic Historiography) opts for a broader focus, deconstructing the layers of historiographical memory on the murder of the Caliph ‘UthmƗn, and examining how narratives of this rebellion reect political and religious tensions of the ninth– fourteenth centuries. Similarly, D. Gershon Lewental provides a comprehensive ana- lysis of the “QƗdisiyyah narrative” through the lens of propagandistic memory from the earliest sources on this battle to twentieth-century and present-day nationalist and Islamist discourses. See QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now: A Case Study of History and Memory, Religion, and Nationalism in Middle Eastern Discourse (Waltham: Brandeis University Dissertation, 2011). Finally, mention should be made of Elizabeth Urban’s dissertation, which analyzes how successive generations of historians and legalists interpreted the Islamic legal category of mawlƗ (pl. mawƗlƯ), and how the denition of this term evolved with changing social contexts. See The Early Islamic MawƗlƯ: A Window onto Processes of Identity Construction and Social Change (Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Dissertation, 2012). 49 Gregor Schoeler, The Genesis of Literature in Islam: From the Aural to the Read, in collaboration with and trans. Shawkat Toorawa (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University ammad; Shawkat Toorawa, “From Memory toۊPress, 2009); The Biography of Mu Written Record,” in Ibn AbƯ ܑƗhir ܑayfnjr and Arabic Writerly Culture: A Ninth- Century Bookman in Baghdad (London: Routledge, 2005), 7–17. 50 “Social Memories: Steps to a Sociology of the Past,” Qualitative Sociology 19, 3 (1996): 283–299. 51 On the revival of Iran in the framework of Islamic salvation history, see Tayeb El- Hibri, Reinterpreting Islamic Historiography, 213–215. 52 Uri Rubin, The Eye of the Beholder. 53 KitƗb al-S Ưra al- nabawiyya li- Ibn HishƗm (4 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- KitƗb al-‘ArabƯ, 1990); Sellheim, “Prophet, Chalif, und Geschichte.” and Kitâb al- Jamal wa-masîr ‘Â’isha wa-‘Alî. A Facsimile ۊKitâb al- Ridda wa’l-futû 54 Edition of the Fragments Preserved in the University Library of Imam Muhammad Ibn Sa‘ud Islamic University in Riyadh (2 vols.), ed. QƗsim al- SƗmarrƗ’Ư (Leiden: Smitskamp Oriental Antiquarium, 1995). 55 W. Atallah, “al-Kalb Ư,” EI, 2nd ed. Introduction 23 56 KitƗb al-ܑ abaqƗt al- kubrƗ (9 vols.) (Leiden: Brill, 1904–1940). 57 KitƗb al- AkhbƗr al- ܒiwƗl (Leiden: Brill, 1888). .(al- buldƗn (Leiden: Brill, 1866 ۊFutnj 58 59 NihƗyat al-irab fƯ akhbƗr al-Furs wa’l-‘Arab (Tehran: Anjuman-i ƖthƗr va MafƗkhir-i FarhangƯ, 1997). 60 Seminal studies on al-৫ abarƯ include Hugh Kennedy ed., Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and His Work (Princeton: Darwin, 2008); Shoshan, Poetics of Islamic Historiography. 61 Major studies include Aতmad Shboul, Al- Mas‘njdƯ and his World: A Muslim Humanist and His Interest in Non- Muslims (London: Ithaca Press, 1979); Tarif Khalidi ed., Islamic Historiography: The Histories of Mas‘njdƯ (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1975); S. Maqbnjl Aতmad and A. RaতmƗn eds., Al- Mas‘njdƯ Millenary Commemoration Volume (Calcutta: The Indian Society for the History of Science and The Institute of Islamic Studies, Aligarh Muslim University, 1960). -wa’l-anbiyƗ’ (Beirut: DƗr Maktabat al ڲ ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ, Ta’rƯkh sinƯ mulnjk al-ar 62 ণayƗt, 1990); Miskawayh, KitƗb TajƗrib al- umam (7 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- Kutub al- ‘Ilmiyya, 2003). 63 TƗrƯkhnƗma, trans. by H. Zotenberg as Chronique de Abou Djafar-Mo‘hammed- Ben- Djarir-Ben-Yezid Tabari, Traduite sur la Version Persane d’Abou-‘Ali Mo‘hammed Bel‘ami (4 vols.) (Paris: G. P. Maisonneuve: Editions Besson et Chantemerle, 1958; repr. of 1867–1874 ed.). Considering the diversity of extant TƗrƯkhnƗma manuscripts, it has been speculated that Bal‘amƯ’s work may have served as the basis of multiple translations of al-৫ abarƯ’s history. See A. C. S. Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Histori- ography and Political Legitimacy: Bal‘amƯ’s TƗrƯkhnƗma (London: Routledge, 2007); Elton Daniel, “The SƗmƗnid ‘Translations’ of al-৫ abarƯ,” in Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and his Work, 263–297. 64 ShƗhnƗma, trans. by Jules Mohl as Le Livre des rois (7 vols.) (Paris: Imprimerie Internationale, 1876–1878). 65 V. Minorsky, “The Older Preface to the ShƗh-nƗma,” in Studi orientalistici in onore Giorgio Levi Della Vida (2 vols.), ed. Giorgio Levi Della Vida, II, 159–179 (Rome: Istituto per l’Oriente, 1956). 66 Olga Davidson, Poet and Hero in the Persian Book of Kings, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013); Dick Davis, “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s Sources,” JAOS 116, 1 (1996): 48–57. This view has been roundly criticized by Mahmoud Omidsalar. See “Unburdening Ferdowsi: Poet and Hero in the Persian Book of Kings,” JOAS 116, 2 (1996): 235–242; Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, the ShƗhnƗmeh (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). 67 Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics, 53–55; “Could al-Tha‘âlibî Have Used the Shâh- nâma as a Source?” Der Islam 75, 2 (1998): 338–346. Davis, on the other hand, argued that al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ relied directly FirdawsƯ’s text, while the latter invented the existence of a prose ShƗhnƗma in order to gain textual authority for his own work. See “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s Sources.” 68 Dimitri Gutas, “Classical Arabic Wisdom Literature: Nature and Scope,” JAOS 101, 1, (1981): 59. On adab, see further S. A. Bonebakker, “Adab and the Concept of Belles-Lettres ,” CHALAB, 16–30; Tarif Khalidi, “History and Adab,” in Arabic Historical Thought, 83–130; Francisco Gabrieli, “Adab,” EI, 2nd ed.; Charles Pellat, “Variations sur le thème de l’adab,” Correspondance d’Orient 5–6 (1964): 19–37; C. A. Nallino, La Littérature arabe des origines à l’époque de la dynastie umayyade, trans. Charles Pellat (Paris: G. P. Maisonneuve, 1950), 7–28. 69 KitƗb al-Bay Ɨn wa’l-tabyƯn (4 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- JƯl 1990); KitƗb al-Bukhal Ɨ’ -iܲ (4 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- Kutub alۊBeirut: DƗr al-ৡƗ dir, N. D.); RasƗ’il al-J Ɨ) ,ayawƗn (7 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr IতyƗ’ al- TurƗth al-‘ArabƯ ۉ-Ilmiyya, 2000); KitƗb al‘ 1969); ThalƗth rasƗ’il (Cairo: al-Ma ৬baދa al-Sala yya, 1926). 24 Introduction 70 KitƗb ‘Uynjn al- akhbƗr (4 vols.) (Cairo: DƗr al-Kutub al-Mi ৢriyya, 1925–1930); KitƗb l al-ұArab wa’l-tanbƯh ұalƗڲal- Ma‘Ɨrif (Beirut: DƗr al- Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1987); Fa ұulnjmihƗ (Abu Dhabi: al- Mujamma‘ al-Thaq ƗfƯ, 1998). 71 KitƗb al-‘Iqd al-far Ưd (6 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al-Arqam ibn AbƯ al-Arqam, 1999). 72 KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ (24 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr IতyƗ’ al-Tur Ɨth al-‘ArabƯ, 1997). On this source, see Hilary Kilpatrick, Making the Great Book of Songs: Compilation and the Author’s Craft in Abnj l-Faraj al-I ܈bahƗnƯ’s KitƗb al- aghƗnƯ (London: Routledge, 2003). 2 Shifting patterns of identity and early Islamic historiography in context

What were the dynamic social, political and cultural contexts that would have inuenced how Muslim historians and litterateurs writing between 750 and 1050 thought about the relationship between the Sasanians and the Arabs of the JƗhiliyya and the formative Muslim community? My objective in this chapter is to offer a preliminary interpretation of how major discourses and controversies that were reective of a broader trend, an eastward shift of the identity and culture dening Islamic civilization, would have shaped the construction and reception of the Islamic conquest narrative over time. To this end, I posit that the mid- late ninth century represented a transitional phase dividing two generations of historical thought on how this narrative was received. I argue that while the rst generation of historians were most concerned with justifying the Arabs’ rise to rule over the ‘ajam, the second generation ultimately saw the Islamic conquest narrative as part of a broader process assimilating Arab and Iranian history into a grander narrative of Islamic salvation history. I base this categorization on Savant’s framing of the second half of the ninth century as a marker representing a change in reception, that is a shift in attitude towards the role of Iranians in which Islamic scholarship and literature adapted itself to speak to rather than about Iranian Muslims.1 The Sasanians are rst afforded signicant representation in Islamic historiography in the early ‘Abbasid period. This is intriguing because, as I shall elaborate below, this era witnessed the crystallization of an Arab- Islamic identity, with the term “Arab” coming to be recognized among elites and intellectuals as representing a civiliza- tion in its own right, on par with the other world civilizations. It is in this context that the Sasanians and their ofcials rst appear in Islamic historiography as two- dimensional foils, embodiments of the stereotypical decadence and hubris that allegedly marred Iranian civilization according to the polemics of this period. Contrasting this image are representations of the Arabs as paragons exemplifying the virtues associated with the Bedouin by removed, nostalgic admirers of Arab culture living in the urban contexts of the caliphate. The purpose of the Islamic conquest narrative viewed from this angle was to justify the Arabs’ conquest of Iran by afrming their integrity as a civilization, celeb- rating their culture, and demonstrating their moral superiority over their imperial neighbors. 26 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography Yet, with the universal histories and works of adab appearing in the late ninth century, there is clearly a shift in focus, where the Iranians are given much more depth of coverage and richer character development. Indeed, this is reective of the emergence of a self-con dent Iranian-Islamic identity, as the eastern Islamic world during this period witnessed the rise of native Iranian political enterprises patronizing a distinctively local form of culture. To this end, the sources of this era still carry the same message legitimizing the rise and integrity of the Arabs to the extent that the works of the previous generations’ akhbƗrƯs lay embedded in them. However, historians like al-৫ abarƯ, al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, and others merged these accounts with more detailed narratives of the Sasanians based on native Iranian sources. The attempt to emphasize the importance of the Sasanians’ deal- ings with the Arab peoples in the broader context of the Sasanians’ own histor- ical drama is clearly contrived, and reective of a larger agenda. I argue that in the scope of Islamic “salvation history,” the Islamic conquest narrative repres- ented the preliminary stage of a broader process in which the people of Iran (par- ticularly of KhurƗsƗn) would ultimately be redeemed. According to this view, the initial fall of Iran was necessary so that it might be puried of the imperial arrogance which had marred the Sasanians, and imbued with the Islamic values of the Arabs and the virtues which their culture could impart. Once this was accomplished, the Iranian people would rise to prominence as leaders of the uni- versal Islamic empire and articulators of the divinely revealed faith.

The rst generation: the crystallization of an Arab-Islamic identity Our akhbƗrƯs of the rst generation all either hailed from or spent a signicant period of time in early ‘Abbasid Iraq. I argue that the interrelated discourses of Arab identity construction and inter-civilizational competition pervading early ‘Abbasid society would have been most instrumental in shaping these historians’ view of Arab- Sasanian relations. For it is in this context where the term “Arab” became an indicator of a collective identity comprising a common culture, com- parable with the other known civilizations of the time, which our akhbƗrƯs framed the Islamic conquest narrative. In what follows, I will rst analyze how the widespread inuence of ‘ajamƯ culture in early ‘Abbasid society factored into the crystallization of an Arab identity. I will then discuss how this process shaped historical memory of the Islamic conquest narrative.

The ‘Abbasid Caliphate: towards a universal “Arab” identity In order to understand the dynamics of identity construction in the early ‘Abbasid caliphate, one must rst take into account the indelible Iranian inu- ence pervading the ‘Abbasid state and society. Interest in Iran can be seen already in the late Umayyad era, when kƗtibs (secretaries) like SƗlim Abnj’l- ‘AlƗ’, and his pupil, ‘Abd al- ণamƯd b. YaতyƗ, composed didactic epistles con- taining commonplace themes of traditional Sasanian andarz (wisdom literature).2 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 27 Yet it is only with the ‘Abbasids that we can say we are dealing with a truly glo- bally oriented enterprise, in which Iranian culture and traditions were particu- larly pronounced.3 The ‘Abbasid caliphs emulated old Iranian styles of rulership and government institutions for the purpose of propagandizing and administer- ing their state. The most conspicuous example of state propaganda was the caliphs’ triumphal architecture. Consider the palace- city of Baghdad itself, pur- posefully built by al- Manৢnjr near the old Sasanian capital of Ctesiphon (Arabic: al- MadƗ’in). With its round plan, oriented on the points of the compass, and viewed by its contemporaries as the “navel of the universe,” the MadƯnat al- SalƗm (City of Peace) was a clear statement by the ‘Abbasids that they were the legitimate heritors of the Sasanians’ former dominions.4 Similarly, the ‘Abbasids resuscitated Sasanian ceremonial traditions, as witnessed by the caliphs’ solemn public sessions, in which the caliph was separated by a curtain from his royal retainers, who, ordered by class, were expected to abide by a strict set of protocol in the presence of the sovereign.5 In terms of administration, the ‘Abbasids relied on a well oiled bureaucracy composed of kuttƗb of Iranian or Iranian- Aramaen descent who viewed them- selves as heirs to the bureaucratic legacy of the class of the Sasanian scribes (Middle Persian: dipƯrƗn). In this context, scribes like the Zoroastrian convert and statesman ‘Abd AllƗh b. al- Muqaffa‘ (d. 760) continued the scholarly legacy of SƗlim and ‘Abd al- ণamƯd by translating Sasanian andarz and composing works of political theory emulating Sasanian models. For example, Ibn al- -Ɨba (Treatise on the Royal Entourage) echoes Sasaۊa܈-Muqaffa‘ ’s RisƗla fƯ’l nian social ideals by advocating a divinely mandated monarchy and the maintenance of a strict social hierarchy, separating the khƗ܈܈a (nobility) from the ‘Ɨmma (commoners).6 As a class, the kuttƗb attained an unprecedented degree of inuence under the ‘Abbasids, thanks to the latter’s wide- scale recruitment of mawƗlƯ (non-Arab clients) from KhurƗsƗn and Transoxiana, as well as their reli- ance on notable ‘ajamƯ scribal families, such as the Barmakids, who hailed from Afghanistan. Though the kuttƗb were a ubiquitous feature of the Umayyad administration, as non- Arabs, they were obliged to become mawƗlƯ in order to gain acceptance into the community. However, by the time that the ‘Abbasids had assumed power, the institution of clientage had become rather anachronistic. Under the ‘Abbasids, the kuttƗb occupied positions of immense power and inu- ence, including the ofce of head vizier (wazƯr al- wuzarƗ’).7 Both this position Ɨt) appear from our sources to be consciousڲƯ al- quڲand that of chief judge (qƗ imitations of Sasanian precedents.8 The global atmosphere of early ‘Abbasid society is exemplied by the ower- ing of adab, which in addition to a literary genre, also represented a humanist mode of thought which valued knowledge of the various civilizations of the world and their respective modes of artistic expression, conduct, and ethical thought, and which contextualized Islamic civilization as the heritor of this legacy of knowledge. Its proponents, known collectively as the udabƗ’ com- prised secretaries, poets, and litterateurs. The prototypical Ɨdib was procient in Arabic poetry and knowledgeable about the exploits of notable Arabs of the 28 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography JƗhiliyya, while at the same time was well acquainted with the maxims, didactic fables, and sciences of the pre- Islamic Iranians, Greeks, and Indians.9 The caliphs actively supported such humanistic knowledge. Both HƗrnjn al- RashƯd (r. 786–809) and al-Ma’m njn (r. 813–833) are associated with the foundation of ikma (House of Wisdom), an academic institution modeled on theۉ -the Bayt al Sasanian archive of JundƯshƗpnjr, dedicated to the study and translation of Pahlavi (Middle Persian), Indian, and Greek texts.10 Yet, the most conspicuous sign of Iranian inuence on the ‘Abbasid caliphate can be seen with the ‘Abbasid revolution itself. The people of KhurƗsƗn pro- vided the mainstay of the ‘Abbasids’ support,11 and this region continued after the revolution to serve a base of recruitment for the ‘Abbasid military and administration. Likewise, the revolutionary message (da‘wa) of equality and dedication to the family of the Prophet which the ‘Abbasid propagandists (du‘Ɨt) promulgated to the population of KhurƗsƗn clearly had universalist implications. Under this new ideology, the Umayyads’ old program of tribal alliances linking the Arab ashrƗf (nobles) was subverted for a new universal identication, in which both Arabs and mawƗlƯ participated on an equal footing.12 As a reection of this principle, the general of the revolution, Abnj Muslim (d. 755), registered the troops in the dƯwƗn according to place of origin as opposed to tribal afli- ation, with the obvious intention of effacing ethnic differences.13 The outcome of this measure was the formation of the revolutionary army of KhurƗsƗn, known as the ahl KhurƗsƗn or ahl al- dawla, a supra- tribal conglomerate identifying by place of origin, and its commitment to the da‘wa and the imƗm of the Prophet.14 As such, it represented the paragon of ‘Abbasid universalism. In this regard, one should also highlight Abnj Muslim himself, whose intentional vagueness about his own origins is emphasized in the sources in order to show his piety and his unwavering loyalty to the da‘wa.15 It is with the “universalism” of the da‘wa that one can begin to understand how identity was conceived in the early ‘Abbasid caliphate. Scholars have long attempted to afx an ethnic identity to the ‘Abbasid caliphate, despite the uni- versalist message of the revolution and obvious diversity of the ‘Abbasid court. Yet, for all the Iranian inuence that we see pervading the early ‘Abbasid caliphate, we are dealing with an enterprise that is much more nuanced than what we can simply identify, at least from the standpoint of ethnicity, as funda- mentally “Iranian,” or as some revisionist critics of the traditional view have attempted, “Arab.”16 Rather, as Crone has demonstrated, the ‘Abbasid revolu- tionary ideology sought to remove the ethnic connotation lying behind notions of Arab identity, and reformulate it as an expression of a universal culture pro- moting a universal Islam open to all ethnicities.17 (Indeed, this aspect of ‘Abbasid ideology was perfectly suited for the region of KhurƗsƗn, which was noted for its heterogeneous population, the product of Arab settlers who had mixed with native inhabitants and had assimilated into the local culture).18 In this context, Crone has shown how the supporters of the revolution sought to replace the ethnic “Arabism” of the backwards, sectarian minded Umayyads, who discrimi- nated against their mawƗlƯ and discouraged the conversion of non-Arabs to Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 29 Islam; with the new “Arabism” and Muslim identity expressed by the KhurƗsƗnƯs and their Arab supporters of Iraq, in which the Arabs’ culture would represent the cosmopolitan high culture and identity of the caliphate, and provide the lan- guage of the elite community. She writes that:

The caliphate thus became a truly supra- ethnic polity, a political organiza- tion in which people could have a sense of belonging wherever they might hail from and with which they could identify. This was the great achieve- ment of the ‘AbbƗsids which secured them survival, in however debilitated form, down to 1258; and this, one would assume, is what modern scholars really have in mind when they say the ‘AbbƗsids ‘granted equality’ to Arab and non- Arab Muslims.19

Yet this was not simply a case of bilateral fusion of Arab and Iranian identities, but rather “Arabism” served as the face of Islamic civilization, supplying the language of state and religion. Likewise, while the caliphs tended to be of mixed origins, they based their claim to legitimacy on their descent from the family of an Arab Prophet, while identifying their state in tribal terms, referring to them- selves as the Bannj ‘AbbƗs (sons of ‘Abbas). Furthermore, the new “Arabism” embodied a cosmopolitan culture, in which both Arabs and mawƗlƯ could freely participate on an equal footing, and in which Iranian modes of culture and gov- ernance might be incorporated, but assimilated and redened in an Arab- Islamic context. A case in point is the abnƗ’ al- dawla (sons of the revolution), the elite guard of the ‘Abbasid caliphs, who claimed descent from the original ahl KhurƗsƗn.20 The abnƗ’ held a strong dual attachment to both KhurƗsƗn, as it was the place from which their esteemed ancestors hailed and the mainstay of the revolution; and Baghdad, the seat of the caliph, their sworn sovereign and the epitome of the dawla for which their progenitors fought.21 Yet, from a cultural perspective (or at least “high-cultural” perspective), the abnƗ’ clearly identied dath poets likeۊas Arabs and spoke Arabic.22 Likewise, even ‘Abbasid era mu Abnj NuwƗs (d. 814) and BashshƗr b. Burd (d. 783) used Arabic language, quite ironically, to poke fun of Bedouin culture while expressing their nostalgia for old Iran.23 In many respects, this situation is comparable to that of early medieval Europe, where in building post- Roman kingdoms, the Germanic rulers revived the notion of Romanitas to propagandize their rule. But Theodoric and Clovis were no Romans, and certainly did not aim to recreate the Roman empire, but rather legitimize their respective gens as the rightful heritor of the glory of Rome through the use of Roman institutions, titles, and insignia and by patronizing Latin language and culture at their respective courts.24 Similarly, the ‘Abbasid caliphs projected an idiom of power that was distinctively Iranian. Yet by no means did this simply entail the resuscitation of the Sasanian empire in an Islamic garb as some scholars have imagined, but rather the articulation of a cosmopolitan Arab culture which came to dene a new world civilization, inher- iting the glory of the Sasanians, but by no means their identity. For the ‘Abbasids 30 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography patronized the construction of Arab culture to be the dening face of their empire. For all that the state sponsored study of Pahlavi, Greek and Syriac might have inuenced the development of Arabic as a language of high culture, Arabic remained (ever since the reform of ‘Abd al- MƗlik) the ofcial language of the ‘Abbasid court. But what exactly was Arab culture, and what did it mean to identify someone or something as Arab? This was something for scholars of diverse origins to work out at the ‘Abbasid court, as we presently discuss.

Arab and ‘Ajam: imagining self and “other” The formation of Arab identity in the early Islamic world has long been a topic of interest among modern scholars. Likewise, the question of whether the Arabs of the JƗhiliyya possessed a shared sense of identity is widely debated, as I shall analyze in the following chapter. In the 1960s, Von Grunebaum argued that the foundation of Islam itself caused the Arab peoples to think of themselves as a cohesive social and political unit.25 Since then, scholars have reached the general consensus that this was a much more gradual process, coming to fruition only in the late Umayyad and early ‘Abbasid eras, during which time we can speak with condence of a collective Arab- Islamic identity.26 The effort to construct an Arab identity during this period is evidenced by the wide- scale cultivation and codication of knowledge of the JƗhiliyya and its poetry at the courts of the caliphs, particularly the ‘Abbasids. The caliphs’ admiration of Arab culture can be seen in reports describing how they enjoyed listening during court sessions to poetry about the JƗhiliyya, especially the ayyƗm al-‘Arab genre. According to one such anecdote, the poet Abnj TammƗm (d. 845) recited poetry in encomium of the caliph, likening him to a hero of the JƗhiliyya. When a vizier protested this comparison of the caliph to a common Bedouin, Abnj TammƗm retorted with an artful repartee in verse which so impressed the caliph that he rewarded him with the governorate of Mosul!27 A similar anecdote has the noted ‘Ɨlim and phi- lologist ‘Abd al- MƗlik al- Aৢma‘Ư reciting poetry on a JƗhilƯ hero. When he gets to the part describing his camel, the Barmakid al- Faঌl b. YaতyƗ said to him, “I beseech you by God not to interrupt our enjoyment of this nightly gathering of ours by describing a scabby camel.” To his complaint, HƗrnjn al-Rash Ưd rebuked his vizier, exclaiming, “Shut up! It is the camels who have driven you from your home and power, taking away the crown of your kingship!”28 Such anecdotes reveal how for all their trappings of Iranian imperium, the caliphs expressed a peculiar solidarity with the Arabs of the JƗhiliyya. To this end, they supported scholarly pursuits related to Arab culture and the “rediscov- ery” of the JƗhiliyya. For example, al- Manৢnjr was an avid patron of Arabic aliyyƗt, anڲڲpoetry and history. One anecdote on the origin of the al- Mufa anthology of pre- and formative Islamic history, recounts how al- Manৢnjr, upon hearing the crown prince al-Mahd Ư recite JƗhilƯ poetry, became so impressed that he commissioned his tutor, al-Mufa ঌঌal al-ঋ abbƯ (d. 780s), to compile “the best works of poetry whose poetry was rare.”29 Several such anthologies, such as Abnj ma‘ƯyyƗt (the same two scholars܈amƗsa and al- Aৢma‘Ư’s al- A ۉ-TammƗm’s al Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 31 cited above) appeared some decades later. Al- Manৢnjr also commissioned Ibn IsতƗq to compose his universal history, which contained a signicant portion on the pre- Islamic Arabs, as I discussed in the previous chapter. Likewise, in addition to his Ta’rƯkh,30 most of Ibn al-Kalb Ư’s scholarship focuses on Arab genealogy and antiquity, making him a prime representative of this “pan- Arabist” trend. Consider his most prominent work of genealogy, the Jamharat al-nasab .31 With its lengthy genealogies stretching to the pre- Islamic period, and its poetry celebrating tribal notables, it embodied a distinctively JƗhilƯ heroic style. Ibn al-Kalb Ư also wrote a book on the polytheistic religion of the JƗhiliyya Arabs, as well as a book on the famous war horses of the Arabs, which comprises a good deal of genealogical literature.32 Such historiography and literature is representative of a genre of scholarship devoted to the ‘ulnjm al- ‘Arab (Arab sciences), whose major subject areas included Arabic linguistics (syntax, lexicography, and philology), genealogy, history, poetry, as well as the adƯth.33ۊ religious elds of Qur’an and Modern scholars have long recognized the anachronistic nature of ‘Abbasid era scholarship on Arabian antiquities. In the 1920s, two scholars came to the conclusion that JƗhiliyya poetry was essentially a product of Islamic times.34 More recently, Rina Drory showed that the concept of the “Arab sciences” itself was fabricated by scholars at the ‘Abbasid court, of which the mawƗlƯ were the most prominent. These likewise conjured a concomitant unied Arab historical identity with the purpose of providing their caliphal patrons with a heritage of knowledge and culture to compete with that of the ‘ajamƯ peoples.35 On the one hand, such scholarship was an exercise in “Abrahamic” religious legitimization, by showing that the recipients of the seal of the prophets and the Qur’an, like the Israelites, were a single people descended from a common ancestor.36 Moreover, from a parallel socio- cultural perspective, modern historians are in general accord that it was the ubiquitous inuence of non-Arabs (particularly Iranians) and their culture at the ‘Abbasid court which led contemporaneous scholars to conceive of the tribes of the Arabian peninsula, Iraq and Syria as likewise com- prising a distinct civilization in their own right, and possessing a body of “know- ledge” which these scholars dutifully codied.37 This view of the Arabs as a civilization is encapsulated by al- JƗতi਌’s statement that “the nations [al- umam] ikam, pl. ofۊ -possessing manners [al- akhlƗq], al-Ɨ dƗb [pl. of adab], wisdom [al ikma], and knowledge [al-‘ilm] are four: the Arabs, Indians, Persians, andۊ Romans.” Al- JƗতi਌ goes on to describe the merits distinguishing the Arabs as ranking as the foremost of the “civilized” peoples.38 More specically, some modern historians frame the manufacture of an Arab cultural heritage and iden- tity that could hold its weight in comparison with ‘ajamƯ civilization as a response of the Shu‘njbiyya.39 The following discussion is devoted to analyzing the dynamics underlying this alleged “movement.” The traditional understanding of the Shu‘njbiyya is that of a “movement” cen- tered in Iraq and reaching its height in the late eighth–ninth centuries, among secretaries and libertine poets of non- Arab descent, who claimed in their writ- ings and poetry the superiority of non- Arab civilization, particularly the Iranians, 32 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography over that of the Arabs. Such a challenge erupted into an all-out debate between these Shu‘njbƯs and the faction labeled by modern scholars as the “anti-Shu‘ njbƯs,” the defenders of Arab civilization.40 However, the problem with this paradigm is that the sources on the Shu‘njbiyya fail to denitively identify any self-professed Shu‘njbƯs. Moreover, our oldest, most important sources on the Shu‘njbiyya were composed by this alleged movement’s critics, al- JƗতi਌, Ibn Qutayba, and al- BalƗdhurƯ, who are quite vague when it comes to identifying Shu‘njbƯs.41 In his KitƗb al- BayƗn wa’l-tabyƯn, for example, al-J Ɨতi਌ paraphrases the polemical arguments of the Shu‘njbƯs, often prefacing their diatribes with the phrase “Taqnjl al- Shu‘njbiyya [Those Shu‘njbƯs say] ” without identifying who he is referring ,l al-‘Arab, Ibn Qutaybaڲto. Similarly, in his treatise in defense of the Arabs, Fa goes to great length in deconstructing the rhetoric of the Shu‘njbƯs without naming any. While he does single out one individual, Abnj ‘Ubayda, for censure, labeling him as “amongst the most devoted of people when it comes to invec- tives against the Arabs,” nowhere does he identify him as a Shu‘njbƯ.42 For as modern scholars have shown, Abnj ‘Ubayda was simply an objective scholar of Arab antiquities, whose works of mathƗlib (faults) targeting Arab tribes and individuals only comprised a fraction of his works, and were most likely balanced with mafƗkhir (points of honor) of the Arabs as well.43 Moreover, Abnj ‘Ubayda does seem like an odd choice for Ibn Qutayba to direct his criticism, considering that there were other notable individuals who more closely t the bill. For example, Ibn Qutayba would certainly have been familiar with the one- eyed poet BashshƗr b. Burd, who stood out for his anti-Arab polemic (see below). Yet, no contemporaneous sources label BashshƗr as a Shu‘njbƯ, nor do they name the libertine poet Abnj NuwƗs, whose polemical poetry Albert Arazi has convincingly shown to be a reection of YamƗmƯ (South Arabian) pride strictly speaking, rather than part of the Shu‘njbiyya.44 Indeed, who was a Shu‘njbƯ and what it meant to be labeled as a Shu‘njbƯ was relative, up to the dis- cretion of the accuser and reective of an ever- changing historical context. For it appears that later-period sources and modern commentators alike have over- applied this term to individuals and to historical contexts where there is insuf- cient evidence for the existence of a pro- Iranian/anti-Arab movement of any kind. Thus, in a discussion pertaining to the Shu‘njbiyya in al-Mas‘ njdƯ’s chron- icle, we nd even al-J Ɨতi਌ himself being labeled as a partisan of the Nabateans over the Arabs!45 So if the Shu‘njbiyya was not a movement, then what exactly are we dealing with? In her article addressing this question, Savant argues that the Shu‘njbiyya was in fact an invention of conservative- minded intellectuals who bemoaned what they saw as the waning position of Arabic culture in Islamic society. She writes, “What we seem to have with Shu‘njbism, then, is a name and a weapon employed by people such as Ibn Qutayba, who saw themselves as defending Arabs and even Arab cultural values.”46 At the same time, while Ibn Qutayba may have truly been concerned about preserving Arabic culture in his own society, his numerous references to al-A ৢma‘Ư, Abnj ‘Ubayda and other earlier scholars in the context of his exposition of the Shu‘njbiyya indicates that the Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 33 conceptualization of such a movement had likely preceded Ibn Qutayba, al- BalƗdhurƯ and al-J Ɨতi਌ by at least some decades. Yet, whether the Shu‘njbiyya was rst imagined by these scholars or by intellectuals of previous generations, one still cannot deny the existence of a pervasive discourse of inter- civilizational competition among scholars and poets that peaked between the eighth and ninth centuries. For our sources are rife with polemical writings and poetry from this period comparing Arab and ‘ajamƯ culture, in which a primordial struggle between the rugged Bedouin Arabs of the desert versus foppish Persian nobility, representing a settled existence and rened cosmopolitan culture, takes center stage. A prime example of this literary construct of “contrast” can be seen with BashshƗr b. Burd’s famous poem boasting of his noble descent from Khusraw and SƗsƗn, the legendary ancestor of the Sasanian dynasty. In this poem, BashshƗr offers a glowing image of his ancestors’ pomp- lled courts, in which the haughty sovereign, “to whom knees were bowed,” donned ermine, gems, and a diadem about his brow, while drinking from golden vessels brought by his ser- vants. On the contrary, he most certainly did not (like the Arabs is his insinua- tion) sup milk from skins, sing camel songs while “trailing behind a scabby camel,” and dig for and eat lizards.47 Writing in Arabic himself, BashshƗr would not have viewed himself as belonging to an anti-Arab “party” composed of like-minded poets and secretar- ies, yet his poem bears an uncanny resemblance to others bearing similar stereo- typed imagery steeped in the dialectic of “Arab versus ‘ajam.”48 Likewise, the reports described above of the viziers’ defamation of the Bedouin Arabs in the presence of the caliph may be viewed in the same light. From the opposing per- spective, while the idea of the Shu‘njbiyya movement may have been imagined by Ibn Qutayba and other scholars, that doesn’t make their arguments in which they outline instances of the Bedouins’ proverbial steadfastness, municence, and eloquence; or their telltale criticisms of the stereotypical decadence and hubris of the Iranian nobility, any less real. So too do we nd cases of prominent ‘ulamƗ’ well outside the parameters of these critics’ writings defending the Arabs and their culture against what they perceived as a decadent, outmoded Persian civilization.49 From a literary and rhetorical standpoint, this “Arab versus ‘ajam” discourse consisted of a diverse set of oppositional dualities, including nomadic versus settled living, civilization versus barbarity, poverty versus decadence, simplicity versus sophistication, generosity versus stinginess, equality versus social hier- archy, sacerdotal kingship versus representative governance, and in some cases piety versus disbelief. To a large extent, this dialectic was inherited from the Graeco- Roman world, where the stereotype of the servile, decadent “Oriental” Persians had been a pervasive theme in literature since the time of classical Athens.50 In terms of representations of the Arabs, Graeco- Roman and Christian authors used literary constructs mirroring ‘Abbasid period polemic. For example, preguring BashshƗr b. Burd, the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus spoke disparagingly of the “Saracens,” as a “mischievous nation” and as “rapacious hawks” who go about half-naked and are constantly wandering.51 Contrasting 34 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography this image, the ancient Greek historian Diodorus Siculus painted a more sympathetic picture of the vigorous nomadic Arabs who would rather live free in the vast spaces of the desert than submit to the authority of an imperial ruler.52 Yet Diodorus also spoke of the Arabs’ brigandage,53 which was a commonplace theme for Christian Syriac authors of Late Antiquity as well in their descriptions of the Tayyiye.54 Indeed, the common thread for all of the Graeco-Roman/ Christian authors is the view of the unsettled Arabs as perennial outsiders, whose aberrant wandering lifestyle represented a stark contrast with the proper life of settled cultivators and townspeople. However, with Islam, we are of course dealing with both a religion and polit- ical enterprise that was born in the Arabian peninsula and which enveloped the Persian oikumené in toto. In early ‘Abbasid society, therefore, the “Arab versus ‘ajam” discourse embodied, at its core, a dialogue between two competing visions of Islamic civilization: The rst idealized the traditions of absolute mon- archy, religious and social hierarchy, and courtly high culture embodied by the imperial civilizations of the ancient Near East. The second equated Islam with the tribal egalitarianism and simplicitas of traditional Arabian society.55 In early ‘Abbasid society, the second vision was clearly dominant. As we have seen, while the early caliphs may have made use of Iranian institutions to run their state and articulate their power, it was ultimately an Arab- Islamic culture which they sought to make the dening face of their civilization. Yet this vision was also favored by the ‘ulamƗ’, who incorporated their own jurisprudential scholar- ship as a fundamental ingredient. The ‘ulamƗ’ were highly inuential at the ‘Abbasid court, enjoying a symbiotic relationship with the caliphs. With the -na, a policy of state- sponsored trials instituted by alۊexception of the mi Ma’mnjn and continued by his rst two successors, in which religious scholars were coerced to testify to the Mu‘tazilite doctrine of the createdness of the Qur’an, the ahl al- sunna received substantial support from the caliphs, who saw in their codication of the sharƯ‘a and the prominent positions they held in their respective communities, a channel through which to exercise their own author- ity.56 The ‘ulamƗ’ were clearly sucked into the current of nostalgic admiration for traditional Arabic culture and the rediscovery of the JƗhiliyya. Some, like Abnj ‘Abd AllƗh al-Sh ƗfƯ‘Ư (d. 820) and al-A ৢma‘Ư were prominent philologists and scholars of Arab antiquities in their own right.57 Indeed, the ‘ulamƗ’ referred -aqq al-‘Arab (law of the Arabs) and his language as lisƗn alۊ to God’s law as ‘Arab (tongue of the Arabs).58 Even the strict Aতmad b. ণanbal (d. 855) stated, “To love the Arabs is belief [imƗn], and to hate the Arabs is hypocrisy [nifƗq].”59 All of this evinces the intimate connection between the Arabs, Arabic and Islam in the view of the early ‘Abbasid ‘ulamƗ’. A nal important point regarding this discourse of inter-civilizational com- petition is its preoccupation with the past, as the JƗhiliyya and the formative Islamic period served as an arena for disputing points of honor and dishonor about a particular group. In this context, we encounter writings, poetry and dia- logues in which memory is attened, where for example the impersonal “Khusraw” or the Caliph ‘Umar b. al-Kha ৬৬Ɨb are envisioned as the primordial Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 35 representatives of Iranian and Arab civilizations respectively. It is with this in mind that I consider how this discourse is reected in early ‘Abbasid historiography.

The appearance of the Sasanians in Islamic historiography This section is devoted to analyzing in what ways the discourses of state forma- tion and identity construction that I examined in the preceding discussion would have affected how early ‘Abbasid akhbƗrƯs thought about Arabs and Sasanians. However, I rst describe how the theme of Iran entered Islamic historiography in the rst place. Ibn IsতƗq relates that in the time of the Prophet, the merchant al- Naঌr b. al-ণƗ rith narrated stories to the people of Mecca about the kings and heroes of Iran, which he learned from his travels to al-ণƯ ra. It is telling that he aimed to woo the attention of the people away from listening to Muতammad’s revelations, thus evincing the indelibly non-Islamic character of his stories in the eyes of the early Muslims.60 The rst serious scholarship on Sasanian history comes in the eighth century, with the translation of the Sasanians’ own court chronicle, the KhudƗynƗma (Book of Kings). The path of transmission of this work into Islamic historiography is unclear, as there were most likely multiple editions of the KhudƗynƗma, and it is difcult to tell which of these was trans- lated during the Islamic period.61 According to al- Mas‘njdƯ, the Umayyad Caliph HishƗm b. ‘Abd al- MƗlik (r. 723–743) commissioned an Arabic translation of an illustrated Sasanian history.62 However, Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ is generally credited with providing the rst and denitive Arabic translation of this work, which he titled Siyar al- mulnjk al-‘ajam (also Siyar al- mulnjk, Siyar al-‘ajam). ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ and Abnj’l-RayতƗn al-B ƯrnjnƯ (d. 1048) put Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ at the top of their lists among the original translators of this work, followed by Muতammad b. al- Jahm al-Barmak Ư, an ofcial in the time of al- Mu‘taৢৢim (r. 833–842).63 Bal‘amƯ and Muতammad b. IsতƗq b. al- NadƯm (d. late tenth century) similarly afford a prominent position to Ibn al- Muqaffa‘, mentioning him rst among the other early redactors of Persian history.64 Whether these other redactors were dependent on Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ ’s translation, how many different versions of the Siyar al- mulnjk were transmitted to succeeding generations of historians, and whether our latter period chroniclers had access to and could read Pahlavi manu- scripts are questions of historiographical inquiry.65 In addition to the KhudƗynƗma, works of andarz, including ‘mirrors for princes’ literature, administrative handbooks, and other forms of wisdom liter- ature anticipating the Islamic adab genre,66 are widely referenced and translated in both Islamic literature and Pahlavi literature of the Islamic era. Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ was likewise a prominent translator of these texts, including the KalƯla wa- Dimna, the TansarnƗma (Letter of Tansar), and the ƖyƯnnƗma (Book of Rules), among other works.67 However, the critical aspect to recognize about this scholarship is that at this point in history, it was still considered foreign to the Muslim experience, as most intellectuals did not recognize ‘ajamƯ history as their history. Indeed, despite the 36 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography conspicuous inuence of ‘ajamƯ culture at the ‘Abbasid court, scholars among the kuttƗb and poets who made Iran their central focus were held suspect by their contemporaries, who often accused them of being clandestine Zoroastrians, or worse, zindƯqs, i.e., adherents of zandaqa, which loosely translates as “heresy,” and refers to Manichaeism and Mazdakism, doctrines originating in the Sasanian era.68 While the purges of zindƯqs are generally recognized as having more to do with political and personal rivalries than with religious convictions, they none- theless reect the atmosphere of suspicion against modes of thought veering too far beyond the boundaries of what was considered traditional Islam by the ahl al- sunna.69 For example, Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ was executed for harboring heretical sentiments under the command of al- Manৢnjr,70 while BashshƗr b. Burd fell victim to the purge of zindƯqs initiated by al- MahdƯ (r. 775–785).71 According to one source, HƗrnjn al- RashƯd’s reason for liquidating the Barmakid family was that they had desecrated the Ka‘ba by putting incense burners in it.72 In the KitƗb ‘Uynjn al- akhbƗr of Ibn Qutayba is a verse attributed to al- Aৢma‘Ư, who defamed the Barmakids by proclaiming:

If shirk [polytheism] is mentioned at a majlis, the faces of the Barmakids light up. Ɨdith on Mazdak!73ۊ And if an aya is recited to them, they bring about

Moreover, critics of the kuttƗb saw the latter’s admiration of old Iran as an expression of their clandestine hatred of Islam. For example, speaking against the kuttƗb, JƗতƯ਌ stated that:

When one mentions the friends of the Prophet (SAW), upon hearing this, the corners of his mouth [the kƗtib] twist, and he crooks on his hip upon mention of their noble qualities. He will then interrupt the discussion with the politics of ArdashƯr PƗpakƗn, the governance of AnnjshirvƗn, and the integrity of the Sasanian family.74

Ibn Qutayba made a similar accusation against the Shu‘njbƯs, claiming that “only fear of the sword keeps them from apostasy, as the mention of the Prophet (SAW) for them is like a foreign body in their throat which makes them choke, or something in the eye which makes them squint.”75 Yet our most prolic kƗtib, Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ clearly saw his role as a reconciler, attempting to fuse in his scholarship Iranian statecraft with Islamic/Qur’anic tenets.76 Similarly, I argue that by translating Sasanian andarz and history into Arabic, Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ and his ilk sought to internalize the heritage of Iran as forming an integral part of Islamic collective memory, and herein lies the difference between the kuttƗb and the akhbƗrƯs of the early ‘Abbasid period. For the latter, Sasanian Iran still represented the “Other.” While these historians were certainly knowledgeable about Iranian history, their scholarship on the subject is clearly detached, as Iran for them served as a backdrop in which to contextualize the more important history of Arabia and the emergence of Islam, i.e., their history. Ibn al- KalbƯ, for Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 37 example, provides valuable information on Iranian history and lore, for which he may have used Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ as a source.77 Yet, his rendition of these events appears undeveloped, peripheral to the central Arab- Islamic narrative. Despite al-৫ abarƯ’s reliance on Ibn al- KalbƯ, he also criticizes his genealogical analysis of ancient Persian kings, which he compares unfavorably to the “experts” in the eld, by which he presumably means Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ and the early transmitters of Sasasian texts.78 Clearly Ibn al- KalbƯ’s primary focus was Arab genealogy and antiquity, and his scholarship is a prime representative of the “pan-Arabist” trend of early ‘Abbasid scholarship, as indicated above. The same may also be said of Abnj ‘Ubayda, who was arguably the most knowledgeable of the akhbƗrƯs of this period when it came to Iranian history and culture. Ibn al-Nad Ưm claims that he was of Persian origin.79 Abnj ‘Ubayda was also known for his linguistic expertise in Persian.80 Furthermore, according to al- Mas‘njdƯ, he composed an AkhbƗr al- Furs (History of the Persians),81 while Ibn al- NadƯm and Ibn KhallikƗn mention a treatise of his on KhurƗsƗn.82 However, a perusal of the titles mentioned in these latter two authors’ bibliographical lists of Abnj ‘Ubayda’s myriad writings clearly reveals that this akhbƗrƯ’s main focus was Arabian antiquities. In this regard, Ibn Qutayba stated that “the majority [of his work] comprises the history of the Arabs and their battle days [akhbƗr al- ‘Arab wa- ayyƗmuhum].”83 Indeed, it is Abnj ‘Ubayda’s scholarship on Arabian history that received the most attention by later scholars, whereas his compara- tively few writings focusing on Iran had little impact.84 It is true that the akhbƗrƯs of the early ‘Abbasid era exhibit much deeper hori- zons in their works than their predecessors of the Umayyad period, whose primary interest was to recreate the community of the Prophet. Mirroring their own claims of universal rule as well as the global orientation of their state, the ‘Abbasid caliphs’ patronized works of history which portrayed the early Islamic community as part of a universal narrative stretching well into the pre- Islamic period. Take for example Ibn IsতƗq, who didn’t just write about the community of the Prophet in isolation, but rather situated the SƯra as part of the grander sweep of world history going back to creation. For it is with Ibn IsতƗq that we begin to see the history of the non- Arabs and the biblical age rst appear on the horizons of Islamic historiographical memory. Furthermore, reecting the legiti- mizing discourses of the ‘Abbasid caliphs, Ibn IsতƗq was among the rst histori- ans to provide a moralistic assessment of historical events, rather than their mere transmission. This entailed not only the insertion of commentary providing us with the author’s “voice,” but also with a rhetorical and literary ourish, as can be seen with stylized dialogues in verse between historical personages, as well as the inclusion of ancient legendary material. Thus, it is starting in the ‘Abbasid period that one can keenly sense the presence of the akhbƗrƯs in their works.85 And yet, for all that the early ‘Abbasids patronized universal historiography, it was still an Arab face, however broadly conceived, which dened their civili- Ɨdithۊ zation. At the same time, our akhbƗrƯs were operating in a context where methodology dominated ta’rƯkh scholarship, and the concomitant tendency of the ‘ulamƗ’ to make Arab-Islamic affairs the center of their world-view affected 38 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography even the most liberal historians. Reecting this, the akhbƗrƯs’ depiction of the Sasanians is conspicuously two- dimensional. For them, Iran was a topic of scholarly inquiry to be analyzed in order to better elucidate the history of the Arabs of the JƗhiliyya and the formative Muslim community. If the Sasanians do serve a role in Islamic historical memory at this point, it is just in their position as ‘ajam, the non-Arab, the foil. As we have seen, during this period, the sense of a common Arab identity was projected into the past unto disparate tribes and peoples of the Arabian peninsula, Iraq and Syria. Yet so too was the “Arab versus ‘ajam” construct foisted upon the peoples of the pre- Islamic era in order to more clearly dene the boundaries of a quintessential, if anachronistic, Arab collective identity. In this context, Iranian civilization, the most inuential of the ‘ajamƯ peoples in Islamic collective memory, serves as the “Other,” reduced to a set of negative stereotypes. This essentialized portrayal of Iran helped bring into focus the positive attributes of the Arabs as they were imagined by intellectuals living in the urban centers of Iraq. To this end, the rhetoric, themes, and stock imagery emanating out of the discourse of inter- civilizational competition are woven into the fabric of our texts and projected onto Arabs and Iranians, particu- larly in the context of encounters between these two peoples. The bent of the polemic employed clearly favors the Arabs. As I indicated in the rst chapter, in such accounts, the Sasanians are made to embody the stereotypical hubris, deca- dence, oppression, and stinginess marring Iranian civilization according to polemical writings of the period. In contrast, we see an idealized portrait of Arab culture, where themes and imagery of Bedouin ruggedness, generosity, and elo- quence are commonplace. The objective of such embellishment was not only to put the Arabs on the historical map of civilizations and to afrm the Arabs’ integrity as a nation. More than that, the akhbƗrƯs intended to prove the ethical superiority of the Arab peoples over an outmoded, decadent Persian civilization. To this end, the Islamic conquest narrative at this stage of reception justies the Arabs as worthy recipients of the true religion of Islam, and as the legitimate heirs of the Iranians, taking over the mantle as leaders of a world empire.

Stage 2: the post- imperial period: the “Iranian renaissance” Below, I analyze how a fully self- condent Iranian Islamic identity that began to crystallize starting in the late ninth century would have affected historical memory of the Islamic conquest narrative. I argue that historians of this period sought to internalize the history of pre- Islamic Iran into a broader vision of Islamic salvation history, which restored the Iranians to their rightful place as leaders of a world empire. Before doing so, however, I examine some of the per- tinent historical developments leading to the so- called “Iranian Renaissance” and the formation of an Iranian-Islamic identity. Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 39 The Iranian renaissance In the preceding section, I demonstrated that the early ‘Abbasids presided over a globally oriented civilization, in which Iranian government institutions, idioms of power, and cultural traditions were subsumed in the process of constructing of a universal Arab-Islamic identity. Yet starting in the late ninth century, and espe- cially in the tenth century, Iran ultimately took over as the dening face of Islamic civilization, as the energy of the caliphate came full circle in its shift towards the Iranian orbit.86 To this end, despite the patronage of an Arab-Islamic high culture within the early ‘Abbasid caliphate, some historical reports on this period foreshadow a decline in prestige associated with being an Arab, while the KhurƗsƗnƯ element increasingly established its centrality in the articulation of a Muslim identity. For example, we read in one anecdote that already in the time of al- Manৢnjr, the noble sheikh Abnj Nukhayla had to wait at the caliph’s palace gate for permission to come in, while the caliph allowed some KhurƗsƗnƯs to freely enter, with the latter hurling abuses at the Arab as they passed him by.87 In another anecdote, an unnamed caliph stipulates that KhurƗsƗnƯ origin was a pre- Ư.88 Likewise, al-J Ɨতi਌ writes of Arabs who claimedڲrequisite for becoming a qƗ to be KhurƗsƗnƯs because they thought it would advance their position.89 Of course, the early caliphs’ wide-scale recruitment of mawƗlƯ from KhurƗsƗn and Transoxiana factored signicantly into this process. The caliphs appointed their mawƗlƯ to leadership positions ahead of tribal ashrƗf, which was clearly a blow to the native Arab tribes. On this process, al-Mas‘ njdƯ wrote:

He [al- Manৢnjr] was the rst to appoint his mawƗlƯ and ghilmƗn [pages] as governors and assign them important functions [on a wide scale]. He advanced them over the Arabs, and his successors followed him in that. Thus, the Arabs fell, their strength disappeared, and their ranks vanished.90

Al- Ma’mnjn was half-Khur ƗsƗnƯ himself, descended from a native KhurƗsƗnƯ rebel though his mother. Before becoming caliph, al- Ma’mnjn served as the gov- ernor of KhurƗsƗn and had the support of his KhurƗsƗnƯ gentry when he wrested the caliphate from his brother al-Am Ưn (r. 809–813). That the populace of Baghdad, led by the ‘ulamƗ’, viewed al- Ma’mnjn’s takeover of their city as a foreign invasion, comparable to heterodox rebellions emanating from KhurƗsƗn that plagued the caliphate during its formative years,91 is indicative of an east- ward shift of power, of which native Iraqis and Syrians clearly took stock.92 In this regard, al-৫ abarƯ relates a report in which a Syrian man warned al- Ma’mnjn against his favoring of the KhurƗsƗnƯ non- Arabs (‘ajam ahl KhurƗsƗn) over the Syrian Arabs.93 Through the course of the ninth century, a variety of factors contributed to cause the disintegration of the caliphate, including factional strife traceable to na policy which dealt a severe blow to theۊthe time of al-Ma’m njn, the failed mi prestige of the caliphs; the anarchy created by the Turkish mamlnjks, who domi- nated the caliphs in the 860s; the catastrophic revolt of African (zanj) slaves 40 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography which bankrupted the ‘Abbasid state; and most signicantly, the emergence of provincial principalities acknowledging the overall sovereignty of the caliph while ruling as de facto independent dynasties. The native Iranian dynasties emerging in the eastern Islamic world in the “post- imperial period” ushered in an era of Iranian political dominance, nativistic pride, and cultural eforescence. They maintained a variable relationship with the ‘Abbasid caliphate ranging from cordial relations, to grudging acceptance, to outright hostility. In 945, the Buyids, a Shi‘ite Iranian dynasty from northern Iran seized control of Iraq, ren- dering the ‘Abbasid caliphs politically obsolete. While the ‘Abbasids did not waver in their claim of descent from the Arab family of the Prophet, the amƯrs of these successor dynasties fashioned lineages claiming direct descent from Sasa- nian kings and legendary Iranian heroes. Furthermore, whereas Baghdad had previously been the center for the dissemination of high culture, during this period, regional metropolises competed with each other in patronizing scholars and artists. Although Arabic continued to be the medium of literary expression for most of the Islamic world, in KhurƗsƗn, litterateurs began to compose poetry and prose in Farsi, or New Persian, which was based on Pahlavi, but mixed with Arabic grammar and vocabulary, and employing Arabic script. New Persian blossomed under the Samanids, and in the following centuries, became the main literary idiom in Iran. Assessing the rise of the Iranian dynasties and their patron- age of a high culture expressed in a quintessentially Iranian idiom, scholars of previous generations labeled this period as an “Iranian Renaissance” or “Persian Intermezzo,” by which they meant the fruition of the Iranian nation’s long struggle since the Arab conquest for political and social autonomy, as well as the revival of Iranian traditions which hitherto had remained dormant.94 Disregard- ing the clear nationalist and racialist undertones in this categorization, we analyze in what follows actions undertaken by these dynasties precipitating the formation of an Iranian-Islamic identity. While the KhurƗsƗnƯ general ‘Abd AllƗh b. ৫Ɨhir (d. 828) and his henchmen come off as menacing foreigners in al-৫ abarƯ’s account of al- Ma’mnjn’s takeover of Baghdad, speaking Persian while their terried prisoner, the Caliph al- AmƯn, awaits execution at their hands,95 the Tahirids (821–873), upon establishing their emirate remained ardent supporters of the caliphate and were both keen patrons and skilled composers of Arabic literature.96 However, the Tahirids’ claim of descent from the Iranian hero Rustam is indicative of the direction in which their successors would head in terms of internalizing the heritage of Iran.97 With the Saffarid dynasty based in SƯstƗn, we have a more denitive step towards the solidication of an Iranian- Islamic identity. Unlike the Tahirids, the early Saffarids took an aggressive stance against the caliphate. The dynasty’s founder, Ya‘qnjb b. al-Layth al-܇ affƗr (the coppersmith, r. 861–879) was particu- larly bombastic in his dealings with the caliph al- Mu‘tamid (r. 870–892). When he stood poised to conquer Baghdad, his secretary, the IৢfahƗnƯ IbrƗhƯm b. MamshƗdh composed a poem on his patron’s behalf, taunting the caliph by claiming to be a descendant of the legendary Iranian ruler Jam (i.e., JamshƯd), and that under the ancient banner of KƗbƯ, he would launch a campaign to take Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 41 revenge for and revive the glory of the kings of Iran. This poet also issues a warning to the “sons of HƗshim” to “abdicate quickly,” as his patron’s Saffarid forces have already been victorious against them with spear and sword. He then proclaims:

Our fathers gave you your kingdom, but you showed no gratitude for our benefactions. Return to your country in the HijƗz, to eat lizards and to graze your sheep; For I shall mount on the throne of the kings, by the help of the edge of my sword and the point of my pen!98

In its formulaic contrast between Iranian glory and Bedouin uncouthness, the poem resembles BashshƗr b. Burd’s poem cited above. At the same time however, it exhibits a much deeper level of vitriol than BashshƗr, who simply offers a jocular critique of Bedouin culture. In another poem, BashshƗr afrms his being a product of a civilization dened by an Arab-Islamic identity, when he claims: “My branches are from the noble Bannj ‘Ɩmir, and my root is the Quraysh of the ‘ajam.”99 For here, BashshƗr acknowledges his patron tribe while utilizing the distinctively Arab- Islamic idiom, the tribe of Quraysh, to express the nobility of his Persian origins. Yet Ibn MamshƗdh, in addition to his boastful claims of royal descent for his patron Ya‘qnjb, makes an evocative statement of ethnic legitimacy by alluding to power symbols from pre- Islamic Iran. Particu- larly the banner of KƗbƯ, the standard of pre-Islamic Iran since the time of the legendary king AfrƯdnjn that had been captured by the Arabs at al-Q Ɨdisiyya, res- onated strongly in Iranian collective memory.100 Moreover, the poem offers a direct assault against the caliphs, and possibly the Arab people as a whole.101 To this end, it is possible that Ibn MamshƗdh’s poem is inauthentic, as it clashes with other sources’ depiction of Ya‘qnjb as a sober ruler and pious defender of Sunni Islam. On this point, Deborah Tor classies the poem as belonging to a strain of Samanid propaganda which sought to discredit the Saffarids by portray- ing Ya‘qnjb as a fanatical anti-Islamic Iranian nationalist.102 Yet, even if we were to accept this view, one cannot deny other evidence showing the unequivocal Iranian bent of Ya‘qnjb’s own identity. For example, according to the TƗrƯkh-i SƯstƗn, the foremost chronicle on the Saffarid dynasty, the rst time Persian poetry was patronized at an Islamic court occurred when Ya‘qnjb requested one of his poets, Muতammad b. WaৢƯf, to recite one of his Arabic panegyrics in Persian, because the amƯr could not understand the Arabic.103 Some later sources likewise allude to poets of the Tahirid and Saffarid eras experimenting with a distinctively new style of Persian poetry.104 At the same time, it is important to recognize that Persian literature was still in its infancy at this point, as business at the Saffarid court continued to be conducted in Arabic. From this discussion, we may conclude that the Saffarids represented a transitional phase in the forma- tion of a fully developed Iranian-Islamic identity that blossomed in the following century. 42 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography The Buyid rulers of western Iran and Iraq were huge supporters of Arabic letters, patronizing the likes of the great poet al-Mutannab Ư (d. 965). However they also sponsored a cultural and political program of Iranian rediscovery. Con- sider ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, who exhibits in his Ta’rƯkh and other scholarship an indelible interest in Iranian history, chronology, geography, philology, and reli- gious traditions, such as the Nawrnjz and MihrjƗn festivals.105 Likewise, the Buyid secretary MiskawƗyh’s TajƗrib al- umam is a didactic ‘mirrors for princes’ style of history based on the experience of Iran.106 Furthermore, the Buyids revived several archaic Persian institutions of rulership. Their assumption of the old Iranian epithet shƗhƗnshƗh (king of kings) was clearly an evocative state- ment of Iranian power considering their subjugation of the caliphate. Indeed, we have Buyid coins inscribed with this title, along with an honoric in Pahlavi, and an image of the ruler emulating those found on Sasanian coins. Finally, like their predecessors, the Buyids claimed Sasanian descent from the legendary king BahrƗm V Gnjr.107 It is with the Buyids, and especially the Samanids, that the “Iranian renais- sance” came into full bloom. Under Samanid sponsorship, we witness a ourish- ing of both Arabic and Persian prose and poetry, and a veritable “industry” of Persian translation of Arabic works.108 We’ve noted in the previous chapter the rich tradition of prose and verse ShƗhnƗmas preceding that of FirdawsƯ, as well as Bal‘amƯ’s “translation” of al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle, which itself may have been the basis, considering the diversity of manuscript evidence, for multiple works. A few decades prior to this activity, the poet RnjdakƯ translated the KalƯla wa- Dimna into Persian under the auspices of Bal‘amƯ’s father, ‘Abnj’l-FaĪl, vizier to Naৢr II b. Aতmad (r. 914–943). Furthermore, in addition to his commissioning the translation of al-৫ abarƯ’s Ta’rƯkh, Manৢnjr b. Nnjh tasked a group of scholars led by Bal‘amƯ to render al-৫ abarƯ’s TafsƯr (Qur’anic commentary) into Persian. As with the other Iranian dynasties, the Samanids claimed descent from Iranian nobility, in their case from the heroic rebel BahrƗm ChnjbƯn.109 Finally, Maতmnjd of Ghazna (r. 998–1030) and his successors patronized both Arabic and Persian historiography and literature. The son of a Turkic mamlnjk turned sultan and an Iranian mother of noble ancestry, Maতmnjd was acculturized in an Iranian courtly setting. He earned notoriety for gathering a wide circle of poets at his court, reserving the title amƯr al-shu’ar Ɨ’ (prince of poets) for his favorite. Contrary to the popular perception about his cultural leanings, Mahmoud Omidsalar points to evidence indicating the sultan’s preference for Persian over Arabic. First, his only surviving correspondences are written in Persian, and second is al-B ƯrnjnƯ’s claim that he actually disliked Arabic.110 A further indication of the Ghaznavids’ Iranian leanings is evidenced by their claim, according to one historian, of descent from the last Sasanian monarch, Yazdagird III (r. 632–651) through the founder of the dynasty, the Turkish mamlnjk SubüktegƯn!111 In what follows, I analyze scholarly approaches to Islamic historiography in the context of the Iranian Renaissance. I argue that any inquiry into this subject must take into account the successful integration of Iranian history in Islamic collective memory. Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 43 Beyond “Islam versus Iran” Modern scholarship on early Islamic Iran is largely shaped by the bias that Iran and its people, with their imperial tradition and legacy of social hierarchy, never successfully assimilated into Islamic civilization in the way that other peoples of the ancient Near East had. According to this paradigm, the conict between the Arab- Islamic versus Iranian visions of Islamic society that took shape in the early ‘Abbasid period was never reconciled. Thus H. A. R. Gibb views the outcome of this conict as an Iranian culture and set of traditions that was only semi- digested in a larger Islamic framework, whereas Crone sees the ‘Abbasids’ inability to create an “Islamic empire” as a result of the caliphs’ inevitable failure “to fuse the Sasanid tradition with Islam.”112 Scholars studying early Persian historiography have likewise been inuenced by this paradigm of an irreconcilable rift, as witnessed by their contriving a sharp distinction between “Islamic” works of history, which focus on biblical themes, pre-Islamic Arabia, and the early caliphate; versus an “Iranian” category, whose texts emphasize matters related to Iran and the KhudƗynƗma tradition.113 However, while it is certainly true that our chroniclers vacillate in their coverage between biblical/Arab and Iranian themes, with some falling on either extreme, by rigidly bifurcating between two models of historiography, scholars are taking for granted a fundamental aspect regarding identity construction of this period. That is, by the time these historians composed their works, the Sasa- nians, whether the author admired them or not, and the experience of Iran itself had already become internalized in Islamic collective memory. For a bipartite classication carries a connotation of mutual exclusivity, i.e., a text oriented around Iranian themes is somehow intrinsically “secular” or “un- Islamic.” Not only does this view represent an anachronistic projection on the part of modern scholars, but it also simply does not concur with the overwhelming evidence of melding between the two traditions. Consider, for example, the attempts of his- torians to reconcile myths, genealogies, and chronological schemes stemming from the Islamic- biblical and Iranian traditions.114 Al- ৫abarƯ, for example, leans towards the idea that Gaynjmart, the “rst man” of the Iranian tradition, was in fact descended from the progeny of Noah (Nnjh) through his son Shem.115 He also takes seriously an alternative model where the biblical prophets and Iranian foundational gures were actually one and the same.116 For his part, al-D ƯnawarƯ makes Jam a descendant of Noah, Nebuchadnezzar (Bukht Naৢr) a king of KayƗnian descent, and conates AfrƯdnjn and Nimrod.117 He also synchronizes the two traditions’ chronologies, informing the reader that Moses, the KayƗnian Kay QubƗdh, and the Arab Prophet Shu‘ayb were contemporaries, as were SulaymƗn and KƗy Khusraw, and Jesus and ArdashƯr.118 While al-D ƯnawarƯ doesn’t mention Gaynjmart, al-Mas‘ njdƯ alludes to one strand of thought which equates Gaynjmart with AmƯm, a descendant of Noah, while al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ states that the general con- sensus among scholars is that he is of the progeny of Adam.119 Furthermore, some historians mention the Iranians’ claim of Abrahamic descent from IsতƗq, which appears to be a matter of pride for them since the 44 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography latter was the son of the freeborn Sarah, while IsmƗ‘Ưl (the ancestor of the Arabs) was the son of the servant HƗjar.120 In this regard, al-Mas‘ njdƯ points to a tradi- tion stating that the Persians used to make a pilgrimage to the Ka‘ba since their ancestor IsতƗq helped IbrƗhƯm construct it. He states that the legendary progen- itor of the Sasanian dynasty, the shepherd SƗsƗn, who made such a pilgrimage, circumambulated the Ka‘ba, and muttered (zamzama) a prayer at the well there. Hence, it became known as the Well of Zamzam.121 While al- Mas‘njdƯ afforded the pre- Islamic Persians a presence in traditional Muslim space, so too do we nd in some geographic literature from this period evidence of prominent sites that have been Islamized in collective memory. For example, the tenth-century geographer al- Iৢ৬akhrƯ points to a tradition claiming that SulaymƗn resided in the city of Iৢ৬akhr, near the ancient ruins of Persepolis, known as Takht- i JamshƯd. Because of this, some locals consider SulaymƗn and JamshƯd one and the same, a view that is discredited by al- Iৢ৬akhrƯ and other historians.122 So too does another geographer of the tenth century, Ibn al-Faq Ưh al- HamadhƗnƯ, connect the names of cities and regions of Iran and ƖdharbayjƗn with Noah and his progeny.123 I reserve a discussion of how Sasanian history came to be integrated in Islamic collective memory for the following section. However, it is suitable to point out here that Tor’s exposition of Seljuq- period wisdom literature contain- ing anachronistic portrayals of Sasanian rulers and ofcials as embodying quint- essentially Islamic virtues is applicable to earlier sources as well, particularly in the depictions of Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn, as we shall see in Chapter 5. Likewise, ta’rƯkh and adab writers of his period exhibit a clear ease in comparing contem- poraneous Muslim rulers with both formative Muslim pious gures and leaders, and Sasanian rulers and notables, as if they are all cut from the same cloth.124 It is true that there was some competition between Arabic and Persian from a linguistic standpoint. In terms of scholarship, philologists like Ibn Durayd (d. 933), Ibn al-Anb ƗrƯ (d. 940), and Ibn FƗris (d. 1004) echo the arguments of al- JƗতi਌ and Ibn Qutayba in their attempts to demonstrate the superiority of the Arabic language, and to disprove the claims of scholars concerning what they saw as Arabic’s aws, particularly the alleged derivativeness of much of its vocabulary and grammar.125 Likewise, both the Samanid and Ghaznavid courts witnessed a debate over whether to make Arabic or Persian the ofcial language of the chancellery.126 Of course, as the language of the Qur’an, Arabic was more closely associated with the Muslim religion itself. Al-B ƯrnjnƯ stated that Persian was suitable for relating the fables of Khusraw, while Arabic should be used for religious and scientic pursuits.127 However, on this issue, Persian had made some inroads with the Samanids, as the ‘ulamƗ’ of this dynasty expressed their support for the translation of al-৫ abarƯ’s TafsƯr into Persian for the very reason that Persian was both the native language and perfectly congruent with Islam. Indeed, as a staunchly orthodox Sunni Iranian dynasty, the Samanids saw the Persian language as a vehicle to legitimize their rule by connecting them with both their Iranian heritage and with Sunni scholarship. This agenda is reected in the Arabic introduction of the TafsƯr, where the Persian translation is justied Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 45 with the statement, “Here, in this region, the language is Persian, and the kings of this realm are Persian kings.”128 It was similar reasoning which compelled Nnjh II b. Manৢnjr to have a ণanafƯ work of qh (Islamic jurisprudence) combat- ting Isma‘ƯlƯsm translated into Persian.129 Moreover, with the Samanids and their successors, both Arabic and Persian were considered perfectly legitimate languages for writing Islamic history, and the language employed by the chroniclers does not necessarily correlate with an Arab- Islamic or Iranian “angle” as one might expect. Take for example the his- torians FirdawsƯ and al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ. Both lived under the Samanids, completed their works under the Ghaznavids, focus on pre-Islamic Iran, and appear to have relied on the same source. Yet FirdawsƯ’s history is in Persian while al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s is in Arabic. While it is true that al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s Arabic chronicle devotes considerably more attention to biblical themes and the pre- Islamic Arabs than does FirdawsƯ, we also have from the Ghaznavid era BayhaqƯ’s TƗrƯkh-i BayhaqƯ, a Persian chronicle which purposefully minimizes Sasanian history (despite BayhaqƯ’s obvious familiarity with the subject) while emphasizing clas- sically “Islamic” ethical themes, such as the superiority of virtue and piety over inherited nobility.130 Likewise, Bal‘amƯ’s TƗrƯkhnƗma, which contains an Arabic preface, does not promote any conspicuous nationalist agenda, and affords the Arabs a position of prominence in its recording of events. Thus, the experience of Iran had become fully integrated in Islamic collective memory with the Iranian renaissance. It remains for us to discuss how writers of this period inter- preted Sasanian history and the Arab conquest of Iran as part of their history.

Iran in “Islamic Salvation History” In what follows, after a brief synopsis of the transmission of Sasanian sources into our extant chronicles, I analyze how the crystallization of a self- condent Iranian-Islamic identity shaped reception of the Islamic conquest narrative. While it is difcult to gauge the path of transmission of Sasanian texts and their translations into our extant sources, we can speak with condence of an ever- widening range, with the passage of time, of Sasanian texts accessible to Muslim authors. To start, one of our earliest extant authors, Ibn Qutayba, references in his works the Siyar al-‘ajam, though he does not specify the translator.131 The ‘Uynjn al- akhbƗr also cites the KalƯla wa- Dimna and the KitƗb al-T Ɨj.132 The anonymous author of the NihƗyat al- irab likewise frequently cites Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ and his Siyar al- mulnjk,133 which has led to a scholarly debate as to what extent this source may have represented an accurate representation of the original KhudƗynƗma itself.134 For his part, al- DƯnawarƯ doesn’t provide much in the way of references, opting for a straight narrative style, but he does cite Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ on Iranian history.135 Regarding our tenth–eleventh century chronicles, al-৫ abarƯ is quite cagey on the matter of Persian sources. He references the ‘ulamƗ’ min al-Furs (scholars of the Persians), a rather opaque category likely referring to the redactors of native Persian sources, though he does not provide any names or titles of texts.136 46 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography Al-Mas‘ njdƯ on the other hand mentions several pre-Islamic Persian sources using their Pahlavi names, including the Khudnjynama, the ƖyƯnnƗma, the KarnƗmag-i ArdashƯr (also known as ‘Ahd ArdashƯr), and other andarz sources. He also names Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ as a translator in one place.137 MiskawƗyh like- wise cites the ‘Ahd ArdashƯr and the SƯrat AnnjshirvƗn.138 Above, I alluded to the lists of early KhudƗynƗma redactors compiled by ণamza, Bal‘amƯ, al- BƯrnjnƯ, and Ibn al-Nad Ưm.139 Similarly, FirdawsƯ and al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ mention Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ ’s translation of the KalƯla wa- Dimna, though incorrectly date it to the time of al-Ma’m njn.140 Thus, by the time we arrive at the late tenth century, our authors had access to an impressive arsenal of Sasanian texts, and a growing list of redactors. But what for our historians did these texts have to do with the Arab conquest of Iran? We discussed above the melding of biblical- Islamic and Iranian themes in historiography of this period. Likewise, our latter akhbƗrƯs merged the history of the Sasanians as reported in the KhudƗynƗma, along with other tracts of Sasa- nian wisdom literature into the traditional canon of Arab- Islamic ta’rƯkh. To the reader, the dissonance between the Sasanians’ own records, which focus on the affairs of the Iranian royal house, and the texts of earlier akhbƗrƯs, in which pre- Islamic Arabia, the formation of the Islamic community, and the early caliphate take center stage, is indeed striking. For its part, the KhudƗynƗma invites its reader to contemplate the trials and victories of the Sasanians, so that he may benet from their experiences. As a didactic drama relating the rise and fall of dynasties, the KhudƗynƗma certainly has its bad guys, parceling blame where it is due for individuals who deviated from the path of justice. Yet, as the Sasani- ans’ own royal chronicle, it emphasizes, not surprisingly, the justice and wisdom of the rulers, their impressive building projects, their stamping out of heretical movements, their patronage of scholarship, and the protection they afforded their subjects. Certainly our authors exercised creative license in their resuscitation of the KhudƗynƗma by projecting contemporaneous Islamic ideas and institutions onto the Sasanians and their context, as we shall see in coming chapters. Even so, this portrayal affording the Sasanians so much depth clearly clashes with the previous generation of akhbƗrƯs’ depiction of them as two- dimensional foils, embodying the stereotypical hubris and decadence pervading the early ‘Abbasid “Arab vs. ‘ajam” discourse. Yet it is exactly with this schizophrenic presentation of the Sasanians that the answer to our question above lies. Now that Iran (particularly northeast Iran) had become the face of Islamic civilization, and Iranians were the main articulators of Islamic culture, chroni- clers of this period were tasked with reconciling the Arab conquest of their native land. One might argue that for a historian like FirdawsƯ, the Arabs’ humil- iating defeat and conquest of the Sasanian empire could not be squared. For this was symptomatic of his split- identity, made up of traditions that were funda- mentally contradictory. As both a pious Muslim and an Iranian, FirdawsƯ could only ponder God’s wisdom in such an event.141 And yet, as Omidsalar has shown, the Arab conquest was simply a fact of life for our historians. It was an accepted event in collective memory preceding the steady reemergence of Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 47 Iranian culture and political power, a process which these historians certainly would have realized made their scholarly endeavors possible.142 This is the story which is anticipated by FirdawsƯ and al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, and detailed by al-৫ abarƯ, al- DƯnawarƯ and others whose accounts continue to their own times. In this context, I argue that the themes of the steady emergence of Iran in the Islamic period, the Arab conquest of Iran, and Sasanian history are linked in historical memory into a broader narrative of Islamic salvation history. For these historians were not satised to simply chart how Iran, particularly the region of KhurƗsƗn, became the dener and leader of Islamic civilization. Rather they fashioned this process as a didactic drama in which the Arabs, Islam, and the Sasanians all play a con- tributing role. Speaking of the agenda to resuscitate Iran in Islamic histori- ography, El- Hibri writes:

In different arenas, various plots unfold in ways that aim at showing how this predestined collision between Islam and Sasanian Persia will in time usher in a political accommodation and moral synthesis that would once again restore to Persia its central historical role of leading the mission of religious salvation realized through stable political rule and moral govern- ment. The process of Islamic salvation history is realized on the ground through the initial fall and eventual unsteady rise of KhurƗsƗn.143

El- Hibri thus sees the fall of Iran as a necessary stage in history, in order for KhurƗsƗn to rise again in an enlightened Islamic form. This is where, I argue, our discordant portrayal of the Sasanians comes into play. For we are essentially dealing with a dual message. On the one hand, the KhudƗynƗma depicts the Sas- anians as great rulers which a contemporaneous reader could admire and learn from, and moreover, identify with as his predecessors. On the other hand, the defaming stereotypes that come across in Sayf and other akhbƗrƯs’ accounts of their dealings with the Arab tribes reveal a darker side to them, and Iranian civi- lization itself. The take-home lesson is that for all its accomplishments and glory, pre-Islamic Iranian civilization was fundamentally awed. To this end, the Arab conquest served an integral function by making it possible for Iran to be puried from the decadence and moral decay that had marred the Sasanians, and imbued with the dignity and humility which the Arab-Islamic tradition had bestowed upon it. This was a means of preserving the dignity of the Iranian people, easing the sting of a conquest which was still relatively recent in col- lective memory by making it a product of the Sasanians’ own agency—for it was their own misrule which brought about their fall. In this way, the “Arab vs. ‘ajam” discourse pervading the old akhbƗrƯs’ accounts was recontextualized, serving as a lesson (‘ibra) for Iranians against the arrogance and oppression to which their predecessors had fallen prey. To this end, it is tting that the carriers of a new faith and political order to Iran are the Arabs, a people whom the Sasa- nians had disparaged. Once the lesson sunk in, it was then possible for the KhurƗsƗnƯs to retake their place. To this end, El-Hibri shows how key events and developments, including 48 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography the third and fourth tnas (civil wars), and the emergence of the successor dynas- ties are portrayed in our sources as stages leading up to KhurƗsƗn’s reemergence as the leader of a world civilization. In this context, he argues that the chroni- clers endeavored to present the resurgence of KhurƗsƗn as a mirror image of the formative Muslim conquest, but in reverse, i.e., as a pure- spirited outsider upon whom the duty of restoring order and justice to a decayed, morally depraved empire had fallen. Thus, in Islamic collective memory of the post- imperial period, Iran’s ultimate salvation is the product of a longstanding dialogue between Arab and Iranian traditions that predates the rise of Islam. This study focuses on the initial phase of this drama, which involved the centuries- long lead up to the Arab conquest of Iran. In this chapter, I have offered a preliminary interpretation outlining how the dynamic discourses stemming from the gradual rise of Iranian cultural and polit- ical inuence in the Islamic world between 750 and 1050 would have shaped how Muslim historians living in different times and places thought about the relationship between the Sasanian empire and the tribes and states of the Arabian peninsula and Iraq, as well as the Islamic conquest of Iran. I have shown that the akhbƗrƯs of the early ‘Abbasid period operated in an intellectual environment pervaded by the discourses of Arab-Islamic identity construction and inter- civilizational competition. As such, they embellished their accounts of the Sasa- nian period with stereotypical themes and imagery contrasting Arabs and Iranians that were commonplace in their own milieu. Their agenda in this was to legitimize the rise of the Arabs as leaders of a world empire, while discrediting the Sasanians. On the other hand, the universal histories of the post-imperial era were compiled during an era witnessing the crystallization of an Islamic-Iranian identity, and thus sought to integrate Iranian history within the traditional frame- work of Arab- Islamic ta’rƯkh. To this end, they fashioned the Sasanian period as an early stage in a larger drama of Islamic salvation history in which both Arabs and Iranians played an integral role. The following chapters analyze the Islamic conquest narrative itself in order to validate my interpretation of these historians’ portrayal and respective agendas.

Notes 1 New Muslims, 72–73, 95. Savant in turn follows Claude Gilliot, who sees the latter half of the ninth century as a watershed representing the “codication” of Islamic scholarship, literature, and artistic styles. See “Creation of a Fixed Text,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Qur’Ɨn, ed. Jane Dammen McAuliffe, 41–57 (Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006). 2 Andrew Marsham, Rituals of Islamic Monarchy: Accession and Succession in the First Muslim Empire (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009), 152, 160–162; J. D Latham, “The Beginnings of Arabic Prose Literature: the Epistolary Genre, ‘Abd al-ণ amƯd al- KƗtib,” CHALUP, 154–164; M. Grignaschi, “Les ‘RasƗ’il ’Aris৬Ɨ৬ƗlƯsa ’ilƗ-l-Iskandar’ de SƗlim Abnj-l-‘AlƗ’ et l’activité culturelle à l’époque omayyade,” Bulletin d’études orientales 19 (1965–1966): 7–83. 3 I apply the terms “global” and “world” in this study to indicate the wide geographic scope of the ‘Abbasid caliphate, and the ethnic diversity of its populace. Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 49 4 Charles Wendell, “BaghdƗd: Imago Mundi, and other Foundation-Lore,” IJMES 2, 2 (1971): 99–128. 5 On ‘Abbasid ceremonial, see Andrew Marsham, Rituals of Islamic Monarchy, 183–308 passim; Dominique Sourdel, “Questions de cérémonial ‘abbaside,” Revue des études islamiques 28 (1960): 121–148; HilƗl al- ৡƗbƯ’, Rusnjm DƗr al- KhilƗfah: The Rules and Regulations of the ‘AbbƗsid Court, trans. E. Salem (Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1977); Pseudo- al-JƗতi਌, KitƗb al- TƗj fƯ akhlƗq al-mul njk, Charles Pellat trans. as Le livre de la couronne (Paris: Société d’édition “Les belles lettres,” 1954); al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 166–167. 6 Ibn al- Muqaffaұ: mort vers 140/757, “Conseilleur” du Calife, trans. Charles Pellat (Paris: Maisonneuve et Larose, 1976), 62–65. On this classication, see also his al- Adab al- ܈aghƯr, in RasƗ’il al- bulaghƗ’, ed. Muতammad Kurd ‘AlƯ, 29–30 (Cairo: Dar al- Kutub al-‘Arabiyya al- KubrƗ, 1913). On these works, see István T. Kristó- Nagy, “La RiৢƗla fƯ’l-ৡaতƗba” and “Les adab- s d’Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ ” in La pensée d’Ibn al- Muqaffa‘: un “agent double” dans le monde persan et arabe (Versailles: Éditions de Paris, 2013), 181–185, 213–263. 7 Several historians associate the wazƯr al- wuzarƗ’ with the Sasanian ofce of wuzurg framƗdhƗr. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 870; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 177; al- Mas‘njdƯ, al- TanbƯh, 148. Arthur Christensen and Dominique Sourdel accepted this connection at face value. See Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 114; Dominique Sourdel, “Le Problème des origines du vizirat,” in Le vizirat ‘abbƗside de 749 à 936 (132 à 324 de l’hégire) (2 vols.) (Damascus: Institut français de Damas, 1959–1960), I, 41–61. Yet Samuel Goitein viewed this ofce as being rmly rooted in the Arab tradition. See “The Origin of the Vizierate and its True Character,” in Studies in Islamic History and Institutions (Leiden: Brill, 1966), 168–196. Ɨt stems from the Sasanian ofceڲƯ al- quڲAccording to our sources, the ofce of qƗ 8 of head priest (mǀbadhƗn mǀbadh). See Ibn Sa‘d, KitƗb al-ܑ abaqƗt al- kubrƗ (9 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- ThaqƗfa, 1969), VII (1), 133; al- Mas‘njdƯ, al- TanbƯh, 148; Michael Morony, Iraq after the Muslim Conquest (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 441–442; Patricia Crone, Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 62, 245. 9 In this sense, adab has been portrayed as the Islamic parallel of the Greek paideia, a system of education in classical studies and mores aimed at producing a scholar- gentleman, and at dening the boundaries of the elite class. See Tarif Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 83. ikma, see Jim Al- Khalili, The House of Wisdom: How Arabicۉ -On the Bayt al 10 Science Saved Ancient Knowledge and Gave Us the Renaissance (New York: Penguin, 2011); Dimitri Gutas, Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco- Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early ‘AbbƗsid Society (2nd–4th/8th–10th centuries) (London: Routledge, 1998), 53–60. 11 Al- JƗতi਌ and Ibn Qutayba likened the role of the KhurƗsƗnƯs in the ‘Abbasid revolu- tion to that of the An܈Ɨr (Helpers) of the Prophet. See ‘Amr b. Baতr al- JƗতi਌, ,iܲ (4 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- Kutub al-‘IlmiyyaۊManƗqib al- Turk in RasƗ’il al- JƗ .l al-‘Arab wa’l-tanbƯh ұalƗ, 97ڲI, 16; Muslim Ibn Qutayba, Fa ,(2000 12 Moshe Sharon, Black Banners from the East (2 vols.) I: The Establishment of the ‘AbbƗsid State: Incubation of a Revolt (Leiden: Brill, 1983), 198; II: Revolt: The Social and Military Aspects of the ‘AbbƗsid Revolution (Jerusalem: Max Schloess- inger Memorial Fund, 1990), 51–55, 258. 13 Sharon, Black Banners II, 99–101, 257–259, and appendix: “The Military Reforms of Abnj Muslim, Their Background and Consequences,” 261–301. 14 Elton Daniel, The Political and Social History of Khurasan under Abbasid Rule 747–820 (Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1979), 58–59. 50 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 15 For example, when questioned on his genealogy, Abnj Muslim is reported to have retorted “My deeds are better for you [to know] than my genealogy.” See al-৫ abarƯ, II, 1965. On this theme, see Saleh Said Agha, The Revolution which Toppled the Umayyads: Neither Arab nor ‘AbbƗsid (Leiden: Brill, 2003), XXXV; Daniel, Khurasan, 100–104. 16 On the traditional view of the ‘Abbasid caliphate as a fundamentally Iranian enter- prise as opposed to the arabische Reich of the Umayyads, see G. van Vloten, De opkomst der Abbasiden in Chorasan (Leiden: Brill, 1890); Wellhausen, The Arab Kingdom and its Fall, trans. Margaret Weir (Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1927). In recent scholarship, this view has been voiced most notably by Mohsen Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers in Early Muslim Society: The Origins of ‘AyyƗrƗn and Futuwwa (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1995), especially pp. 280–281. The “revisionist” historians on the other hand argue that the revolution could not have been an Iranian revival movement, since it was mostly Arabs from KhurƗsƗn who directed the revolt, and Arab forces (muqƗtila) who formed the backbone of the ‘Abbasid army. Moreover, the ‘Abbasids themselves claimed descent from an Arab prophet and presided over an Arabic speaking court. See M. A. Shaban The ‘AbbƗsid Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970); Sharon, Black Banners; Amikam Elad, “Aspects of the Transition from the Umayyad to the ‘Abbasid Caliphate,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 19 (1995): 89–132. 17 “MawƗlƯ and the Prophet’s Family: an Early Shi‘ite View,” in Patronate and Patronage in Early and Classical Islam, eds. M. Bernards and J. Nawas, 167–194 (Leiden: Brill, 2005); “The Signicance of Wooden Weapons in al- MukhtƗr’s Revolt and the ‘AbbƗsid Revolution,” in Studies in Honour of Clifford Edmund Bos- worth, Volume 1: Hunter of the East: Arabic and Semitic Studies, ed. I. R. Netton, 174–187 (Leiden: Brill, 2000); Medieval Islamic Political Thought (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), 96–98. 18 Al- JƗতi਌ for example, wrote that When you look at the sons of the Arabs and the Bedouin who had settled in KhurƗsƗn, you cannot distinguish between the one whose father had settled in FarghƗna and the native of FarghƗna. You are unable to detect any differences between them, in that they both have reddish- brown mustaches, ruddy skin, large necks, and they both don FarghƗnƯ dress. (ManƗqib al-Turk, 50–51) On the assimilation of the KhurƗsƗnƯ Arabs, see further Wellhausen, Arab Kingdom, 493–494; Sharon, Black Banners I: 66–68. 19 Political Thought, 97. However, elsewhere Crone does emphasize that this ethos of equality had less to do with the resentment emanating from the Iranian masses, but was rather more relevant for inuential mawƗlƯ, who complained about the Umayy- ads’ discriminatory measures which could have only affected their privileged circle, such as denying them marriage to Arab women of noble stock and government posi- tions. See “MawƗlƯ and the Prophet’s Family, 190–191. 20 On the abnƗ’ al-dawla , see John Tuner, “The abnƗ’ al-dawla : The Denition and Legitimation of Identity in Response to the Fourth Fitna,” JAOS 124, 1 (2004): 1–22; “AbnƗ’,” EI, 3rd ed.; Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, passim; Crone, “The ‘AbbƗsid AbnƗ’ and SƗsƗnid Cavalrymen,” JRAS 8, 1 (1998): 1–19; Slaves on Horses, 66–67; Sharon, Black Banners II: 297–299; Jacob Lassner, The Shaping of ‘AbbƗsid Rule (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980), 129–136. 21 On the dual allegiance of the abnƗ’, see ManƗqib al- Turk, 24–26; Sharon, Black Banners II: 290–292. 22 On this point, see Crone, “The ‘AbbƗsid ‘AbnƗ’ and SƗsƗnid Cavalrymen,” 14. dathnjn (moderns) to the old style, seeۊFor a description of the challenge of the mu 23 Beatrice Gruendler, “Meeting the Patron: An AkhbƗr Type and its Implications for Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 51 -dath Poetry,” in Ideas, Images, and Methods of Portrayal: Insights into ClassiۊMu cal Arabic Literature and Islam, ed. Sebastian Günther, 59–88 (Leiden: Brill, 2005); M. M. Badawi, “ ‘Abbasid Poetry and its Antecedents,” CHALAB, 146–166; Robert Irwin, Night and Horses and the Desert: An Anthology of Classical Arabic Liter- ature (New York: Penguin, 2000 reprint), 117–118. 24 On legitimizing ethnic discourse in late antique Europe, see Walter Pohl ed., Strat- egies of Distinction: The Construction of Ethnic Communities, 300–800 (Leiden: Brill, 1998). 25 G. E. Von Grunebaum, “The Nature of Arab Unity Before Islam,” Arabica 10, 1 (1963): 5–23. 26 Jan Retsö, The Arabs in Antiquity: Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayy- ads (London: Routledge, 2003), 65–66; Robert Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam (London: Routledge, 2001), 246–247; Rina Drory, “The Abbasid Construction of the Jahiliyya: Cultural Authority in the Making,” Studia Islamica 83 (1996): 33–49. 27 Abnj’l-‘AbbƗs Shams al-D Ưn b. KhallikƗn, KitƗb WafayƗt al- a‘yƗn, trans. Bn. de Slane as Ibn Khallikan’s Biographical Dictionary (4 vols.) (New York: Johnson Reprint Corp., 1961; repr. of. 1871 ed.), I, 350–351. 28 Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 244, translating from Muতammad b. ‘ImrƗn a l - MarzubƗnƯ’s KitƗb Nnjr al- qabas. 29 Abnj ‘AlƯ al- QƗlƯ, KitƗb Dhayl al- amƗlƯ wa’l-nawƗdir (2 vols.) (Beirut: al- Maktab al- TijƯrƯ, 1965), II, 130–132. On al- Mufaঌঌal’s compilation, see also Muতammad b. IsতƗq b. al- NadƯm, The Fihrist: A 10th Century AD Survey of Islamic Culture, ed. and trans. Bayard Dodge (Chicago: Great Books of the Islamic World, 1998; repr. of 1970 ed.), 151; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 247; Rina Drory, “The Abbasid Construction of the Jahiliyya,” 33–34. 30 While there is no evidence that Ibn al-Kalb Ư received caliphal patronage for his Ta’rƯkh, al-৫ abarƯ (III, 528) relates that the Caliph al- MahdƯ rewarded him for writing a letter slandering the ruler of al- Andalus, thus indicating that Ibn al-KalbƯ belonged to a circle of scholars receiving caliphal patronage. 31 Werner Caskel, Ёamharat an- nasab; das genealogische Werk des Hišam Ibn .(ammad al- KalbƯ (2 vols.) (Leiden: Brill, 1966ۊMu 32 Atallah, “al-Kalb Ư”; Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 52–54; Ibn al- NadƯm, 208. 33 Drory, “The Abbasid Construction of the Jahiliyya,” 42. Ibn Qutayba provides a .l al-ұArab, 119–120ffڲcomprehensive list of the Arab sciences in his Fa 34 D. S. Margoliouth, “The Origins of Arabic Poetry,” JRAS 57, 3 (1925): 417–449; ৫ƗhƗ ণusayn, FƯ’l-shi‘r al- JƗhilƯ (Cairo: DƗr al-Ma‘ Ɨrif, 1925). 35 “The Abbasid Construction of the Jahiliyya.” 36 Donner, Narratives, 110. On this point, Donner argues that the transition from early adƯth, which mentionۊ adƯth, which only reference tribes separately, to laterۊ period the “Arabs” as a group, was an adaptation by the transmitters to show the integrity of the Arabs as a single people. 37 See this chapter, note 26, for scholarship. 38 Al- BayƗn, I, 384–385. 39 ‘Abd al-‘AzƯz al- DnjrƯ, al- Judhnjr al- ta’rƯkhiyya lil-Shu ұnjbƯyya (Beirut: DƗr al-৫ alƯދa, 1962), 95–96; Retsö, The Arabs in Antiquity, 65; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 246–247; Donner, Narratives, 109–110, 201–202. 40 The two foundational studies on the Shu‘njbiyya include Ignaz Goldziher, “The Shu‘njbiyya” and “The Shu‘njbiyya and its Manifestation in Scholarship,” in Muslim Studies (2006), 137–198; H. A. R. Gibb, “The Social Signicance of the Shuubiya,” in Studies on the Civilization of Islam, eds. S. Stanford and W. Polk (Boston: Beacon Press, 1962), 62–73. The term Shu‘übiyya itself is derived from Verse 49:13 in the Qu’ran, which reads: 52 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography Oh men, We have created you from a male and a female, and We have made you into groups (shu‘ûb) and tribes (qabâ’il) that you may come to know one another; truly, the noblest (akram) among you before God is the most righteous (atqâ) among you; truly God is the All-Knowing, the All-seeing. See Roy Mottahedeh, “The Shu‘ûbîyah Controversy and the Social History of Early Islamic Iran,” IJMES 7, 2 (1976): 164. 41 On this point, see Sarah Savant, “Naming Shu‘njbƯs,” in Essays in Islamic Philology, History, and Philosophy: A Festschrift in Celebration and Honor of Professor Ahmad Mahdavi Damghani’s 90th Birthday, eds. A. Korangy, W. M. Thackston, R. Mottahedeh, and W. Granara, 166–184 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2016); New Muslims, 28. See also my conference presentation, “So Who Were the Shu‘njbƯs Anyway? Constructing Identity in the Early ‘Abbasid Caliphate,” Presentation for the panel “Imagining the Ummah: Texts, Culture and the Creation of Community in Early Islam,” Middle East Studies Association Annual Meeting, Denver, 2015. l al-‘Arab, 37. Likewise, in his al- Ma‘Ɨrif (302), he claimed that Abnj ‘UbaydaڲFa 42 “hated the Arabs and a wrote a book on their faults [mathƗlibihƗ].” This statement is cited by Ibn KhallikƗn, III, 389. 43 Gibb, “The Social Signicance of the Shuubiya,” 67–69; Michael Lecker, “Bio- graphical Notes on Abnj ‘Ubayda Ma‘mar b. al- MuthannƗ,” Studia Islamica 81 (1995): 94–97; Wilferd Madelung, “Abnj ‘Ubayda Ma‘mar b. al- MuthannƗ as a His- torian,” Journal of Islamic Studies 3 (1992): 53. 44 Albert Arazi, “Abnj NuwƗs fut- il Šu‘njbite?” Arabica 26 (1979): 1–61. 45 Murnjj, II, 289. 46 “Naming Shu‘njbƯs,” 178. 47 Translated in A.F.L Beeston ed., Selections from the Poetry of BaššƗr (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 50. 48 Consider the report in the KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ (II, 536–538) of the Marwanid era poet IsmƗ‘Ưl b. YasƗr, who recited poetry at a court session, rife with fulsome praise of the ‘ajam and invective against the Arabs, insulting the latter for (among other things) the JƗhiliyya practice of female infanticide. See also the poem of the Saffarid minister IbrƗhƯm b. MamshƗdh described on pp. 40–41 of this study. 49 See below and in the analytical portion of this study. 50 Reinhold Bichler and Robert Rollinger, “Greece v–vi. The Image of Persia and Per- sians in Greek Literature,” EIr, 2012; Benjamin Isaac, The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 257–323 et passim; Vincent Rosivach, “The Romans’ View of the Persians,” The Classical World 78, 1 (1984): 1–8. 51 Roman History of Ammianus Marcellinus during the Reigns of the Emperors Con- stantius, Julian, Jovianus, Valentinian, and Valens, trans. C. D. Yonge (London: George Bell, 1902), Book XIV, Chapter IV: 1–7, pp. 1–12; Conor Whately, “Arabs, Outsiders, and Stereotypes from Ammianus Marcellinus to Theophylact Simocatta,” in Inside and Out: Interactions between Rome and the Peoples on the Arabian and Egyptian Frontiers in Late Antiquity, eds. Jitse H. F. Dijkstra and Greg Fisher, 215–233 (Leuven: Peeters, 2014); M. C. A. Macdonald et al., “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century,” in Arabs and Empires before Islam, ed. Greg Fisher, 77–79 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). 52 Diodorus Siculus, Diodorus of Sicily, trans. C. H. Oldfather et al. (12 vols.) (Cam- bridge: Harvard University Press, 1933–1967), Book II (trans. Oldfather): 48, p. 43; 54, p. 61; Book XIX (trans. Russel Geer): 94, pp. 87–89; 97, pp. 97–99; M. C. A. Macdonald, “Arabs, Arabias, and the Greeks: Contact and Perceptions,” in Literacy and Identity in Pre- Islamic Arabia (V), 23ff. (Farnham: Variorium, 2009); M. C. A. Macdonald et al., “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century,” 65–66. 53 Book II: 48, pp. 41–43. Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 53 54 The poet Isaac of Antioch, for example, referred to the Arabs who sacked Beth ণur as “children of Hagar, those furious wild asses,” while Evagrius complained of a raid by “barbarian Scenitae, laying waste to everything.” See M. C. A. Macdonald et al., “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century,”, 88. 55 On this construct of “competing visions,” see Gibb, “The Evolution of Government in Early Islam,” in Studies on the Civilization of Islam, 34–46; and “The Social Sig- nicance of the Shuubiya,” 66; Crone, Slaves on Horses, 62–63. 56 On the ‘Abbasids’ patronage of the ‘ulamƗ’, see Muhammad Qasim Zaman, Reli- gion and Politics under the Early ‘AbbƗsids: the Emergence of the Proto- SunnƯ Elite (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 144–166; Chase Robinson, Empire and Elites after the Muslim Conquest: The Transformation of Northern Mesopotamia (Cambridge: Cambridge .na, see this chapter, note 69ۊUniversity Press, 2000), 158–164. For more on the mi 57 According to Ibn KhallikƗn, it was said of al- Aৢma‘Ư that no one mastered the idiom of the Bedouin as he had. On his scholarship, see WafayƗt al-a‘y Ɨn, I, 123–127. 58 Crone, Slaves on Horses, 63. 59 Donnner, Narratives, 110, quoting Aতmad b. ণanbal’s KitƗb al- sunna. 60 Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, II, 12. 61 ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ (Ta’rƯkh, 16, 22) cites a translator of Pahlavi, who expressed dif- culty in compiling a single history due to the variance of KhudƗynƗma manuscripts to which he had access. ণamza also cites a Zoroastrian priest who claimed to have studied 20 different manuscripts of the KhudƗynƗma in order to derive an accurate dating scheme for the kings of Iran. This has led Mahmoud Omidsalar to view the KhudƗynƗma as representing a genre of history writing rather than a single book. See Poetics and Politics, 37–40. Supporting this theory, evidence provided by Ibn Qutayba and the NihƗyat al- irab indicates that Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ himself possibly had access to numerous editions of the KhudƗynƗma. See this chapter, note 110. On the KhudƗynƗma, see further Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila, “Al-Kisraw Ư and the Arabic Translations of the KhudƗynƗmag,” in Travelling through Time: Essays in Honour of Kaj Öhrnberg, eds. Sylvia Akar, Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila, and Inka Nokso-Koivisto, 65–92 (Helsinki: Finnish Oriental Society, 2013); Zeev Rubin, ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ’s Sources for Sasanian History,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 35 (2008): 27–58; Mohsen Zakeri, “Al- ৫abarƯ on Sasanian History: a Study in Sources,” in Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and His Work, 27–40; A. Shahpur Shahbazi, “On the Xwaday- namag,” Acta Iranica 30 (1990): 208–229; Theodor Nöldeke, “Einleitung,” in Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden (Leiden: Brill, 1973; repr. of 1879 ed.), XIII–XXVIII; The Iranian National Epic or The Shahnamah, trans. Leonid Bogdanov (Philadelphia: Porcupine Press, 1979; repr. of 1930 ed.), 23–26. 62 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, al- TanbƯh, 151; Murnjj, III, 156. 63 ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ, 10; Abnj’l-RƗyতƗn al- BƯrnjnƯ, KitƗb al-Ɩ thƗr al- bƗqiyya ‘an al- qarnjn al-kh Ɨliyya (Paris: Dar Biblion, 2009), 144. On Muতammad b. al- Jahm al- BarmakƯ, see Ibn KhallikƗn, I, 63, IV, 68. 64 Bal‘amƯ, I, 4; Ibn al-Nad Ưm, 589–560. 65 See pp. 45–46 for a broad overview of the transmission of the Siyar al-mul njk into later historiography and the scholarship listed in this chapter, note 61, for compre- hensive analyses. 66 Fereshteh Davaran, Continuity in Iranian Identity: Resilience of a Cultural Heritage (London: Routledge, 2010), 171ff. 67 On Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ ’s translations of these Pahlavi texts, see István T. Kristó-Nagy, “Ses oeuvres,” “La KalƯla wa- Dimna,” and “La lettre de Tansar,” in La pensée d’Ibn al- Muqaffa‘, 81–169; J. D. Latham, “Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ and Early ‘Abbasid Prose,” CHALAB, 50–57; Ehsan Yarshater, “Iranian National History,” CHI 3, 1: 359–366; Mary Boyce, The Letter of Tansar (Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1968); Ibn al-Nad Ưm, 259–260, 716–717; Ibn KhallikƗn, I, 432; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 54 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 633; FirdawsƯ, VI, 364–365; Muতammad b. al-ণ asan b. IsfandiyƗr, TƗrƯkh-i ܑabaristƗn (Tehran: Muতammad Rama਌ƗnƯ, 1955), 12–41. 68 On Islamic memory of the Mazdakite heresy, see Chapter 5. 69 Al- Ma’mnjn’s promulgation of the Mu‘tazilite creed assimilating classical falsafa into an Islamic context presents an interesting conundrum. For here we are dealing with a conspicuously foreign mode of thought used to combat another, zandaqa. Yet, it was also an attempt to corral the power of the ‘ulamƗ’. As such, it represented an aberra- tion of a broader pattern in which the caliphs patronized the ahl al-sunna . The main -na, Aতmad b. ণanbal enjoyed the wide-scale support of the Baghۊopponent of the mi -na were continued by alۊdadi populace, and while the unpopular policies of the mi Ma’mnjn’s rst two successors, they were ultimately abandoned by al-Mutawakkil na, see Zaman, Religion and Politics, 106–114; Christopherۊr. 847–861). On the mi) Melchert, Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Oxford: Oneworld, 2006), 8–15; El- Hibri, Reinterpret- ing Islamic Historiography, 96–98; Crone, Slaves on Horses, 70–71, 77–78, 258. 70 Melhem Chokr, Zandaqa et zindƯqs en Islam au second siècle de l’hégire (Damas- cus: Presses de l’Ifpo, 1993), 20; Ibn KhallikƗn, I, 431–444. 71 Chokr, Zandaqa et zindƯqs, 266, 285–286; al- AghƗnƯ, II, 172; al-৫ abarƯ, III, 538–539. 72 Muতammad b. ‘Abdnjs al- JahshiyarƯ, KitƗb al- wuzarƗҲ wa’l-kuttƗb (Cairo: Muৢ৬afá al- BƗbƯ al-ণ alabƯ, 1938), 253. On a similar note, one source relates that the minister al- Faঌl b. Sahl induced al- Ma’mnjn to have an incense burner, which had allegedly belonged to the last Sasanian emperor, Yazdagird III placed in the Ka‘ba. See El- Hibri, Reinterpreting Islamic Historiography, 101, note 19, citing al- QƗঌƯ al- RashƯd’s KitƗb al- DhakhƗ’ir. 73 ‘Uynjn al- akhbƗr, I, 51. 74 Cited in al-D njrƯ, al- Judhnjr, 70. .l al-‘Arab, 33ڲFa 75 76 Take for example his separation of the elites and commoners. Such a separation among the umma is attested to as early as the caliphate of ‘UthmƗn b. ‘AffƗn (r. 644–656). See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2849, 2950. Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ ’s innovation in this regard was to add a specically Islamic element to this classication, by incorpor- ating knowledge of Muslim scriptures and religious piety as one of the factors den- ing membership to the elite class. Indeed, he species the necessity of the ahl al- qh wa’l-sunna (specialists of Islamic jurisprudence and the sunna) as educators. Fur- thermore, he adapted the old Iranian notion of the sovereign as a divine intermediary into a Muslim context, subordinating the king’s authority to the Qur’an and the sunna. While the sovereign (imƗm) possessed the exclusive right to exercise inde- pendent reasoning (al- rƗ’Ư) in making executive decisions, he could do so only when the Muslim scriptures provided no clear course of action. See Pellat trans., Ibn al- Muqaffa‘, 28–29, 60–63. 77 M. Grignaschi, “La NihƗyatu-l-’Arab fƯ AপbƗri-l- Furs wa- l-‘Arab et les Siyaru Mulnjki- l-‘A÷am du Ps. Ibn- al-Muqaffa‘,” Bulletin d’études orientales 26 (1973): 108. 78 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 154–155; Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 53. 79 Ibn al- NadƯm, 116. For a full discussion of the debate regarding Abnj ‘Ubayda’s origins, see Lecker, “Biographical Notes on Abnj ‘Ubayda Ma‘mar b. al-Muthann Ɨ.” 80 On Abnj ‘Ubayda’s scholarship on Persian philology, particularly its inuence on Arabic, see Goldziher, Muslim Studies (2006), 182–183. 81 Al- Mas‘njdƯ writes that Abnj ‘Ubayda’s AkhbƗr al- Furs was based on the work of ‘Umar KisrƗ. This shadowy gure, named for his expertise in Iranian history, is sparsely referenced in Islamic sources. See Murnjj, I, 151, 159, 172, 190; Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila and Ilkka Lindstedt, “Appendix: ‘Umar KisrƗ,” in “Al- KisrawƯ and the Arabic Translations of the KhudƗynƗmag,” 90–92; Zakeri, “Al-৫ abarƯ on Sasa- nian History,” 36; Shboul, Al- Mas‘njdƯ and his World, 104. Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 55 82 Ibn al-Nad Ưm, 116; Ibn KhallikƗn, III, 391. Ibn al-Nad Ưm (117) also references a .(Ɨ’il al-Furs (Book on the Excellences of the PersiansڲKitƗb Fa 83 Al- Ma‘Ɨrif, 302. Though Ibn Qutayba qualies this statement by stating that Abnj ‘Ubayda spoke Arabic poorly, claiming that he was unable to utter a verse of poetry or to read from the Qur’an without making a mistake. These remarks of Ibn Qutayba on Abnj ‘Ubayda are referenced by Ibn KhallikƗn, III, 388–389. 84 For example, there is no reference to the AkhbƗr al-Furs outside of the Murnjj al- dhahab. When al- Mas‘njdƯ does cite from this work (I, 190), he simply provides, as Madelung (“Abnj ‘Ubayda Ma‘mar b. al-Muthann Ɨ as a Historian,” 47–56, 53) points out, “a dry list of the Persian kings and dynasties” at the end of his section on pre- Islamic Persia, clearly indicating the secondary status of this work for him in com- parison to his other sources on Persian history. 85 On Ibn IsতƗq, see Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 34–39. 86 My framing of this trend in terms of an eastward vector closely follows that of Richard Bulliet, who charts the process by what was originally the “edge” of Islamic civilization—Iran and Transoxiana—became the “center,” i.e., the hub for the articu- lation and dissemination of Islamic religious, intellectual and social institutions. See Islam: The View from the Edge (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994). 87 Al- AghƗnƯ, X, 488. 88 Ibn al- NadƯm, 510–511. The source of this story is IsতƗq b. IbrƗhƯm al-Mus‘ab Ư (d. 850), a prominent Tahirid serving the caliphs from al-Ma’m njn to al-Mutawakkil. See John Turner, “Ishaq ibn Ibrahim,” in Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclo- pedia (2 vols.), ed. Josef Meri, I, 402 (London: Routledge, 2006). Even if one casts doubt on this statement’s legitimacy (as does Zaman, Religion and Politics, 195), one must accept its intended purpose as an indicator of the ever increasing promi- nence of KhurƗsƗn in early ‘Abbasid society. 89 Al- JƗতi਌, ThalƗth rasƗ’il (Cairo: al-Ma ৬baދa al-Sala yya, 1926), 49–50. 90 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, IV, 521. 91 On these movements, see Parveneh Pourshariati, Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian Parthian- Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran (London: I. B. Tauris, 2008), 437–452; B. S. Amoretti, “Sects and Heresies,” in CHI, 4: The Period from the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs, ed. R. N. Frye, 481–519 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975); G. H. Sadighi, Les Mouvements religieux iraniens au IIe et au IIIe siècle de l’hégire, (Paris: Les Presses modernes, 1938). 92 El- Hibri, Reinterpreting Islamic Historiography, 99–101 and following note. 93 Al- ৫abarƯ, III, 1142. 94 On this theme, see Joel Kraemer, Humanism in the Renaissance of Islam: The Cul- tural Revival during the Buyid Age, 2nd ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1992), 286. R. N. Frye, The Golden Age of Persia: The Arabs in the East (London: Harper and Row Pub- lishers, 1975), 212; S. M. Stern, “Ya‘qnjb the Coppersmith and Persian National Sen- timent,” in Iran and Islam: In Memory of the Late Vladimir Minorsky, ed. C. E. Bosworth, 535–555 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 1971); Bertold Spuler, Iran in früh-islamischer Zeit: Politik, Kultur, Verwaltung und öffentliches Leben zwischen der arabischen und der seldschukischen Eroberung, 633 bis 1055 (Wies- baden: F. Steiner, 1952), 234–237ff.; V. Minorsky, La domination des Dailamites (Paris: E. Leroux, 1932), 21; Goldziher, Muslim Studies (2006), 144. 95 Al- ৫abarƯ, III, 921–924. 96 C. E. Bosworth, “The Tahirids and Arabic Culture,” Journal of Semitic Studies 14 (1969): 45–79. 97 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, al- TanbƯh, 446. 98 Translated in S. M. Stern, “Ya‘qnjb the Coppersmith and Persian National Senti- ment,” 542. The poem is found in complete form in YƗqnjt b. ‘Abd AllƗh al- ণamawƯ’s biographical dictionary, Mu‘jam al- udabƗ’ (20 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- Fikr, 1980), II, 16–18. 56 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 99 Al- AghƗnƯ, II, 27. For a similar verse, see al-Mas‘ njdƯ, I, Murnjj, 162. 100 According to Iranian legend, the banner of KƗbƯ was rst borne by a smith named KƗbƯ or KƗva in a rebellion against the tyrant ঋaততƗk. It was co-opted by the king AfrƯdnjn who founded the KayƗnian dynasty, and remained in the Iranians’ posses- sion until the Arab conquest. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 207–208, 2337; FirdawsƯ, I, 65–66; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 26, 38; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 476; Lewental, QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now, 208–212; Yarshater, “Iranian National History,” 372; Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 212, 502–504. 101 The context of war with the caliphate indicates that by addressing the “sons of HƗshim,” the poet meant the ‘Abbasid family, as the latter claimed descent from HƗshim b. ‘Abd al-Man Ɨf, the great- grandfather of the Prophet. From this, it would follow that the statement, “Our fathers gave you your kingdom” refers to the role played by the KhurƗsƗnƯs in the ‘Abbasid revolution. Yet one could also interpret “sons of HƗshim” to refer to the Arab people collectively, since HƗshim was an ancestor of the Arab Prophet, whose followers brought Arab suzerainty to Iran in the rst place. According to this interpretation, “Our fathers gave you your kingdom” plays down the Arab conquest of the Sasanian empire, making it out as if the Irani- ans had forfeited to the Arabs. 102 “Historical Representations of Ya‘qnjb b. al- Layth: A Reappraisal,” JRAS 12, 3 (2002): 247–275. 103 TƗrƯkh-i SƯstƗn (Tehran: IntishƗrƗt-i Mu‘Ưn, 2002), 214–216. The TƗrƯkh-i SƯstƗn (207–208) also corroborates Ya‘qnjb’s claim of descent from JamshƯd, via the Sasa- nian ruler Khusraw II ParvƯz. 104 See G. Lazard, “The Rise of the New Persian Language,” in CHI 4: 595, 608. 105 Franz Rosenthal, “ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ,” EI, 2nd ed.; Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 117ff. 106 Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 70–76; Kraemer, Humanism in the Renaissance of Islam; M. Arkoun, “Miskawayh,” EI, 2nd ed. 107 Wilferd Madelung, “The Assumption of the Title ShƗhƗnshƗh by the Bnjyids” and “The Reign of the Daylam (Dawlat al- Daylam),” JNES 28, 2–3 (1969): 84–108, 168–183; Heribert Busse, “The Revival of Persian Kingship under the Bnjyids,” in Islamic Civilisation 950–1150, ed. D. S. Richards, 47–60 (Oxford: Cassirer, 1973); John Donohue, The Buwayhid Dynasty in Iraq 334H./945 to 403H./1012: Shaping Institutions for the Future (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 21–34. 108 Julie Meisami, “History as Literature,” 6–19; Elton Daniel, “The Rise and Develop- ment of Persian Historiography,” in Persian Historiography, ed. Charles Melville, 103–114; “The SƗmƗnid “Translations” of al-৫ abarƯ,” 263–297; Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography and Political Legitimacy; Lazard, “The Rise of the New Persian Language.” See further relevant scholarship on FirdawsƯ provided in the previous chapter and in what follows. 109 Deborah Tor, “The Long Shadow of Pre- Islamic Iranian Rulership: Antagonism or Assimilation,” in Late Antiquity: Eastern Perspectives, eds. Teresa Bernheimer and :udnjd al-‘Ɩlamۉ ;(Adam Silverstein, 153–154 (Exeter: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2012 ‘The Regions of the World’: A Persian Geography 372 A.H./982 A.D., trans. V. Minor- sky (London: Messrs. Luzac and Co., 1937), 102; Abnj’l-QƗsim b. ণawqal, KitƗb .Leiden: Brill, 1939), 468) ڲnjrat al- ar܇ 110 Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics, 107–108. 111 Tor, “Long Shadow,” 154; MinhƗj-i SirƗj JnjzjƗnƯ, ܑabaqƗt-i NƗ܈irƯ (2 vols.) (Tehran: AsƗ৬Ưr, 2010/2011), I, 226. 112 Gibb, “The Evolution of Government in Early Islam,” 34–46; Crone, Slaves on Horses, see especially p. 62. 113 Meisami, “The Past in Service of the Present”; “History as Literature,” 10; Charles Melville, “The Historian at Work,” in Persian Historiography, 91; Hayrettin Yücesoy, “Ancient Imperial Heritage and Islamic Universal Historiography: Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 57 a l - D ƯnawarƯ’s Secular Perspective,” Journal of Global History 2 (2007): 135–155; and to a lesser extent Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography and Political Legitimacy, 106–107. 114 For a full discussion, see Savant, New Muslims, 37–59, 148–156; “Genealogy and Ethnogenesis in al-Mas‘udi’s Muruj al- Dhahab,” in Genealogy and Knowledge in Muslim Societies: Understanding the Past, eds. Sarah Bowen Savant and Helena de Felipe, 115–130 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014); “Isaac as the Per- sians’ Ishmael: Pride and the Pre- Islamic Past in Ninth and Tenth- Century Islam,” Comparative Islamic Studies 2, 1 (2006): 5–25. 115 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 199ff. 116 Ibid., 147–148, 155. On this theme, see also al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, Ghurar, 1–2; al-B ƯrnjnƯ, al- ƖthƗr al-b Ɨqiyya, 148 and the correlation between SulaymƗn and JamshƯd discussed below. 117 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 4–6, 8–10, 25–26. Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, I, 154) corrects this view of Nebuchadnezzar, stating he was rather a marzbƗn (frontier governor) for the Persians. 118 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 14, 23, 46–47. He writes of a visit of one of Jesus’ followers to ArdashƯr’s court in Ctesiphon. 119 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 149; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, Ghurar, 1–4. ,l al-‘ArabڲAl- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 161–163; al- TanbƯh, 154–156; Ibn Qutayba, Fa 120 46–47; Abnj Nu‘aym al-I ৢbahƗnƯ. KitƗb Dhikr akhbƗr I܈bahƗn (2 vols.) (Leiden: Brill, 1931–1934), I, 11–12. 121 Murnjj, I, 163; al- TanbƯh, 155–156. This is a likely allusion to the Zoroastrian ritual of muttering prayer. 122 Abnj IsতƗq IbrƗhƯm b. Muতammad al-F ƗrisƯ al- Iৢ৬akhrƯ, KitƗb al- MasƗlik wa’l- mamƗlik (Leiden: Brill, 1927), 123. Al- DƯnawarƯ (9) and al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ (Ghurar, 10–11) argue that a gulf of thousands of years separated these two gures. Ibn Qutayba (KitƗb al- Ma‘Ɨrif, 362), however, states that SulaymƗn and JamshƯd were contemporaries. 123 He writes that HamadhƗn was named after a great grandson of Nnjh (Noah) born in that city, while HamadhƗn’s brother IৢbahƗn built the city which bears his name. NihƗwand is named after its builder Nnjh. Likewise the region of ƖdharbayjƗn itself is connected with one ƖdhƗrbadh, a descendant of Nnjh. See Aতmad b. Muতammad b. al- FaqƯh al-Hamadh ƗnƯ, KitƗb al- BuldƗn (Beirut: ‘Ɩlam al-Kutub, 1996), 459, 527, 529, 581. 124 Tor sees this as evidence in her argument against the “Islam” versus “Iran” classi- cation scheme of Islamic historiography described above. See “The Islamisation of Iranian Kingly Ideals in the Persianate Fürstenspiegel,” Iran 49 (2011): 115–122; “Long Shadow.” 125 Lutz Richter- Bernburg, “Linguistic Shu‘njbiya and Early Neo- Persian Prose,” JAOS 94, 1 (1974): 55–64; Goldziher, Muslim Studies (2006), 191–198. 126 On the Samanid case, see W. L. Treadwell, The Political History of the SƗmƗnid State (Oxford: Oxford University Dissertation, 1991), 173–180. On the Ghaznavid chancellery, see Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics, 106–108. Omidsalar convincingly shows that this competition was more a reection of the ability of the court ofcials, rather than a cultural preference for either language held by these ofcials or by the Maতmnjd himself. See further C. E. Bosworth, “The Persian Contribution to Islamic Historiography in the pre- Mongol Period,” in The Persian Presence in the Islamic World, ed. Richard Hovannisian and Georges Sabagh, 218–236 (Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1998); Richter-Bernburg, “Linguistic Shu‘njbiya,” 57–59. 127 Richter-Bernburg, “Linguistic Shu‘njbiya,” 59. 128 Translated in Meisami, “History as Literature,” 9. See also Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography and Political Legitimacy, 44–46, 167–172; Richter- Bernburg, “Linguistic Shu‘njbiya,” 62–63. 58 Shifting identities and Islamic historiography 129 Richter-Bernburg, “Linguistic Shu‘njbiya,” 56. 130 On this theme in BayhaqƯ’s chronicle, see Meisami, “The Past in Service of the Present.” 131 ‘Uynjn, I, 117, 178. It is possible that Ibn Qutayba had access to multiple manuscripts of the Siyar. In the KitƗb al-Ma‘ Ɨrif (362), he indicates that he has read Kutub lڲbooks—plural) Siyar al-‘ajam, indicating multiple editions. Likewise, in his Fa) al-‘Arab (86), he refers to kutub al-‘ajam, which I interpret to mean multiple edi- tions of the Siyar al-‘ajam, though it can refer simply to Persian sources in general. (In this text, he mentions Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ (42, 105), but not in the capacity of a translator.) Similarly, the author of the NihƗyat al- irab (82, 159) quotes Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ as saying that he has read kutub al-‘ajam and Kutub Siyar al-mul njk. See this chapter, note 133, for a full listing of this source’s citations of Ibn al-Muqaffa‘. 132 For KalƯla wa- Dimna, see ‘Uynjn, I, 168, 281, II, 179, III, 180, 192. For the KitƗb al- TƗj, see ‘Uynjn, I, 5, 11. 133 NihƗyat al- irab, 82, 89, 99, 110, 159, 203, 208, 212, 213, 216, 256, 277, 324, 327, 336. 134 Nöldeke, Geschichte, 475–476; Edward G. Browne, “Some Account of the Arabic Work entitled ‘Niháyatu’l-irab fí akhbári’l-Furs wa’l-‘Arab,’ particularly of that part which treats of the Persian Kings,” JRAS 32, 2 (1900): 195–259; M. Grignaschi, “La NihƗyatu-l- ’Arab fƯ AপbƗri-l-Furs wa-l-‘Arab et les Siyaru Mulnjki-l-‘A÷am du Ps. Ibn- al-Muqaffa‘.” 135 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 9. 136 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 854. Elsewhere (I, 155), he refers to them simply as ‘ulamƗ’ al- Furs, which is presumably the same group. 137 Murnjj, I, 150, 153, 158, 168; al- TanbƯh, 149–150; Shboul, Al- Mas‘njdƯ and his World, 104–107. 138 Miskawayh, TajƗrib al- umam, I, 97–107, 133–140 139 See p. 35. 140 Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics, 71; FirdawsƯ, VI, 364–365; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, Ghurar, 633. 141 Dick Davis, Epic and Sedition: The Case of Ferdowsi’s ShƗhnƗmeh (Washington D.C.: Mage Publishers, 2006; repr. of 1992 ed.), 175–177. 142 Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics, 97–98. 143 Reinterpreting Islamic Historiography, 213. 3 The opening of the drama ShƗpnjr and the Sheikh

For he [ShƗpnjr II] had heard from the wind blowing from the direction of the Arabs, of the latter’s rise and their conquering of the Persians’ rule in his [the Prophet’s] name.1

How does the Islamic conquest narrative begin? The Islamic sources show how a northward migration of Arabs into northern Arabia, Iraq, and Syria occurring towards the end of the AshkƗnian (Parthian) period and the subsequent rise of the aggressive Sasanian empire set the stage for direct encounters between Iranians and the Arabs that had settled in or near their territory. In this context, the beginning of the moralizing story explicating the Arab conquest of Iran is to be found with the depiction of the punitive campaign undertaken by ShƗpnjr II (309–379) in response to the incursions of some Arab tribes into Iraq and southern Iran. The account of this conquest portrays the king as a tyrant, using excessive force against the poor nomads and being overindulgent in his wrath. In this regard, I will highlight the portrayal of a meeting found in both al- Mas‘njdƯ’s and al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s chronicles, in which an Arab elder (a sheikh of the TamƯm confeder- ation in the Murnjj, and an anonymous old woman in the Ghurar) chastises the king for his cruel treatment of the Arabs and convinces him to desist from his massacre of them. I will argue that this meeting is a clear projection of the “Arab versus ‘ajam” discourse discussed in the previous chapter, exhibiting contrasting notions of the Iranians’ cruelty and avarice, versus the steadfastness, eloquence, and wisdom of the Arabs, as represented by the elder, who dares to confront the Sasanian king. Further, I will show how the dialogue of this meeting is heavily steeped in the language of dawla (literally, “turn”),2 i.e., the actors appear to recognize the inevitable transition of power between the two peoples that was yet to come. In what follows, after a brief description of historical portrayals of the relations between the Arabs and the Iranians in antiquity and during the establishment of Sasanian rule, I will proceed to examine the reports of ShƗpnjr’s Arabian campaign. 60 The opening of the drama The Arab–Iranian legacy in the Islamic narrative tradition: of legend and history The deep- rooted interconnection between Arab and Iranian history in Islamic historiography is evidenced by the merger of the Iranian mythical and Islamic- biblical traditions, as I analyzed in the previous chapter. Likewise, one reads of encounters between these two peoples occurring in the context of the pre- Sasanian dynasties. However, these encounters are shrouded in lore, especially for the earliest periods. For example, we have the saga of the tyrannical oppres- sor of the Iranians, ঋaততƗk, who is described in some traditions as an Arab king. According to this legend, ঋaততƗk had snakes attached to his shoulders, which he fed with the brains of his subjects. ঋaততƗk had defeated JamshƯd, but was himself vanquished by the founder of the KayƗnian dynasty, AfrƯdnjn, with the help of the blacksmith KƗva.3 The ShƗhnƗma relates that after ruling for 50 years, AfrƯdnjn managed to have his three sons married to Yemeni princesses, despite the mechinations of the king of Yemen, who tried to prevent these mar- riages from occurring through trickery and magic, because he could not bear to be separated from his daughters.4 From the KayƗnian dynasty, we also have reports of the quixotic ruler Kay KƗvus, whose harebrained acts, along with a near- death encounter in a manmade ying machine,5 included an ill-fated expe- dition to Yemen, for which the doughty hero Rustam had to rescue him when he was captured and imprisoned by the Yemeni king’s forces.6 Regarding Yemen, some sources describe a fantastic tale of a ণimyarite conquest of Iran (along with much of the known world!), as occurring during the KayƗnian era, though in other cases, this tradition is rmly rooted in Sasanian history.7 Regarding the twighlight of the KayƗnian era, the ShƗhnƗma makes mention of the king DƗrƗb’s defeat of an Arab chieftain named Shu‘ayb.8 The Islamic sources are not in accord on the post-Alexander period. There is a tendency among them to conate the regional magnates originally appointed by Alexander to govern Iraq and Iran, and their progeny, known in the Islamic tradition as the mulnjk al-ܒ awƗ’if (party kings), with the AshkƗnians/Arsacids (Parthians). According to al-Mas‘ njdƯ, the mulnjk al-ܒ awƗ’if were vassals of the AshkƗnians. Interestingly enough, this author also states that these party kings included Per- sians, Arabs, and Nabateans, thus providing a signicant political role for the Arabs at an early date.9 Furthermore, our sources relate that this period witnessed a migration of southern Arabs to Baতrayn in search of fertile lands. With the decline in power of the AshkƗnian kings, these Arab tribes, coveting the lush agricultural regions of Iraq, settled the area around al-ণƯ ra and al- AnbƗr. The Tannjkh confederation, the predecessors of the Lakhmids, emerged in Iraq as a result of this wave of migration.10 This migration, along with the rise of the Sasanian dynasty occurring soon thereafter, laid the foundations for the Islamic conquest narrative to commence. As I indicated in the rst chapter, the rise of the Sasanians indicates a critical transition to the real history of Iran in the Islamic historical tradition. This is clearly evidenced by the difference in the depiction of the Sasanians versus their The opening of the drama 61 predecessors. However, what is true for the Persians is also true for the Arabs. For Hoyland shows that “Arab” history in Islamic historical memory appears to get going in earnest with this Arab migration, to the extent that the groups which formed the basis of the formative umma crystallized in its aftermath. Moreover, the migration set in motion processes which anticipated the Muslim conquest of the Near East by bringing the Arab tribes in closer contact with both the Roman and Iranian empires.11 In this latter regard, our Islamic sources appear to corroborate Roman/ Christian sources, as well as epigraphic evidence, which indicate the increasing presence of the Arabs in imperial affairs starting in the third century. All of our available evidence shows that the Romans and the Sasanians (from the inception of their regime) competed to bring the local Arab states and tribes of the Arabian peninsula and the Levant under their inuence through direct conquest, by appointing vassal rulers, and by forming strategic alliances.12 For their part, inscriptions from this period describe such vassalage relationships, but at the same time evince the growing power and self- condence of the Arabs. The most prominent example of these is the NamƗra funerary inscription of Imrnj’l-Qays located in southern Syria, which is written in old Arabic (but using Nabatean Aramaic script). In this text, Imrnj’l-Qays describes himself as “King of all the Arabs,” and mentions his association with the Roman Empire (and possibly the Sasanians as well).13 Modern scholars have debated whether this inscription and other epigraphic evidence for the widespread use of Arabic prior to the rise of Islam constitutes sufcient evidence that the pre-Islamic Arabs possessed any sense of an awareness of themselves as a people. In his foundational study on this question, G. E. Von Grunebaum argued that Islam effectuated a transforma- tion in which the Arabs of the JƗhiliyya went from being a disparate group of tribes possessing a common culture but lacking any sense of cohesion or solid- arity to a self- conscious political and social grouping of peoples possessing a sense of shared identity.14 Hoyland sees the beginning of Arab ethnogenesis emerging as a result of increasing contact between the Arabs and their imperial neighbors starting in the third century.15 At the same time, he cautions that the epigraphic record from the JƗhiliyya period “does not point unequivocally to an Arab identity,” but only “the ingredients of such—common language, literature and history—that suggests at least the makings of such identity.”16 In the most recent iteration of this debate, Fisher contends that the Arabs were keenly aware of their growing power vis- à-vis their imperial neighbors, and that the use of Arabic in inscriptions like NamƗra served as a self- conscious statement of Arab political integrity in the face of these imposing empires. Beyond that, Fisher echoes Hoyland’s assessment that the evidence does not permit us to denitively argue whether or not the Arabs possessed a sense of collective identity, at least in an ethnic or genealogical sense.17 However, from the standpoint of ‘Abbasid period historiography, we are dealing with an assortment of tribes that did indeed see themselves as a distinct people. Mirroring historical reality, the Islamic conquest narrative portrays the Arabs as becoming increasingly important in imperial affairs and politically self-con dent as we approach the rise of Islam. 62 The opening of the drama Yet, the stage for the narrative is rst set by the collision that ensued between the northwardly migration of Arab tribes and the rise of an aggressive Iranian empire bent on control of the Arabs and their lands. rڲaۉ -The conquest of al- MaysƗn and al Our rst denitive encounter between Arabs and Sasanians in the Islamic histor- ical tradition comes with ArdashƯr I’s campaigns against Iraq. Several sources mention that ArdashƯr conquered the old principality of al-Mays Ɨn (Greek: MesƝnƝ; Middle Persian: MƝshƗn)18 and established the Lakhmid client state at al-ণƯ ra in order to keep the local Arab tribes at bay, particularly those in the vicinity of al-ণƯ ra and al- AnbƗr, forcing those Arabs who did not want to submit to his authority to evacuate the area to the adjoining desert regions.19 I shall say more about the Lakhmids and historical depictions of their relations with the Sasanians in the following chapter. According to al-৫ abarƯ’s account, ArdashƯr launched a further expedition to the Arabian peninsula, annexing Baতrayn.20 Other sources, however, show that his campaign in the peninsula was more far- reaching, claiming that he subdued both ‘UmƗn and YamƗma in addition to Baতrayn.21 Although this latter material on ArdashƯr’s Arabian campaign may appear tenuous, it nonetheless reveals the efforts of early Muslim historians to put the Arabs on the map of Sasanian history early on. For example, with regard to one source’s portrayal of a unied resistance of Yemeni tribes to ArdashƯr’s invasion, Piacentini writes, “one may believe that the author allowed himself some legendary embellishments and an intentionally epic tone to give maximum emphasis to ‘Arabism’ and its warlike aspects, in a clearly arabocentric vision of history, typical of this period.”22 r (Hatra) the independent caravan city standing at the centerڲa ۉ-In AD 240, al of the Mesopotamian road system, fabled for its resistance to Trajan and then Hadrian, fell to ArdashƯr’s successor and son ShƗpnjr I (or perhaps to both father and son in a joint campaign).23 Inscriptions at Hatra speak of native Hatrans and the Arabs living there as two separate groups.24 From the standpoint of Islamic historical memory however, we are essentially dealing with an Arab enterprise, or one at least dominated by a strong Arab element. For example, al-৫ abarƯ and Miskawayh recognize one tradition that the ruler, al-ঋ ayzan (or al- Sanatrouq/al- SƗ৬irnjn), belonged to the BƗ JarmƗ, the native inhabitants of the region, yet both lean towards Ibn al- KalbƯ’s report that this ruler was an Arab of the QuঌƗ‘a con- federation, whose constituent tribes formed the base of his power.25 Echoing his source, Bal‘amƯ also states that al- ঋayzan was an Arab of the QuঌƗ‘a, while al- DƯnawarƯ, FirdawsƯ, and the NihƗyat al- irab similarly describe him as a Ghassa- nid.26 These sources embellish the legend of the Sasanian conquest of Hatra, which relates that ShƗpnjr and the daughter of al-ঋ ayzan, the princess al- NaঌƯra (MalƯka in some sources) fell in love with each other during the siege. Commu- nicating by secret messages, the princess offered to help ShƗpnjr conquer the city if he would agree to marry her. ShƗpnjr agreed, and through the sorcery of the princess (she had the Iranian king create a talisman: a silver collared dove whose The opening of the drama 63 leg was painted with menstrual blood from a blue- eyed virgin, which caused the walls of the city to go up in ames when it was released), ShƗpnjr conquered the city and killed al-ঋ ayzan. Al-৫ abarƯ relates that ShƗpnjr reduced the city to ruins, and massacred many of the QuঌƗ‘a as well as members of the Bannj ণulwƗn. In this context, he cites poetry lamenting the destruction of Hatra and ShƗpnjr’s killing of its people.27 Bal‘amƯ also describes the massacre of the Arabs, stating:

ShƗpnjr led a body of troops himself, and attacked al-ঋ ayzan, killing him. He then passed the sword to all those Arab soldiers who composed the gar- rison. Not a soul escaped. ShƗpnjr killed them all. Those who tried to save themselves by escaping through the opening of the wall were massacred by the troops which ShƗpnjr had posted there. These were Arabs of the desert, of the ণijƗz, Baতrayn, YamƗma, Syria, and of Yemen. There was not a single tribe which did not have some men in the fortress, and they were all killed. This was thus a calamity for all of the Arab tribes, and the history of this affair is preserved in the songs of the Arabs.28

The sources continue that the following morning, after the marriage had been consummated, the princess complained of discomfort from her pillow during the night, which was discovered to be caused by a myrtle- leaf scratching her. When a surprised ShƗpnjr asked how her father treated her, she responded by telling him of the decadent foods he fed her (egg yolks, cream, marrow, honey and the best wine), and the soft garments he gave her. Annoyed that she would betray her father despite such treatment, the king executed the princess by having her dragged to death by a wild horse.29 The account of ShƗpnjr’s conquest of Hatra and his affair with al- NaঌƯra, rich as it is in mythical imagery and legend, reveals many illuminating aspects about Islamic literature, particularly similarities with European folklore.30 Moreover, based on the sources’ emphasis on ShƗpnjr’s massacre of the Arabs of Hatra, one may conclude that this episode served as an early case of the Sasanians’ oppression of the Arabs.

The account of ShƗpnjr II’s campaign against the Arabs However, our most signicant early encounter of the Islamic conquest narrative comes with ShƗpnjr II’s punitive expedition against the Arabs, which he under- took as a result of the incursions of some tribes into the fertile districts of Iraq and southern Iran. Several of our akhbƗrƯs deal with ShƗpnjr II’s reign, highlight- ing his wars against foreign invaders. Al- ৫abarƯ, who provided the most compre- hensive description of ShƗpnjr’s campaign against the Arabs, wrote that that the Bannj TamƯm, ‘Abd al-Qays, and Bakr b. WƗ’il tribes, driven by desperation from their harsh way of life, crossed the sea from Baতrayn in order to plunder the fertile areas of FƗrs (southern Iran), and turn it into pasture. (Other sources mention the IyƗd as being prominent among these raiders.) ShƗpnjr was unable to respond immediately because of his tender age, but upon reaching manhood, assembled an elite cavalry of 1,000 troops. He went on a retaliatory campaign 64 The opening of the drama against the Arabs, for which his unrelenting slaughter and cruelty is emphasized. He moved rst against those Arabs in FƗrs. He then crossed the gulf, subduing the tribes in his path as he marched through Baতrayn and YamƗma. His expedi- tion led him as far west as the vicinity of Medina. Al-৫ abarƯ related that ShƗpnjr would have further opportunity to ght the Arabs in his subsequent wars with the Romans, with whom some Arab tribes had allied themselves.31 Modern historians have debated the veracity of al-৫ abarƯ’s report with regards to the extent of ShƗpnjr’s campaign.32 However, regardless of the details, the fact that Al-৫ abarƯ and other chroniclers underlined the scope of this expedition indi- cates the seminal importance which this episode held for them. Al-৫ abarƯ’s rendition appears, if not an outright justication of the Arabs’ actions, then at least a sympathetic explanation. According to his account,

The lands of the Arabs were the closest of the lands to FƗrs, and these Arabs were amongst the neediest of the nations for something to provide them with sustenance and with lands. This was because of the wretchedness of their condition and the hardship of their way of life. So a great gathering of them crossed the sea (in order to settle the lands of FƗrs).33

Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ similarly explained,

The Arabs, whose country is the closest to those of Iraq and FƗrs, were during this period, more than any other nation, in need to emigrate and to search for booty through cutting with the sword and the point of the lance because of the scarcity of their lifestyle.34

Both of these explanations emphasize the Arabs’ straitened circumstances in the unforgiving desert, while they insinuate clashes with the more comfortable life of the inhabitants of the Sasanian empire, who occupy the lush, agricultural regions of southern Iraq and FƗrs. In this context, several historians specify the SawƗd region of Iraq occupied by the IyƗd, so named for its dense vegetation which appears black when viewed at a distance from the barren desert south of it.35 The historians thus highlight the Arabs’ desperate conditions in order to give meaning to their actions. Although both al-৫ abarƯ and al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ recognize the damage which the Arabs had wrought, their statements above express the notion that it was only the Arabs’ poverty which compelled them to raid the Iranian lands, not any inherent evil in their character. This idea that the Arabs were compelled by their poverty to migrate across the gulf and to cause the damage that they had puts into perspective ShƗpnjr’s reaction, which the sources depict as cruelly excessive. Below is al-৫ abarƯ’s report of ShƗpnjr’s campaign against the Arabs, which underlines his wanton destruction of them:

He commanded them [his troops] to proceed in following his order and forbade them to spare any of the Arabs whom they encountered, or to go The opening of the drama 65 astray in order to seize booty. Then he led them forth, and fell upon those Arabs who were pasturing FƗrs while they were exposed. He wrought the most evil slaughter upon them, reduced others to the harshest captivity, and put the remainder of them to ight. Then he crossed the sea with his troops and arrived at al- Kha৬৬. He marched through the land of al- Baতrayn. He killed its people, and did not accept any ransom, nor did he go astray to take any spoils. He then turned around and came to Hajar, where there were people from the Bedouin of TamƯm, Bakr b. WƗ’il, and ‘Abd al-Qays. He spread slaughter amongst them, and shed so much of their blood that it owed like a torrent of rain, such that those of them who ed knew that not even a cave in a mountain nor an island in the sea would save them. Then he turned to the lands of ‘Abd al- Qays and destroyed all the people there except for those who ed into the desert sands. He next came to al- YamƗma, and slaughtered the people there in the same manner. He did not pass by any of the Arabs’ springs without damaging them, nor any of their wells without lling them in. He then came within the vicinity of Medina. He killed the Arabs he found and took captives. Then he turned towards the lands of Bakr and Taghlib. He killed the Arabs he found there, took captives, and lled in their springs. Until he died, ShƗpnjr greedily pursued killing the Arabs and tearing out the shoulders of their leaders. This is reason they named him Dhnj’l-AktƗf (the possessor of the shoulders).36

Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s description of these events, which closely follows al- ৫abarƯ’s rendition, emphasizes similar themes. He wrote,

The only importance for ShƗpnjr was to obtain revenge (intiqƗm) on the closest of his enemies on the fringes of his empire, and these were the Arabs. His fury for them increased as they increased, and his anger for them owed like blood.

After describing ShƗpnjr’s preparations for war, al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s account continues:

He rst threw himself upon the IyƗd of the borders of the SawƗd, until all there was left was decaying bones. None of them survived except a small band which reached Roman territory. Then he crossed the sea and arrived at al-Kha ৬৬. He put the people of al- Baতrayn to the sword, tearing them to pieces. He took no ransom and did not stop for booty. He then continued on his route until he arrived at Hajar, where there resided some Bedouin from TamƯm, Bakr b. WƗ’il, and ‘Abd al-Qays. He shed blood there which raged like a torrent of rain. He then came to the lands of ‘Abd al-Qays, upon whom he cast a terrible torment by extracting their shoulders. He further came to the land of al- YamƗma, which he put under his administration. On his way, he did not pass a spring of water of the Arabs without lling it in, so that no well remained for them that was not destroyed. He then returned 66 The opening of the drama to the lands of Bakr and Taghlib which lay between his kingdom of Iran and the Syrian forts of the Romans. He inicted upon them the damage of fate and divine decree, and ignited amongst them the re of a desiccated tree. For the rest of the Arabs, he brought wide- scale destructive, annihilating battle to their homes and places of refuge. He killed so many Arabs and extracted fty thousand of their shoulders, that he was nicknamed Dhnj’l- AktƗf.37

These accounts’ portrayal of these events, contrasting between the stereotypical tyranny of the Persian monarch versus the poverty of the Bedouin, is a clear pro- jection of the discourse of inter- civilizational competition. These historians applied literary and rhetorical tropes to help underline this vilifying depiction of ShƗpnjr. For example, in addition to his wanton killing, his lling up of water springs sounds particularly draconian, as the Arabs were so limited on this resource, and its removal was tantamount to execution. At the same time, ShƗpnjr’s commonly recognized nickname, Dhnj’l-AktƗf, the possessor of the shoulders, which alludes to his inhumane practice of removing prisoners’ shoul- ders, is a visceral illustration of the excessive cruelty with which ShƗpnjr treated the Arabs. Whether ShƗpnjr actually carried out these measures, as modern scholars have debated, is not relevant for this study’s purposes.38 Rather, what concerns us is the legacy which ShƗpnjr left in the imagination of the Muslim historians, and the fact that they chose to underline these actions to demonstrate ShƗpnjr’s excess in dealing with the Arab tribes. Along these lines, stylistic embellishments in these texts, such as the Arabs’ blood owing like a “torrent of ’Ɨڲrain,” or ShƗpnjr’s inicting the damage of “fate and divine decree” (al- qa wa’l-qadar, which is the Islamic terminology for predestination) help complete the illustration of destruction which the authors intended to highlight. The Arabs on the other hand, at this point appear in these accounts as a far cry from the united, conquering Muslim armies of later centuries. They seem powerless to resist the might of ShƗpnjr, and this makes his campaigns against them appear even more sinister. In what follows, I will further discuss the implications of this portrayal of ShƗpnjr’s cruelty in the context of the embellished accounts of his meeting with the Arab elder.

The momentous meeting This contrast underlined in the sources between the Iranian king in his excessive cruelty and the vulnerable Arabs comes together most vividly in two reports of a meeting, occurring in the midst of this campaign, between the king and an Arab elder, conveyed by al-Mas‘ njdƯ and al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ respectively. It is impossible to determine the origin of these accounts. Based on the subject material, an edu- cated inference would lead to the conclusion of Ibn al- KalbƯ as the common source, as both historians cite this akhbƗrƯ elsewhere in their texts.39 Ibn KhurradƗdhbih is also a possible candidate on this chain of transmission since both authors rely heavily on this author’s Ta’rƯkh for their accounts of The opening of the drama 67 pre- Islamic history.40 In al- Mas‘njdƯ’s account, which is the more descriptive of the two, ShƗpnjr travels to the land of Baতrayn, where he enacts a horric slaugh- ter on the Bannj TamƯm residing there. Al-Mas‘ njdƯ relates how in the course of his campaign, ShƗpnjr comes across the 300-year- old sheikh, ‘Amr b. TamƯm b. Marr. Al- Mas‘njdƯ sets the stage for this epic meeting with a scene in which a group of TamƯm are hurriedly preparing to ee their dwellings in advance of ShƗpnjr, who is hot on their pursuit. The tribesmen had placed the old sheikh in a basket, intending to carry him in their ight. Yet, ‘Amr refused to be taken along, and insisted that he be left behind amongst their dwellings so as not to hinder his fellow tribesmen. He explained to them, “I will maybe die today or tomorrow. What remains for me in the expanse of age? Perhaps God will save you through me from the attack of this king, who is bearing down upon the Arabs.”41 The tribesmen therefore left ‘Amr behind. The following excerpt details al- Mas‘njdƯ’s account of ShƗpnjr’s arrival with his army at the recently evacuated TamƯm encampment, and his dialogue with sheikh ‘Amr:

When the horses of ShƗpnjr approached the dwellings, they [the Sasanian troops] saw that the people had left, and they saw the basket [holding ‘Amr] hanging from a tree. ‘Amr heard the neighing and footsteps of the horses, and the muttering of the men. He called out to them in a weak voice, so they took him, and brought him to ShƗpnjr. When he was put in the presence of the king, the latter noticed the obvious signs of old age and the passing of years upon him. ShƗpnjr said to him, “Who are you, oh old sheikh?” He responded, “I am ‘Amr ibn TamƯm b. Marr, and I have reached in years what you see. The people have ed from you because of your excessiveness in killing and the severity of your punishment of them. I have chosen to die at your hands so that those of my people who have escaped may live. Perhaps then God, the Lord of the Heavens and Earth, will grant them freedom from suffering at your hands, and will avert you in his way from killing them. I would like to ask you something if you would permit me.” “Let’s hear it,” said ShƗpnjr. ‘Amr said to him, “What is it which has carried you to kill your subjects and the men of the Arabs?” ShƗpnjr responded, “I kill them for what they have committed in taking from my lands and from the people of my kingdom.” To this, ‘Amr said, “Although they have done this, you have not acted as an upright guardian towards them. When you arrived, they stopped the wicked- ness they were causing out of reverence (or fear) for you.”42

At this point in the narrative, the dialogue transitions to a kerygmatic conversa- tion between representatives of Arab and Persian civilization. For the Sasanian king ShƗpnjr, pressed by sheikh ‘Amr to give him the real reason for his slaugh- ter of the Arabs, reveals to him:

“I kill them because we kings of Persia have found in our stored knowledge and in what has come down from the reports of our most ancient ancestors that the Arabs will be granted victory over us, and will be victorious over 68 The opening of the drama our rule [‘alƗ mulkinƗ].” ‘Amr asked, “Are you sure on this matter, or do you think that it’s only a possibility?” ShƗpnjr said, “I am sure of it, and it is inevitable that it will be so.” So ‘Amr said, “If you know that it be so, then why are you being so evil to the Arabs? By God, if you spare the Arabs, all of them, and treat them well, then they will reward your people with their municence when they come to power [‘ind idƗlat al- dawla lahum]. If you preserve them, then they will reward you when power comes to them, and they will preserve you and your people. If the matter is true as you say, then this is the most judicious course of action. If the matter is false, then why hurry to sin and shed the blood of your subjects?” ShƗpnjr replied, “The matter is true and so it shall be for you Arabs. You have advised well in your speech.” So ShƗpnjr granted the people protection [amƗn], sheathed his sword, and stopped killing them.43

Thus, in al-Mas‘ njdƯ’s account of this meeting, ShƗpnjr, after being rebuked by sheikh ‘Amr for his cruelty against the Arabs, recognizes the inevitable change (dawla) in power that will occur between the Persians and Arabs at a future date, which is a reference to the Muslim conquest of Iran. Yet he does not refer to it as such. -a) who conۊƯ܈In al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s account, it is an eloquent old woman (‘ajnjz fa fronts the king. However, the intended effect is the same. His report of this meeting proceeds as follows:

The swords of ShƗpnjr had not yet been quenched by the blood of the Arabs and he was not nished devouring them when an eloquent old woman stood in his way and shouted out to him. Now it was the custom of kings to stop when someone shouted out to them. So he stopped for her. She said to him, “Oh king, if you have come seeking vengeance, then surely you have achieved it and then some! Indeed, you have spread death amongst the Arab tribes. But know that there will be revenge [qi܈Ɨ܈an] for this, even if it takes some time.” So ShƗpnjr commanded to stop killing the Arabs. It is said that the woman intended by her words the Prophet (SAW) and his revenge for the Arabs upon the Persians [iqti܈Ɨ܈ahu lil-‘Arab min al- Furs]. The news of his emergence had been transmitted down the genera- tions for such a long time before his birth that no-one knows whence it originated. ShƗpnjr did what he did out of fear of the Arabs. For he had heard ,[al-‘Arab ۊfrom the wind blowing from the direction of the Arabs [habnjb rƯ of the latter’s rise and their conquering of the Persians’ rule [mulkihim] in his [the Prophet’s] name.44

Sadan has effectively shown how such dialogues between kings and humble Bedouin pervade Islamic literature, underscoring competing ideals which had led to tension within the Islamic world, such as between nomadic and sedentary lifestyle, Arab and Iranian culture, hierarchy/kingship and equality, and decadence and asceticism.45 With my discussion of the “Arab versus ‘ajam” The opening of the drama 69 discourse in the previous chapter, I analyzed how these themes of contrast were particularly pervasive in scholarship and literature of the early ‘Abbasid era. In what follows I analyze this anecdote of ShƗpnjr and the elder through the lens of this discourse, while showing how it ts as an opening chapter in the broader scheme of the Islamic conquest narrative. We begin with the depiction of ShƗpnjr. When compared to the other sections in the Islamic historical tradition on this king, the portrayal of him as a tyrant appears at odds. Reecting what was most likely the KhudƗynƗma tradition, the Islamic sources depict his 70-plus- year reign as a great success, and preserve various examples of his justice, courage, magnanimity, and prudent administra- tion. ShƗpnjr’s destiny for a long successful reign is foreshadowed symbolically in the sources from before his birth, through the crowning of his mother’s stomach while she was still pregnant with him.46 The chroniclers lauded the ingenuity of the king, who in his early years had constructed an additional bridge to deal with the overcrowding of trafc on the Tigris.47 With the exception of his cruelty against the Arabs, the sources record in admiration ShƗpnjr’s intrepid battles against external foes, particularly the Romans. In this context, we read of ShƗpnjr’s daring venture in which he entered the Roman empire as a spy, only to be discovered by the emperor and imprisoned. The story goes that the Romans then took the captive ShƗpnjr on his conquest against the vulnerable Iranian realm. In the midst of this campaign, however, the brave ShƗpnjr managed to escape and rally his troops to victory.48 And yet, in the historians’ depiction of his treatment of the Arabs, he appears as an arrogant tyrant. Indeed, the theme of ShƗpnjr’s “excess” in killing the Arabs pervading al-৫ abarƯ and al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s accounts is likewise prominent in other Islamic sources which describe this campaign. For example, Miskawayh accused ShƗpnjr of saraf (excess/intemperance) in reference to his slaughter of the Arabs, and wrote that he “did not limit himself to take vengeance upon only those [Arabs] who committed offence or transgressed his bounds, but he even killed the innocent, and shed the blood of those who were not accountable for any sin [against him].”49 Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ for his part depicted ShƗpnjr’s campaign against the Arabs as a product of his haughtiness (‘utnjw) and insolence (jabriyya), traits which he argues came about because the people of his kingdom spoiled him in his youth.50 In the framework of the meeting, the elder in both accounts likewise castigates the king for his extreme brutality towards the Arabs, and rebukes him for killing them, despite the fact that he had already removed the threat which they posed. Echoing the notion that it was only the Arabs’ desperate situation that caused them to invade Sasanian territory in the rst place, the sheikh ‘Amr scolds the king for his isrƗka fƯ’l-qatl ([your] excess in killing) and his shiddat ‘aqnjbatika (severity of [your] punishment) towards his subjects (ra‘ayyatika, lit- erally “your ock”). The intended lesson here is that a benevolent sovereign would have treated the Arabs’ infraction with sympathy for their plight – a ruler has the responsibility to take into account the condition of those who are weaker than him, and not slaughter them out of anger, just because he possesses the power to do so. 70 The opening of the drama However, as both reports emphasize, ShƗpnjr is unrelenting in his wrath and desire for revenge against the Arabs, which he gratied by his wanton killing of them. Indeed, it is possible that the emphasis on ShƗpnjr’s overindulgence in killing the Arab occupiers of his lands is a projection of the classic stereotype of the Iranians’ bukhl (stinginess). The works of Ibn Qutayba and al-J Ɨতi਌, espe- cially the latter’s KitƗb al- BukhalƗ’ (Book of Misers) provide entertaining, dis- paraging anecdotes of the alleged stinginess of the kuttƗb. In this context, one can compare ShƗpnjr, in his avaricious treatment of the Arabs to the grievous exemplars of bukhl described by al-J Ɨতi਌, like the man who refused al-J Ɨতi਌ and his friends refuge in his protected garden during a scorching afternoon,51 or more poignantly, like the miserly banker who mercilessly beat his starving servants, suspecting that they had stolen a mixture which aids in the digestion of food!52 In the contemporaneous discourse, the alleged stinginess of the Persians con- trasted with the proverbial generosity and hospitality of the Bedouin Arabs, a theme I shall explore in detail in Chapter 6. Furthermore, ShƗpnjr’s wrath against the Arabs is redolent of the grudge alleg- edly borne by the so- called Shu‘njbƯs and the kuttƗb towards the Arabs. As I alluded to in the previous chapter, al- JƗতi਌ and Ibn Qutayba saw the kuttƗb’s nostalgic admiration for the pre- Islamic Persians as a reection of their hatred of Islam. Al- JƗতi਌ further argued that the reason for their animosity against the Arabs lies in the fact that it was the Arabs who brought Islam, which superseded both the faith and state of their ancestors. This sentiment can be seen in the fol- lowing statement of his:

For most of those who are suspicious of Islam, this feeling has come to them by way of the Shu‘njbiyya. For if one hates something, then one hates its people, and if one hates that language [Arabic], then one hates that island [meaning the Arabian peninsula]. These feelings continue to change him until he casts off his Islam, in as much as the Arabs [whom he hates] are the ones who brought it and they were the predecessors.53

In another place, he claimed that “the Shu‘njbƯs and the ƖzƗdmardiyya [“freemen,” referring to the Iranian secretarial class] hate the family of the Prophet (SAW) and his followers who conquered [their ancestors’ lands], killed the Majnjs, and brought Islam.”54 Herein lies the perceived link between ShƗpnjr and the contemporaneous alleged haters of the Arabs in Islamic historical memory. For just as the latter supposedly bore a secret grudge against the Arabs for conquering their ancestors’ kingdom, similarly it is revealed in both accounts that the real cause of ShƗpnjr’s fury towards the Arabs was not simply their inva- sion of his lands, but rather his awareness and apprehension of the preordained change in fortune (dawla) that they would bring towards the progeny of his dynasty and his nation. I will discuss further below the incorporation and impli- cation of the language of dawla in the context of this meeting. Thus, ShƗpnjr II, as he is portrayed in Islamic historiography, embodies the view of the Sasanians that was commonplace in early ‘Abbasid society of rulers The opening of the drama 71 who were just on the whole, but awed in many respects. In ShƗpnjr’s case, it was his excessive brutality towards the Arabs, which mars his otherwise noble image. At the conclusion of the meeting, ShƗpnjr’s scruples take over, as he is convinced by the elder to refrain from any more killing (at least for the time being). Opposing the mighty Iranian king is the feeble Arab elder. The aged sheikh ‘Amr and the anonymous old woman serve as symbolic representations of the Arab peoples of this time as they were conceived in the early Islamic historical tradition. Just as the akhbƗrƯs portrayed the Arab tribes of this era as divided and politically marginal, a faint echo from the unied conquering armies who would one day turn the tables and conquer their oppressors, so too do the weak old man and woman only serve as harbingers of the Arab champions who would deantly challenge the Sasanian king at his court, bearing the message of the Prophet, and later defeat his armies in battle. At the same time, the elders’ standing up to the Iranian tyrant, despite their own enfeebled condition, is a strong indicator of their fortitude. Thus, ‘Amr’s self- sacricing insistence to be left behind, suspended in a basket so as to delay the Iranians and save his own people, shows not only his own bravery, but also the seless commitment of the Arabs toward their fellow tribesmen. The old man awaiting the footsteps of the Iranians’ horses, so inrm from age that he has to sit in a hanging basket is a particularly evocative image, which is clearly intended to elicit the admiration of the reader. For her part, the old woman in al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s account, who dares to call out to and threaten the king in his tracks appears equally courageous. I will have a great deal more to say about the theme of Bedouin virtues in the ensuing chapters. Moreover, in addition to their resolve, these accounts provide these elders a certain dignied eloquence, which is only enhanced by the illustration of their enfeebled state. In the presence of the intimidating king and his soldiers, the elders of both accounts are shown to remain steadfast in their rebuke and warn- ings. They present a cogent argument, and succeed in instructing the proud ,aۊƯ܈sovereign of the error of his ways. Indeed, the old woman is described as fa meaning “eloquent” (in Arabic). This portrayal evokes the commonplace dis- course of the famed eloquence of the Bedouin Arabs pervading early Islamic scholarship. For several Muslim scholars argued that despite their harsh lifestyle, the Arabs possessed a degree of cultivation on par with the other civilizations, as witnessed through the beauty of the Arabic language, as well as through their skill in poetry and oratory. The litterateur Abnj ণayyƗn al- TawতƯdƯ (d. 1023), for example, wrote the following in praise of the Arabic language:

We have listened to many languages and have not found among them anything that can compare to the clarity of Arabic. By this I mean the open- ings which are in its words, the space which we nd in between their letters, the interval between their emissions, and the balance which we experience in the patterns of Arabic.55

With respect to oratory, Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih proclaimed that “the Arabs’ speech is the most noble, splendid and eloquent. It is also the most succinct and clearest of 72 The opening of the drama manner.”56 Similarly, al- JƗতi਌ claimed that Arabic poetry is rhythmic and har- monious unlike the poetry of the ‘ajam.57 He likewise asserted that whereas Persian public speakers have to contemplate and study what they are going to say before making their speeches, for Arab poets, the words come spontan- eously, as if they are inspired. He explained that this is because the Arabs’ pre- carious life on the move has endowed them with the ability to improvise. It is thus not necessary for them to ponder long or to seek aid from notes or manuals.58 In the context of this exposition of the Shu‘njbiyya, he further asserts:

If you were to take the hand of a Shu‘njbƯ and bring him to the lands of the pure Bedouin Arabs, which are the source of complete eloquence in Arabic a al- tƗmma], and brought him to a Bedouin poet of great genius, orۊƗ܈al- fa] an eloquent orator, then he would know what you said was the truth, and he would witness the proof with his own eyes.59

Thus, in the context of the meeting, ‘Amr and the old woman appear as models of Bedouin eloquence, serving as mouthpieces for our historians to project a contemporaneous viewpoint. Through their words, they guide both ShƗpnjr and the reader, instructing both with rhetoric from the ‘Abbasid period rendered into an eloquent dialectic. We will see in later chapters that in terms of the develop- ment of the plot of our story, these elders serve as the rst in a series of Arab ambassadors to the Sasanians, who would become increasingly assertive as the Arab peoples grew in power and importance.

The theme of Dawla The world is made up of rotations [duwal]. For each king there is an allotted span of time.60

As I have shown, in the description of ShƗpnjr’s campaign against the Arabs, and especially the portrayal of his meeting with the Arab elder, the Sasanian king comes off as a malevolent oppressor, greedy for the blood of the Arabs. ‘Amr/ the old woman, on the other hand, appear brave, dignied, and eloquent in the face of the Iranian king’s tyranny, despite his/her inrmed condition. What was the use of this embellishment however? Why did al-Mas‘ njdƯ and al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ describe in such detail a meeting between the Sasanian ruler and an Arab sheikh(a)? I argue that this episode serves as the opening of our kerygmatic story explicating the Arab conquest of Iran. At this point in the narrative, the Arabs are divided and unable to defend themselves against the might of the Iranian jug- gernaut which is at the apex of its power. Yet, the sense one derives from the narrative is that something is brewing between these two peoples. This feeling is conveyed not only through moralistic projections upon ShƗpnjr and the Arabs, but is also reinforced by direct, apocalyptic statements to this end by the prot- agonists of both accounts. With this dialogue, the reader has the feeling that one is exiting our chronicles’ sequential presentation of mundane year-to-year events The opening of the drama 73 to deal with an issue that has more universal, millenarian implications. In al- Mas‘njdƯ’s account, after ‘Amr presses ShƗpnjr on the issue, the king confesses that the real reason that he has treated the Arabs so harshly is that the ancient Persian sources of knowledge have preordained the rise of the Arabs and their conquest of the Iranians. Is the wise old sheikh also privy to this outcome? Although al- Mas‘njdƯ does not say so directly, he does provide some stylistic hints pointing in this direction, such as with ‘Amr’s repeatedly invoking the name AllƗh, underlining (quite anachronistically) his monotheistic leanings. In one of these cases, he even proclaims, “God, the Lord of the Heavens which is a conspicuous ,(ڲand Earth” (AllƗh, Malik al- samƗwƗt wa’l-ar Qur’anic injunction.61 Also, it should be understood as no accident that ‘Amr is a sheikh of TamƯm, which would become one of the foremost tribes in the formative Islamic period, including in its ranks the legendary hero of the con- quests, al- Qa‘qƗ‘ b. ‘Amr, among other notable gures. Indeed, as the son of his tribe’s progenitor TamƯm himself, ‘Amr serves as a temporal bridge linking the ancient Arabs with those who would play a pivotal role in the rise of Islam. The old sheikh, however, in his counsel to the king, leaves the question open by simply stating that if these events do indeed unfold, then it would be better to spare the Arabs now, and treat them well, if he wants them to return the favor upon their rise to power. Yet, couched in the prudent, seemingly innocu- ous advice of the sheikh is a veiled threat, even at this early stage, that the Arabs will one day subdue the Iranians, so the latter had better treat the Arabs with dignity. Moreover, this dialogue embellishes the notion of dawla, as witnessed by the use of this term as well as variants upon the root, dƗl-wƗw-lƗm. ShƗpnjr rst con- fesses al-‘Arab satudƗl ‘alaynƗ (the Arabs will be granted victory upon us), before the old man says ‘ind idƗlat al- dawla lahum (upon their turn) in reference to the Arabs’ rise to power. In order to comprehend the signicance of this usage, it serves us to provide a brief background into the history and etymology of this term. Dawla literarily means a “turn.” Its earliest references conveyed a period of success in power or in an ofce. It was also used to indicate the vicis- situdes of fate.62 The rst widespread application of dawla as an indicator of political change comes from the ‘Abbasid revolution. Through their dawla, the ‘Abbasids and their supporters claimed to be “returning” to the original pristine Islam of the Prophet and the formative Muslim community, which the usurping Umayyads had corrupted with their secular, tyrannical rule. In order to sub- stantiate this ideology, the ‘Abbasids patronized a vision of historiography that underlined their ancestors’ inuential position in the formative umma and their close relationship with the Prophet. For example, among the numerous traditions within our chronicles bearing the conspicuous stamp of ‘Abbasid propaganda is the widely circulated report of the Prophet’s alleged nomination of his uncle ‘AbbƗs b. ‘Abd al- Mu৬৬alib (the progenitor of the ‘Abbasid dynasty) as his heir.63 The sources also abound in tales of miraculous signs, visions, and dreams as well as anachronistic proofs which convey a sense of apocalyptic predestination regarding the ‘Abbasid revolution.64 74 The opening of the drama The ‘Abbasid du‘Ɨt (revolutionary propagandists) originally preached that their dawla would be THE TURN—by which they meant that they were usher- ing in an age of harmony and prosperity such that there would be no need for further revolutions. However, as the decades passed, and it had become clear that the ‘Abbasids were not going to bring about the millenarian order that they had originally propagated, dawla devolved to simply indicate the ‘Abbasid “house” or “dynasty,” and eventually came to be co- opted by other dynasties that would soon emerge. At the same time, dawla also acquired a broader, more generic connotation, indicating a predestined change in mulk between peoples and nations.65 It is in this sense that al-Mas‘ njdƯ, through the voice of ‘Amr, plays with the term dawla to underline the divinely fated “turn” from the Iranian Sasa- nians to the Muslim Arabs. Indeed, the theme of dynastic “turns” between the Persians and Arabs is commonplace in early Islamic historiography and liter- ature. One notable example can be seen with the following oft-cited speech in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle by Qaত৬aba b. ShabƯb, the ‘Abbasid revolutionary com- mander, to his KhurƗsƗnƯ troops, prior to their engagement with the enemy Umayyads:

Oh people of KhurƗsƗn, this land used to belong to your forefathers. They were granted victory over their enemies because of their justice and good behavior, until they changed and acted tyrannically. So God became angry with them and took away their power, empowering over them the lowliest nation to share the earth with them. They took their country, slept with their women and enslaved their children. Yet they governed with justice, fullled their contracts, and aided the oppressed. But then they too changed their ways, ruled oppressively and brought fear to the pious members of the Prophet’s family. So now God has empowered you over them so that He may take revenge [yantaqam] on them through you.66

This speech is a classic specimen of ‘Abbasid propaganda, as it emphasizes (albeit without the use of the term, dawla) the transfer of power from the Irani- ans to the Arabs, and then to the HƗshimites and their KhurƗsƗnƯ allies. It also stresses the notion that dynasties fall through their own agency; it was the Sasa- nians and then the Umayyads’ tyranny which displeased God, and brought about their destruction. To this end, the victory of the new ruling enterprise is framed in terms of divine retribution for the former’s unjust rule. The theme of turning between the Iranians and Arabs is likewise a prominent theme for Ibn Qutayba. l al-‘Arab, he lists reasons why the Arabs’ rule (mulk) is better thanڲIn his Fa that of the Persians. First among these was that the foundations of the Arabs’ rule lie in the revelation of the Prophet, whereas the Persians’ kingdom was based merely on conquest and plunder. He also argues that it is better to be al- nƗsikh, the replacers, meaning, the Arabs; versus al- mansnjkh, i.e., those who are replaced, meaning the Persians.67 And so, it is the case with al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s report of the meeting as well. In apocalyptic language, the old woman foretells that the Arabs will take revenge The opening of the drama 75 (qi܈Ɨ܈an) on the Iranians, even if it takes some time – an obvious reference to the Islamic conquest which was several centuries off. Moreover, whereas al- Mas‘njdƯ’s account vaguely refers to the change in fortune that was to occur between the Arabs and the Iranians, al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ tells us directly that the old woman intended through her rebuke the rise of the Prophet. In fact, we are informed that she was part of a line of transmission predicting the rise of the Prophet, and that the news of his emergence had been passed down for so long that its origin was unknown, thus legitimizing the rise of Islam by indicating that it was known among peoples of remote antiquity. Similarly to al- Mas‘njdƯ, al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ also suggested that ShƗpnjr was aware of this outcome, as he wrote that the true motive behind ShƗpnjr’s actions was his fear of the “wind blowing from -al-‘Arab), i.e., the alleged rumors eman ۊthe direction of the Arabs” (habnjb rƯ ating from Arabia predicting the rise of an Arabian Prophet and the Arabs’ taking of the Iranians’ rule (mulkihim).

Conclusion In what has preceded, I have argued that the Islamic conquest narrative is framed by a northward migration of Arab tribes and the rise of an aggressive Iranian dynasty. In this context, I have attempted to show that early Islamic historical portrayals of ShƗpnjr II’s retributive campaign against the Arabs serve as the opening chapter. These depictions highlight the oppression and avarice of the otherwise just Sasanian king in his excessive punishment of the Arab tribes. This theme is prominently conveyed in an apocryphal meeting between the king and the old sheikh in al- Mas‘njdƯ’s account, and the anonymous old woman in al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s chronicle. In the reports of these meetings, the two opposing charac- ters function as symbolic contrasts – the king representing the hubris, oppression, and bukhl of the Iranian nobility, versus the elder who despite his/her enfeebled state signies the virtues of fortitude, eloquence, piety, and wisdom that scholars of the early ‘Abbasid caliphate associated with the Arabs of the JƗhiliyya. The projection of such a formulaic contrast, along with seemingly clairvoyant predic- tions of the rise of Islam and the Arab conquest served to validate the change in fortune (dawla) between these two peoples, which was still centuries off. In this way, the dialogue between ShƗpnjr and the sheikh serves as an instructive lesson (‘ibra), referring the reader to the starting point where the Sasanians rst erred, and showing how the Arabs t into this equation.

Notes 1 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 521. 2 See pp. 73–74 for a brief history and etymology of this term. 3 This legend is rooted in the Avesta, which describes how the monster Aži DahƗka is killed by ĬraƝtaona (Middle Persian: FarƯdnjn). It also appears throughout the Zoroas- trian Pahlavi literature, including the MƝnǀg-i Khrad, the Bundahishn, and the DƝnkard. The latter text describes the evil king DahƗk as a TƗj, meaning Arab, who is defeated and fettered to Mount DemƗvand by the victorious FarƯdnjn. See P. O. 76 The opening of the drama Skjærvø, “AždahƗ in Old and Middle Iranian,” EIr, 1987. Regarding the Islamic sources, FirdawsƯ (I, 39–84) likewise provides a heavily embellished portrait of an Arab ঋaততƗk. See also al-৫ abarƯ, I, 201–210; Bal‘amƯ, I, 115–117; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 17–35; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 151; al- DƯnawarƯ, 6–7; Miskawayh, I, 62–64; Djalal Khaleghi- Motlagh, “AždahƗ in Persian Literature,” EIr, 1987. 4 FirdawsƯ, I, 88–101. 5 FirdawsƯ, II, 31–38; Bal‘amƯ, I, 465; al- DƯnawarƯ, 15. Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 603) similarly wrote that God gave Kay KƗvus and his retinue the power to ascend to the clouds, but then took it away, so that all died except for him. 6 This account exists in several variants, some of which include the romance between Kay KƗvus and the king of Yemen’s daughter. See FirdawsƯ, II, 1–14, 17–25; al- ৫abarƯ, I, 603–604; Bal‘amƯ, I, 465–466; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 156–163; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 153; Miskawayh, I, 72. 7 See p. 104. 8 FirdawsƯ, V, 39–40. 9 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 158. 10 Some sources state that internecine wars among the tribes triggered this migration. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 744–750; Bal‘amƯ, II, 1–9; Miskawayh, I, 89–90. Other texts point to a natural disaster, namely the collapse of the Ma’rib dam, as the initial cause. See al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 380–383; ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 74; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 203ff.; Ibn Qutayba, al- Ma‘Ɨrif, 357. Baতrayn as a historical region corresponded approxi- mately to the area between Qatar and Kuwait. See Derek Kennet, “The Decline of Eastern Arabia in the Sasanian Period,” Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy 18 (2007), 46–47; YƗqnjt b. ދAbd AllƗh al-ণ amawƯ, Mu‘jam al-buld Ɨn (5 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al-ৡƗ dir, N. D.), I, 346–349. 11 “Arab Kings, Arab Tribes, and the Beginnings of Arab Historical Memory in Late Roman Epigraphy,” in From Hellenism to Islam: Cultural and Linguistic Change in the Roman Near East, eds. Hannah Cotton, Robert Hoyland, Jonathan Price, and David Wasserstein, 374–400 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009). 12 The Romans and Sasanians’ dynamic relationship with the Arabs in the context of their imperial competition is a widely researched topic. Two of the most prominent studies in recent years include Greg Fisher’s edited volume, Arabs and Empires before Islam, and his monograph, Between Empires: Arabs, Romans and Sasanians in Late Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). A notable trend in scholar- ship on the Roman Empire is to compare Rome’s relationship with the eastern barbar- ians (i.e., the Arabs on their borders) with that of the Germanic tribes. See Hoyland, “Arab Kings, Arab Tribes”; Fisher, Between Empires, 80–83. Regarding the Sasani- ans, several scholars have analyzed the latters’ effort to control the Indian Ocean maritime trade through the Persian Gulf and the caravan routes across the Arabian peninsula by constructing port towns and citadels on both coasts of the gulf, and by subjecting or making alliances with the tribes of the interior. See Kennet, “The Decline of Eastern Arabia in the Sasanian Period”; Touraj Daryaee, “The Persian Gulf Trade in Late Antiquity,” Journal of World History 14, 1, (2003): 1–16; David White- house, “Sasanian Maritime Activity,” in The Indian Ocean in Antiquity, ed. J. Reade, 339–349 (London: Routledge, 1996); David Whitehouse and Andrew Williamson, “Sasanian Maritime Trade,” Iran 11 (1973): 29–49; J. C. Wilkinson, “The Julanda of Oman,” The Journal of Oman Studies 1 (1975): 98–99; “Arab-Persian Land Relation- ships in Late SasƗnid Oman,” PSAS 3 (1973): 40–51; V. Fiorani Piacentini, “ArdashƯr I PƗpakƗn and the Wars against the Arabs: Working Hypothesis on the Sasanian Hold on the Gulf,” PSAS 15 (1985): 57–77. Similarly, Morony has shown that the Sasani- ans sought to control and promote a diverse array of Arabian industries. These included gold, silver, copper, and iron mining in various regions of the peninsula, a booming textile and leather industry in YamƗma, and agricultural production in ‘UmƗn. The latter is evidenced by the remains of extensive Sasanian waterworks in The opening of the drama 77 that region. See “The Late Sasanian Economic Impact on the Arabian Peninsula,” NƗme-ye IrƗn-e BƗstƗn 1, 2 (2001–2002): 25–37; “Economic Boundaries? Late Antiquity and Early Islam,” JESHO 47, 2 (2004): 183–184. Finally, historians have assessed to what degree the pre- Islamic Arabs possessed a collective sense of identity that formed in the context of the Arabs’ interaction with their imperial neighbors. See p. 61. 13 See p. 83 for analysis of this inscription in the context of Lakhmid dynastic history. 14 “The Nature of Arab Unity Before Islam.” 15 “Arab Kings, Arab Tribes”; “Epigraphy and the Emergence of Arab Identity,” in From Al-Andalus to Khurasan: Documents from the Medieval Islamic World, eds. Petra Sijpesteijn, Lennart Sundelin, Soa Tovar, and Amalia Zomeño, 219–242 (Leiden: Brill, 2007); “Language and Identity: The Twin Histories of Arabic and Aramaic (and: Why did Aramaic Succeed where Greek Failed?)” Scripta Classica Israelica 23 (2004): 183–199. 16 “Epigraphy and the Emergence of Arab Identity,” 232. 17 “Arabic, Culture, and Ethnicity,” in Between Empires: Arabs, Romans and Sasanians in Late Antiquity, 128–172; “Kingdoms or Dynasties? Arabs, History, and Identity before Islam,” Journal of Late Antiquity 4, 2 (2011): 245–267. Other recent scholar- ship on this debate includes M. C. A. Macdonald, “Arabs, Arabias, and Arabic before Late Antiquity,” Topoi 16 (2009): 277–332; Literacy and Identity in Pre- Islamic Arabia. In this collection, see especially “Some Reections on Epigraphy and Ethni- city in the Roman Near East,” (IV) 177–190; Fergus Millar, “Rome’s Arab Allies in Late Antiquity: Conceptions and Representations from within the Frontiers of the Empire,” in Commutatio et Contentio: Studies in the Late Roman, Sasanian, and Early Islamic Near East, In Memory of Zeev Rubin, eds. Henning Börm and Josef Wiesehöfer, 199–226 (Dusseldorf: Wellem, 2010); “The Theodosian Empire (408–450) and the Arabs: Saracens or Ishmaelites?” in Cultural Borrowings and Ethnic Appropriations in Antiquity, ed. Erich Gruen, 297–317 (Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 2005); Christian Robin, “Les Arabes de ণimyar, des ‘Romains’ et des Perses (IIIe- VIe siècles de l’ère chrétienne),” Semitica et Classica 1 (2008): 167–208. 18 This region corresponded with the Seleucid province Characene, whose capital was Charax Spasinou. See C. E. Bosworth trans., The History of al-ܑ abarƯ: The SƗsƗnids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen 5 (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999), 13, n. 52. 19 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 818–822; Bal‘amƯ, II, 2–3, 27–28, 72–75; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 159. For analyses of ArdashƯr’s campaigns against the Arabs, see Piacentini, “ArdashƯr I PƗpakƗn”; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 27–28; Kennet, “The Decline of Eastern Arabia in the Sasanian Period,” 87; C. E. Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” in CHI 3, 1: 594. 20 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 820. 21 NihƗyat al-irab , 182–183; al- DƯnawarƯ, 45. 22 Piacentini, “ArdashƯr I PƗpakƗn,” 66. 23 ShƗpnjr I is best known for his defeat and capture of the Roman emperor Valerian. He is referred to as ShƗpnjr al- Junnjd in the Arabic sources, meaning “ShƗpnjr of the hosts” for his many conquests. On the conquest of Hatra, see Mohsen Zakeri, “Arabic Reports on the Fall of Hatra to the Sasanids: History or Legend?” in Story- telling in the Framework of Non- Fictional Arabic Literature, 158–167; Beate Dignas and Engelbert Winter, Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity: Neighbors and Rivals (Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 19–22, 154–155; Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” 595–596; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 77; Retsö, The Arabs in Antiquity, 460–462, 481–482; Lucinda Dirven, “Hatra: A Pre- Islamic Mecca in the Eastern Jazirah,” ARAM Periodical 19 (2007): 370; Piacentini, “ArdashƯr I PƗpakƗn,” 66–68; Josef Wiesehöfer, “Die Anfänge sassanidischer Westpolitik und der Untergang Hatras,” Klio; Beiträge zur alten Geschichte 64 (1982): 437–447; M. L. Chaumont, 78 The opening of the drama “A propos de la chute de Hatra et du couronnement de ShƗpnjr Ier,” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 27 (1979): 207–237; A. Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 218–219; André Maricq, “Hatra de Sanatrouq,” Syria 32, 3–4 (1955): 284. 24 M. C. A. Macdonald et al., “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century,” 34–39; J. B. Segal, “Arabs at Hatra and the Vicinity: Marginalia on New Aramaic Texts,” Journal of Semitic Studies 31 (1986): 58–80. 25 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 827; Miskawayh, I, 107. This tradition relating that he was of the BƗ JarmƗ is also found in Ibn Qutayba, al- Ma‘Ɨrif, 357. 26 Bal‘amƯ, II, 80; al- DƯnawarƯ, 50–51; FirdawsƯ, V, 342 (FirdawsƯ refers to this ruler as ৫Ɨyir.); NihƗyat al-irab , 223. 27 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 829–830. 28 Bal‘amƯ, II, 82. 29 For reports of this legendary conquest, see al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 489–494; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 827–830; Bal‘amƯ, II, 80–84; Miskawayh, I, 107–108. Al-D ƯnawarƯ (50–51), FirdawsƯ (V, 342–348), and the NihƗyat al- irab (223–224) attributed this conquest to the reign of ShƗpnjr II. The latter two sources specify that MalƯka was the daughter of an Iranian princess who had been kidnapped by ৫Ɨyir/al-ঋ ayzan. They, along with al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, do not mention her talisman, but rather state that she arranged to ply the defenders of the fortress with wine, and then opened its gates while they were drunk, allowing ShƗpnjr to enter. 30 In particular, several scholars have made the connection of this story with the “prin- cess and the pea” fable. See C. E. Bosworth trans., The History of al- ܑabarƯ 5, 36, n. 113; Zakeri, “Arabic Reports,” 165; A. Christensen, “La princesse sur la feuille de myrte et la princesse sur le pois,” Acta Orientalia 24 (1936): 241–257; L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 219; Albrecht Wirth, “The Tale of the King’s Daughter in the Besieged Town,” American Anthropologist 7, 4 (1894): 367–372. 31 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 836–844. For other accounts of ShƗpnjr’s retributive campaign against the Arabs, see Bal‘amƯ, II, 92–99; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 517–521; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 172–174; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 161–162; al- DƯnawarƯ, 49–51; Miskawayh, I, 109–110, NihƗyat al- irab, 222–223; ‘Abd al-ণ ayy GardƯzƯ, Zayn al-akhb Ɨr (Tehran: DunyƗ-yi KitƗb, 1984/1985), 72. It is also found in the Pahlavi text, the Greater Bun- dahishn. See Zeke Kassock, The Greater Iranian Bundahishn: A Pahlavi Student’s 2013 Guide (Fredericksburg: Kassock Bros. Publishing Co., 2013), 392. 32 Theodor Nöldeke expressed skepticism for what he called “dieser abenteuerliche Zug [this fanciful adventure].” See Geschichte, 57, n. 1. More recent historians, however, have accepted the veracity of this report, viewing ShƗpnjr’s expedition not simply as the fulllment of his desire for revenge against the Arabs, but rather as a strategic political and economic move against the Romans. They have argued that in taking control of much of Arabia, ShƗpnjr had the more pragmatic objective of compelling Roman merchants using the west coast of Arabia as a disembarkation point to pay a customs tax. See ‘IrfƗn ShahƯd, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1984), 62–73; F. Altheim and R. Stiehl, “Šapur II und die Araber,” in Die Araber in der alten Welt 2 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1965), 355–356. For additional analyses of ShƗpnjr II’s cam- paign, see Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” 603; Retsö, The Arabs in Antiquity, 473; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 28. 33 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 836. 34 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 514. 35 YƗqnjt, Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, III, 272; H. H. Schaeder, “SawƗd,” EI, 2nd ed. 36 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 838–839, 843–844. 37 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 517–520. 38 Nöldeke (Geschichte, 52, n. 1) believed this title to be an aberration of a Sasanian honoric meaning one who “shoulders” the burdens of government. Christensen The opening of the drama 79 (L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 235, n. 2) on the other hand supported the original interpretation. 39 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 158, 300, 303; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 22, 256 40 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 10; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 130ff., 257, 262ff., 378, 415, 444, 458, 386, 556ff., 604. On this source as a possible explanation for the similarities between these two texts, see Shboul, Al- Mas‘njdƯ and his World, 104. 41 Murnjj, I, 173. 42 Ibid. 43 Ibid., 173–174. 44 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 520–521. 45 Joseph Sadan, “The “Nomad versus Sedentary” Framework in Arabic Literature.” From a more general perspective, one may further make the case that this motif is based on the universal “king and peasant” tale type in world literature. See Stith Thompson, Motif- Index of Folk Literature 3 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1956), 426: H561.6, “king and peasant.” 46 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ (512) wrote of adjoining good omens, including the ease of ShƗpnjr’s mother’s pregnancy, and his being born on a full moon. See also al-D ƯnawarƯ, 49; FirdawsƯ, V, 339; Miskawayh, I, 109; ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 41; NihƗyat al- irab, 217. In Bal‘amƯ’s account (II, 91), the crown is placed on the infant ShƗpnjr’s crib. The topos of the crowning of a pregnant mother is also found in the KitƗb al- TƯjƗn, when the mother of the prince of ণimyar, al- Nu‘mƗn b. Ya‘fur was crowned on her pregnant imyar (Sana‘a: Markaz al-Dir ƗsƗtۉ stomach. See Ibn HishƗm, KitƗb al- TƯjƗn fƯ mulnjk wa’l-AbতƗth al-Yamaniyya, 1979), 67. 47 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 837; Bal‘amƯ, II, 92; FirdawsƯ, V, 340–341; Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 515–516; al- DƯnawarƯ, 50; NihƗyat al-irab , 222. 48 Al-৫ abarƯ, I, 844–845; Bal‘amƯ, II, 99–100; FirdawsƯ, V, 348–370; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 521–528; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 174–175; ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 41. Even in the Roman world, ShƗpnjr possessed a certain gravitas that did not go unnoticed by Roman historians. Speaking about the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus, Christensen wrote “malgré son antip- athie naturelle contre l’ennemi dangereux de l’empire romain, ne peut pas supprimer, dans sa relation, une certaine admiration de l’apparition imposante de ShƗhpuhr et de son courage personnel [in spite of his natural antipathy for this dangerous enemy of the Roman empire, he couldn’t suppress a certain admiration for ShƗpnjr’s imposing appear- ance and personal courage].” See L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 249. Christensen was refer- ring to Ammianus’ description of ShƗpnjr’s imposing stature and the bravery he exhibited during a siege, ghting alongside his troops under a hailstorm of projectiles. See Ammi- anus Marcellinus, Book XIX, Chapter I: 1–5, p. 185; Chapter VII: 8, pp. 197–198. 49 Miskawayh, I, 111. 50 Ta’rƯkh, I, 161–162. 51 Al- BukhalƗ’, 34–35. 52 Ibid., 33. .ayawƗn, VII, 220 ۉ-Al 53 54 Al- BukhalƗ’, 177. 55 KitƗb al-‘ImtƗ‘ wa’l-mu’Ɨnasa (Beirut: DƗr al-Ma‘rifa, 2004), 48. 56 Al-‘Iqd, III, 405. 57 Al- BayƗn, I, 385. 58 Ibid., III, 28. 59 Ibid., 29. 60 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 470—the advice of the AshkƗnian king FƯrnjz to his son Khusraw. 61 In a similar vein, D. S. Margoliouth gave numerous examples of JƗhiliyya poetry in which monotheistic themes and even Qur’anic terminology were superimposed by some early Islamic antiquarians. Chief amongst these is the invoking of the name AllƗh, for which he cites several excerpts attributed to the pre-Islamic bard ‘AbƯd b. al- Abraৢ. See “The Origins of Arabic Poetry,” 435–436. 80 The opening of the drama 62 Several modern scholars have studied the evolution of this term. See Sharon, Black Banners 1: 19–27; Lassner, Islamic Revolution and Historical Memory, XI–XXV; “The ‘Abbasid Dawla: An Essay on the Concept of Revolution in Early Islam,” in Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity, eds. F. M. Clover and R. S. Humphreys, 247–270 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989); Bernard Lewis, “Islamic Concepts of Revolution,” in Islam in History: Ideas, People, and Events in the Middle East, 2nd ed. (Chicago: Open Court, 1993), 311–322; Franz Rosenthal, “Dawla,” EI, 2nd ed. 63 On this tradition, see Sharon, Black Banners 1: 76, 87, 94–95. 64 One such set of traditions contained in the AkhbƗr al- dawla al-‘AbbƗsiyya purports that black, the color of the ‘Abbasid revolution, was the preferred color of the Prophet, the early Muslims, and even some biblical heroes. For example, the AkhbƗr relates that Gabriel revealed to the Prophet that “a time will come when your nation will wear it [black] and will take glory in it.” See the section, Dhikr al- sawƗd (On the color black) in the AkhbƗr for this and other traditions. A. A. al- DnjrƯ and A. J. al- Mu৬৬alibƯ, eds. AkhbƗr al- dawla al-‘AbbƗsiyya wa- fƯhi akhbƗr al-‘AbbƗs wa- waladihi (Beirut: Dar al-৫ alƯ‘a 1971), 245–247. On this theme in ‘Abbasid apologetics, see further, Lassner, Islamic Revolution and Historical Memory, 2–4; The Shaping of ‘AbbƗsid Rule, 28. 65 On this application of dawla, see Lewis’ reference in his “Islamic Concepts of Revolution” to Ya‘qnjb b. IsতƗq al-Kind Ư’s RasƗ’il IkhwƗn al-܈ afƗ’, 312. 66 Al- ৫abarƯ, II, 2004–2005. On this speech, see “The Signicance of Wooden Weapons in al- MukhtƗr’s Revolt and the ‘AbbƗsid Revolution,” 185; Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 280–281; Sharon, Black Banners 2: 187–188; Lassner, The Shaping of ‘AbbƗsid Rule, 277, n. 16. .l al-‘Arab, 51ڲFa 67 4 BahrƗm V Gnjr, the Lakhmids, and the Hephthalite disaster

Al- ণƯra was built on that day when ‘Amr [son of RabƯ‘a] settled it. From that point, the people of Lakhm became connected both to al-ণƯra, as well as to the akƗsira [pl. of kisrƗ] who gave them rule over the Arabs.1

With seminal events of the fth century, the plot of the Islamic conquest nar- rative further develops, while its trajectory becomes ever clearer. To this end, I will focus in this chapter on the depiction of two key episodes. I will rst analyze the character of the Sasanian king BahrƗm V Gnjr (r. 420–438), paying particular attention to the depiction of his relationship with the Lakhmid suzerain, al- Mundhir I, who was given the responsibility of rearing the young BahrƗm, and later aided in his taking the throne. I will show how the Muslim authors intended to emphasize both the high culture of the Lakhmids and their inuence in Sasa- nian imperial affairs, as well as to demonstrate that BahrƗm’s bravery and elo- quence stemmed from his hearty Arab upbringing. I will then briey examine the report of the disastrous defeat of BahrƗm Gnjr’s grandson PƯrnjz I (r. 459–484) at the hands of the Hephthalites (Turks in some accounts). I will argue that the Hephthalites’/Turks’ routing of the Iranians is portrayed in the early Islamic nar- rative tradition as an ominous precursor for later battles between the Iranians and the Arabs. The main theme of this chapter is to show that in the framework of the Arab-Sasanian drama, this period forms a new chapter, in which the Arabs gradually become active players in the affairs of the Sasanians, and in which the Iranian kings begin to lose some of their prestige. Before turning to the legen- dary history of BahrƗm Gnjr, however, I will rst provide a brief summary of the origins and rise of the Lakhmid kings according to the Islamic sources.

The origins and rise of the Lakhmids of al-ণƯ ra in the Islamic historical tradition The account of the origins and early kings of the Lakhmids, for which we are primarily indebted to Ibn IsতƗq and Ibn al- KalbƯ, is muddled, often contradictory, and is heavily steeped in lore.2 According to Ibn IsতƗq, the progenitors of the Lakhmid family were southern Arabs who left Yemen as a result of the 82 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster prognostication of the legendary soothsayers Sa৬Ưত and Shiqq. Interpreting a dream of the ruler RabƯ‘a b. Naৢr al- LakhmƯ, they foretold future events, includ- ing the Abyssinians’ conquest of Yemen, their subsequent defeat, and the rise of the Prophet. Fearing an Abyssinian onslaught which was, unbeknownst to him, still centuries off, RabƯ‘a dispatched his sons and other family members to Iraq during the reign of ShƗpnjr I.3 These two kƗhins factor later in our narrative to predict the fall of the Sasanian dynasty, as we shall see in Chapter 5. Iraq during this period was inhabited by the intertribal Tannjkh confederation, which is reported to have migrated from Baতrayn to Iraq during the Parthian period.4 The king of Tannjkh at this time was JadhƯma al- Abrash (the leper), son of the chief MƗlik b. Fahm.5 The sources wax heavily on the saga of this legen- dary ruler, which Hoyland considers, coming on the heels of the migration of southern Arabs, as constituting the integral preliminary chapter of Arab history in Islamic historical memory.6 Drawing on the tradition of Ibn al-Kalb Ư, our sources relate how JadhƯma, in a drunken state, arranged for the marriage of his sister RaqƗsh to his servant of the Lakhmid tribe, ‘AdƯ b. Naৢr b. RabƯ‘a. (Notice the difference in genealogy between Ibn al- KalbƯ’s and Ibn IsতƗq’s accounts, where Naৢr and RabƯ‘a are switched in the Lakhmid line of descent.) Their child, ‘Amr, would become the rst Lakhmid king.7 When the Palmyrene queen al- ZabbƗ’ bint ਋Ɨrib (Zenobia) deceitfully captured JadhƯma (luring him to her court through a promise of marriage) and executed him, ‘Amr avenged his uncle, killing al- ZabbƗ’ through a Trojan horse- style ruse conceived and carried out by one of his ministers, in which he had his soldiers smuggled into Palmyra in treasure sacks. He then established his residence in al-ণƯ ra.8 According to Ibn al- KalbƯ’s report in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle, al-ণƯ ra was rst established by Nebuchadnezzar (Bukhtnaৢৢar), who settled groups of Arabs there.9 The geography of al- ণƯra made it a center of diplomatic exchange between the Roman and Sasanian empires, and a key caravan city on the trade route between the Arabian peninsula and the Sasanian capital Ctesiphon (Arabic: al- MadƗ’in). With the establishment of the Lakhmid dynasty, al-ণƯ ra replaced the fallen Hatra as the metropolitan commercial and cultural center of the region.10 The Islamic sources stress the intimate connection between the Sasani- ans and the Lakhmids stretching back to the inception of both dynasties. They indicate that the Sasanians installed the Lakhmids at the strategic city of al-ণƯ ra so that they could provide a defensive buffer against the Romans, and to control the Arab tribes in their sphere of inuence. Al-৫ abarƯ, for example, wrote that starting with the time of ArdashƯr I,

‘Amr [b. ‘AdƯ] and his progeny became kings over Iraq and the deserts of the ণijƗz which were inhabited by the Arabs because the Persian kings employed them for this purpose, relying on them to keep the Arabs next to them under control.11

ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ similarly states that “The Naৢrid family were governors [‘ummƗl] over the Arabs for the akƗsira.”12 Al- DƯnawarƯ, for his part, emphasizes BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 83 that both the Lakhmid dynasty and the city of al-ণƯ ra itself were products of Sasanian political machination. He states:

Al- ণƯra was built on that day when ‘Amr [son of RabƯ‘a] settled it. Then ‘Amr was joined by his brothers and other family members. From that point, the people of Lakhm became connected both to al-ণƯ ra, as well as to the akƗsira who gave them rule over the Arabs.13

Of course, the contrived image of the Sasanians and the Lakhmids as being inextricably linked from their foundation belies the historical evidence. Take for example Imrnj’l-Qays al-Bad’ (the rst), who al- ৫abarƯ (based on Ibn al-Kalb Ư) describes as the son and successor of ‘Amr b. ‘AdƯ, a convert to Christianity, and a governor for the Sasanians.14 Yet the NamƗra inscription mentions that Imrnj’l Qays (assuming al- ৫abarƯ and the inscription are referring to the same ruler) established his sons as tribal chiefs, and that the latter served as “horsemen” (f- r - s- w ) for the Roman empire.15 Additionally, the site of the burial in Roman Syria, as well as Imrnj’l-Qays’ Christianity mentioned by al-৫ abarƯ, would indicate his having a closer association with the Roman empire. Some historians postulate from this contradictory evidence as well as from the far-reaching conquest activ- ity mentioned in the inscription that Imrnj’l-Qays served both empires on his own terms, but then gravitated towards the Romans towards the end of his life.16 Regarding these two dynasties’ actual relationship, we can safely conclude that it was informal in the beginning and gradually developed, such that by the sixth century, we can condently speak of the Lakhmids’ ofcial position as Sasanian clients.17 Likewise the notion of the continuity of the Lakhmid rulers is rather problem- atic. ‘Amr b. ‘AdƯ is ubiquitously considered the founder of the dynasty, but the sources present divergent lines of succession for the rulers after him.18 The sources are particularly vague for the rst few rulers after ‘Amr. Both al- ৫abarƯ and ণamza wrote that Imrnj’l-Qays I ruled for 114 years!19 Modern scholars have tended to approach the issue of Lakhmid succession with a critical eye. Some have pointed out, without atly rejecting the idea of Lakhmid continuity, that there is no strong evidence that the rulers of the sixth- early seventh centuries, for which the Islamic sources provide a much richer account, were part of the same dynasty as those rulers mentioned in the earlier inscriptions, like ‘Amr and Imrnj’l-Qays.20 Retsö has taken this argument a step further, by contending of the legendary and contradictory features of the narrative of the early Lakhmids, that the origins of the Lakhmids were fabricated by story- tellers of a later period employed at the Lakhmid court, in order to give their royal suzerains an ancient, glorious past.21 However, while the Lakhmids’ perennial position as Sasanian vassals, as well as the continuity of this dynasty’s line of rulers might be difcult to substantiate, these are indeed features that are emphasized by the Islamic sources, whose purpose in doing so was to present the picture of these two dynasties as having an interconnected destiny stemming from their origins. For as we shall see in Chapter 6, the Islamic conquest narrative portrays the 84 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster Sasanians’ mistreatment and subsequent liquidation of the Arab Lakhmids by ParvƯz II, despite their centuries of loyal service, as an instrumental factor con- tributing to the decline and fall of the Sasanian empire.

BahrƗm and the Lakhmids While the fourth century is hazy in Islamic historiography on the Lakhmids, our chronicles provide a detailed description of this dynasty’s history with the reigns of al- Nu‘mƗn I (c.400–c.418) and his successor al- Mundhir I (c.418–c.462). In what follows, I shall analyze the account of al-Mundhir’s rearing of BahrƗm Gnjr, and his inuence in installing the latter as king. I will demonstrate that this episode of the Islamic conquest narrative, which underlines the role played by the Lakhmids in raising BahrƗm and aiding him in his quest for the throne serves to denote the increasing importance of the Arab peoples in Sasanian affairs. In the Islamic historiographical tradition, BahrƗm Gnjr is depicted as a romantic hero, celebrated for his legendary exploits as a hunter and warrior. Regarding al- ৫abarƯ’s depiction of him, Karbowska laments, “Leider vermittelt dieses Werk nur wenig von genauen historischen Tatsachen und zeichnet sich durch bunte, fabel, -und sagenhafte Beschreibung des Helden [Unfortunately this work con- cerns itself with few precise historical facts and presents colorful, fantastic and legendary descriptions of heroes.].”22 However, for the purposes of this study, it is exactly the legendary, heroic image of BahrƗm which the Muslim chroniclers preserved that interests us. According to the narrative of BahrƗm’s life, the Sasanian king Yazdagird I (r. 399–420) al- AthƯm (the sinner) sent his only son to be raised by the Arabs in the Lakhmids’ capital of al-ণƯ ra. There is some confusion, however, as to which Lakhmid king Yazdagird was charged with rearing BahrƗm. Al- ৫abarƯ provides two versions of this history. The rst of these, based on the report of Ibn al- KalbƯ, states that Yazdagird I entrusted his son BahrƗm to al- Nu‘mƗn I al- A‘war (the one- eyed), who constructed the palace of al- Khwarnaq for the young prince. Al- Nu‘mƗn retired from government when BahrƗm was 14, upon which time his son and successor al- Mundhir took over the role of BahrƗm’s guardian.23 This account evidences the strong relationship between al- Nu‘mƗn and the Sasanian king, who provided the ruler of al-ণƯ ra two military regiments to keep control of the Arab tribes: The rst, known as Dawsar, was composed of Tannjkh tribes- men, and the second, al- ShahbƗ’, was composed of Persians.24 In the following section of his text, al-৫ abarƯ relates the biography of BahrƗm Gnjr based on Persian scholars’ accounts of their own history. It seems likely that al-৫ abarƯ is referring here to the Siyar al- mulnjk, though he does not refer to this text or any of its translators by name.25 According to this account, Yazdagird summoned al- Mundhir himself to raise BahrƗm when he was born.26 Moreover, whereas Ibn al- KalbƯ’s report is clearly more interested in Lakhmid affairs and Arab history, it is in this latter account that al-৫ abarƯ provides a detailed descrip- tion focusing on BahrƗm’s early years at the Lakhmid court, his rise to the Sasa- nian throne with the help of al- Mundhir, and his legendary feats of courage both BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 85 in al-ণƯ ra and as king. The other sources on this episode appear to combine ele- ments from both traditions.27 In what follows, I provide a synopsis of BahrƗm’s biography in Islamic historiography before discussing how it ts into the Islamic conquest narrative. Some sources relate that Yazdagird consulted his astrologers on the day of BahrƗm’s birth, who informed the king that the child will succeed him as ruler, and advised Yazdagird to send him to a foreign land to be raised.28 Yazdagird therefore sent BahrƗm to be brought up amongst the Arabs in the healthy environment of al-ণƯ ra. However, the ShƗhnƗma reports that Yazdagird sent BahrƗm to Yemen instead of Iraq.29 The Lakhmid sovereign raised the infant prince at the magnicent palace of al- Khwarnaq. At the request of the young child, he was provided with the best instructors in archery, equestrianism, writing, and other intellectual skills. As he grew, BahrƗm developed a reputation for his martial abilities and his love for hunting and sport. In one interesting anecdote, he is said to have killed a lion and an ass with the same arrow.30 The story continues that when Yazdagird died, the Iranian nobles agreed to not elect BahrƗm to the throne, for fear that as his father’s progeny, he would be tyrannical, and because he had not yet held any administrative posts to date, a recognized prerequisite for becoming king in the Sasanian state. They instead promoted to the throne another member of the royal family from a different line, named Khusraw. BahrƗm subsequently marched to the Sasanian court with al- Mundhir and his army to vie for the throne. He proposed a trial of courage to the nobles, whereby the crown and royal regalia would be placed between two lions, and both he and Khusraw would have to seize these royal articles. After Khusraw deferred the rst attempt to BahrƗm, the latter slew the lions with his mace and succeeded in procuring the crown and regalia, whereupon Khusraw and the nobles recognized BahrƗm as their undisputed king. The remaining account of the reign of BahrƗm Gnjr details his legendary exploits, including his defeat of the Turkish KhƗqƗn31 (with only 300 men and seven nobles according to al-৫ abarƯ)32 and the Romans, his visit to the king of India in disguise and his various feats of courage in that realm, his expedition against the “countries of the Blacks” (bilƗd al- SnjdƗn) that are near Yemen,33 and his mysterious death, in which he fell and disappeared into a pit or swamp while chasing an onager, never to be found.34

Ruggedness and renement at the Lakhmid court Before analyzing the portrayal of the characters of BahrƗm and al- Mundhir, I will rst examine our sources’ emphasis on the image of the Lakhmids as rustic and hearty, yet rened Arabs. The Tannjkh, the Lakhmids, their Ghassanid rivals, and the Arabs of the Kinda confederation clearly represent a change from their Arab predecessors inhabiting Iraq and Syria. As Hoyland points out,

These Arab chiefdoms of the fourth to sixth centuries were very different from the client states of the Nabateans, Palmyrenes, and Hatrans of former 86 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster times. The latter peoples were in general sedentary, they were assimilated to Greco-Aramaean culture, and they had their own revenues, derived from trade and agriculture, with which they sponsored art and agriculture.35

While both were Arabs, the newcomers clearly embodied a purer Bedouin exist- ence from the perspective of Islamic historiography. So while the Palmyrene villain al- ZabbƗ’ is portrayed as more Roman in culture than Arab,36 her rivals, the Tannjkh, on the other hand, are described as living a pastoral-nomadic exist- ence outside of al- ণƯra in tents and dwellings made from camel hairs and skins.37 Hoyland likewise shows that this transition was highly signicant in Islamic historical memory because it marked a change in power in Iraq and the Levant between the proto- or original Arabs (al-‘Arab al-‘Ɨriba/al-nj lƗ) represented by al- ZabbƗ’, and the newcomers, who were mostly Arabized Arabs (al-‘Arab al- muta‘arriba/al- musta‘riba).38 In this context, the impression that the sources give of the Lakhmids is that of a semi- settled regime, well acquainted with the nomadic lifestyle of the Bedouin and integrated within the social network of tribes within their territory.39 Regarding our narrative then, the implication is that Yazdagird sent BahrƗm to be raised by the Lakhmids so that he might be toughened by the Arabs’ rugged lifestyle. By doing so, he was forecasting the Umayyad practice of sending princes to live with the Bedouin so that they would acquire their virile attributes, learn pristine Arabic, and grow up in the healthy environment of the desert, free from the deleterious effects of settled civilization.40 In the context of this episode, al-‘Arab) is a common ڲthe salubrious climate in the land of the Arabs (ar theme. For example, Bal‘amƯ writes “He [Yazdagird] wanted to send him [BahrƗm] to the region of al-ণƯ ra, where the air was most healthy.” Yazdagird is then reported to have said to al-Nu‘m Ɨn, “I want to give you my son, to take him away and raise him in the air of al-ণƯ ra and the desert.”41 The idea that the Arabs’ heartiness stemmed from their tough existence living the desert is a commonplace trope in early Islamic literature. Ibn Qutayba, for example, argued that the harsh desert living “accustomed the Arabs to distress and made them forbearing and courageous.”42 This notion that the Arabs’ rugged, healthy desert living made them superior specimens is also expressed by al-Mas‘ njdƯ, who claimed:

The Arabs prefer the Bedouin lifestyle and residing in the desert. Therefore, amongst all of the peoples, they are the strongest of resolve and forbearance, and possess the healthiest, most powerful bodies. They are also the most protective of their honor and the most sagacious. This is all a result of what the purity of the climate and vast open spaces of the desert has imparted to them.43

In this text, al- Mas‘njdƯ bears a conspicuous resemblance to Diodorus in his claim that the Arabs’ decision to live in the desert was a conscious choice, as they preferred the freedom of a Spartan existence living in the vast spaces of the BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 87 desert, rather than submiting to an empire.44 The trope of the heroic Bedouin is a commonplace projection in the Islamic conquest narrative, which we will revisit throughout this study. Thus, Yazdagird’s act of sending his son to to raised by the Lakhmids evokes themes of the Arabs’ toughness and the purity of desert living. Though the Lakhmids were kings who ruled from their court in al-ণƯ ra, the Bedouin existence formed an integral part of their identity. In the analysis of depictions of BahrƗm’s prowess below, we will likewise see that his “Arab” upbringing serves as a pervasive theme. And yet, the chroniclers emphasized that despite their comparatively humble existence, the Lakhmids possessed renement in their own regard, and were capable of rearing an imperial prince. To this end, they detail how BahrƗm was tended to with the utmost of care at al- Khwarnaq. Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ reported that al- Mundhir “did not overlook any possibility to honor BahrƗm and to treat him kindly,” while al- Ya‘qnjbƯ wrote that he was raised with “beautiful morals” (akhlƗq jamƯla).45 Moreover, the composite Arab and Persian components of his upbringing are also clearly underlined. This inuence can be seen symbolically from his infancy, as the Lakhmid ruler arranged to have him suckled by three noble women, one Persian and two Arab.46 The author of the NihƗyat al- irab even claimed that BahrƗm “possessed the countenance of both his people and the nobles [ashrƗf] of the Arabs.”47 As a boy, the precocious young prince demanded an education, so he was provided with the best teachers. What is signicant here is that the sources show that he utilized instructors versed in the martial and intellectual arts of both the Arabs and the Persians. Al- DƯnawarƯ, for example, stated that al- Mundhir provided BahrƗm with “mu’addibƯn [educators] from Persia and from amongst the Arabs. BahrƗm mastered these peoples’ adabs [knowledge] and became whole in them. He was raised in a laudable way, excelled in horsemanship, and became exceedingly intelligent.”48 Al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ similarly wrote that “BahrƗm was educated in the adab of the Arabs, learning to a bi- lughatihƗ] and acquiring their nobleۊa܈speak their language eloquently [fa distinguishing qualities.”49 The intention of such statements was to emphasize that the Arabs possessed their own adab which rivaled that of the Iranians. I will further analyze this theme below in my discussion of portrayals of BahrƗm’s renement, which the sources lead us to believe he acquired from his upbringing amongst the Arabs. The Lakhmids’ crowning achievement of this period from the standpoint of the akhbƗrƯs was the magnicent palace of al- Khwarnaq.50 The chroniclers counted al- Khwarnaq, the nearby palace of al- SadƯr, along with the fortress of GhumdƗn in Yemen as among the most remarkable buildings of antiquity. Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ labeled al- Khwarnaq and al- SadƯr as “the most glorious buildings of the Arabs.”51 Bal‘amƯ marveled about how al- Khwarnaq changed color during the day and glowed like the moon at night from the milk mixed into its mortar.52 Our sources also abound in poetry commemorating al- Khwarnaq. One poet is reported to have compared it to a “towering mountain possessing high, difcult slopes.” (al-ܒ awd dhƯ’l-bƗdhikh al-܈ a‘b).53 Moreover, al- Khwarnaq serves as the pervasive backdrop in the drama of al- Nu‘mƗn’s reign and Lakhmid history in 88 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster general. The sources relate the saga of its construction, emphasizing the import- ance which the Lakhmid king attached to constructing a suitable palace to raise BahrƗm. Bal‘amƯ wrote that al-Nu‘m Ɨn said to the architect SinnimƗr:

I have with me the son of the king of Persia. I want to construct for him an edice higher than any other, at whose height I can raise this child so that he may breathe the healthiest air. I want you to build a round wall around it of such exactitude and beauty such that no one may speak of a parallel con- struction in Syria or Rome.54

Although SinnimƗr achieved his task, he paid dearly with his off- handed comment that he could have constructed an even more impressive edice. For, enraged that SinnimƗr didn’t build him the highest building he could, al- Nu‘mƗn had the architect hurled from the top to his death, an event which is immortal- ized in Arabic poetry, and which gave rise to the expression, “recompense of SinnimƗr.”55 Later in his life, while contemplating the vast beauty of his kingdom from al- Khwarnaq’s heights, al- Nu‘mƗn is reported to have had an epiphany about the transitory nature of this life. He therefore abandoned his position to adopt the life of a wandering Christian mendicant.56 This episode is captured in the poem composed by the famous ণƯran bard, ‘AdƯ b. Zayd.57 The vivid atten- tion afforded to this palace in the chronicles is indicative of an endeavor to show that the pre- Islamic Arab peoples possessed a legacy of civilization comparable with the non- Arab empires of late antiquity. In the context of the biography of BahrƗm Gnjr, it evidences the Lakhmids’ ability to construct a palace suitable for raising a Persian prince. In this way, al- Khwarnaq, along with the other ruins of al-ণƯ ra, serves as a testament to the architectural achievements of the Arabs, and a nostalgic reminder of an era of Arab glory frozen in context by Islamic col- lective memory.58

BahrƗm V Gnjr: the “Arab” Sasanian king The image of BahrƗm Gnjr in the sources is a hero whose prowess and adab stem from his Arab upbringing. This would explain Ibn Qutayba’s reference to this l al-‘Arab, as he saw BahrƗm’s upbringing amongst the “kingڲepisode in his Fa of the Arabs in the bƗdiyya (desert)” as a point of pride for the pre-Islamic Arabs.59 The sources furthermore make it clear that despite his being Persian, the Arabs accepted BahrƗm as one of their own. Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, for example, relates that the Arabs took pride in BahrƗm’s victory in the lion ordeal “because he was their foster son, had grown up amongst them, and identied himself as a member of their group.”60 The unabashed loyalty of the Arabs to BahrƗm can also be seen in Bal‘amƯ’s portrayal of their collective pledge of fealty to the prince prior to his march to the Sasanian capital, in which they proclaimed: “The rule of the Persians and the Arabs is yours. We are all obedient to you and our lives are your ransom!”61 Such strong conviction is indicative of the intimate connection the Arabs felt for BahrƗm. BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 89 The Sasanian nobles on the other hand considered BahrƗm’s “Arab” attributes shameful, unbetting a member of the royal family. This was one of the reasons, one reads, along with BahrƗm’s being the son of the wicked Yazdagird, that they initially selected another candidate for the throne. Thus al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ wrote that the nobles rejected BahrƗm because they believed he possessed the “rough and crude manners of the Arabs.”62 Likewise in al-Ya‘q njbƯ’s account, they agreed that, “His [Yazdagird’s] son BahrƗm grew up in the land of the Arabs. He there- fore has no knowledge of rulership.”63 In both al- ৫abarƯ and Miskawayh’s accounts, the nobles passed over BahrƗm, saying, “He has not been brought up in the Persian ways, but his upbringing has been solely in the Arab ways. There- fore, his nature is like the Arabs’ nature, since he has grown up amongst them.”64 The anonymous author of the NihƗyat al- irab adds that the nobles also looked down upon BahrƗm’s speaking Arabic.65 The Iranian nobles, in their dismissive treatment of BahrƗm and their pretentious attitude towards the Arabs, serve as anachronistic projections of the kuttƗb of the Islamic period, who allegedly bore a grudge against the Arabs and denigrated their culture. At the same time, the Muslim reader would have no doubt comprehended the conspicuous irony in their dismissive rejection of BahrƗm, knowing full well that with the rise of Islam, the Arab people would ultimately turn the tables to conquer the Persians and become their lords. Furthermore, the sources emphasize that BahrƗm’s upbringing amongst the hearty and healthy Arabs was a source of his martial abilities. Miskawayh states that Yazdagird sent BahrƗm to al- ণƯra to learn furnjsiyya (horsemanship), as if the Arabs’ superiority in this art was common knowledge among the peoples of the pre- Islamic Near East.66 Likewise, an indelible motif pervading both written sources and Iranian art is the depiction BahrƗm hunting and ghting on camel- back, which serves as a poignant illustration of his Arab background. In FirdawsƯ and al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s accounts, BahrƗm is portrayed mounted on a camel when he accomplishes his legendary feat of “making a female gazelle a male and a male a female” at the request of his female slave ƖzƗdeh.67 Al- DƯnawarƯ similarly stated that when BahrƗm defeated the Turks, he had his soldiers mounted on camels.68 In Chapter 2, I analyzed various examples of the commonplace trope in ‘Abbasid literature associating and comparing the Arabs with their camels.69 This linkage between Arabs and camels was expressed by Greek historians as well, including Agatharchides, Diodorus, and Clement of Alexandria, who wrote about the Arabs’ complete reliance on these animals for virtually all of their material needs. Within this context, the Arab warrior ghting on camelback was a conspicuous topos in the literature of antiquity, even though the Arabs most certainly never fought mounted on camels, but merely used camels to carry their baggage and equipment.70 It therefore follows that this image would have like- wise resonated in Islamic collective memory, such that the portrayal of the Persian king Bahram ghting and hunting on camelback was highlighted by our akhbƗrƯs to underscore his Arab upbringing. At the same time, as described above, the sources underline BahrƗm’s erudi- tion, particularly his excelling in the adab of the Arabs and Persians, as a product 90 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster of the education he received at the Lakhmid court. In this regard, BahrƗm’s mastery of these two peoples’ languages is a pervasive motif. For example, the anonymous author of the NihƗyat al- irab wrote, “He became procient in Arabic and became most eloquent at speaking it. He also mastered Persian,” while al- Mas‘njdƯ proclaimed that as a result of his upbringing with the Arabs in al-ণƯ ra, “he [learned to] recite poetry in Arabic and spoke the rest of the languages. He composed much poetry in both Arabic and Persian.”71 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ similarly listed the 11 languages which BahrƗm mastered, including Arabic, and the various functions which he applied each one of these for.72 Both al- Mas‘njdƯ and al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ preserve specimens of BahrƗm’s poetry in order to demonstrate his eloquence. One illustrative example is the following verse which BahrƗm alleg- edly recited after defeating the Turks and slaying their KhƗqƗn:

I recite to him upon routing his soldiers: “It is as if you haven’t heard of the attacks of BahrƗm. I am the protector of the whole kingdom of Persia. What good is kingship without a defender?”73

In Chapter 3, I discussed how the proverbial eloquence of the Arabs and the beauty of the Arabic language were pervasive themes in the discourse of inter- civilizational competition marking the early ‘Abbasid period.74 Therefore, the image of a Sasanian prince eloquently reciting Arabic poetry, the prized art among the Arabs, surely would have captured the imagination of the contempo- raneous Muslim reader. For the nostalgic admirers of the Arab tradition like al- JƗতi਌, Arabic poetry, the vehicle by which the desert Bedouin expressed their rustic eloquence, served as proof of the Arabs’ cultural sophistication. In this context, we might view through the same lens the heroic tribesmen of the ayyƗm al-‘Arab literature, expressing their muruwa (virility) in the heat of battle through the medium of verse, as accounts such as this of BahrƗm Gnjr reciting Arabic poetry in the thick of ghting or during the chase. The picture of BahrƗm Gnjr that emerges from the sources, therefore, is not only of a skilled hunter and warrior, but of an educated, sophisticated gentleman. The moral of this episode is that the Arabs could indeed produce brave rulers. As a Sasanian prince raised amongst the Arabs, BahrƗm Gnjr serves in the Islamic conquest narrative as a precursor to the conquering Arabs, who would take over the reins of empire from the Iranians.

Al- Mundhir I b. al- Nu‘mƗn: the guardian of the Prince In our analysis of this episode, we should also underline the seminal part played by the wise Lakhmid king al-Mundhir, who raises BahrƗm in such a laudable way, and is an unwavering supporter and guide to the prince in his quest to become king. Al- Mundhir serves a similar role as ‘Amr, the sheikh of TamƯm, i.e., of a sage- like counselor to the king. However, whereas ‘Amr could only warn ShƗpnjr II to desist from killing the Arabs, al- Mundhir took an active role BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 91 in mediating the affairs of BahrƗm, aiding the young prince in reclaiming his royal birthright. Indeed, the sources lead us to believe that al- Mundhir was the architect of this enterprise. According to al-৫ abarƯ’s rendition of these events, it was al- Mundhir who devised the stratagem for bringing BahrƗm to the throne, rst sending his own son al- Nu‘mƗn to the Sasanian capital with a force of 10,000 men, and then going himself with BahrƗm and al- Nu‘mƗn with a larger army. It was al- Mundhir, the sources relate, with whom the Sasanian nobles ini- tially negotiated, and it was only after being prompted by his guardian, that BahrƗm directly addressed his countrymen.75 The notion that al- Mundhir dir- ected this affair is likewise communicated by al- DƯnawarƯ, who stated in his rather truncated rendition of these events, that when news arrived that another had been selected to be king, “al-Mundhir ordered [ammara] BahrƗm to go out and demand the birthright of his father.”76 By emphasizing al- Mundhir’s inuence in shaping the affairs of the Iranian state, the chroniclers were clearly trying to illustrate the increasing importance and prestige of the Arabs amongst the late antique empires. In contrast to the passive sheikh ‘Amr, al- Mundhir’s active role in Sasanian politics shows that the Arabs were beginning to become a major force for the Iranians to reckon with. In this context, al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ writes that upon becoming king, BahrƗm elevated the rank of al-Mundhir, putting under his authority all of the lands from al- ণƯra to the ণijƗz. He then states, “This was the rst wind which blew for the Arabs and a sign of their coming turn [iqbƗlihƗ].”77 What is signicant about this clearly kerygmatic statement is that al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ uses the term iqbƗl, which liter- ally means a “turn,” thus conveying the same idea as its synonym, dawla. Of course, al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ here is forecasting the rise of Islam and the Arabs’ political hegemony, which was now on the distant historical horizon. In general, the BahrƗm Gnjr episode represents an important turning point in the Islamic conquest narrative, in which the destinies of the Arabs and Sasanians l al-‘Arab, Ibn Qutayba portrays thisڲare now beginning to converge. In his Fa episode, as well as the Arabs’ defeat of the Persians at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr in the following century, as among the major events linking Arab and Persian history.78 In this context, Ibn Qutayba, along with other historians, likewise attach seminal importance to the rst major defeat of the Sasanians and the death of the king PƯrnjz I at the hands at the Hephthalites.

PƯrnjz I and the HayƗܒila: the rst major Sasanian defeat In the Islamic historiographical tradition, the rst major Sasanian defeat, which resulted in the death of the ruler PƯrnjz I, came at the hands of the HayƗܒila.79 This group is generally associated with the contemporaneous Central Asian con- federation of the Hephthalites (also known as the “White Huns”).80 However, according to some accounts it is not the Hephthalites, but rather the same “Turks” which had fought BahrƗm that defeat PƯrnjz. In what follows, I provide a synopsis of both traditions, which portray this defeat from a moralistic per- spective as divine retribution for the violation of a covenant between the two 92 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster empires. I will then argue that this defeat marks another critical juncture in the Islamic conquest narrative. For while this episode does not involve the Arabs, it does mark the point in which the Sasanians’ weakness is beginning to become apparent. According to the rst narrative, PƯrnjz set out on a campaign against the HayƗܒila.81 However, his enemies were ready. For an old man in service of the king AkhshunvƗr (also referred to as UkhshunvƗz, KhnjshnavƗz, among other variants) devised a stratagem, selessly volunteering to be mutilated. He then went to the PƯrnjz’s camp, claiming that he would show the Iranians a shortcut because of what AkhshunvƗr had done to him. However, he led the army into the middle of a barren desert and the Sasanians, after losing many men, realized this ruse only too late. They therefore surrendered and sued for peace. PƯrnjz was forced to swear an oath to AkhshunvƗr to never cross into his land again. This account continues that after returning to Ctesiphon, PƯrnjz became resent- ful of these terms, and out of pride, set out once again to attack the Hephthalites. This move was opposed by his ministers and soldiers alike, who recognized that the breaking of a covenant taken under God was an ill-omened move which courted disaster. PƯrnjz ignored the advice of the advisors, and in some accounts, he is reported, as a trick to not violate the letter of his agreement, to have his army carry the boundary marker demarcating the border between the Sasanians’ territory and land of the HayƗܒila along with them on their march.82 Before the fateful battle, AkhshunvƗr and PƯrnjz came out from their lines to discuss matters personally. Despite warning him that breaking a covenant would surely lead to his demise and pleading with him to act as his forefathers would have, PƯrnjz stubbornly refused and proceeded to send his unenthusiastic troops into battle. In some sources, AkhshunvƗr afxes the page of the agreement to his lance when addressing the Iranian army, causing many of PƯrnjz’s troops to abandon him.83 In order to defeat PƯrnjz, the crafty Hephthalite king dug a ditch near his camp which he covered up with weak boards topped with dirt. When the Sasanian army charged, they fell in, and many of them, including PƯrnjz, perished. Ulti- mately, the Sasanians did rally under the SijistƗnƯ magnate SnjkhrƗ, to repel the Hephthalites from their lands, forcing them to return the spoils and prisoners that they had taken. SnjkhrƗ took effective control of the Sasanian state with the death of PƯrnjz. According to the other tradition, which is considerably less detailed, PƯrnjz, as a young man, took refuge with the king of the HayƗܒila when his brother Hurmuz seized the throne, forcing PƯrnjz to ee. The Hephthalite ruler equipped the royal refugee with an army, with which he defeated and killed his brother, and retook the throne. These sources relate that PƯrnjz later attacked the KhƗqƗn of the Turks. However, there are some clear parallels between this account and that of PƯrnjz’s defeat at the hands of the Hephthalites mentioned above, which evid- ences some possible blurring between the two traditions.84 First, al-D ƯnawarƯ and the NihƗyat, mirroring Miskawayh (see this chapter, note 82), state that PƯrnjz had his army drag the boundary tower constructed by BahrƗm Gnjr to delineate his territory from the land of the Turks, on his march towards the KhƗqƗn. In the BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 93 ShƗhnƗma on the other hand, when PƯrnjz comes upon the tower constructed by BahrƗm Gnjr, he vows to build another one, deep in the heart of Turanian ter- ritory.85 Second, the three aforementioned sources name the Turkish KhƗqƗn as AkhshuvƗn/KhnjshnavƗz, who in this tradition likewise acts as the voice of morality, warning PƯrnjz against his transgressing the boundaries established by his own grandfather BahrƗm, and that he will be punished for his evil. All three sources describe the KhƗqƗn’s use of the same ruse of defeating PƯrnjz by luring his army into a ditch. Finally, in these accounts, SnjkhrƗ (al-D ƯnawarƯ: Shnjkhar; NihƗyat: SnjkharƗvƯdh; FirdawsƯ: Snjfaray) who had been charged with adminis- tering the affairs of the Sasanian state in its sovereign’s absence, ultimately defeated the Turks, repelling them from Sasanian territory. PƯrnjz’s defeat at the hands of a Central Asian confederation in the fth century, be they Huns or Turks, serves as an important watershed in the Islamic conquest narrative, showing for the rst time that the Sasanians were in fact vul- nerable, even against enemies numerically weaker than and not as organized as they were, especially if the latter occupied the moral high ground. While this episode does not involve the Arabs, I argue that it still plays a strong role in Islamic kerygmatic history by portraying this defeat as precursor, in a similar way as the later Battle of Dhnj QƗr (See Chapter 6), to the Muslim conquest and liquidation of the Sasanian dynasty. To start, this episode is relevant for our story since both the Huns and Turks, coming from a pastoral-nomadic steppe background, bear a strong likeness to the Arabs. Indeed, contemporaneous observers of the late antique and early Islamic worlds either noticed the resemblance between these peoples, or at least spoke about them using similar terms. For example, Fisher, Lewin, and Whately have pointed out the same telltale tropes of brigandage, perdy, promiscuity, along with other cultural shortcomings associated with nomads in the Roman world, occurring in Ammianus’ accounts of both the Saracens and Huns.86 More- over, al- JƗতi਌, in his ManƗqib al- Turk, poignantly argues for the similarity between the Bedouin Arabs and the Turks, stating:

The Turks are a people of migratory tribes, desert dwellers and lords of live- stock. They are the Bedouin [a‘rƗb] of the non- Arab peoples, (just as the HadhƯl tribe are the Kurds of the Arabs). They don’t bother themselves with industries and trades, medicine, agriculture, and engineering, nor with plant- ing, building, irrigation, and levying taxes. Their only interests are raiding, hunting, riding horses, the ghting of heroes, the quest for booty, and the conquest of lands.87

This recognized similarity between Arabian and Central Asian nomads helps bring into focus the conspicuous parallels between Islamic historical accounts of the Sasanians’ defeat to the Hephthalites/Turks and the Arab- Muslims. For both emphasize the trope of the victory of a group of humble steppe origins, which makes up for an apparent lack of political and military organization, as well as numbers in comparison with its pompous Persian foe, with its moral superiority 94 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster and divine favor. In this context, it warrants mention that Ibn Qutayba provides a detailed account of PƯrnjz’s saga with the HayƗܒila, interestingly enough, in his l al-‘Arab, his treatise in defense of the Arabs! Ibn Qutayba stated that itڲFa -babtu an adhkuۊprovided him special pleasure to mention this anecdote (a rahu).88 Coming in the text shortly after his description of the Arabs’ role in raising BahrƗm Gnjr, and the victory of the Bannj ShƗybƗn over the Persian asƗwira (noble cavalry) at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr, it would seem that the Sasani- ans’ loss to the HayƗܒila does carry some kerygmatic value for the author, as a sign of a weakening Sasanian state against a backdrop of growing Arab power. The Hephthalites in this episode resemble the Arabs as they are portrayed by our sources in their encounters with the Sasanians. In particular, the seless old man who volunteers to be mutilated so as to trick PƯrnjz resembles Sheikh ‘Amr, who as we saw in the previous chapter, stayed behind in his camp as ShƗpnjr approached, in order to buy his eeing fellow tribesmen some time, knowing full well that he would be apprehended by the Persians. Indeed, in Ibn Qutayba’s account, the old man’s explanation of his actions to his king is remarkably similar to ‘Amr’s speech to his compatriots, urging them to leave him behind.89 For in response to the befuddled AkhshunvƗr’s question to him about what benet his actions will bring, he states:

I have reached [in years] what I have wanted to reach in the world, and I am certain that death is imminent, even if it might be delayed by a few days. I would therefore love to seal off my life in the best possible way, by provid- ing faithful counsel to my brothers and by damaging my enemy.90

The ruler AkhshunvƗr likewise serves as a model of moral rectitude. Several sources report that when PƯrnjz came to his land, requesting an army to defeat his brother, he responded that he would only provide assistance upon proof that Hurmuz was an unjust king. After learning that this was indeed the case, he is reported to have proclaimed, “God is displeased by tyranny, and rule does not prosper by it.”91 The inclusion of this proclamation shows that the chroniclers were attempting to establish the high character of AkhshunvƗr, since such apho- ristic sayings in the Islamic narrative tradition were generally reserved for heroic kings and pious religious gures. The historians emphasized that when AkhshunvƗr defeated the Iranians for the rst time, he treated the prisoners most graciously. In Bal‘amƯ’s account, after scolding PƯrnjz for his ingratitude and warning him that his being captured was an act of divine will, he promised to adopt him as his son, and freed the Iranians. Bal‘amƯ’s report continues that AkhshunvƗr, as an act of good will, then gave PƯrnjz generous gifts including ne garments, carpets, vases, and animals.92 Later, in his meeting with PƯrnjz prior to their fateful battle, AkhshunvƗr delivers a lengthy speech to the Sasanian king, which in its chastisement of PƯrnjz’s hubris, and its invocation of divine retribution, anticipates the eloquent arguments uttered by the God- fearing Muslim emissaries to the Sasanians and Romans prior to the Muslims’ monumental victories over these empires. BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 95 AkhshunvƗr rebukes PƯrnjz, saying that it is only his pride which has led him to carry out this attack. He then reminds PƯrnjz of their sacrosanct agreement (‘ahd), warning him of the disastrous consequences for one who breaks a sworn con- tract. He also warns PƯrnjz that he will most certainly be defeated if he chooses to ght, since, he says to him, “you seek aid in your abundance of soldiers and the number of your companions of which you boast,” whereas, “we seek aid in God, whom we exalt, and by the covenant which we made with you.”93 In addition to the portrayal of AkhshunvƗr’s apparent (and surprising!) proto-monotheism, one sees here the theme of PƯrnjz’s overcondence in his numbers. Indeed the Sasani- ans’ reliance upon their numbers, as well as other purely material advantages (such as organization and superior weaponry) was a common critique of the Sas- anians among early Muslim authors, as I shall analyze more closely in Chapter 7. While the sources present PƯrnjz as an effective ruler early in his reign, high- lighting how he adroitly kept his people from starving during a famine, and detailing his building activity, the overall picture of this king which emerges is that of a tyrant, who was defeated and killed due to his pride in the numerical superiority of his army and his failure to abide by an oath. The authors depicted him as an unwise and arrogant king, whose hubris compelled him to go out to war, even after the mǀbadhƗn mobƗdh (head priest) warned him against such an evil action, and even though his own soldiers recognized the injustice of such an undertaking. By his breaking of the oath, we are led to believe that he had effect- ively demoted himself from the prestige enjoyed by ArdashƯr, ShƗpnjr, BahrƗm, and his other notable forefathers, hence AkhshunvƗr’s reminder that his forbear- ers abided by agreements whether they liked them or not.94 In one account, he warned PƯrnjz in anachronistic monotheistic language, saying, “God, lofty and exalted, [‘azza wa- jalla—yet another Qur’anic injunction!] does not work by trickery nor does he double- cross. Desist from what your forefathers would not have not done, and do not undertake what they would have not undertaken!”95 Finally, according to Bal‘amƯ, after he perished, the Hephthalites found upon the body of PƯrnjz a golden amulet listing his treasures.96 The obvious ironic message here is that all of his wealth is no use to him in the end. We shall see that this theme, in which all an Iranian lord has on the brink of disaster is his luxuries, recurs in our narrative.

Conclusion The early Muslim chronicles thus underline BahrƗm Gnjr’s upbringing amongst the Lakhmids of al-ণƯ ra as the source of his heroic character and renement. This emphasis was intended to prove that the Arab peoples possessed a certain rustic sophistication, and that they could raise kings in their own right. These sources also highlight the role of BahrƗm’s guardian al- Mundhir in his life to show the inuence of the pre- Islamic Arabs in Sasanian politics. The intended effect of this portrayal was to demonstrate the increasing importance of the Arab peoples in imperial affairs. At the same time, this episode serves as a formative 96 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster stage in Arab kerygmatic history. To this end, I also analyzed the account of the Hephthalite/Turkish victory over the Sasanians as a watershed in the Islamic conquest narrative, showing for the rst time, the vulnerability of the Sasanians, while serving as a precursor to the later Muslim conquest of the Sasanian realms, which would likewise be carried out by a people with inferior means, but who held the moral high ground. The Sasanians are shown to be equally pompous prior to ghting the Muslims, and this, we shall see, is what brings on their downfall.

Notes 1 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 56. 2 The name Lakhmid stems from the “Bannj Lakhm,” a pre- Islamic South Arabian tribe from which the Lakhmid kings claimed descent. This dynasty is also referred to as the “Bannj Naৢr” (Naৢrids), after ‘AdƯ b. Naৢr, the father of ‘Amr, the dynas- -Ư ra: Eine araۉ-ty’s progenitor. Prominent studies include Isabel Toral-Niehoff, Al bische Kulturmetropole im spätantiken Kontext (Leiden: Brill, 2014); “Late Antique Iran and the Arabs: the Case of al- Hira,” Journal of Persianate Studies 6 (2013): 115–126; M. J. Kister, “Al-ণƯ ra: Some Notes on its Relation with Arabia,” Arabica 15, 2 (1968): 143–169; ‘IrfƗn ShahƯd, “Lakhmids,” EI, 2nd ed.; Gustav -îra: Ein Versuch zur arabisch ۉ-miden in alېRothstein, Der Dynastie der La persischen Geschichte zur Zeit der Sasaniden (Berlin: Reuther and Reichard, 1899). 3 Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 31–35; al- TƯjƗn, 303–305; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 910–914. For his part, al- DƯnawarƯ (56) writes that RabƯ‘a sent his son ‘Amr to either Yazdagird b. ShƗpnjr I or ShƗpnjr II, and that he became the rst Lakhmid ruler of al-ণƯ ra. (This ‘Amr is not to be confused with ‘Amr b. ‘AdƯ, who was the former’s grand nephew according to al- DƯnawarƯ’s scheme.) Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 380–383) does not mention this account, but he does state that Sa৬Ưত and Shiqq prognosticated the ooding of the Ma’rib dam, which was the catalyst triggering the Arab migration. On Sa৬Ưত and Shiqq, see further Rubin, The Eye of the Beholder, 54. 4 On this migration, see p. 60. 5 Whether JadhƯma al- Abrash was the same as the “GadhƯmat, king of Tannjkh” men- tioned in the bilingual (Nabatean and Greek) Umm al- JimƗl inscription on Jordan is a question of scholarly debate. See Macdonald et al., “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century,” 28–30. 6 “Arab Kings, Arab Tribes,” 389. 7 The bilingual Middle Persian and Parthian Paikuli inscription mentions one “ ‘Amr King of the Lakhmids” as one of the Sasanian King Narseh’s vassals. See H. Humbach and P. O. Skjaervø, The Sassanian Inscription of Paikuli (4 vols.) (Wies- baden: Dr Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 1978–1983), III/1, 71. 8 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 746–769; Bal‘amƯ, II, 7–28; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 315–320; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 208–209; ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ, 75–76; Ibn Qutayba, al- Ma‘Ɨrif, 357–358; Miskawayh, I, 90–95. Al- DƯnawarƯ (56) appears to blend Ibn IsতƗq’s account of RabƯ‘a b. Naৢr’s dream and Ibn al-KalbƯ’s narrative of the Tannjkh, claiming that JadhƯma was the son of ‘Amr b. RabƯ‘a, who had migrated to Iraq after Sa৬Ưত and Shiqq’s prognostication. Al-D ƯnawarƯ also states that it was al- ZabbƗ’s daughter MƗriyya, who tricked and murdered JadhƯma. 9 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 672, 744–745; Bal‘amƯ, II, 5–6; Miskawayh, I, 77, 89. Al- ণƯra derives ,ayr) built by Nebuchadnezzar to contain the Arabs ۊ-its name from the enclosure (al which fell into ruin. Al-D ƯnawarƯ (56), on the other hand, indicates that it was con- structed for the Lakhmid migrants to settle by the Sasanians. BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 97 10 Curiously, Ibn Qutayba relates an alternative tradition for the origins of ‘AdƯ b. Naৢr, stating that this was not Naৢr b. RabƯ‘a, but rather Naৢr b. al- SƗ৬irnjn, the king of the n (the citadel). It seems likely that he was referring to the܈i ۊ-Syrians and owner of al same ruler of Hatra (al-ঋ ayzan/al- SƗ৬irnjn) we encountered in the previous chapter, thus providing a link between the two dynasties. See al- Ma‘Ɨrif, 357; Yasmine Zahran, The Lakhmids of Hira: Sons of the Water of Heaven (London: Stacey Inter- national, 2009), 24–25. For his part, al- DƯnawarƯ (56) states that al- ঋayzan was an uncle of al-Zabb Ɨ’. 11 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 769. 12 ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 89. 13 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 56. 14 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 834. 15 There appears to be disagreement as to whether the term f- s -r- w means “Persians” (thus denoting a relationship between Imrnj’l-Qays and the Persians) or, more generi- cally, “horsemen.” Regardless, the reference to Imrnj’l-Qays’ association with the -Ư ra, 63; ‘IrfƗn ShahƯd, Byzanۉ-Roman empire is irrefutable. See Toral-Niehoff, Al tium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century, 43–44. 16 M. C. A. Macdonanld et al. “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century,” 75; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 79; Benjamin Isaac, The Limits of Empire: The Roman Army in the East, rev. ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000), 240. For his part, ‘IrfƗn ShahƯd theorizes that ShƗpnjr II’s punitive campaign against the Arabs discussed in the previous chapter would have provided the incentive for Imrnj’l-Qays to switch sides. See Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century, 32–34. 17 Toral-Niehoff, “Late-Antique Iran and the Arabs,” 119. Ư ra, 223–224) provides a very helpful table listing the differentۉ-Toral-Niehoff (Al 18 lines of Lakhmid dynastic succession contained within the major sources. 19 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 834; ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 77. 20 Fisher, “Editor’s Introduction,” Arabs and Empires, 7; Christian Robin, “Les Arabes de ণimyar,” 185. 21 Retsö, The Arabs in Antiquity, 477–480. 22 A. Karbowska, “Einige Bemerkungen über Bahram Gur: Epos und Geschichte,” Folia Orientalia 22 (1984): 97. For other modern studies on BahrƗm Gnjr, see O. Klima, “BahrƗm V Gǀr,” EIr, 1989; W. L. Hanaway Jr., “BahrƗm V Gǀr in Persian Legend and Literature,” EIr, 1989. 23 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 850–855. 24 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 853. These units are also mentioned by ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ (79) as well as by the twelfth-century historian of the Shi‘ite Iraqi Mazyadid dynasty, Abnj’l-BaqƗ’ ,Ɨ’i‘ڲHibbat AllƗh al-ণ illƯ. This author speaks of another group known as al- Wa which was a unit of 1,000 asƗwira (Persian cavalry) stationed in al- ণƯra and rotated every year. See al- ManƗqib al- mazyadiyya fƯ akhbƗr al-mul njk al- Asadiyya (2 vols.) (Al-‘Ayn: Markaz Zayid lil-Tur Ɨth wa’l-Ta’rƯkh, 2000), I, 109, 113. See further M. J. ,midenېƯ ra, 63–64; Rothstein, Laۉ-Kister, “Al-ণƯ ra,” 167; Toral-Niehoff, Al 134–135. 25 We can say with a fair degree of certainty that the account of BahrƗm Gnjr’s upbring- ing amongst the Lakhmids formed part of the original KhudƗynƗma. The author of the NihƗyat (256) even cites Ibn al-Muqaffa‘, the preeminent translator of the KhudƗynƗma, as its source for its account of BahrƗm Gnjr. Yet the reception of this episode during the Islamic period must have led to some literary embellishment of it. In particular, our sources’ emphasized juxtaposition between the Persian and Arab inuences shaping BahrƗm (see the analysis below) reects an ‘Abbasid period dis- course in which Arab and Persian civilization stand at odds. For such a paradigm would not have been recognizable to a Sasanian chronicler, who wouldn’t have con- sidered the Arabs as a rival civilization, but rather as one of many peoples classied under the broader rubric of AnƯrƗn, or non-Iranian. On the ƮrƗn versus AnƯrƗn 98 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster construct, see Dick Davis, “Iran and Aniran: The Shaping of a Legend,” in Iran Facing Others: Identity Boundaries in Historical Perspective, eds. Abbas Amanat and Farzin Vejdani, 37–48 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012); Philippe Gignoux, “AnƝrƗn,” EIr, 1985. 26 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 854–855. 27 See al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 176–177; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 162–163; al- DƯnawarƯ, 53, 56–60; Bal‘amƯ, II, 104–126; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 539–569; Miskawayh, I, 114–129; NihƗyat, 252–266; ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ, 79–80. In the ShƗhnƗma, al- Mundhir, and his own son, al- Nu‘mƗn came together to Yazdagird’s court to convince the king to send BahrƗm to be raised with them in their kingdom in Yemen (as opposed to al-ণƯ ra). See FirdawsƯ, V, 396–400. 28 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 854; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 539; FirdawsƯ, V, 396–398. 29 See note 27. 30 BahrƗm’s epithet “Gnjr” means “wild ass” and is a reference to his skill at hunting. According to Bal‘amƯ (II, 112) it is through this specic feat that BahrƗm attained his laqab. See FirdawsƯ, V, 408–409; Bosworth, The History of al-ܑ abarƯ 5: 81–82, n. 220; Hanaway, “BahrƗm V Gǀr in Persian Legend and Literature.” 31 The sources refer to this ruler as KhƗqƗn, king of the Turks, or simply just as KhƗqƗn. This is clearly an anachronistic projection, reecting a tendency in Islamic histori- ography to refer to Central Asian nomadic groups indiscriminately as Turks. Chris- tensen (L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 280) makes the case that the group that BahrƗm defeated were actually the Chionite Huns, though Klima (“BahrƗm V Gǀr”) regards them as Hephthalites. 32 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 864. 33 This presumably means the Horn of Africa. This account of a clearly legendary cam- paign was possibly inuenced by the conquest of Yemen commissioned by Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn in the sixth century. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 871; Miskawayh, I, 120; Bosworth, The History of al- ܑabarƯ 5: 105–106, n. 272. 34 According to FirdawsƯ (VI, 61–64) however, he simply died in his sleep. 35 Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 82. 36 Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, I, 317) mentions a tradition where al- ZabbƗ’ was a Roman who spoke Arabic. 37 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 749, 822; ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 77. 38 Though he admits that there was substantial mixing between the two groups. Thus, according to one tradition, JadhƯma himself was a proto- Arab. See al- ৫abarƯ, I, 750, 757; “Arab Kings, Arab Tribes,” 389. 39 Thus Lakhmid society is described as a composite of settled, semi- settled and non- settled elements, including the nomadic Tannjkh living in the vicinity of al- ণƯra and -lƗf (conۊal- AnbƗr, the ‘IbƗd, the settled Christian town dwellers of al-ণƯ ra, and the a federates), who appear to have been recently settled Bedouin who had joined the resi- dents of al- ণƯra. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 822; ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ, 77; Bosworth, The History .miden, 18ffېof al-ܑ abarƯ 5: 122, n. 79; Rothstein, La 40 A. El- Tayib, “Pre-Islamic Poetry,” in CHALUP, 35–36. 41 Bal‘amƯ, II, 105 .l al-‘Arab, 63ڲFa 42 43 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 336. 44 Diodorus (Book XIX: 94, p. 87) writes that in order to preserve their liberty, the Arabs “live in the open air, claiming as native land a wilderness that has neither rivers nor abundant springs from which it is possible for a hostile army to obtain water.” For Diodorus’ other statements to this effect, see the citations provided in Chapter 2, note 52. 45 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 542; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 162. 46 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 855; Bal‘amƯ, II, 105; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 540; NihƗyat, 253. Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ (Ta’rƯkh, I, 172) only mentions the Arab women that suckled BahrƗm, whereas BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 99 FirdawsƯ (V, 400) equalizes the equation, claiming it was two Arab women and two Persian women. 47 NihƗyat, 254. BahrƗm was said to be the son of the Jewish exilarch’s daughter, which might explain why he looked like both the Persians and the Semitic Arabs. See Klima, “BahrƗm V Gǀr.” On the other hand, it seems likely that this statement is an indica- tion that BahrƗm was so immersed in the ways of the Arabs that he literally came to resemble them. 48 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 53. 49 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 540–541. On BahrƗm’s Arab instructors, see also al- ৫abarƯ, I, 856; Mis- kawayh, I, 115; NihƗyat, 257–258. 50 On al- Khwarnaq, see Bosworth, The History of al-ܑ abarƯ 5: 75, n. 200; L. Massi- .miden, 15–16ېgnon, “al-K ࡯ h࡯ awarnaল,” EI, 2nd ed.; Rothstein, La 51 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 540. 52 Bal‘amƯ, II, 106. 53 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 852; Bal‘amƯ, II, 108–109. 54 Bal‘amƯ, II, 106. 55 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 851–852; Bal‘amƯ, II, 106–107. 56 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 853–854; Bal‘amƯ, II, 109–110; ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 79–80. 57 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 853–854; ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ, 80. 58 Adam Talib, “Topoi and Topography in the Histories of al-ণƯ ra,” in History and Iden- tity in the Late Antique Near East, ed. Philip Wood, 123–147 (Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press, 2013). .l al-‘Arab, 86ڲFa 59 60 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 553. 61 Bal‘amƯ, II, 113. 62 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 550. 63 Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 162. 64 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 858; Miskawayh, I, 115. 65 NihƗyat, 257. 66 Miskawayh, I, 115. 67 FirdawsƯ, V, 405–407; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 542–543. On the artistic depiction of BahrƗm mounted on a camel, see Richard Ettinghausen, “Bahram Gur’s Hunting Feats or the Problem of Identication,” Iran 17 (1979): 27. 68 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 58. 69 See pp. 30, 33. 70 Macdonald, “Arabians, Arabias, and the Greeks: Contact and Perceptions,” 24–26. 71 NihƗyat, 254; Murnjj, I, 166–167. 72 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 555–556. 73 For the term I’ve translated as “soldiers,” al- Mas‘njdƯ uses the word jumnj‘, whereas in al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s account, it is junnjd. See al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 177; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 556–557. The poetry these two authors provide is close but not identical, indicating a common source. Al-Mas‘ njdƯ does not list a source, but states that he provides further discussion on the poetry of BahrƗm Gnjr in his larger volumes, AkhbƗr al-zam Ɨn and KitƗb al-Awsa ܒ. Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ on the other hand states that this poetry was preserved by ‘AdƯ b. Zayd, the poet of al-ণƯ ra, and he lists Ibn KhurradƗdhbih as a source, which we have seen served as a common source for both authors on Persian history. See pp. 66–67. 74 See pp. 71–72. 75 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 858–860. See also Bal‘amƯ, II, 114–116; FirdawsƯ, V, 427–432; Miska- wayh, I, 115–116, NihƗyat, 256–257, which closely parallel al-৫ abarƯ’s account in their rendition of these events. 76 Al- DƯnawarƯ, 57. 77 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 555. .l al-‘Arab, 94ڲFa 78 100 BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 79 Bal‘amƯ, (II, 128) provides the etymology of this word, arguing that it is the plural of hayܒal, which means “brave man” in the Bukharan language. Al- Mas‘njdƯ states that the HayƗܒila are in fact the Sogdians. See Murnjj, I, 178. 80 See Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 295; R. N. Frye, “The Political History of Iran under the Sasanians,” in CHI 3, 1: 147–148. The study of the Hephthalite empire has proven to be challenging for modern scholars since the diverse sources on this enigmatic Central Asian confederation provide contradictory information. Litvin- ski postulates that the discrepancies in the texts as to the Hephthalites’ lifestyle, appearance, degree of government and the like are the result of their starting out as a nomadic people, who later settled in towns, and developed a rudimentary administra- tion. See B. A. Litvinski, “The Hephthalite Empire,” in History of Civilizations of Central Asia 3: The Crossroads of Civilizations: A.D. 250–750, eds. B. A. Litvinski, Zhang Guang-da, and R. Shabani Samghabadi (Paris: Unesco, 1996), 135–162. See also A. D. H. Bivar, “HayƗ৬ila,” EI, 2nd ed.; F. Grenet, “Regional Interaction in Central Asia and Northwest India in the Kidarite and Hephthalite Periods,” in Indo- Iranian Languages and Peoples, ed. Nicholas Sims- Williams (Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press, 2003), 203–224. 81 Ibn Qutayba bases his report on the Siyar al-‘ajam. See ‘Uynjn al- akhbƗr, I, 117–121; ;l al-‘Arab, 94–98. Other variants of this tradition include al-৫ abarƯ, I, 872–880ڲFa Bal‘amƯ, II, 127–128, 131–144; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 573–583; Miskawayh, I, 120–122; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 178. ,l al-‘Arab, 95; Bal‘amƯ, II, 136. Miskawayh (IڲIbn Qutayba, ‘Uynjn, I, 118–119; Fa 82 122) states that the boundary marker was in fact the tower originally built by BahrƗm Gnjr to denote the border between his territory and that of his enemy, the Turks. PƯrnjz commissioned 50 elephants and 300 men to drag the tower with him on his march. By doing so, PƯrnjz violated his ‘ahd (contract) with UkhshunvƗz to not cross this boundary. 83 Bal‘amƯ, II, 141; FirdawsƯ, VI, 75; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 581. This act is reminiscent of Mu‘Ɨwiyya I’s strategy at the Battle of SiffƯn (AD 657/AH 37), in which he had his sol- diers attach pages of the Qur’an to their lances, so as to dissuade the army of ‘AlƯ from ghting fellow Muslims. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 3329. 84 FirdawsƯ, VI, 68–92; al- DƯnawarƯ, 60–62; NihƗyat, 270, 277–280; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 163. Bal‘amƯ (II, 135–136) incorporates this tradition in his account by stating that the king of the HayƗܒila, through his messenger, scolded PƯrnjz for coming out to ght him despite the assistance that he had previously given the Sasanian king against his brother. For his part, FirdawsƯ is unclear as to whether KhnjshnavƗz was a Turk or a Hephthalite. He states that PƯrnjz set out to make war against the Turks (VI, 73), and labels KhnjshnavƗz as the commander of the Turks (V, 78, sepahdƗr TurkƗn). Later on in his narrative, however, FirdawsƯ has Snjfaray send a threatening message to KhnjshnavƗz, stating that he is going to destroy the HayܒƗliyƗn (VI, 85), which would indicate that KhnjshnavƗz was a Hephthalite ruler. Another indication that KhnjshnavƗz was a Hephthalite appears further on in the text (VI, 249–250), when the Hephthalites claim, after their defeat at the hands of the Turks, that they will make as their leader someone else from the family of KhnjshnavƗz if their current ruler does not agree to become tributary to Iran. 85 FirdawsƯ, VI, 73–74. 86 “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century,” 78–79. 87 ManƗqib al- Turk, 55. HadhƯl is a MuঌarƯ tribe of the ণijƗz. .l al-‘Arab, 95ڲFa 88 89 See p. 67. 90 ‘Uynjn, I, 118. Though the old man does state that he hopes that his family will be rewarded through his sacrice. 91 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 872; Bal‘amƯ, II, 127–128; Miskawayh, I, 120. 92 Bal‘amƯ, II, 136–137. BahrƗm V Gnjr, Lakhmids, Hephthalite disaster 101 -l al-‘Arab, 97. See also Bal‘amƯ, II, 140 and alڲIbn Qutayba, ‘Uynjn, I, 120; Fa 93 Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 581 for statements to the same effect. 94 Ibn Qutayba, ‘Uynjn, I, 120. Bal‘amƯ (II, 141) similarly stated that he warned the Iranian soldiers, “Since ancient times, never has a king broken a treaty or employed a ruse without it causing him to perish.” 95 Miskawayh, I, 122. 96 Bal‘amƯ, II, 142. 5 The twilight of Sasanian power Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn and the saga of ণimyar

And what am I to do with what the king has given me when the mountains of the land from which I have come are composed entirely of gold and silver?1

In the next phase of our story, we encounter QubƗdh I (r. 488–496, 498 or 499–531) and Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn (r. 531–579) in their dealings with the Arabs. We will see that the Islamic chronicles portray QubƗdh’s loss of control of his Arab provinces (along with a rather incredible Yemeni conquest of Iran according to some traditions) as a product of his misrule and zandaqa. Likewise, AnnjshirvƗn’s amelioration of the situation with the Arabs is depicted as part of his successful program of imperial restoration. In this context, I will examine the reports of the ণimyarite embassy (or two embassies depending on the account) to AnnjshirvƗn’s court in search of aid against the Abyssinian occupiers of South Arabia, and the subsequent Iranian-Yemeni conquest of that region. I will endeavor to show that these accounts highlight the eloquence and dignity of the Arab visitor in the face of the Iranians’ imposing ceremonial. I will also analyze the more general absorption of the South Arabian tradition into the canon of Arab- Islamic kerygmatic history. This chapter concludes with an examination of other notable events of AnnjshirvƗn’s reign, including the infamous Yawm al- Safqa (Day of the Slamming/Shutting), which refers to the Sasanians’ massacre of Bannj TamƯm tribesmen at the al- Mushaqqar castle near Hajar,2 as well as the inauspicious omens taking place in Iran on the eve of the Prophet’s birth that signaled the fall of the Sasanian dynasty.

QubƗdh I and Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn is considered amongst the greatest of the Sasanian kings in the Islamic narrative tradition. His reign is given the most space in the Islamic texts, and he is portrayed as a provider of stability, coming to power after a period of disorder rst set in motion with the defeat and death of PƯrnjz I, and then exacerbated by Khusraw’s I father and predecessor, QubƗdh I. The sources make it clear that QubƗdh’s hold on power had always been tenuous. When his rival brother BalƗsh became king after the death of PƯrnjz, QubƗdh ed to the The twilight of Sasanian power 103 Turkish KhƗqƗn, who equipped him with an army to take the throne. However, BalƗsh’s untimely death facilitated this process. Later in his reign, QubƗdh was ousted by another brother, JƗmƗsp. This time, he took refuge with the ruler of the HayƗܒila, who assisted him in regaining his kingdom by providing him an army to march on Ctesiphon.3 QubƗdh also contended with the ambitions and rivalries of the ahl al-buy njtƗt, i.e., noble families descended from vassal kings of the Parthian period. Early in his reign, he made common cause with the MihrƗn family, employing one of its members to kill the powerful QƗrin SnjkhrƗ, who had been the real arbiter of power in the empire ever since the death of PƯrnjz.4 Yet our sources depict the Mazdakite heresy as the main cause of instability during this period. Mazdak appears as a charlatan who claimed to be a prophet, and started a movement preaching the equal distribution of property and women amongst the Iranian people. The sources indicate that the weak- minded QubƗdh fell prey to the machinations of what they regard as a manipulative fraud, lending his full support for Mazdak to implement these measures. As a result, Iranian society fell into a state of utter chaos, with children and parents not knowing each other, and with no man’s property or wives being safe from being taken. Based on the apparent discrepancies and inconsistencies within our sources (both Christian and Muslim) regarding the Mazdakite episode, modern historians have debated not only the details and chronology of this movement, but also whether Mazdak himself even existed. Most recently, Jackson Bonner has effectively argued that the Mazdakite heresy’s impact on Iranian society was exaggerated in the KhudƗynƗma tradition for the propagandistic purpose of por- traying Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn, who brought an end to Mazdakism and executed Mazdak, as a bulwark of Zoroastrian orthodoxy.5 Indeed, Khusraw’s handling of the Mazdakite heresy must be viewed in the light of his other meritorious accom- plishments that are emphasized in the Islamic sources, as products of Khusraw’s “communications department,” from which the later Islamic sources derive their portrayal of this latter Sasanian ruler as the savior of Iran. The narrative of Khusraw’s life begins with the legend of his birth, conceived by QubƗdh when he was on the run from JƗmƗsp, and a daughter of a dihqƗn descended from the ancient king AfrƯdnjn.6 The sources detail the measures Khusraw took upon becoming king to centralize the control of the Sasanian monarchy and to stabilize the state after the misrule of his father QubƗdh. We read that either as crown prince or immediately upon becoming king, Khusraw I put down the Mazdakite heresy, established Zoroastrian orthodoxy, and reafrmed the social divisions between nobles and commoners, thus earning him the title, AnnjshirvƗn (of the pure soul). The sources further detail his administra- tive reforms, the most notable of which was his division of his empire into four provinces.7 Regarding the military, he is reported to have formed a standing army out of recruits from the dihqƗn class, for whom he provided equipment and training, and remunerated with stipends or land. He instituted a review of this army, which he is said to have once supervised incognito in the guise of a caval- ryman.8 In terms of nancial matters, we read of Khusraw I’s overhaul of the Sasanian tax system, whose effect was to double the state revenue.9 Finally, the 104 The twilight of Sasanian power sources detail Khusraw I’s military triumphs. In this regard, several of the akhbƗrƯs describe, quite incorrectly, how he vanquished the Hephthalites, thus avenging his grandfather PƯrnjz.10 All of this makes Khusraw I’s rule appear as a model of state centralization and prosperity. However, the sources also reect the historical reality that AnnjshirvƗn’s rule represented a sort of twilight of Sasanian power. It would be the last period for Sasanian greatness, as the power struggle which had been sim- mering under the surface for some time, between the ahl al- buynjtƗt and the Sas- anian monarchy, which was supported by the dihqƗns and the scribes, would bring the empire to its knees under the weak rulers who succeeded Khusraw I.11 Thus, Frye comments on Khusraw I:

His very name became, like that of Caesar, the designation of the Sasanian kings for the Arabs and almost a synonym for splendor and glory. But Chosroes ruled Iran less than a century before the Arab conquest and, as is not uncommon in history, the seeds of decay already existed in the period of greatest splendour in the Sasanian Empire.12

QubƗdh, Khusraw, and the Arabs The Islamic sources connect QubƗdh’s misrule with the Sasanians’ loss of control of the Arabian sphere. In this regard, several texts detail how the latter part of QubƗdh’s second reign witnessed the “Kindite interregnum,” in which al-ণƗ rith b. ‘Amr, chief of the powerful tribe of Kinda, took control of al-ণƯ ra from the Lakhmids, becoming, albeit nominally, the Sasanians’ vassal.13 According to al- ৫abarƯ, Bal‘amƯ, and Miskawayh (who closely follows al-৫ abarƯ in his account of pre- Islamic history), al-ণƗ rith, sensing QubƗdh’s weakness, crossed the Euphra- tes and invaded the SawƗd, despite having reached an agreement of vassalage with the Sasanian king. When QubƗdh protested, al-ণƗ rith blamed these attacks on robbers and demanded more lands in that region to be put under his authority, to which QubƗdh acquiesced. What follows in the accounts of these same histori- ans is the stuff of legend.14 Continuing on this same narrative, which is based on Ibn al-Kalb Ư, they write that al-ণƗ rith sent a message to the Tubba‘, the king of Yemen, advising him to attack the Persians since their king is a zindƯq who is vegetarian and a pacist (thus implying that their king is weak and their kingdom is vulnerable).15 The Tubba‘ marched to al-ণƯ ra and sent his nephew, Shamir Dhnj’l-JanƗh (elsewhere: Shamir Yur’ish) against QubƗdh. The latter routed the Sasanian army and then killed QubƗdh in Rayy. Tubba‘ then sent both Shamir and his own son ণasƗn to Central Asia, promising the throne of China to whoever reached it rst!16 Another son, Ya‘fur, was sent west, subduing Constantinople, but died in an attempt to conquer Rome. Shamir conquered Samarqand through a ruse in which he snuck his men into the city in treasure chests.17 He then marched on China, only to nd that ণasan had already beaten him there. According to al- ৫abarƯ and Miskawayh, the Tubba‘ had constructed a string of lighthouses between him and China so that he could communicate with his sons!18 The twilight of Sasanian power 105 The inclusion of this fanciful Alexander-romance style “alternate” narrative must be analyzed for its didactic function. It seems likely that we are dealing with a South Arabian tradition of propaganda extolling the legendary feats of the ণimyarites that has been cross- pollinated with a native Iranian tradition that blames QubƗdh for the ills of the empire during this era. For QubƗdh’s weakness and Mazdakism are portrayed as the root cause of this chain of events precipitat- ing the Kindite interregnum, and then the fall of Iran and the death of the Sasa- nian king himself.19 Indeed, all of our sources describing these events preface a‘f (weakness) of QubƗdh. This episodeڲ their accounts by emphasizing the therefore serves as a lesson warning of the dangers of zandaqa by showing that if allowed to go unchecked, heretical beliefs and practices will cause the collapse of social order (as witnessed with the Mazdakite movement) and will ultimately lead to the fall of the state, by encouraging outsiders to invade. It is therefore tting that al-ণƗ rith, the erce Arab chieftain,20 should recognize the vulner- ability of a king who abhors bloodshed. As a weak-minded zindƯq, QubƗdh thus opened up the doors for the Arabs to invade his kingdom.21 Our sources report that upon becoming king, Khusraw I remedied the debacle with the Arabs brought on by his father’s misrule. Those texts that deal in depth with the Yemeni invasion tradition wrap it up neatly, returning to the main KhudƗynƗma narrative in which QubƗdh dies naturally, succeeded by his son without incident.22 In general, the Islamic historical tradition shows an increased Iranian presence in the Arabian peninsula marking Khusraw I’s reign. This can be seen in his returning the Lakhmids to their position of authority in al-ণƯ ra, thus restoring the status quo that had been in place between these two dynasties since the beginnings of them both. The sources describe how Khusraw made al- Mundhir III b. al- Nu‘mƗn (c.504–554) king of the Arabs, and delegated upon him an unprecedented level of authority, thus extending his own inuence amongst the Arabs. According to al-৫ abarƯ, Khusraw appointed him the ruler of Baতrayn, ‘UmƗn, YamƗma as far as ৫Ɨ’if, the ণijƗz, and of all the Arabs of the intervening lands.23 What is signicant in this regard is that the sources frame Khusraw’s handling of the Arab situation as among his most notable remedial measures. Islamic memory of the importance with which the Sasanians of this latter era regarded Arabia is particularly exemplied by an anecdote provided by several sources of a dramatic court session, in which Khusraw both appointed al- Mundhir III as ruler of the Arabs and ordered the execution of Mazdak and his followers. This account relates that Khusraw had been keeping his antipathy against Mazdak hidden until he attained the throne. After both Mazdak and al- Mundhir entered the court session, he proclaimed:

I have two desires, which I ask AllƗh ‘azza wa-jalla 24 grant for me. Mazdak asked, “What are these two desires oh king?” Khusraw responded, “The rst is that I make this noble Arab man,” by which he meant al- Mundhir, “king and install him as my governor [over the Arabs]. The second is that I kill the zindƯqs.” Mazdak asked, “How are you able to kill all of these people?” To this, Khusraw responded, “Well you’re here, oh son of a whore, and the 106 The twilight of Sasanian power stench of your stocking from when I kissed it has never left my nose!” He then commanded that Mazdak be crucied.25

This anecdote then describes Khusraw’s massacre of all the zindƯqs in his empire, which earned him his title, AnnjshirvƗn. This account not only underlines the central importance which the Arabs and Arabia held for Khusraw, but it also places his reinstatement of the Lakhmids as his agents over the Arabs on the same level as his stamping out of the Mazdakite heresy. Both acts are portrayed as necessary for restoring the normative social and political order of the Sasa- nian empire. A nal example of the historiographical emphasis on the Lakhmids’ seminal importance in Sasanian affairs during this period comes in the ShƗhnƗma, which describes al- Mundhir’s complaint to Khusraw of the Romans’ incursions in his territory. FirdawsƯ portrays this dialogue as the catalyst leading to war between the two empires.26 Yet, the sources make it clear that in his effort to control the Arabian pen- insula, Khusraw I dealt with other groups besides the Lakhmids. In accounts of this period, we begin to read of centrally appointed Sasanian governors in Arabia. For example, the Lakhmids had to share authority with an Iranian gov- ernor in Baতrayn according to al-৫ abarƯ.27 Another source mentions that Khusraw I made a treaty with a leading clan of the Azd in the interior of ‘UmƗn, in which the chiefs of the latter took the title of JulandƗ and became a vassal dynasty similar to the Lakhmids. This agreement gave authority to the Arabs in the mountains, deserts, and outlying regions of ‘UmƗn, while the Sasanians con- trolled the settled and coastal regions through a governor appointed in RustƗq.28 However, regarding Arabian affairs, the sources focus the most attention on Khusraw’s dealing with South Arabia, and it is to this subject we now turn.

The embassies from the Yemen The Islamic historical portrayal of the Yemeni embassy (or embassies) to Khusraw I’s court in search of aid against the occupying Ethiopians/Abyssini- ans, and the subsequent joint Iranian- Yemeni campaign of South Arabia form a seminal chapter in the Islamic conquest narrative. According to the sources, the events precipitating this/these meeting(s) proceeded as follows: The Abyssinian ruler sent his general Abraha to conquer South Arabia after the Jewish ণimyarite King Ynjsuf Dhnj NuwƗs massacred the Christians of NajrƗn. (The ণimyarites had converted to Judaism during the reign of Abnj Karib).29 The Yemeni king died in battle after plunging himself and his horse into the sea to escape. The Ethiopians ruled Yemen oppressively for decades, prompting a Yemeni delega- tion to the Iranian court in search of help to remove the occupiers. The accounts of this/these meeting(s) and the ensuing joint conquest of South Arabia are based on two traditions stemming from Ibn al-Kalb Ư and Ibn IsতƗq respectively.30 I will base my summary of these two reports on al- ৫abarƯ’s account of them, while taking note of some important variations in the other texts. According to Ibn al- KalbƯ’s narrative, the Abyssinian general Abraha took The twilight of Sasanian power 107 RayতƗna, the wife of the ণimyarite nobleman Abnj Murra Dhnj Yazan, and fathered his successors, Yaksnjm and Masrnjq by her. Abnj Murra therefore ed to the court of the Lakhmid king seeking aid. The latter had Abnj Murra accompany him on an embassy to the Sasanian capital. Although he impressed Khusraw I with his noble demeanor and was treated well by him, he failed to obtain any military assistance from him and died at the Sasanian court seven years later. Meanwhile, back in Yemen, Abnj Murra had another son by RayতƗna, named Ma‘dƯ Karib.31 This son of Abnj Murra, who had only been an infant at the time of his father’s ight, grew up with his mother at the court of Abraha, thinking the latter was his father. However, as a man he learned the truth of his origin when his half- brother Masrnjq ridiculed his lineage, and his mother informed him of the truth of his parentage. Ibn al-Kalb Ư’s account continues that Ma‘dƯ Karib vowed revenge and like his father, he traveled to the neighboring kings to seek aid. He rst went to Byzan- tium, but was rebuffed by the emperor who stated that he could not make war against his fellow Christians. He then made his way to the Sasanian court, where he succeeded in impressing Khusraw with his eloquence and grace. This time, however, Khusraw provided the military assistance to his visitor. According to Ibn IsতƗq’s simpler account, we only read of one embassy, that of Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan. Similarly to Ibn al- KalbƯ’s account, this tradition relates that Sayf was rst rebuffed by the Roman emperor, and then accompanied the Lakhmid king to the Sasanian court, where he procured the assistance of Khusraw I. In both accounts, upon the advice of his advisors, Khusraw sent the Yemeni ambassador with an army of prisoners led by the old Daylamite general Vahriz.32 This army defeated the Abyssinians, and Ma‘dƯ Karib/Sayf was made king, though as a tributary to the Sasanian state. In what ways do the accounts of these embassies t into the Islamic conquest narrative? In the context of the depiction of these meetings, despite his legendary status in the Islamic narrative tradition, AnnjshirvƗn appears as an imposing and intimidating king, conforming in this case to disparaging stereotypes of Iranian ostentation. Though he shows sympathy to the Yemenis’ plight, he is rather dis- missive of the embassy. The Yemeni ambassador(s), on the other hand is shown to impress the king with his courage, eloquence and dignied comportment. To start off our analysis, we consider al-৫ abarƯ’s description (on Ibn IsতƗq) of Khus- raw’s elaborate regalia and imposing ceremonial:

When al- Nu‘mƗn [the Lakhmid king] came into KisrƗ’s presence and had nished his business with the king, he mentioned Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan to him, and his reason for coming to him. He asked KisrƗ to permit Sayf an audi- ence, which he granted. KisrƗ was in his throne room where his crown was kept. This crown was equivalent to a huge measure of grain. It was set with rubies, emeralds, pearls, gold, and silver. It was hanging by a chain of gold from the arch of that room because it was too heavy for his neck to bear. He was covered in cloaks until he sat on that throne. Then his head was inserted into the crown. When he was seated rmly on his thrown, the cloaks were 108 The twilight of Sasanian power removed from him. No one saw him for the rst time without falling down on his knees out of awe for him. When Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan entered upon him, he likewise fell to his knees.33

By describing Khusraw’s ostentatious ceremonial at length, al-৫ abarƯ set the tone of this meeting. Through this detailed illustration of Sasanian royal effects, particularly Khusraw’s comically burdensome crown, he intended to emphasize the Sasanians’ excessive pomp as well as their purposeful intimidation of visi- tors to their court.34 To stress this intimidation factor, al-৫ abarƯ (Ibn IsতƗq) men- tioned that upon witnessing this spectacle, an awestruck Sayf fell to his knees, a common occurrence for rst time visitors to Khusraw’s court!35 Even more telling is when, in Bal‘amƯ’s account (which follows Ibn al- KalbƯ’s outline), the “white- bearded sheikh” Abnj Murra fainted in the midst of all this splendor, and had to be helped up by al-Nu‘m Ɨn.36 This description must be viewed through the lens of inter- civilizational com- petition marking the early ‘Abbasid period, during which time contemporaneous scholars and litterateurs equated Iran with its traditions of royalty and power. For them, it was a civilization, rst and foremost, embodying grandiose ceremo- nial and splendor.37 Of course, the Sasanians’ cult obsession with royal markers, which they believed to be material representations of their farr (inherited divine majesty) was certainly real,38 and it was indeed through Persian that the Arabic language developed its vocabulary for items denoting royalty and luxury.39 However, I argue that from the standpoint of a Muslim audience’s reception, by emphasizing the intimidation factor in Khusraw’s overdone ceremonial, al- ৫abarƯ’s description does not evoke nostalgia of a glorious Iranian past, but rather conjures criticisms of Iranian traditions of royalty and class markers voiced by scholars like al- JƗতi਌, who lambasted the Sasanians for their reliance upon royal paraphernalia in order to awe their subjects into submission. In this regard, he wrote:

The kings of Persia used to wear crowns [al- tƯjƗn], sit on thrones [al- asirra], and recline on cushions [al- furush]. But, shouldn’t kings ll the eyes of their enemies with dread, instill fear in the hearts of the recalcitrant, and command the respect of the commoners [al- awwƗm] by virtue of the great- ness of their own rule and by the power of fate, or should they simply use tools [al-Ɨ lƗt]? Is the only remedy to cause fear amongst them? Does fear of you [by which he means kings] benet them? Isn’t it rather a practice of governance combining dignity and affection which benets the people and brings about obedience amongst them?40

Al- JƗতi਌ furthermore lamented the ‘Abbasids’ taking up the wearing of extrava- gant Persian headgear, while the Prophet achieved a dignied appearance by simply veiling his face with his turban.41 With regards to this notion of the superiority of the Arabs’ material simplicity over the Iranians’ opulence, the Caliph ‘Umar I b. al-Kha ৬৬Ɨb served as the paradigm for early Muslim authors, The twilight of Sasanian power 109 as I shall analyze in more detail in Chapter 7. On the subject of headgear, ‘Umar’s proclamation, “the Arabs’ turbans are their crowns,” is a commonplace aphorism for al-J Ɨতi਌.42 Matching Khusraw’s hubristic display of ceremonial in these texts is his rather dismissive treatment of the Arab ambassador, especially at rst. To a pleading Sayf, al-৫ abarƯ (Ibn IsতƗq) wrote that Khusraw coldly responded, “Your land is far away from our land, and is lacking in anything good. There is nothing there but sheep and camels, which we have no need for. I am in no position to embroil a Persian army in the land of the Arabs. I have no need for that.”43 Moreover, even when the king decided to help Sayf, rather than providing him with a regular army, he sent him with a small force of 800 prisoners, so that he would benet regardless of the outcome of the expedition. For the minister who suggested this idea to him said, “O king, there are men in your prisons who you have con- demned to death. If you sent them with him [Sayf] and they perished, then this is what you wanted to do to them anyway. And if they gain control of his country, then another kingdom will be added to your kingdom.”44 Contrasting the depiction of the Iranians’ intimidating ceremonial and Khus- raw’s dismissive treatment of the Yemeni ambassador(s) is the emphasis on the latter’s courage and dignied bearing in the face of such pomp. In each account, he articulates a compelling argument, moving Khusraw to sympathy for his plight. In Bal‘amƯ’s account, the old Abnj Murra’s gripping words even bring the king to tears.45 These accounts also stress that AnnjshirvƗn was impressed into considering the Yemeni situation seriously when the ambassador performed some daring act. For example, al-৫ abarƯ (Ibn al-Kalb Ư) described how Ma‘dƯ Karib, in order to gain an audience with the king, boldly jumped in front of him while he was outside his palace on horseback, informing him that he was the son of the Yemeni sheikh who died at Khusraw’s court and that he had come to demand justice. This courageous act impressed the king into hearing his case.46 Moreover, a common motif in both traditions is for AnnjshirvƗn to rst give the Yemeni ambassador money and lavish gifts instead of providing any military help, and for the latter to give all of it away in protest. In al-৫ abarƯ’s rendition of Ibn IsতƗq’s account, when the king gave Sayf a robe of honor and 10,000 dirhams in lieu of any tangible assistance, Sayf responded by deantly distrib- uting all of the money amongst the slaves at the Iranian court. When an incensed Khusraw demanded an explanation, Sayf boldly retorted, “And what am I to do with what the king has given me when the mountains of the land from which I have come are composed entirely of gold and silver? I have only come to the king so that he might protect me from evil and remove humiliation from me.”47 In al-৫ abarƯ’s rendition of Ibn al- KalbƯ’s account, only Ma‘dƯ Karib gives away the king’s gift.48 However, in Bal‘amƯ’s account, both Dhnj Yazan and his son distribute the king’s gift in this way. According to Bal‘amƯ, when the Iranian king demanded an explanation of Dhnj Yazan, he responded,

O king, I have only acted thus so as to give thanks to God for allowing me to see the king’s face and for letting me speak to you. In the place from 110 The twilight of Sasanian power where I have come, the soil is entirely gold and silver. In my country, there are only a few mountains which do not contain gold and silver mines.49

The ambassador’s well articulated explanation of his intrepid act of deance clearly impresses Khusraw. In the KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ, after Sayf explains his action, Khusraw asked his marzbƗns (frontier governors), “What do you think about this Arab? I think he is a rajul jald (lit. “man of skin,” meaning very brave).”50 The ambassador’s giving away of the king’s gift serves as a poignant illustra- tion of the Arabs’ proverbial karm (generosity). Indeed, through his actions and words, he exemplies the idealized portrait of an Arab sheikh, who was likewise expected to distribute money and resources among the members of his tribe, rather than hoard them greedily for himself.51 At the same time, a gift from the king himself was certainly a high honor, so by dispersing it among the slaves at court, the ণimyarite was in a sense, snubbing the Sasanians’ class- oriented value system. Furthermore, in his response, the ambassador corrects Khusraw, who thinks that he can appease his Arab visitor by simply granting him a monetary award. Khusraw’s stereotypical notions about the Arabs’ poverty and his misconception about the land of Yemen can be seen with his claim that there is nothing there but camels and sheep, as alluded to above. Such ignorance was intended to draw the indignation of an educated Muslim reader, who would have known that the land of Yemen had always been a lush land rich in resources, which included abundant deposits of gold and silver. Thus, the ণimyarite noble sets the pre- sumptuous king right, informing him that the riches of his country were plenty and he did not come seeking monetary aid, as if he were some poor Bedouin looking for a handout. The ambassador’s behavior at the Sasanian court is thus intended to disprove contemporaneous stereotypes that all Arab peoples of the JƗhiliyya were poverty-stricken nomads, and to show that the pre-Islamic Arab kingdoms on the contrary possessed wealth and sophistication. Indeed, the Irani- ans’ miscalculation of the Arabs’ intentions, thinking that they have only come to their realms seeking handouts or plunder, is a commonplace theme which appears in the accounts of later encounters, particularly the Muslim embassies to the Iranians prior to the Battle of al-Q Ɨdisiyya. What follows in the Islamic narrative is the report of the miraculous victory of an undermanned Iranian-Arab army.52 The reconquest of Yemen is portrayed as a joint effort, in which the Yemenis contributed their part, and in which the allies expressed solidarity and mutual support. For example, when Vahriz asked Sayf what he could provide the war effort, he responded, “Whatever you desire from Arab men and horses. I will put my leg together with your leg so that we either die or are victorious together.” Vahriz then told Sayf, “You have spoken fairly and eloquently.”53 The chroniclers likewise include poetry commemorat- ing this campaign as a joint enterprise.54 After obtaining victory, Vahriz, under orders from Khusraw, installed Ma‘dƯ Karib/Sayf as the king of Yemen. The latter ruled briey, but after being assassinated by some of his Abyssinian The twilight of Sasanian power 111 guards, the Iranians took over the administration directly. This situation lasted until the time of the Prophet, when the governor, his ofcials, and soldiers there converted to Islam.

The ণimyarite saga and the Arab- Islamic historical tradition The saga of the Abyssinian conquest of South Arabia, the ণimyarite embassies to the Sasanian court and subsequent reconquest of that region reect in the works of Ibn al- KalbƯ, Ibn IsতƗq, and Ibn HishƗm a streaming together of South Arabian and Muslim traditions into a larger Islamic master narrative. Indeed, these akhbƗrƯs serve as a conduit to an even older South Arabian historical tradi- tion. Ibn IsতƗq for example, is cited by al-৫ abarƯ in numerous locations in the same isnƗd as the prominent Umayyad era South Arabian rƗwƯ, Wahb b. Munab- bih (d. c.732), who in some cases appears to have served as a direct informant for the Medinan scholar.55 Likewise, much of Ibn IsতƗq’s material on pre- Islamic Yemen in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle and in Ibn HishƗm’s redaction of his SƯra matches that in the latter’s KitƗb al- TƯjƗn, which claims to be based on the work of Wahb, though appears to be liberally edited.56 Ibn HishƗm himself was of ণimyarite ancestry, which might explain his Yemeni bias. Thanks to the preser- vation of this South Arabian tradition, our extant histories contain a body of literature emphasizing both the Arabness of the people of Yemen, as well as their role in anticipating the rise of Islam. At this juncture, it is imperative to point out that the historical ণimyarite kings would not have considered themselves Arabs. For South Arabian inscrip- tions, some of which date from the ণimyarite era, mention the Arabs (‘-r- b) as a distinct group, in the capacity as either allies or enemies.57 In the Umayyad period, the people of YamƗma came to be provided with an ancestry from Qur’anic prophets as well as boasting rights of descent from the rst speaker of Arabic.58 Yet this reects a political discourse which sought to dene which of the regional, supra-tribal factions within the Umayyad power structure were the most genuine Arabs, rather than what it meant to be an Arab.59 However, in the context of the early ‘Abbasid caliphate, in which emerged the concept of an Arab “civilization,” intellectuals spoke about all of the peoples of the Arabian peninsula in generic terms, taking into account a certain degree of regional and tribal and variation to be sure, but on the whole, assuming that they were dealing with a unitary, homogenous grouping of tribes. Al- JƗতi਌ for example, in his ManƗqib al- Turk, stresses the unity of the north and south Arabians. He argues that despite the variations in language and manners among the regions and tribes of the Arabian peninsula,

All of them are completely Arab, with none being mixed, nor possessing a non- Arab father or mother, nor spuriously claiming to be the son of a father that they are not. For there is no difference between the sons of Qaত৬Ɨn [southern Arabs] and the sons of ‘AdnƗn [northern Arabs] with respect to the natural characteristics which God has imprinted upon his creation, as well as to 112 The twilight of Sasanian power the way he has distinguished the people of each region in terms of appear- ance, manners, and language. If you were to ask, “How can the sons of both those two [Qaত৬Ɨn and ‘AdnƗn] be Arab despite the difference in their descent?” we would reply, “Regarding the unity of the Arabs, they are the same in terms of the land in which they grew up, their language, their natural disposition, high- mindedness, pride, zeal, manners, and their nature. They are molded in one form.”60

It is through this lens of Arab homogeneity that we may assess how ‘Abbasid era historians thought and wrote about the ণimyarites. For example, in the account of Shamir Dhnj al-Jan Ɨh’s conquest of Samarqand, while besieging the city, the ণimyarite conqueror negotiates through a messenger with its princess, informing al-‘Arab), and that he would ڲher that he has come from the land of the Arabs (ar like to marry her so that the two would have a son who would rule the Arabs and the Persians.61 Thus, Shamir is shown to identify his homeland as Arab. At the same time, we analyzed in the previous chapter Ibn IsতƗq’s account of the legendary South Arabian soothsayers, Sa৬Ưত and Shiqq, who predicted from the dream of RabƯ‘a b. Naৢr, the Abyssinian conquest of Yemen and the rise of the Prophet and Islam.62 Indeed, these kƗhins factor into our narrative again. For example, the NihƗyat al-irab relates a tradition allegedly stemming from the formative era South Arabian rƗwƯ, ‘AbƯd b. Sharya (d. 686) (via ‘Ɩmir b. ShurahbƯl al- Sha‘bƯ (d. 721–722), that ৡƗtƯত and Shiqq prognosticated the rise of the Prophet to the lat- ter’s ancestor ‘Abd al-Man Ɨf during the time of QubƗdh.63 Some sources also describe Sa৬Ưত’s nal prediction, coming on the heels of the ominous events occuring in Iran, of the approaching fall of the Sasanian dynasty, as I analyze further below. With the Abyssinian occupation, we converge with Qu’ranic time, as the events related to the Snjrat al- FƯl (Chapter of the Elephant) feature prominently in our akhbƗrƯs’ reports.64 Indeed, the accounts on Abraha’s Meccan campaign portray the southern and northern Arabs alike as presenting a unied resistance to the Abyssinians in defense of the ণijƗz.65 From the standpoint of Islamic kerygma, the QurayshƯ chief and grandfather of the Prophet, ‘Abd al-Mu ৬৬alib b. HƗshim plays a role in this narrative, recognizing the Ka‘ba as a monotheistic shrine built by Abraham and condently entrusting its defense to its divine pro- tector.66 Furthermore, he later becomes associated with the last ণimyarite ruler, Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan, who is remembered in Islamic historiography as a proto- Muslim Arab hero. Sayf ’s short reign is characterized as a brief golden age for the Arabs. On this, Nuha Khoury writes:

The semi- legendary Sayf ibn Dhi Yazan is presented in the accounts as the last great king before the nal disintegration of the South Arabian kingdom. He is transformed into an Arab hero who paves the way for Arabia’s uni- cation under Islam.67

Sayf ’s “Arab” credentials and connection to Islam are made manifest in the account of his meetings with ‘Abd al- Mu৬৬alib, which is contained in several The twilight of Sasanian power 113 sources. When Sayf secured the throne, ‘Abd al- Mu৬৬alib was one of many Arab notables who visited his court to pay homage to him. When he was brought into the presence of the king, he praised him by proclaiming:

You, may God prohibit curse, are the king of the Arabs. You are their springtime in which they thrive. You, oh king, are the head of the Arabs who guides them. You are their prop which provides them support and their fort in which they take refuge. Your ancestors were for us the best of ancestors, and you are best t to succeed them. We are the people of God’s sanctuary, the gatekeepers of his house. It gladdens us that we be sent to you, so as to remove from you the burden weighing upon us.68

When this session in which ‘Abd al- Mu৬৬alib extolled the Arab king Sayf con- cluded, he stayed with him as his guest. After some time, Sayf summoned his guest to his court again. At this point, Sayf heralded the rise of Islam by inform- ing ‘Abd al- Mu৬৬alib that he is in the possession of a special book which foretold the prophecy of his grandson, Muতammad and the rise of a new religion, whose followers, by the power of God will “extinguish the res, chase away Satan, and break the idols.”69 This anecdote serves to mark a transitional point in the Islamic historical tradition. By predicting the future prophecy of Muতammad to ‘Abd al- Mu৬৬alib, Sayf plays the same role as Sa৬Ưত and Shiqq, who according to one tra- dition, did the same for ‘Abd al- Mu৬৬alib’s grandfather, ‘Abd al-Man Ɨf (see above). Moreover, in his capacity as king, by forecasting the rise of a new reli- gious and political order, Sayf is, in essense, passing on the mantle of leadership from the distinguished ণimyarite dynasty to the family of the Prophet.70 Thus, from the perspective of the Islamic conquest narrative, the ণimyarite saga, which is based on an older tradition of particularistic South Arabian propa- ganda, has been revived by ‘Abbasid era historians for both its Islamic keryg- matic value, and to show that there existed an ancient, glorious Arabian kingdom in which all Arabs could take pride. Indeed, memory of the ণimyarite legacy survived to become a xture in medieval Arabic literature. The most prominent example is a fourteenth-century Egyptian folk narrative, in which Sayf appears again in his familiar role as a proto- Muslim Arab hero, reciting a transmuted ShahƗda (in which he bears witness to Abraham being the companion of God and Muতammad being the seal of the prophets who will come at the end of time), and defending monotheism against the enemy star-worshippers. 71

GhumdƗn: the famed palace of Yemen In the Islamic historical tradition, the palace of GhumdƗn in San‘a, like the Lakhmids’ al- Khwarnaq, serves as a testament to the Arabs’ architectural ability and to the majesty of their kings. Khoury argues that GhumdƗn was the foremost amongst other South Arabian structures “that were absorbed into Islamic history and became sources of pride and symbols of Arab kingship.” On its powerful symbolism, she states: 114 The twilight of Sasanian power Ghumdan appears in historical accounts as a prototypical monument of kingship and power. As a royal residence, it is an exclusive or restricted structure, a shrine to kingship which expresses the Arab concept of mulk. Ghumdan is a power monument. It is a dynastic Arab shrine that expresses liberation and sends a message of victory. Ghumdan is too important in Arab memory not to be incorporated into Islamic history.72

Our most detailed description of GhumdƗn is provided by Al- ণasan b. Aতmad al- HamdƗnƯ (d. 945), the self-proclaimed LisƗn al- Yaman (tongue of Yemen). In his KitƗb al- IklƯl, which is a catalog of South Arabian antiquities, he cites Wahb b. Munabbih as conrming that GhumdƗn was constructed by Noah’s son Shem.73 The KitƗb al-T ƯjƗn, which likewise rests on the authority of Wahb, por- trays GhumdƗn as a staple of the ণimyarites, serving as the royal residence of WƗ’il b. ণimyar, son of the dynasty’s progenitor.74 It is stated in this work that “only the greatest kings resided in the castle of GhumdƗn, and these were the ণimyarite kings worthy of the title, Tubba‘.”75 GhumdƗn also features promi- nently in the narrative of Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan. The sources describe how upon tri- umphing over the Abyssinians and becoming king, Sayf received at his palace delegations of Arab notables including ‘Abd al-Mu ৬৬alib, and poets, such as Abnj’l-ৡalt. The latter’s famous madƯh in celebration of the victory, advises the king: “Drink freely with the crown on your head, sitting atop GhumdƗn, a house which you have made to be resided in [again].”76 Furthermore, we encounter in the texts detailed descriptions of GhumdƗn’s remarkable construction and amazing features. For example, YƗqnjt b. ދAbd AllƗh al-ণ amawƯ’s (d. 1229) historical atlas describes, on the authority of Ibn al- KalbƯ, GhumdƗn as a poly- chromatic edice, whose interior citadel contained an open- air courtroom made of colored marble, and a roof constructed from a single marble slab. In the corners of the courtroom stood four lion statues that sounded like they were roaring when wind blew in through their rears and out through their mouths. Furthermore, it was lit up with lamps at night, so that it resembled a lightening bolt from the perspective of someone viewing it from afar.77 Al- HamdƗnƯ’s description of GhumdƗn closely resembles that of YƗqnjt.78 He also provides ample specimens of poetry (including his own), celebrating GhumdƗn’s remark- able attributes, such as its lofty height, being 20 stories, so high that “it courts the stars above” (yunƗghƯ al-nujum ‘ƗlƯhƗ) and “[its top] is encircled by clouds like a ab bi-‘imƗmatin).79 The intention of such involved܈Ɨb mu‘ۊturban” (min al- sa illustrations of GhumdƗn’s awe- inspiring architecture was to elicit a sense of admiration for the ণimyarite kings who inhabited this wondrous fortress. GhumdƗn thus serves as a symbol of a glorious Arabian heritage, proof that the Arabs occupied a prestigious place amongst the world’s ancient civilizations.

Yawm al- Safqa Among Khusraw’s other dealings with the Arabs, the infamous Yawm al- Safqa (Day of the Slamming) stands out as an illustrative example of the Sasanians’ The twilight of Sasanian power 115 tyranny. The sources are in conict on some details, particularly whether this event occurred during the reign of AnnjshirvƗn or his grandson Khusraw II ParvƯz.80 However, they are in general conformity regarding the overall contours of this story. These akhbƗrƯs relate that tribesmen of the Bannj TamƯm raided a richly laden caravan belonging to Khusraw.81 The surviving asƗwira (Persian cavalry) who had accompanied the caravan were aided by Hawdha b. ‘AlƯ, a notable of the ণanƯfa b. Lujaym,82 who provided them with provisions, and later accompanied them to AnnjshirvƗn’s/ParvƯz’s court. Hawdha impressed the Iranian king with his handsomeness, intelligence and courage, thus prompting the king to give him some expensive gifts, including a diadem of pearls.83 Khusraw took Hawdha’s advice to avoid directly engaging the TamƯm head on in their eastern Arabian homeland, which was sparse desert incapable of sup- porting his cavalry. He instead opted for Hawdha’s suggestion of a ruse. Accord- ing to Abnj’l-Faraj, Khusraw withheld the shipment of goods to the land of TamƯm for one year. Conditions became desperate for the TamƯm, as they experienced a drought in that same year.84 Khusraw then had his governor of Baতrayn, ƖzƗdh FƯrnjz, invite the TamƯm to the al- Mushaqqar castle near Hajar, and promise them that there were provisions inside for them.85 The unsuspecting Arabs were told to remove their weapons before entering. Once inside, however, they were led one by one to ƖzƗdh FƯrnjz and his asƗwira, who massacred them.86 The slaughter continued until one tribesman gured out what was going on when he saw men entering and not leaving, and warned the rest of the people outside.87 This account illustrating the Sasanians’ cruel chastisement of the TamƯm echoes the report of ShƗpnjr II’s retributive campaign against this same tribe (along with other groups) that we analyzed in Chapter 3. Here, Khusraw shows his bukhl (stinginess) by withholding provisions from the TamƯm, taking advantage of the Arabs’ poverty in order to exact vengeance upon them. Sim- ilarly, his craven stratagem of avoiding a direct confrontation, luring the TamƯm to the al- Mushaqqar castle, and slaughtering them while they are isolated and unarmed, does not accord with the otherwise valiant portrayal of AnnjshirvƗn (assuming that we are not dealing with ParvƯz) that comes across in the KhudƗynƗma tradition. While one may grant that he was only following the course of action suggested to him by Hawdha b. ‘AlƯ, this does not absolve Khusraw from censure when one considers the perniciousness of this act. (In this regard, Abnj’l-Faraj’s rst account of this event does not even mention Hawdha). Hawdha on the other hand, fullls the role of the eloquent Arab ambassador at Khusraw’s court. Hawdha showed himself to be quite graceful, and succeeded in impressing the Persian king.88 His wit and eloquence are manifested in his answers to a series of questions that Khusraw posed to him. Here is this dialogue:

KisrƗ asked him [Hawdha], “How many sons have you?” Hawdha said, “Ten.” “Which of them do you love the most?” Hawdha responded, “The absent one until he returns, the smallest one until he grows up, and the one 116 The twilight of Sasanian power who is sick until he recovers.” KisrƗ then said, “This intelligence which you have displayed has carried you to ask of me a means [to carry out your intentions].”89

This short question-and-answer trope, in which the responder demonstrates his eloquence, is commonplace in Islamic adab. At the same time, this theme of a king testing the wit of a visitor to his court through a series of questions, and the latter responding with eloquent repartees, has antecedents in Persian andarz. In this regards, one prominent text is the Khusraw ud RƝdag (Khusraw and the Page), which has survived in a Pahlavi manuscript and is also translated into Arabic in al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s Ghurar. This story describes how an orphan boy of noble origins succeeds in impressing the sovereign (Khusraw I in the Pahlavi version, Khusraw II in the Arabic version) by eloquently responding to his ques- tions about the pleasures and pastimes of elite life.90 In the Islamic period, notions of Bedouin living and Arabness came to serve as pervasive themes in such dialogues. For example, the above- cited dialogue between Khusraw and Hawdha is also contained in the KitƗb al-‘Iqd al- farƯd. However, this version adds the following additional dialogue:

He [KisrƗ] asked, “What is your sustenance in your land?” He [Hawdha] responded, “Bread.” KisrƗ then said, “This is the ‘intelligence of bread’ (‘aql al- khubz). It makes him more intelligent than the people of the deserts whose sustenance is milk and dates.”91

Here, Khusraw expresses his disparaging attitude towards Bedouin living, by arguing that Hawdha’s intelligence must derive from his living a settled life, which is implied by bread being his main source of sustenance. Yet, most of these dialogues in Islamic literature are stylized in such a manner that the Arab visitor proudly identies with his nomadic heritage, and eloquently proves the virtues of the Bedouin to the unwitting Persian king. An illustrative example is provided by al- Mas‘njdƯ, who on the authority of al- Haytham b. ‘AdƯ (d. 822) and al-Sharq Ư b. al- Qa৬ƗmƯ, reports on an embassy of some unnamed Arab orators (khuܒabƗ’) to the court of AnnjshirvƗn. In his account, Khusraw asked one of the orators about the life of the Arabs in the open country, and their deci- sion to live as Bedouin (al- badnj). This khƗܒib responded:

“Oh king, they [the Arabs] rule the land and it doesn’t rule them. They do not need to surround themselves with walls for their defense, but instead rely on sharp blades and pointed spears for protection.” [KisrƗ asked:] “What are their main sources of nourishment?” [The Arab responded:] “Meat, milk, date wine, and dates.” “What are their qualities?” He responded, “Strength, nobility, generosity, hospitality to the guest, protect- ing the client, giving sanctuary to the fearful, fullling responsibilities, and freely granting generous actions. They are travelers of the night, lions of the thickets, inhabitants of the open spaces, accustomed to poverty, moderate The twilight of Sasanian power 117 with each other, and regard submissiveness scornfully. They take venge- ance, nd shame in ignominy, and protect [their] honor.” KisrƗ replied, “You have described these people nobly.”92

This text represents the classic question- and-answer dialogue theme in Islamic adab. Here, the anonymous Arab khƗܒib illustrates his own eloquence while suc- cessfully making a case for the merits of the Bedouin. The khƗܒib celebrates the Bedouins’ steadfastness, which he portrays as a product of the scarce conditions they face in the desert. He also underlines their municence and hospitality. I will analyze the Islamic era discourses revolving around these two themes in the forthcoming chapters, as they are illustrated more poignantly in the accounts of subsequent Arab- Sasanian encounters. This dialogue is clearly intended to serve a didactic function, falling in the text directly after the author’s own similar expression of admiration of the Arab nomads living in the “vast open spaces,” which I cited above.93 In this anecdote, the identity of this orator and the details regarding his visit to AnnjshirvƗn’s court are irrelevant. Rather, he plays the role of representative of Arab civilization, projecting an ideal of Arab culture articu- lated by al-Mas‘ njdƯ, and likely possessed by his sources as well. This dialogue exemplies the trope of an Arab ambassador defending his peoples’ culture in the face of an imposing Sasanian king or ofcial. Such meetings become increas- ingly pervasive in our narrative and are described in more detail as we get ever closer to the Islamic conquest of Iran.

The birth of the Prophet and the inauspicious omens at Khusraw’s court The reign of Khusraw I coincides with the birth of the Prophet. In this context, some sources bring together the SƯrat al- NabƯ and the history of the Iranian kings by describing ill- boding omens occurring in Iran on eve of the Prophet’s birth.94 They mention that an earthquake caused 14 embattlements (13 according to al- Ya‘qnjbƯ) of Khusraw’s throne room (ƮvƗn KisrƗ) to fall down, the sacred re of FƗrs (i.e., the re of the temple of Iৢ৬akhr), which the authors claim had not been extinguished for 1,000 years went out, and the waters of the lake of SƗwa95 sank into the earth. That same night, the mǀbadhƗn mobƗdh had an ominous dream of refractory camels leading noble Arab horses across the Tigris and spreading in the Iranians’ realms. Bal‘amƯ, differing slightly from the other sources, described a battle taking place in this dream, in which a few small Arab camels put to ight a more numerous group of larger camels, and then penetrated Iran.96 The narrative continues that, much perturbed by these events, AnnjshirvƗn held a council with his ministers. The mǀbadhƗn mobƗdh recognized that these signs were premonitions of an event that was to come from Arabia. AnnjshirvƗn therefore resolved to nd a sage well versed in the traditions of the Arabs, who might interpret these disturbing portents. He sent a request for such an individual to the Lakhmid king, who dispatched the old Christian wise man ‘Abd al-Mas Ưত to him. The latter, in turn, in order to answer these questions, embarked on a 118 The twilight of Sasanian power journey to Syria, where there resided his uncle, the aged kƗhin, Sa৬Ưত. Here, we encounter Sa৬Ưত now on the brink of death. He informed ‘Abd al- MasƯত that he already knew why he had come and told him of the occurrences which prompted the latter’s visit. He proclaimed that these events heralded the rise of an Arab Prophet bearing a new religion and that the Iranians’ rule will pass to the Arabs. He said that the number of embattlements which had fallen in the ƮvƗn signify the number of kings which will rule Iran before this event takes place. Sa৬Ưত then expired on the spot. When the news of Sa৬Ưত’s prediction reached AnnjshirvƗn, he was relieved to learn that the fall of his dynasty would not occur in his lifetime. Of course, the Muslim reader would have known that the Islamic conquest of Iran was closer at hand than AnnjshirvƗn and his contemporaries might have thought. For AnnjshirvƗn’s grandson Khusraw II ParvƯz was the last Sasanian monarch to experience a long reign, as his successors rose and fell in rapid suc- cession while the Sasanian state fell into disarray under these weak rulers. This account embodies the theme of dawla. The portentous occurrences at Khusraw’s court indicate that from this point in the narrative of the Iranian kings, the rise of Islam and the Arab-Islamic conquest of Iran were now on the foreseeable horizon. In this context, this account contains charged tropes signal- ing this transfer of power. For example, the burning out of the re at Iৢ৬akhr is a portentous sign of both the replacement of Zoroastrianism (al- majnjsiyya) with Islam and the fall of the Sasanian kings, since re was propagandized by the latter as a manifestation of their farr.97 The demise of the Sasanian state is also foreshadowed by the damage caused to the ƮvƗn, which is a more conspicuous expression of Iranian power. That the embattlements were brought down by an earthquake, a natural disaster, shows that the fall of Iran was preordained, an act of divine will. At the same time, the camels in the mǀbadhƗn mobƗdh’s dream, which crossed the Tigris and spread in the land of the Iranians, are clearly meta- phorical for the Arabs, who lived a Bedouin lifestyle, and who would come to supplant the Iranians in their realm. Finally, the presence of the aged kƗhin Sa৬Ưত in this account is possibly a later accretion, in which the gure Sa৬Ưত was appropriated from Ibn IsতƗq’s report of RabƯ‘a’s dream, and grafted onto the context of the Sasanian court in the spirit of melding the Arab and Iranian historical traditions. This is evidenced by the fact that this anecdote is not contained in the SƯra of Ibn IsতƗq, nor the KitƗb al- TƯjƗn. Moreover, al- ৫abarƯ provides a spurious isnƗd, allegedly drawing his account of these events from a khabr stemming from the 150-year- old father of Makhznjm b. HƗni’ al- MakhznjmƯ.98 To be fair, however, Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih’s isnƗd (JarƯr b. ণazim-‘Ikrima-Ibn ‘AbbƗs) appears to be more plausible. Regard- less, Sa৬Ưত himself represents the tradition of an antique Arabia. His nal prog- nostication and death signies the end of an era, in which the Arab peoples had occupied a marginal role in relation to the ‘ajamƯ empires. Now, one no longer reads of old warners like Sa৬Ưত, Shiqq, and ‘Amr b. TamƯm, but rather of the Arab champions of the ‘ayyƗm al-‘Arab (battles days) literature, and the increas- ingly aggressive behavior of the Arabs towards the Iranians. The twilight of Sasanian power 119 Conclusion In this chapter, I have analyzed reports of Arab-Sasanian encounters occurring during the reigns of QubƗdh I and Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn. I have shown that our sources portrayed QubƗdh’s mismanagement of his empire and his weakness as causing the Kindite interregnum, and according to a few akhbƗrƯs, a rather unbe- lievable Yemeni invasion of Iran. It would therefore be up to his son and succes- sor AnnjshirvƗn to x the problems in his empire caused by his father. Khusraw remedied the situation with the Arabs by reinstalling the Lakhmids in their posi- tion as Sasanian vassals. However, with respect to Khusraw’s dealings with the Arabs, the Islamic historical tradition focuses the most attention on the joint Sasanian- ণimyarite reconquest of the Yemen. In this context, the sources high- light the ণimyarite embassies to Khusraw’s court in search of aid, in which the ambassador(s) pleads his case with dignity in the face of Khusraw’s imposing ceremonial and rather diminutive treatment of him. In general, the ণimyarite saga, stemming from a pre-‘Abbasid South Arabian propagandistic tradition, serves to forecast the rise of Islam and to lend evidence to the existence of a glo- rious Arab civilization. In this regard, Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan serves as a bridge in the Arab- Islamic historical tradition, streaming a legacy of ণimyarite prestige into the rise of the Arabs and Islam. This chapter also investigated accounts of the infamous Yawm al- Safqa, in which Khusraw opted for a deceitful stratagem to chastise the TamƯm. We concluded by examining accounts of the ominous events occurring in Iran coinciding with the birth of the Prophet, presaging the rise of Islam and the fall of the Sasanian state. Not surprisingly, it would be up to an Arab, the ancient soothsayer Sa৬Ưত, to make this prediction for the Iranians.

Notes 1 ৫abarƯ, I, 947. This was the ণimyarite Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan’s indignant response to Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn’s gift of money and slaves to him, in lieu of the military aid the South Arabian noble had requested to repel the Abyssinians occupying his home- land. See p. 109. 2 YƗqnjt explained that the term safqa refers to when one of the TamƯm was warned of what was happening inside the castle of al- Mushaqqar (see below), he picked up his sword and freed himself. However, the door of the castle was slammed shut behind him, and those still inside were killed. See YƗqnjt, Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, II, 414. 3 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 882–884, 887; Miskawayh, I, 123–125; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 583, 586–587, 589–594. Bal‘amƯ (II, 144–146, 149–151) does not mention the Hephthalites in this respect, indicating it was the Turkish KhƗqƗn who assisted QubƗdh in claiming the throne both times. Al- DƯnawarƯ (66–67), al-Ya‘q njbƯ (Ta’rƯkh, I, 164), and the NihƗyat (295–297) describe QubƗdh’s ousting of his brother JƗmƗsp with the help of the Hep- hthalites, but don’t mention his dispute with BalƗsh. FirdawsƯ (VI, 78–94) provides a somewhat different account. He narrates that QubƗdh, who had accompanied PƯrnjz on his campaign against KhnjshnavƗz, was captured during the battle and held hostage by the Central Asian ruler. Snjfaray managed to free QubƗdh after his victory over KhnjshnavƗz. Snjfaray then had BalƗsh deposed, and arranged to raise QubƗdh to the throne. This rendition is echoed by ণamza (82), who states that QubƗdh was a prisoner at the Hepthalite court freed by a Persian army. The idea that QubƗdh was a hostage at the Hephthalite court is corroborated by the Syriac author, Joshua the 120 The twilight of Sasanian power Stylite. In his version, PƯrnjz had left QubƗdh as a hostage with the Hepthalites as part of his original agreement with their ruler. See The Chronicle of Joshua the Stylite, Composed in Syriac A.D. 507 with a Translation into English and Notes, trans. W. Wright (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1882), 8. 4 FirdawsƯ describes how Snjfaray (SnjkhrƗ) arranged for QubƗdh to become king (see previous note), only to be betrayed by QubƗdh with the help of the MihrƗns (VI, 97–102). Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 885–886) relates that QubƗdh killed SnjkhrƗ’s son, Zarmihr as well. Bal‘amƯ (II, 147–148), however, species that QubƗdh did not kill Zarmihr. See also Miskawayh, I, 123–124; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 164; al- DƯnawarƯ, 66; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 588; NihƗyat, 295. 5 It is beyond the scope of this chapter to outline all of the discrepancies in our sources regarding this enigmatic heresiarch. Jackson Bonner’s most convincing evidence against the severity of the Mazdakite movement’s impact is the discovery of contem- poraneous seals of noble Iranian families, whose very existence prove that the social class system in the empire remained intact. Other arguments in favor of exaggeration arise from the lack of mention of the name Mazdak in the Christian sources, as well as the fact that QubƗdh carried out a war against the Romans, which would have been impossible had Sasanian society been in the state of disarray that the Muslim sources emphasize it was. See Michael Jackson Bonner, “Six Problèmes d’interprétation his- toriographique dans les règnes de PƝrǀz, BalƗš, JƗmƗsp, et KavƗd,” Historia i ĝiwat 4 (2015); “Sasanian Propaganda in the Reign of ঩usraw ƖnnjšƯrvƗn,” in Husraw Ier: Reconstruction d’un règne: Sources et documents, ed. C. Jullien, 1–25 (Paris: Peeters, 2015). On the Mazdakite episode, see further Pourshariati, Sasanian Empire, 82–83, 344–347; Crone, “KavƗd’s Heresy and Mazdak’s Revolt,” Iran 29 (1991): 21–42; M. Morony and M. Guidi, “Mazdak,” EI, 2nd ed.; H. Gaube, “Mazdak: Historical Reality or Invention?” Studia Iranica 11 (1982): 111–122; Yarshater, “Mazdakism,” CHI 3, 2: 991–1024; Christensen, “Le Mouvement Mazdakite,” in L’Iran sous les Sassa- nides, 316–361; al- ৫abarƯ, I, 885–886, 893–894; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 596–605; FirdawsƯ, VI, 109–119; Bal‘amƯ, II, 148–149, 159; Miskawayh, I, 124–125, 129; al- DƯnawarƯ, 66–69; NihƗyat, 295, 303; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 178; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 164; al- AghƗnƯ, V, 56–57; Muতammad b. al- AthƯr, KitƗb al- KƗmil fƯ’l-ta’rƯkh (13 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al-ৡƗ dir, 1965–1967), I, 434–435. 6 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 883–884; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 591–593; FirdawsƯ, VI, 105–106; Miskawayh, I, 124–125; Bal‘amƯ, II, 150–152; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 66–67; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 163; NihƗyat, 296–297. 7 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 894, 1056; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 609–610; FirdawsƯ, VI, 127; Miskawayh, I, 124–125; al- DƯnawarƯ, 69; NihƗyat, 303. The four-fold division of the Sasanian empire has recently been conrmed by the discovery of bullae dating from the time of Khusraw I that state the names and titles of the governors of the four regions of the empire. See Pourshariati’s references (Sasanian Empire, 11, 94–95, 98–101, 470) to Rika Gyselen, “The Four Generals of the Sasanian Empire: Some Sigillographic Evid- ence,” Conferenze 14 (Rome, 2001). 8 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 963–965; FirdawsƯ, VI, 134–139; Bal‘amƯ, II, 227–232; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 73–75; NihƗyat, 330ff.; Ibn al- AthƯr, I, 455–457. On Khusraw I’s military reforms, see Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 46ff.; F. Altheim and R. Stiehl, Ein asiatischer Staat: Feudalismus unter den Sasaniden und ihren Nachbarn (Wiesbaden: Limes-Verlag, 1954), 134–135; Zeev Rubin, “The Reforms of Khusro AnnjshirwƗn,” in The Byzan- tine and Early Islamic Near East. Vol. 3: States, Resources and Armies, eds. A. Cameron, L. Conrad, and G. R. D. King, 227–297 (Princeton: Darwin, 1995). 9 The Sasanians are reported to have maintained a dual land and poll tax, which was later inherited by the Muslim rulers. Until the reign of Khusraw I, the land tax was based on a proportion of the yields. After completing a survey of the land started by his predecessor QubƗdh I, Khusraw I had a new system drawn up in which the amount of the tax, to be paid in cash and kind, was based on what kind of product was grown. The twilight of Sasanian power 121 Khusraw I is also said to have extended the poll tax requirement, which had previ- ously been paid mainly by Christians to include all non- noble males between the ages of 20 and 50. He apportioned it to be between 4 to 48 dirhams based on ability to pay. Nobles, priests, scribes, and soldiers were exempt from the poll tax. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 960–963; FirdawsƯ, VI, 127–129; Bal‘amƯ, II, 222–226; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 180; Miskawayh, I, 130–131; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 72–73; NihƗyat, 328–330; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, I, 455; Rubin, “The Reforms of Khusro AnnjshirwƗn”; Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 46–47; V. G. Lukonin, “Political, Social and Military Institutions,” CHI 3, 2: 745–746; Morony, Iraq, 99–100, 106–107; Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 366–367. 10 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 899; Bal‘amƯ, II, 161–162; Miskawayh, I, 129; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 69; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, I 180; NihƗyat, 303–304. In the ShƗhnƗma (VI, 245–250) however, it is the Turks that denitively defeat the Hephthalites, and this event is corroborated by Western sources. These other Islamic sources’ ascription of the victory to Khusraw therefore evinces the work of pro- Khusraw propaganda in them. See Jackson Bonner, “Sasanian Propaganda in the Reign of ঩usraw ƖnnjšƯrvƗn,” 14–19. 11 Indeed, Pourshariati’s (Sasanian Empire, 1–161) main thesis is that the image of the Sasanian state as a centralized monarchy is indebted to Sasanian legitimist historiography, which she argues was intended to mask what was in fact a loosely knit confederacy between the Sasanians and the old Parthian families. She further con- tends that competition between these two factions destabilized the state in the years prior to the Arab conquest. On this struggle, see also Frye, The Heritage of Persia, 224–225. 12 The Heritage of Persia, 215. 13 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 881–882, 888–889; Bal‘amƯ, II, 154–156; Miskawayh, I, 124–126. Abnj’l-Faraj al- IৢfahƗnƯ insinuates that QubƗdh played a part in effectuating this trans- ition, since the Lakhmid ruler al-Mundhir III b. al- Nu‘mƗn refused his summons to convert to Mazdakism while al-ণƗ rith accepted it. See al- AghƗnƯ, V, 56–58, VI, 418. ণamza (45) likewise states that QubƗdh made al-ণƗ rith his agent over the Arabs. On the Kindite interregnum, see further ণamza, 82–83; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 216–217; Gunnar Olinder, The Kings of Kinda of the Family of Ɩkil al- MurƗr, (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1927), 51–69; ShahƯd, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century (2 vols.) (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1995), vol. 2, 725; Kister, “Al- ণƯra,” 83; Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” 600; .miden, 87–93ېChristensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 358–359; Rothstein, La 14 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 889–892; Bal‘amƯ, II, 32, 156–159; Miskawayh, I, 126–127; Zeev Rubin, “Al- ৫abarƯ and the Age of the Sasanians,” in Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and His Work, 43–45. 15 These historians offer very similar accounts of this narrative. Bal‘amƯ (II, 31–32) con- rms the identity of this Tubba‘ as Abnj Karib. Al- ৫abarƯ indicates elsewhere (I, 880–882) that the Kinda chieftains served the rulers of Yemen. Abnj’l-Faraj (V, 57–58) likewise points to a tradition stemming from Ibn Qutayba stipulating that al- ণƗrith’s authority stemmed from Tubba‘, not QubƗdh. 16 This is clearly a trope, as it echoes the same challenge which the Umayyad amƯr al- HajjƗj b. Ynjsuf posed to his generals Qutayba b. Muslim and Muতammad b. al- QƗsim. See al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 289. 17 We saw this same “Trojan horse” trope with the account of ‘Amr b. ‘AdƯ’s defeat of al-ZabbƗ’. See p. 82. Bal‘amƯ (II, 32, 158–159) and ণamza (100) state that Samar- qand derives its name from Shamir’s conquest of it. The derivation in Persian is Shamir kand, meaning the “City of Shamir,” according to Bal‘amƯ, and “Shamir destroyed it,” according to ণamza. 18 Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 892) also cites Ibn IsতƗq on this conquest, stating that it was ণasan’s father TubƗn As‘ad Abnj Karib who had traveled to the east (mashraq). Yet, further below (I, 909–910) he provides another tradition from Ibn IsতƗq, which has Shamir Yur’ish making the expedition to China, building Samarqand, and even establishing 122 The twilight of Sasanian power the encampment of al-ণƯ ra, with all these events occurring before the time of RabƯ‘a b. Naৢr. Miskawayh similarly provides earlier in his chronicle (I, 80) an account of Abnj Karib’s conquest of China occurring in the KayƗnian period. For his part, ণamza (100–101) writes of Shamir Yur’ish’s conquest of KhurƗsƗn (but not China) in the KayƗnian period. Finally, al-Mas‘ njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 305) states that Kulaykarib, a grand- son of Shamir made the trip to China. 19 As Bosworth observes, this account of QubƗdh’s death (al- ৫abarƯ, I, 890) clearly clashes with the report of his death in al- ৫abarƯ’s account occurring just a few pages earlier (p. 888) in which the Iranian sovereign appears to have died without incident, shortly before which he conferred onto his son Khusraw the responsibility of imple- menting measures that he wanted to be executed after his death. This account, most likely stemming from the KhudƗynƗma tradition, indicates that QubƗdh died a natural death and a smooth transition of rule ensued. It certainly makes no mention of an invasion from Yemen. See Bosworth, The History of al- ܑabarƯ 5: 142, n. 364. 20 Abnj’l-Faraj poetically stated of him that he was shadƯd al-mulk ba‘Ưd al- ܈Ưt, meaning he was a “erce ruler of great renown.” See al- AghƗnƯ, V, 56. 21 It is possible that QubƗdh serves in this account as a proto- Shu‘njbƯ as well, depending on how one interprets the anecdote of the joke he played on al-ণƗ rith during their meeting. Here, QubƗdh ordered a dish of pitless dates delivered for himself, and a dish of dates with their pits still in to al-ণƗ rith. QubƗdh began eating the dates whole, so al-ণƗ rith followed suit, removing the pits of his dates. When QubƗdh asked al- ণƗrith why he wasn’t consuming the dates whole as he was, al-ণƗ rith responded that among his people, only camels and sheep ate dates with their pits still in. At this point, al-ণƗ rith realized that he was being ridiculed. On the one hand, one might view this simply as a lighthearted jest on the part of QubƗdh. On the other hand, one might see this prank as a derogatory defamation of Arab culture by likening an Arab chieftain to his own livestock, thus evoking images of Bedouin uncouthness. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 888–889; Bal‘amƯ, II, 155; Miskawayh, I, 125. 22 Bal‘amƯ (II, 159) states that Khusraw defeated the Tubba‘, expelling him and al- ণƗrith from his territory. Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 891–892) and Miskawayh (I, 127) write that the Tubba‘, Shamir, and al-ণ asan returned to Yemen of their own accord. 23 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 958. Nöldeke (Geschichte, 238, n. 4) doubted the veracity of this statement, arguing that this was too much territory for the Iranians to be able to control, even indirectly through the Lakhmids. However, Sidney Smith accepts it, citing the presence of Arabian gravestones from this period with similar inscrip- tions and distributed over a wide area, which he argues is an indicator of political unity. See Sidney Smith, “Events in Arabia in the 6th Century A.D.,” BSOAS 16, 3 (1954): 442. 24 We saw how the Hephthalite king AkhshunvƗr proclaimed this same Qu’ranic injunc- tion during his encounter with PƯrnjz. See p. 95. 25 This is the account provided by Ibn al- AthƯr, I, 434–435. Those of al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ (604–605) and Abnj’l-Faraj (al- AghƗnƯ, V, 56–57) are virtually identical to this one. 26 FirdawsƯ, VI, 151–154. 27 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 985. On the Sasanian governorship in Baতrayn, see further F. E. Peters, Muhammad and the Origins of Islam (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994), 68; Frye, “Bahrain under the Sasanians,” in Dilmun; New Studies on the Archaeology and Early History of Bahrain, ed. Daniel Potts (Berlin: D. Reimer, .miden, 131–133ېRothstein, La ;168 ,(1983 28 See Hoyland’s (Arabia and the Arabs, 29–30) reference to Salama b. Muslim al- AwtabƯ’s AnsƗb al-‘Arab. The Sasanians’ presence in ‘UmƗn is evidenced by the remains of their qanƗts (subterranean irrigation channels) there. See Morony, “Economic Impact,” 30–31; J. C. Wilkinson, “The Origins of the Omani State,” in The Arabian Peninsula: Society and Politics, ed. Derek Hopwood (London: Allen and Unwin, 1972), 70–71. The twilight of Sasanian power 123 29 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 901–910; Bal‘amƯ, II, 164–169; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 35–42; Michael Lecker, “The Conversion of ণimyar to Judaism and the Jewish Bannj Hadl of Medina,” Die Welt des Orients 26 (1995): 129–136. 30 Both traditions are contained within al-৫ abarƯ, I, 945–958. See also Bal‘amƯ, II, 202–219; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 76–83; al-T ƯjƗn, 315–317; NihƗyat, 316–320; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 165; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 308–309; ণamza, 107–108; al- DƯnawarƯ, 65–66; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 616–619; al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 196–198. For modern scholarship, see Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” 606–607; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 56–57; Frye, “The Political History of Iran under the Sasanians,” 156–158; ShahƯd, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, vol. 1, 364–372; Retsö, “In the Shade of Himyar and Sasan: The Political History of pre-Islamic Arabia Accord- ing to the AyyƗm al-‘arab- Literature,” Arabia: Revue de Sabéologie 2 (2004): 111–118. 31 Bal‘amƯ (II, 203) stated that Ma‘dƯ Karib was surnamed “Sayf.” Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 308) on the other hand, wrote that Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan was the father and Ma‘dƯ Karib was the son. 32 ণamza (109) informs us that Vahriz was an honoric name indicating his rank, and that his real name was KhurzƗd b. NarsƗ. 33 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 946–947. The same description is contained in Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 76–77; al- TƯjƗn, 315. Bal‘amƯ (II, 205–206) provides a similar text as well. The Lakhmid king in this account is al- Nu‘mƗn III b. al-Mundhir (r. 580–602), which is clearly inaccurate, as he was the last Lakhmid king, deposed by Khusraw II ParvƯz, as we shall see in the following chapter. Ibn al- KalbƯ’s rendition (al-৫ abarƯ, I, 950) has ‘Amr II b. Hind (r. 554–569) as the Lakhmid suzerain in this account. See Bosworth, The History of al- ܑabarƯ, 5: 237, n. 587. 34 On the Sasanian hanging crown, see Chapter 1, note 40. This motif is similar to a topos in Roman literature and rhetoric of the “Oriental” queen Zenobia being so over- laden with gemstones that she can hardly bear their weight. See Dignas and Winter, Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity, 161–162; Elke Merten, Zwei Herrscherfeste in der Historia Augusta; Untersuchungen zu den pompae der Kaiser Gallienus und Aurelianus (Bonn: R. Habelt Verlag, 1968), 132–140. 35 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 946–947. 36 Bal‘amƯ, II, 206. 37 I alluded to the wide- ranging inltration of Iranian institutions of power and adminis- tration at the ‘Abbasid court in Chapter 2 (see pp. 26–29). Descriptions of Sasanian ceremonial pervade Islamic adab, the most prominent of which is the KitƗb al- TƗj fƯ akhbƗr al-mul njk, a didactic “mirrors for princes” handbook falsely attributed to al- JƗতi਌, detailing the court rituals, protocol, and practices of the Sasanians and the ‘Abbasids. On the authorship of the KitƗb al- TƗj, see Pellat’s commentary in his translation of this work, Le livre de la couronne, 11–17; and Gregor Schoeler, “Ver- fasser und Titel des dem öƗতi਌ zugeschriebenen sog. KitƗb al- TƗ÷,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 130 (1980): 217–225. 38 In the Iranian tradition, the kings’ right to rule was based on the belief of their exclu- sive possession of the farr (Avestan: xࢷarΩnah), an idea rooted in the Avestan tradi- tion denoting a divine gift of grace affording prosperity and power. See Abolala Soudavar, The Aura of Kings: Legitimacy and Divine Sanction in Iranian Kingship (Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 2003); G. Gnoli, “Farr(ah),” EIr, 1999; Pourshariati, Sasanian Empire, p. 48, n. 222, p. 354; Jamsheed Choksy, “Sacral Kingship in Sasa- nian Iran,” Bulletin of the Asia Institute 2 (1988): 35–52; Morony, Iraq, 30–32; J. Duchesne- Guillemin, “La Royauté iranienne et le XࢷarΩnah,” in EIr, 375–386; R. N. Frye, “The Charisma of Kingship in Ancient Iran,” Iranica Antiqua 4 (1964): 36–54; G. Widengren, “The Sacral Kingship of Iran,” Studies in the History of Religions, supp. to Numen 4 (1959): 242–257. The Sasanian kings’ use of royal effects to express their divine majesty can be seen prominently in their monumental rock reliefs, such as Khusraw II ParvƯz’s sacred 124 The twilight of Sasanian power grotto at TƗq-i BustƗn. Inside there are two scenes, one of which is the investiture of the king, who receives a diadem from Ahura MazdƗ and the goddess AnƗhitƗ. At the grotto’s front is an arch decorated by a large beribboned diadem at the top and two angels in the spandrels, each bearing a diadem. See Soudavar, The Aura of Kings, 13, 19, 58–59, 64, plts. 11, 13, 62; Dorothy Shepherd, “Sasanian Art,” CHI 3, 2: 1085–1088, plts. 94–96. Indeed, crowns, diadems, and other royal headgear were viewed as expressive embodiments of farr by the Sasanians. For example, ShƗpnjr II was observed by Ammianus wearing in the place of a crown a golden, bejeweled ram’s head. The ram was one of the incarnations of the Avestan VԥrԥșraȖna (Vere- thragna), a principle deity symbolizing victory in the Zoroastrian pantheon, from whom the name BahrƗm is derived. See Ammianus, Book XIX, Chapter I: 3, p. 185; Soudavar, The Aura of Kings, 23–25; Duchesne- Guillemin, “Zoroastrian Religion,” CHI 3, 2: 886, 903; Peck, “Crown II.” Similarly, al- BƯrnjnƯ relates that during the MihrijƗn festival, the Sasanian kings donned rayed crowns in the shape of the sun, which was a sign of the Indo- Iranian god Mithra, the bestower of the farr according to Iranian tradition. See al- BƯrnjnƯ, al- AthƗr al- bƗqiyya, 303; Pourshariati, Sasanian Empire, 354, n. 2021. 39 On this process, see A. Tafazzoli, “Arabic Language II: Iranian Loanwords in Arabic,” EIr, 1986; Mushegh Asatrian, “Iranian Elements in Arabic: The State of Research,” Iran and the Caucasus 10, 1 (2006): 87–106; Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” 609–611; Shaul Shaked, “From Iran to Islam: On Some Symbols of Royalty;” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 7 (1986): 75–91. 40 Al- BayƗn, III, 115. 41 Ibid., 117–118. 42 Al- BayƗn, II, 88, III, 100. In the KitƗb al- BukhalƗ’ (170), al-J Ɨতi਌ similarly states that among the people of the desert (al- qawm fƯ bƗdiyyƗtihim), “one’s turban is his crown.” M. J. Kister demonstrates that ‘Umar’s saying must be viewed in the wider context of the reverence for the turban (al-‘imƗma) in Arab society. During the JƗhiliyya, he explains, it was viewed as a symbol of honor and authority. With the coming of Islam, the turban developed a pious connotation, as its wearing was intended to distinguish the Muslims from the non- believers. See “ ‘The Crowns of this Community’. Some Notes on the Turban in the Muslim Tradition,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 24 (2000): 217–245. 43 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 947. 44 Ibid., 947–948. 45 Bal‘amƯ, II, 207. 46 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 952. 47 Ibid., 947. 48 Ibid., 952. The Yemen was famed for its abundant gold and silver mines. See Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 111. 49 Bal‘amƯ, II, 207–208. 50 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 196. 51 I will describe contemporaneous notions of the Arabs’ generosity among Muslim scholars in the following chapter. 52 The historical reconquest of Yemen has been dated to AD 570. See Smith “Events in Arabia,” 434. 53 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 197; al- ৫abarƯ, I, 948; Ibn HishƗm, al- TƯjƗn, 316. 54 On Sayf ’s own poetic boast of his and Vahriz’s defeat of the Abyssinians, see Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 79; al- TƯjƗn, 316. Additionally the famous madƯh (praise) of this campaign composed by Abnj’l-ৡalt is contained in several sources. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 956–957; Bal‘amƯ, II, 216; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 618–619; al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 199; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 80; al- TƯjƗn, 317; Al- ণasan b. Aতmad al- HamdƗnƯ, Al- IklƯl (al- Juz’ al- ThƗmin) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1940), 14. The twilight of Sasanian power 125 55 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 361, 415, 464, 471, 504, 539, 544, 559, 562, 572–573, 584, 658, 794, 920, 1009. 56 The discussion on medical theory, theology, and philosophy at the beginning of the KitƗb al- TƯjƗn is reective of an early ‘Abbasid era discourse. Likewise the wide gulf between references to Wahb that are apparent further into the text makes it seem likely that Wahb’s original writing has been doctored, possibly by the editor Ibn HishƗm himself. See Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 70–71. On the KitƗb al- TƯjƗn, see also Jan Retsö, “Wahb b. Munabbih, the KitƗb al- tƯjƗn and the History of Yemen,” Arabia 3 (2005–2006): 227–236. 57 Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 229; Jan Retsö, “Arabs in Pre- Islamic South Arabia,” Archäologische Berichte aus dem Yemen 10 (2005): 129–130; The Arabs in Antiquity, 33. 58 According to the genealogical scheme ascribed to Wahb b. Munabbih in the KitƗb al- TƯjƗn (37ff.), the ণimyarite kings were descended from the Prophet Hnjd. The latter’s grandson, Ya‘rub b. Qaত৬Ɨn was the rst speaker of Arabic, and composed Arabic poetry as well. In the AkhbƗr al- Yaman wa- ash‘ƗruhƗ wa- ansƗbuhƗ, the early South Arabian rƗwƯ ‘AbƯd b. Sharya (d. 686) supplies this information in response to the question posed by Mu‘Ɨwiyya I as to who were the al-‘Arab al-‘Ɨriba (the proto- or original Arabs) and who were the al-‘Arab al- musta‘riba (the Arabicized Arabs). His answer implies that the descendants of Qaত৬Ɨn (the southern Arabs) were the original Arabs, whereas the Quraysh (representing the northern Arabs) are the Arabicized ones, because, as he informs the caliph, they are descended from IsmƗ‘Ưl, who learned Arabic and mixed with the original Arabs in Mecca. This text has been published as an appendix to the KitƗb al- TƯjƗn (see pp. 327–328.) Elise Crosby accepts its authen- ticity, though admits the inltration of later accretions. See The History, Poetry, and Genealogy of the Yemen: The Akhbar of Abid b. Sharya al- Jurhumi (Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2007, 1st Gorgias Press ed.), 61–70. Retsö on the other hand, argues that the text was produced in the early ‘Abbasid period, though he believes it does reect a latter Umayyad period discourse. See The Arabs in Antiquity, 34, 56, notes 65, 66. 59 Retsö, “Wahb b. Munabbih, the KitƗb al- tƯjƗn and the History of Yemen,” 234. 60 ManƗqib al- Turk, 12–13. Hoyland has made the same point regarding the ‘Abbasid projection of a unied Arabia, and has likewise translated a text from al- JƗতi਌’s ManƗqib al- Turk that overlaps with this one as evidence. See Arabia and the Arabs, 229–230. 61 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 890–891; Miskawayh, I, 126. 62 See pp. 81–82. 63 NihƗyat, 304–306. 64 According to this narrative, Abraha, the Abyssinian governor of Yemen marched on Mecca intending to destroy the Ka‘ba. His army was accompanied by an elephant, named Maতmnjd. However, when the elephant got near the holy sanctuary, it kneeled, refusing to advance (after Abraha’s prisoner and guide Nufayl b. ণabƯb whispered in his ear the order to do so, informing the elephant that he was in the vicinity of God’s sacred sanctuary). Abraha and many of his men were then killed by a ock of birds sent by God that dropped stones from their beaks onto them. The specic details regarding the identity of the attackers and the date are not provided in the Qur’an. However, it is later scholars that ll in the gaps, and provide this connection. See ৫abarƯ, I, 935–942; Bal‘amƯ, II, 188–202; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 58–76; al- TƯjƗn, 314; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 307–308, 340–341; NihƗyat, 308–315; al- DƯnawarƯ, 64. For modern scholarship, see ‘IrfƗn ShahƯd, “Two Qur’anic Snjras: al- FƯl and Qurayš,” ,sƗn ‘AbbƗs, ed. WadƗd al- QƗঌƯۊin Studia Arabica et Islamica. Festschrift for I 429–436 (Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1981); G. H. Newby, “Abraha and Sennacherib: A Talmudic Parallel to the TafsƯr on SurƗt al- FƯl,” JAOS 94 (1974): 431–437; and following note. 126 The twilight of Sasanian power 65 Bosworth, who views this narrative as a product of “Arab-Islamic national pride,” indicates that Ibn IsতƗq downplayed the fact that Abraha did indeed have some sym- pathy amongst the native Arab population, as evidenced by the warm reception he received in ৫Ɨ’if. See ৫abarƯ, I, 937; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 62–63. He also points to other traditions, namely Muতammad b. ণabƯb’s Munammaq, which speaks of southern and northern Arab tribes on Abraha’s side in this campaign. See The History of al- ܑabarƯ 5: 220, n. 546. 66 See this chapter, note 64, for references. 67 Nuha Khoury, “The Dome of the Rock, the Ka‘ba, and Ghumdan: Arab Myths and Umayyad Monuments,” Muqurnas 10 (1993): 61. 68 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 199; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 310; Bal‘amƯ, II, 216; Ibn HishƗm, al- TƯjƗn, 319; NihƗyat, 321; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 229; Retsö, “Wahb b. Munabbih,” 234. 69 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 200. On Sayf ’s prognostication, see also al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 311; Ibn HishƗm, al- TƯjƗn, 319–321; NihƗyat, 321–322. 70 Retsö (“Wahb b. Munabbih,” 234) argues that Sayf ’s identication of Muতammad is the Yemeni response to the BahƯrƗ legend found in Ibn IsতƗq’s SƯra, in which a Syrian monk was the rst to identify the last prophet. 71 Lena Jayyusi, The Adventures of Sayf Ben Dhi Yazan: An Arab Folk Epic (Blooming- ton: Indiana University Press, 1999). 72 Khoury, “The Dome of the Rock, the Ka‘ba, and Ghumdan: Arab Myths and Umayyad Monuments,” 60–62. 73 Al- HamdƗnƯ, 18. 74 Ibn HishƗm, al- TƯjƗn, 64. 75 Ibid., 69. 76 See this chapter, note 54, for sources containing this poem. 77 Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, IV, 210. 78 Al- HamdƗnƯ, 18–21; Khoury, “The Dome of the Rock, the Ka‘ba, and Ghumdan,” 60. 79 Al- HamdƗnƯ, 11, 13. 80 Al- ৫abarƯ’s (I, 984–988) and Ibn al- AthƯr’s (I, 468–469) reports, which both cite Ibn al- KalbƯ, relate that Yawm al- Safqa occurred during the reign of AnnjshirvƗn, when Vahriz was the governor of Yemen. ণamza (114) and YƗqnjt, Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, (III, 413–414) on the other hand, date this event to the reign of Khusraw II ParvƯz. Abnj’l-Faraj (IX, 203–205) provides the most detailed description of these events, which are based on two traditions: The rst stems from al-Mufa ঌঌal by way of Abnj ‘Ubayda, and the second stems from Ibn al- KalbƯ, whose own report, Abnj’l-Faraj informs us, is based on ণammad al- RƗwiyya. Abnj’l-Faraj does not explicitly state to which kisrƗ he is refer- ring, but the indication is that it is ParvƯz, since he mentions that the governor of Yemen at this time was BadhƗm, who was commonly known to be ParvƯz’s governor. See al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 229–230; YƗqnjt, Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, III, 413; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 958, 1010, 1041, 1572; ণamza, 114; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, 83; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, II, 213. In the latter three sources, he is named “BadhƗn.” This last Sasanian governor of Yemen factors into the Islamic conquest narrative as a convert to Islam, as I analyze in the following chapter. 81 Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 984), Abnj’l-Faraj’s rst account (IX, 203), ণamza (114), Ibn al-Ath Ưr (I, 468), and YƗqnjt (Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, III, 413) state that the caravan contained Yemeni luxuries, which the Sasanian governor sent to Khusraw. Al- ৫abarƯ and Abnj’l-Faraj specify that it was intercepted in the territory of the Bannj Yarbnj‘. Al- ৫abarƯ and Ibn al- AthƯr state that a TamƯmƯ tribesman named ৡa‘ৡa‘a b. NƗjiyya b. ‘IqƗl al- MujƗshi‘Ư convinced the Bannj Yarbnj‘ to raid this caravan, arguing that it would simply fall into the hands of the Bakr b. WƗ’il, TamƯm’s enemies, if they did not take it rst. Abnj’l-Faraj’s second account (IX, 203–205) on the other hand, states that the caravan was sent by Khusraw to BadhƗm. Hawdha b. ‘AlƯ, a notable of ণanƯfa b. Lujaym (see following note), was in charge of escorting the caravan through his territory. Hawdha convinced the asƗwira in the caravan to allow him to continue to escort the caravan The twilight of Sasanian power 127 through TamƯmƯ territory, even though they had already contracted with the Bannj Sa‘d for that section of the route. As retribution, the Bannj Sa‘d attacked the caravan, killing most of the asƗwira, and capturing Hawdha and the survivors. Hawdha was forced to ransom himself and the surviving Iranians. 82 This was a contingent of Bakr b. WƗ’il, inhabiting the rich eastern province of YamƗma and controlling the strategic oasis town of JƗwƗ on the trade route from South Arabia. See Bosworth, The History of al- ܑabarƯ 5: 289–290, n. 683; Abdullah al- Askar, Al- Yamama in the Early Islamic Era (Reading: Ithaca Press in association with King Abdul Aziz Foundation for Research and Archives, 2002), 64–66. 83 Hence, he became known as Hawdha Dhnj’l-TƗj (the possessor of the crown). See al- ৫abarƯ, I, 985; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, I 468. 84 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 204. 85 According to al-৫ abarƯ (I, 985), ƖzƗdh FƯrnjz was nicknamed al- Muka‘bir (the mutila- tor) because he cut off peoples’ hands and feet. ণamza (100) states that ƖzƗdh FƯrnjz was called al- Muka‘bir because he cut off the feet of Arabs within his territory that left his boundary. However, elsewhere (114) he names him as DƗd FƯrnjz, and claims that the nickname of al- Muka‘bir came from his cutting off the hands of the TamƯm ۊfor their raiding Khusraw’s caravan. Al- Muka‘bir is featured in al-Bal ƗdhurƯ’s Futnj al- buldƗn (85–86) as well. Al- BalƗdhurƯ references his service to Khusraw (presum- ably ParvƯz) and his massacre of the TamƯm. He then goes on to describe his initial resistance to the ‘Umar b. al-Kha ৬৬Ɨb, and (like BahdƗm) his conversion to Islam. 86 Ibn al- AthƯr (I, 469) species that the boys were spared, and sent to Persia as slaves. 87 YƗqnjt states that this man and those outside fought and succeeded in freeing them- selves, but the door was slammed shut on those inside, and they were killed. See this chapter, note 2. Abnj’l-Faraj al- IৢfahƗnƯ provides a similar account in his rst nar- rative. In the second, he relates that the TamƯm rebelled upon realizing the ruse, and put ƖzƗdh FƯrnjz and Hawdha to ight. See al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 203, 205. 88 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 234; al- ৫abarƯ, I, 984; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, I, 468. 89 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 204. 90 Khusraw ud RƝdag, ed. and trans. J. M. Unvala as The Pahlavi Text: “King Husrav and His Boy” (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1921); al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 705–711; Mahnaz Moazami, “঳usraw-Ư KawƗdƗn ud rƝdak-Ɲw,” EIr, 2014. 91 Al-‘Iqd, II, 219. 92 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 336–337. 93 See p. 86. 94 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 981–984; Bal‘amƯ, II, 235–237; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 8–9; NihƗyat, 304–305; al-‘Iqd, II, 26–28; YƗqnjt, Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, III, 179. Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, I, 187) ascribes these events to the reign of Khusraw II ParvƯz. 95 YƗqnjt (Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, III, 179) conrms its location in Persia between Rayy and HamadƗn. However, Ibn ‘Abd Rabih (II, 26) indicates that it is located in the Yemen. 96 Bal‘amƯ, II, 235. 97 It was commonplace practice for Sasanian kings upon their coronation to establish re temples that served as centers for the ritualistic cult worship of the gods and to honor the royal family. The Sasanians’ view of re as a symbol of their majesty can be seen in their power media, particularly their coins in which the regnal re alter is displayed on the reverse, encircled by diadems and “enthroned,” so as to embody the sovereign himself. See Matthew Canepa, The Two Eyes of the Earth: Art and Ritual of Kingship between Rome and Sasanian Iran (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009), 15–18; M. Alram, “Early Sasanian Coinage,” in The Idea of Iran. Vol. 3: The Sasanian Era, eds. V. Sarkhosh Curtis and S. Stewart, 17–30 (London: I. B. Tauris, 2008). 98 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 981. 6 The buildup to the confrontation Khusraw II ParvƯz and the rise of the Arabs

Islamic historical memory bears witness to the unraveling of the Sasanian state under Khusraw II ParvƯz (r. 591–628), the last effective sovereign of the Sasa- nian dynasty. In this context, I commence this chaper by examining the account of ParvƯz’s rescue by IyƗs b. QabƯৢa, chief of the ৫ayyi’ tribe, when the young king was eeing the rebel BahrƗm ChnjbƯn. I then discuss how, in the Islamic historical tradition, the allure of power and luxuries caused the king to become oppressive of his subjects, decadent, and avaricious for the wealth of others, thus making him the model of the stereotypical monarchical tyranny conceived by Muslim critics of Iranian civilization. It is against the background of the degen- eration of ParvƯz’s character occurring later in his reign that I will examine the reports of his subsequent dealings with the Arabs, for whom he showed con- tempt. The rst case of such accounts describes the last Lakhmid king, al- Nu‘mƗn III b. al- Mundhir’s (r. 580–602) visit to the Sasanian court, and the follow- up embassy of Arab notables sent by the Lakhmid ruler in response to the ill treatment he had received from ParvƯz during his trip. The second is the account of the Battle of Dhnj QƗr, which is portrayed in the Islamic tradition as a result of ParvƯz’s liquidation of the Lakhmid state. Moreover, the narrative of this battle underlines the bravery of the Arabs in the classic style of the ayyƗm al-‘Arab genre of literature, while depicting Dhnj QƗr as a forerunner to the Islamic conquest of Iran. I will conclude by analyzing the depiction of the ominous events occurring towards the end of ParvƯz’s reign, as well as ParvƯz’s ignominious deposal and execution, which both heralded the fall of the Sasanian dynasty and the rise of the Arabs under the banner of Islam.

An Arab chieftain’s hospitality to a Persian king The account of ParvƯz’s early years describes the difcult ascent of a young king striving to maintain his rule. The Islamic narrative tends to be sympathetic to the youthful ParvƯz, portraying him in a heroic light in a power struggle for which the odds were stacked against him. It details the treacherous blinding and murder of his father Hormuz IV (r. 570–590) by his uncles Bis৬Ɨm and Binday, and his having to contend with the rebel general BahrƗm ChnjbƯn,1 who took control over Ctesiphon, forcing ParvƯz to ee to Byzantium where he hoped to acquire the The buildup to the confrontation 129 support of the emperor Mawriq (Maurice) to regain his throne. In the narrative of ParvƯz’s ight from BahrƗm ChnjbƯn, the reader comes across the description of ParvƯz’s momentous encounter with an Arab chief. Bal‘amƯ and the NihƗyat al- irab provide virtually identical accounts of this meeting.2 It is also described in somewhat less detail by FirdawsƯ, and referenced in other chronicles as well.3 It is related that after a narrow escape from the usurper BahrƗm, ParvƯz and only ten of his companions traveled three days and nights, and were suffering from fatigue and hunger. When they reached the bank of the Euphrates, they encountered a lone Bedouin (i‘rƗbƯ) mounted on a camel. ParvƯz, who is reported to have spoken some Arabic and to have known the Arabs’ genealogies, asked the Arab who he was. He responded that he was IyƗs b. QabƯৢa of the Bannj ৫ayyi’. (In the ShƗhnƗma, he is Qays b. al- ণƗrith.) When IyƗs found out that he was talking to the king, he dismounted to pay him homage, and invited him to stay with his tribe, telling him that it would be his honor to have the king as his guest. The remainder of this anecdote serves as a conspicuous illustration of the Arabs’ proverbial hospitality. The small Iranian party was greeted by the not- ables of the tribe, who gave them straw mats to sit on. Growing impatient and fearing that they would be discovered by BahrƗm’s forces, ParvƯz pleaded with IyƗs to just give him and his group some food and they would be on their way. However, IyƗs insisted on providing hospitality to his guest. He reassured the king that they were safe, and called for fresh milk and dates to be given to the refugees. He then prepared some bread by cooking dough in a hole in the ground, which was the custom of camel drivers and shepherds, so the reader is informed. He also had a lamb slaughtered and roasted for his guests. However, FirdawsƯ only mentions the cow Qays had slaughtered for Parviz and his men. Satised but exhausted from their travails, the Iranians then fell asleep. The magnanimous character of the Arab IyƗs is shown, however, most clearly by what occurs next in this account. ParvƯz and his entourage arose after their siesta wishing to leave, but the concerned IyƗs informed them that it was a three- day journey through the desert, and to make it they would need adequate food, a guide, and fresh horses. IyƗs assured the king that he would provide all these things in the morning and invited him to spend the night with his tribe. While Qays sent the group with a guide in the ShƗhnƗma, in Bal‘amƯ and the NihƗyat’s accounts, IyƗs personally accompanied ParvƯz and his men on his journey. When they reached their destination, ParvƯz said to IyƗs,

You have proven your kindness toward me, and have attached me to your- self with links of kindness. When I return from the court of the Romans, and when I recover my kingdom, you must come to my palace, so that I can recompense you.4

Bal‘amƯ and the NihƗyat diverge on how IyƗs responded. In the NihƗyat, he simply says, “I will if God most high wills it [in shƗ’ AllƗh ta‘ƗlƗ].”5 However, Bal‘amƯ reports that, feeling slighted by ParvƯz’s suggestion, IyƗs proudly 130 The buildup to the confrontation responded, “We are Arabs! When we give hospitality to someone, we don’t expect compensation, nor do we go searching for it! However, when you recover your kingdom, and when you occupy the throne, I will come to pay you homage.” Bal‘amƯ concluded this anecdote by stating that ParvƯz left IyƗs feeling shameful for what he had said to him.6 This account embellishes a romanticized image of the rugged desert living and famed hospitality of the Bedouin that would have been easily recognizable to an early Muslim audience. In the Islamic tradition, the Bedouin are recog- nized for their ethos of generosity. Indeed, Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih portrays the notion adƯth, inۊ of the Arabs’ generosity as a fundamental Islamic precept, by citing a which the Prophet himself pronounced, “When you are in need of something, ask the Arabs. For they are endowed with three characteristics: the magnanim- ity that comes from their noble descent, mutual shame, and the benecence of God.”7 Furthermore, Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih expresses the idea, by means of an alle- gory, that the Arabs’ generosity and hospitality stemmed from their rigorous existence in the desert (much like the anonymous khƗܒib we encountered in the previous chapter).8 In this story, the famed kƗtib of FƗrs, Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ posed a question to a group of men asking which of the world’s nations (al- umam) is the most sagacious. When they answered that it is Persia (assuming that this is what he wanted to hear), he responded to their surprise that it is the Arabs. After succinctly describing the dening characteristics of the other peoples, he justies his selection by describing the noble characteristics of the Arabs:

The Arabs governed despite not having a previous example to follow. They are owners of camels and sheep, and live in dwellings made of hair and skin. [Each] one of them gives generously with his food, is gracious about expending his own effort, and shares what he has obtained with ease and what he has obtained with difculty.

After describing the Arabs’ famed eloquence, Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ then states that it was the Arabs’ predilection for generosity which caused God to honor them by sending among their people the nal prophet, his religion, and the caliphate. adƯth cited above, religious andۊ Through this claim, he attaches, as does the political signicance to a simple cultural attribute.9 (As a preeminent scholar of Persian statecraft, this anecdote’s insertion of Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ into the role of admirer of the Arabs is clearly intended for its ironic effect.) Similar notions -l alڲregarding the Arabs’ generosity are expressed by Ibn Qutayba, whose Fa ‘Arab is cited by Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih.10 Ibn Qutayba argues that due to the Arabs’ straitened circumstances in the JƗhiliyya,

the necessity for one to preserve his neighbors and to protect their property superseded any obligations he might have to his close friends. One of them would give generously to his neighbor before giving to himself, and would safeguard his property with his own.11 The buildup to the confrontation 131 Ibn Qutayba also highlights the Arabs’ seless and total hospitality to their guests, making them “strive to be without possessions” and “the best when it comes to giving gifts.”12 It is thus through the lens of this discourse celebrating the hospitality of the rugged nomadic Arabs that we may better comprehend the subtext of this account, which provides a vivid description of IyƗs’ generosity to his Iranian guests set against the backdrop of a Bedouin encampment. In this regards, one is stricken by the irony of the idea that the great Sasanian king, accustomed as he was to the luxuries of royal living, would be reduced to having to put up with this rustic, though well- intentioned, treatment from the Arabs. The Muslim reader living during the ninth-tenth centuries would have found it humorous to visualize ParvƯz, who as we shall soon see, was to become the model of Iranian royal gran- deur in the Islamic tradition, accepting the hospitality of poor Bedouin, seated with his entourage on straw mats, and consuming the simple foods of the Arabs, such as dates, milk, roast lamb, and bread prepared using a special method known to the nomads. Moreover, one surmises from this account that IyƗs could just as easily have turned over the wayward Iranians as prisoners to BahrƗm ChnjbƯn, and have received a substantial reward right then. On the contrary however, IyƗs is portrayed as going out of his way to look after his guests. By doing so, he serves to project an ideal of Bedouin hospitality that was conceived by nostalgic Muslim scholars and litterateurs living centuries removed from these events. As an interesting postscript to this account, our sources report that after parting ways with IyƗs, ParvƯz encountered on his way to Constantinople a Christian hermit who knew who ParvƯz was (despite ParvƯz’s lying to the monk, telling him that he was merely the Persian king’s messenger), and proceeded to relate future events for him. One of his predictions was that rule (mulk) will leave his progeny and go to “a nation descended from IsmƗ‘Ưl b. IbrƗhƯm which lives in the deserts, whose food is dates and meat, and whose drink is milk.”13 What stands out in this prognostication is the monk’s emphasis on both the Abrahamic descent and the pastoral nomadic existence of the bearers of the new world political order. By so doing, he is not just stating that the Islamic empire will come from the Arabs, but is, in essence, identifying the Arabs’ Arabness as the dening feature of this new enterprise.

The archetype of a decadent king The Islamic narrative of ParvƯz’s reign describes how the Iranian sovereign ulti- mately solidied his rule by defeating BahrƗm ChnjbƯn, whom he later had assas- sinated, and by removing his refractory uncles Bis৬Ɨm and Binday. However, the sources show that after consolidating his power, the king’s personal character underwent a process of degeneration, which became especially acute towards the end of his life. In this regard, they indicate that his success lled him with vain- glory to the extent that he was oppressive to his subjects, and he developed a predilection for luxuries, jealously coveting the possessions of others. For example, al-৫ abarƯ, citing Ibn al-Kalb Ư, wrote that: 132 The buildup to the confrontation KisrƗ became excessively prideful because of the abundance of wealth, various types of jewels, equipment and horses which he had accumulated, and because of the vast lands he had conquered from the enemy. Matters unfolded in such a way as to help him, and he was granted good fortune in his ventures. Yet, he was vain and horribly avaricious. He envied people for the wealth that they possessed. He was the most avaricious of the people for jewels, vessels, and the like. KisrƗ disdained his people, scorning them in such a way as no judicious, discerning monarch would ever do.14

ParvƯz is remembered for his mercurial temper, being quick to order cruel pun- ishments and executions. For instance, al-Mas‘ njdƯ detailed how ParvƯz capri- ciously cut off the nose and mouth, and then executed his wise minister Buzurjmihr. He then had his vice- minister, KhayrƗrƯs, drowned in the Tigris when the latter reproached the king for what he had done. Al- Mas‘njdƯ wrote that without the guidance of these two talented sages, “ParvƯz wandered from the way of justice and truth. He weighed down upon the nobles [khawƗ܈܈] and com- moners [‘awƗmm] with injustice and tyranny, the likes of which had not been seen before.”15 Similarly, ParvƯz is reported to have had a tendency of removing the shoulders of whomever entered his presence to inform him of his army’s defeat.16 Furthermore, several sources mention that Khusraw imprisoned and later ordered the execution of his troops returning from defeat with the Roman emperor Heraclius. The author of the NihƗyat al-irab , who provides the clearly inated gure of 20,000 condemned noblemen, writes that when the ofcial charged with implementing this order asked how he could possibly kill so many people, Khusraw simply responded that he could kill 1,000 men each day! Fearing insurrection, this ofcial did not carry out the order.17 Matching ParvƯz’s capricious cruelty was his extravagance. The sources emphasize how ParvƯz showed disdain for his subjects while heaping burden- some taxes upon them in order to pay for his luxurious lifestyle. In this regard, some texts highlight ParvƯz’s commissioning of the corrupt Nabatean (‘iljƯ) minister FarrukhzƗdh to collect the taxes in arrears. The latter took advantage of his position, using violence and torture to unlawfully seize his peoples’ wealth. This measure led to a scarcity of food, driving many people from their lands.18 ParvƯz on the other hand accumulated a vast amount of riches for himself, acquiring more wealth than any monarch ever had according to some accounts.19 To this end, we encounter vivid descriptions of the sumptuousness of ParvƯz’s court in our texts. For example, he is reported to have possessed a crown encrusted with pearls the size of eggs, rubies, and emeralds, and which necessi- tated a suspension chain because of its weight, like the crown of AnnjshirvƗn.20 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ and FirdawsƯ attributed to him the building of the grandiose palace in Ctesiphon, known as the TƗq-i KisrƗ.21 According to these authors, ParvƯz’s “cosmic throne” (Takht- i ܑƗqdƯs) was made of ebony and teak, and adorned with gold and silver. Standing over it was an elaborate canopy displaying the signs of the zodiac and the seven climes. Its stars were made of gold and its sky was made of lapis lazuli.22 ParvƯz’s throne room is also reported to have contained a The buildup to the confrontation 133 luxurious carpet, the BahƗr-i KisrƗ (Khusraw’s Spring), which displayed a lush, bucolic scene of rivers, houses, and gardens, and was decorated in gold and silver.23 Regarding Khusraw’s other possessions, the NihƗyat provides an inventory of all of Khusraw’s luxurious ill- gotten gains (slaves, gold and silver dinars, rings and vessels; brocades; aromatics; etc.) acquired through his burdensome taxation of his subjects.24 Several historians also describe Khusraw’s “treasure of the which is said to have comprised 1,000 shiploads full of ,(ۊwind” (Kanz al- RƯ ne garments, pearls, gold, and silver, that the monarch intercepted from the Byzantines off the coast of ‘UmƗn.25 ParvƯz is further said to have several won- drous items in his possession, including a napkin that wouldn’t burn when set to re, and malleable gold which had the consistency of wax.26 Al- Mas‘njdƯ claimed that Khusraw possessed 1,000 elephants that were commanded to bow down to him during his military procession.27 Khusraw II ParvƯz is thus remembered in the Islamic historical tradition for his tyrannical rule and decadence. It is in this context that one must consider the accounts of ParvƯz’s decaying relations with al- Nu‘mƗn III b. al- Mundhir, the last king of the Lakhmid state, as well as his subsequent engagement with the Bakr b. WƗ’il confederation at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr. For it is in these descriptions of his dealings with the Arabs that his hubris and caprice especially stand out, as will be shown in what follows.

The Lakhmid embassies to Khusraw

Khusraw and al- Nu‘mƗn III The rst sign of tension between ParvƯz and al- Nu‘mƗn in our narrative appears with the account of the Lakhmid king’s delegation (wafd) to the Sasanian court. The account of this embassy and of a follow-up delegation sent by the Lakhmid king is contained in the KitƗb al-‘Iqd al- farƯd, whose author bases his report on Ibn al- KalbƯ, and in the NihƗyat al-irab .28 The account of the rst embassy opens with al-Nu‘m Ɨn appearing before the Iranian monarch, with delegations from Byzantium, China, India, and the Turks also present at the court session. Each peoples’ representative was given the opportunity to describe the merits of their respective countries (buldƗnihim). When it was al-Nu‘m Ɨn’s turn, he boasted about the Arab people, mentioning their nobility, intelligence, and the wisdom in their poetry. However, ParvƯz responded to this statement by launching into a condescending, vitriolic diatribe against the Arabs. He said he has considered the circumstances of all the nations (al- umam) that visited him, and found each of them to possess merit in different respects. The Greeks are distinguished by their close- knit society, the greatness of their rule, their skill and accomplish- ments in architecture, and a religion which distinguishes between the permissible and the forbidden; the Indians by their wisdom, arithmetic, medicine, industries, and the bounty of their lands; and the Chinese by their advanced war equipment, iron wares, horsemanship, and ambition. Even the Turks and Khazars deserve 134 The buildup to the confrontation merit for maintaining social cohesion in the inhospitable environment that they inhabited. He then states:

I haven’t seen that the Arabs possess any good characteristics in the matter of dƯn wa- dunyƗ (religion and the world). Yet, what indicates their despica- bleness, lowliness, and their lack of importance is that they live in their encampments among frightened beasts and stray birds. They kill their chil- dren out of poverty, and eat each other out of need. They have no part of the world’s foods, clothes, drinks, pastimes, and joys. The best food which one who lives in comfort among them can obtain is camel meat, which disgusts predatory animals, because of its heaviness, bad taste, and fear of disease. If one of them gives hospitality to a guest, he counts it as a noble deed, and if he is fed a meal, he considers it booty. Then I see that you don’t submit to the fact of your lowliness, lack, poverty, and misery, and you even brag, wanting to put yourselves on top of the classes of people!29

The account of this court session is framed as a competition between civiliza- tions, and as such is strongly redolent of al-J Ɨতi਌’s discourse comparing the merits and accomplishments of the world’s nations.30 Through this insulting speech, ParvƯz is made to echo the anti- Bedouin rhetoric voiced by later polemi- cists of the Islamic era like BashshƗr b. Burd. In his emphasis on the JƗhiliyya Arabs’ poverty, a commonplace trope as we have seen, ParvƯz claims that the Arabs kill their children out of poverty. This is most certainly a reference to the JƗhiliyya practice of female infanticide, a clear blemish for the Arabs that polemicists picked up on in the context of inter-civilizational competition. For example, in the last line of his poem lambasting the Arabs, the Marwanid period poet IsmƗ‘Ưl b. YasƗr, whom Abnj’l-Faraj labeled as a Shu‘njbƯ, recited: “We [‘ajam] raised our daughters while you [Arabs] buried yours alive in the ground!”31 At the same time, Khusraw mocks the diet of the Bedouin Arabs. For the Arabs, he indicates, know nothing of the haute cuisine of the ‘ajam (which brings to mind the mouth-watering dishes described in the text, Khusraw ud RƝdag)32 and the best meal one of them can hope for is camel meat. I have already cited in my analysis of our narrative other examples of individuals den- ing the Arabs by the food of the desert that they consume, such as meat, milk, and dates.33 Indeed, the Arabs’ eating habits was a subject of derision for both BashshƗr b. Burd and Ibn MamshƗdh, whose previously cited poems deride the Arabs for their alleged lizard eating tendencies.34 Similarly, al-Taw তƯdƯ reports of a Shu‘njbƯ named al- JayhƗnƯ who accused the Arabs of eating rats, lizards, and snakes, and running about together naked.35 Furthermore, Khusraw’s accusation of the Arabs’ cannibalism mirrors the (alleged) Shu‘njbƯs’ claim cited in the KitƗb al-‘Iqd al- farƯd that the Arabs “are aggressive wolves and frightened beasts which devour each other.”36 This statement’s comparison of the Arabs to njsh al- nƗra) also bears likeness to Khusraw’s claimۊfrightened beasts (al- wu that the Arabs dwell in their encampments amongst “frightened beasts,” for which he uses the same vocabulary. The buildup to the confrontation 135 Such stereotypes may be observed in Graeco- Roman and late antique/medi- eval Christian literature as well. For example, the Roman historian Ammianus described an incident in which a half- naked Saracen engaged in a cannibalistic act by killing a Goth with his dagger and sucking his blood.37 Furthermore, Jer- ome’s Vita Malchi describes how the monk St. Malchus was attacked and dragged off into captivity atop a camel by Saracen raiders, who forced him to live like a nomad, eating half- cooked meat and drinking camel milk.38 The theme of camel meat eating nomads is contained in later Christian chronicles, such as with Theophanes’ account of the Jews realizing that Muhammad was not the “anointed one” when they witnessed him consuming the esh of a camel,39 as well as with Michael the Syrian’s report of the Ghassanid king al-ণƗ rith serving the Chalcedonian bishop Ephrem camel meat. Al-ণƗ rith did this intentionally to show Ephrem that his disgust with the camel meat was the same as al-ণƗ rith’s own revulsion for the Chalcedonian faith.40 E. Key Fowden astutely comments that this scheme worked because “it tapped into the deep- running prejudices against the nomadic Arab way of life, in which the consumption of camel meat was a mainstay.”41 Khusraw’s mockery of the Arabs’ simple diet and alleged cannibalism must thus be viewed through the lens of a broader polemical dis- course spanning late antique and medieval literature ridiculing the eating culture of the Arabs. Through such conduct, ParvƯz in this account conforms to the trope of the arrogant Iranian sovereign, who is dismissive of his Arab visitors and holds an inordinate regard for material possessions. In this context, his belittling of the hospitality in which the Arabs prided themselves appears particularly hypocritical when one considers the self-sacri cing hospitality that he is reported to have received from the Bannj ৫ayyi’ when eeing BahrƗm ChnjbƯn.42 In al-Nu‘m Ɨn’s retort to the Iranian king, he defended Arab culture by responding to each of ParvƯz’s accusations and insults. He claimed that the Arabs surpassed the other nations, “by their glory and power, by the beauty of their faces, by their fortitude and municence, the wisdom of their tongues, the strength of their intellects, and by their pride and fulllment [of obligations].” Al- Nu‘mƗn also reiterates the idea expressed by the anonymous khƗܒib we encoun- tered in the previous chapter regarding the Arabs’ lack of need for defensive structures, by boasting that “their fortresses are the backs of their horses, their beds are the ground, their roofs are the sky, their shields are their swords, and their equipment is forbearance.” He then went on to laud the Arabs for being knowledgeable of their genealogies, and for their self-sacri cing hospitality, claiming that even the poorest among them owned a young female camel (bakra), which he would gladly slaughter to serve a night visitor. In this regard, he defended the Arabs’ consumption of camels. Besides their usefulness both as mounts and food, he claimed that these animals have “the most fat, the tastiest meat, and the most delicate milk.” Furthermore, al-Nu’m Ɨn argued for the Arabs’ eloquence, a common theme for al-J Ɨতi਌ and his contemporaries as we have seen. He stated:

As for the wisdom of their tongues, God most high [AllƗh ta‘ƗlƗ] has given them in their poetry, in the beauty of their speech, its meter and rhymes, 136 The buildup to the confrontation along with their knowledge of things, their imparting words of wisdom, and their eloquent description of characteristics, what no other peoples’ [al- ajnƗs] tongue possesses.

Finally, echoing the notion of the “free- spirited” Arabs expressed by al-Mas‘ njdƯ and Diodorus before him, al- Nu‘mƗn argued that the Arabs’ lack of political cohesion was due to their dislike of having to pay taxes and being coerced by tyrants, unlike the other nations that freely submit to one family, out of fear of foreign invaders.43 Thus, through their dialogue, Khusraw and al- Nu‘mƗn serve as focal points for the projection of an ‘Abbasid era debate comparing negative and positive stereotypes of the Arabs.

Arab notables At Khusraw’s court This account then relates that though ParvƯz was impressed by al- Nu‘mƗn’s speech, the Lakhmid king was still much irked with this slight against his people, and was afraid that it was an indication that ParvƯz intended to annex the Lakhmid kingdom and make the Arabs pay taxes directly to him, thus foreshad- owing the Sasanian liquidation of his state. It is mentioned that upon his return to al-ণƯ ra, al- Nu‘mƗn gathered some prominent Arab notables whom he planned to send to the Sasanian court. His intention was to have this group impress the king with their good manners and eloquence, and to compose themselves in a self- condent, but not overly deant manner. He told them that:

When you enter, each one of you say what comes to him so that KisrƗ learns that the Arabs are not what he has thought nor what his mind has told him. Don’t say anything to make him angry. For he is a king of great power and has many servants. He lives in luxury and is quite taken with himself. But don’t show weakness to him like a lowly submissive either. Let it be [for you] a matter of making manifest the strength of your intelligence, the superiority of your ranks, and the high degree of your importance.44

Al- Nu‘mƗn equipped each one of them with a ne outt so that they would impress Khusraw, and sent them to the Sasanian capital with a letter addressed to ParvƯz, informing him that he has sent to him “a group of Arabs possessing excellence in terms of their noble descent, intellects, and manners [ƗdƗbihim],” and that he intends, through them, to respond to the king’s belittling accusations against the Arabs which he made to him on his previous visit.45 This group’s meeting with the Sasanian king is portrayed as a tense exchange between the two sides. When called upon, each of the Arab ambassadors delivers a series of gnomic statements in a self- assured but respectful manner which does not chal- lenge ParvƯz’s authority outright, but appears deant nonetheless. For each one of these formulaic dialogues, Khusraw answers with a terse retort dismissing the Arab’s words. The Arab in turn delivers a witty repartee of his own, using clever wordplay and logic to turn Khusraw’s own words against him. Aktham b. ৡayfƯ The buildup to the confrontation 137 was the rst to stand up and speak, followed by ণƗjib b. ZurƗra. The latter is reported to have met Khusraw on a previous occasion, in which he offered the king his bow as a security, a gesture whose signicance Khusraw acknowledged and therefore accepted.46 Upon meeting Khusraw again, he proclaimed to the sovereign:

Your power is high and your rule is feared. The Arabs are a erce nation, whose power is consolidated and they defend themselves. They love you if you are friendly with them. They are at ease with you when you are tender with them, and they will listen to you if you are generous to them. They are bitter like colocynth, yet tender like rain clouds, sweet like honey, and smooth like pure water. We are their delegates to you and their tongues in your presence. We honor our debts and defend our noble descent. Our clans listen and are obedient towards us. If we return [to them] praising your goodness, then you will receive praises from all of us. But if we blame you, it won’t be just our blaming of you, but theirs as well.47

When it was al-ণƗ rith b. ‘UbƗd’s turn, he proclaimed that “we are your closest neighbors and your helpers who will assist you. Our horses are numerous and our armies imposing. If you seek our aid, we will not wait. Our spears are long and our lives are short.”48 According to Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih’s account, ParvƯz then remarked (in rhyme), “Noble souls, but by God, a weak nation.” To this dismissive statement, al-ণƗ rith cleverly asked, “How can someone who is weak also be noble?”49 Further on in this session, ‘Alqama b. ‘UlƗtha stated:

Oh king! Whoever tests the Arabs comes to know their excellence. So do right by the Arabs. They are like towering, immovable mountains in strength. If you acknowledge their excellence, they will strengthen you, and if you call them for help, they will not abandon you.50

Qays b. Mas‘njd then gave a slightly more conciliatory speech. He stated:

We haven’t come, oh king, to vie for superiority [with you], nor have we traced our ancestry as an act of opposition, but rather so that you, your sub- jects, and those who come to you from the delegations of other nations know that we do not inch in our speech, nor desist in our courage. If we are raced, we won’t be left behind, and if we are vied with for superiority, we will not be defeated.51

Towards the end of the meeting, the Yemenite ‘Amr b. Ma‘dƯ Karib likewise urged the king to do right by the Arabs, saying:

Attract our obedience through your speech, restrain our impulse with your clemency, and placate us with your assistance. We will be amenable. For we 138 The buildup to the confrontation are a people whose rock has not been scratched by the pecking beaks of those who want to gnaw on us. We have defended ourselves against all who have wished to oppress us.52

Thus, al- Nu‘mƗn’s intention in sending this delegation of Arab gentlemen was to show the Iranian king that the Arabs possessed manners and renement in their own regard. By having these men show off their eloquence to the king while standing up to him in a respectful way at his court, he hoped to dispel any idea that the Arabs were a weak, undignied nation that the Sasanians could simply put under their direct control if they desired. Modern historians have already noted the historical signicance of this account of al-Nu‘m Ɨn’s embassy and the follow- up delegation as a projection of ‘Abbasid era intercultural polemics.53 Indeed, this anecdote ts the classic pattern of an Arab delegation to the Sasanian court, in which themes highlight- ing the Arabs’ eloquence, rough living, generosity, and courage contrast sharply with the stereotypical illustration of a pompous, materialistic Persian sovereign who is dismissive of his Arab guests and their ways. In this context, al- Nu‘mƗn and the Arab notables are portrayed, quite anachronistically, as representatives and defenders of a universal Arab culture uniting the tribesmen of the Arabian peninsula, Iraq and Syria. They are shown as experiencing a sense of group solidarity superseding their tribal afliations, thus reinforcing notions of Arab collective identity and shared cultural heritage imagined in the ‘Abbasid period. Moreover, this account is imbued with the theme of dawla. For the Arab not- ables’ urging of ParvƯz to treat the Arabs justly is reminiscent of the advice of Sheikh ‘Amr to ShƗpnjr, which we analyzed in Chapter 3. The underlying impli- cation here is that the Arabs would rise against the Iranians should the latter overstep their bounds in dealing with them. The clearest of these warnings is expressed by ‘Ɩmir b. al-৫ ufayl, who is reported to have asked Khusraw:

What do you really know of our power, and what have you beheld of our excellence? Or to be exact, [do you know] if in the turning of days [in idƗlat al- ayyƗm] there will occur for us matters of renown?

When Khusraw asked what he was talking about, ‘Ɩmir informed him that he was referring to an alliance of the tribes of RabƯ‘a and Muঌar. When Khusraw further asked what matter (amr) would cause these tribes to unite, ‘Ɩmir told him that he was only relating what he had heard from an informant.54 Though not clearly stated, it is implied that Islam would be the amr unifying these tribes. In this regard, the reader will notice the application of the verb idƗlat, which, coming from the same root (dƗl-wƗw-lƗm) as the word dawla, serves to highlight the approaching “turn” between the Persians and Arabs that would come with the rise of Islam. In comparison with the reports of previous meetings that I have examined between the Iranians and the Arabs, one clearly witnesses in this account a strengthening in the position of the Arabs vis- à-vis the Iranian monarch. For this time, we are not dealing with old sheikhs, nor dispossessed The buildup to the confrontation 139 nobles who have come to the Sasanian court in search of aid, but rather a self- condent Arab king, and a group of notable Arabs, who stand up to the Iranian monarch in a deant but respectful manner, bafing him with their verve. This anecdote concludes with ParvƯz not heeding the advice of his Arab visitors, and showing himself to be vexed by their conduct. He forgives the Arabs, allowing them to return home in peace, though the reader anticipates the actions that ParvƯz was soon to take against al- Nu‘mƗn and the Arabs. With this in mind, I now turn to the accounts of the dissolution of the Lakhmid state and the sub- sequent engagement at Dhnj QƗr.

‘AdƯ b. Zayd and the fall of the Lakhmid state Our sources portray al- ণƯra, especially in the century leading up to the rise of Islam, as a cosmopolitan hub in which Arabs and Persians intermingled, and whose residents practiced Christianity, Arab paganism, Zoroastrianism, and Judaism side by side. The most conspicuous examples in the sources of al- ণƯra’s intercultural atmosphere were the Christian Arab (‘ibƗdƯ) elite families, from whose ranks emerged prominent bilingual scribes, such as the famed poet ‘AdƯ b. Zayd, who was educated amongst the local Persian aristocracy and served the Sasanian administration (see below). The culturally open environment of the Lakhmid court can be seen with the king QƗbnjs b. al-Mundhir’s (r. 569/570–573/574) adoption of his conspicuously Persian name.55 Moreover, the Lakhmid rulers of this period, particularly ‘Amr II b. Hind (r. 554–569) and the Christian convert al- Nu‘mƗn III, are remembered for the renement of their court and for their patronage of art, philosophy, and poetry. The compendiums of JƗhiliyya poetry compiled during the ‘Abbasid period illustrate a scene of poets at the Lakhmid court using a distinctively Bedouin idiom to praise their royal patrons as tribal chiefs, residing in tents, and surrounded by their majlis.56 Yet, early Muslim philologists also recognized the indelible Persian inuence in this poetry when it came to expressing notions of power and luxury. For example, Ibn Qutayba remarks that the famed bard, Maymnjn b. Qays al- A‘shƗ, a regular at al-ণƯ ra, was fond of using Persian words in his poetry, a result of his frequent visits to the Sasanian court. In this regard, he cites verses of al-A‘sh Ɨ’s poetry containing Persian words for musical instruments.57 At the same time, Ibn IsতƗq indicates that the allure of Persia was also strongly felt among the general populace of al-ণƯ ra, who enjoyed listening to the tales of Rustam and IsfandiyƗr.58 There is no reason to doubt that that the portrayal of al- ণƯra as a melting pot between Arab and Persian culture and traditions is historically accurate. However, from the standpoint of Islamic historical memory, the rened, cosmo- politan culture in al-ণƯ ra is underlined (as I indicated in Chapter 4) for the purpose of expressing pride in Arab civilization. This is clearly reected in the detailed biography of the aforementioned ‘AdƯ b. Zayd. Both ‘AdƯ and his father Zayd were the products of a mixed upbringing, much like the legendary king BahrƗm Gnjr who mastered the adabs of the Arabs and Persians.59 Abnj’l-Faraj 140 The buildup to the confrontation informs us that Zayd had been taken in by a local marzbƗn after the death of his father ণammƗd. Zayd had already mastered Arabic before learning Persian at this marzbƗn’s house. He then served in Khusraw’s postal service, an ofce hith- erto only entrusted to sons of marzbƗns.60 ‘AdƯ was likewise educated in the household of a marzbƗn, where he mastered Arabic and Persian, as well as the gentlemanly pursuits of archery and polo. It is reported that he then entered the Sasanian administration, serving as a translator and correspondent. During his tenure, ‘AdƯ served as royal ambassador to Constantinople and under his direction, Arabic became an ofcial language of the Sasanian state registry (dƯvƗn). ‘AdƯ was particularly recognized for his possession of good manners and renement. For example, it is said that when the nobles at the Sasanian court rst beheld him, “they delighted in the beauty of his appearance, and when he spoke they found him to be the most elegant and ready with an answer among the noblemen.”61 With the case of ‘AdƯ b. Zayd, we thus have an eloquent Arab who successfully masters the high culture of the Persians, earning him the admiration of the Sasanian rulers and nobles. Regarding his poetry, his poem commemorating al- Khwarnaq and al-Nu‘m Ɨn I’s decision to adopt the life of a Christian mendicant, serves as a nostalgic reminder of a glorious Arab kingdom that existed prior to the rise of Islam.62 At the same time, ‘AdƯ b. Zayd plays a part in the Islamic accounts of the Lakhmids’ nal years, as they link, through a series of complicated intrigues, the fall of this dynasty (and by extension, the Sasanians’ defeat at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr) to al-Nu‘m Ɨn III’s execution of the ণƯran poet and statesman.63 According to this narrative, ‘AdƯ had been entrusted with the care of al- Nu‘mƗn when the latter was young, and strategized to have him crowned king, an act which earned him the enmity of the Bannj MarƯnƗ and Bannj Buqayla, rival ‘ibƗdƯ clans. In this context, we encounter one ‘AdƯ b. MarƯnƗ, who had tried and failed to raise al- Nu‘mƗn’s brother, al-Aswad to the throne. Ibn MarƯnƗ resented ‘AdƯ b. Zayd’s position of prominence and friendship with the Lakhmid ruler. He therefore con- spired against ‘AdƯ b. Zayd by falsely attributing to him statements and a letter bragging of his dominance over al-Nu‘m Ɨn. The irate Lakhmid king imprisoned ‘AdƯ and soon thereafter executed him, despite ParvƯz’s order to have him released.64 In his place, ‘AdƯ’s son Zayd took over his father’s position as the head of the Sasanian correspondence bureau to the land of the Arabs. To avenge his father, Zayd hatched a plot of his own to bring about ParvƯz’s wrath towards al- Nu‘mƗn. He convinced ParvƯz to send him to al- Nu‘mƗn to ask for a slave- girl whose appearance and character matched a list of specications. However, the sly Zayd knew that al-Nu‘m Ɨn would refuse such a request since the Arabs were extremely protective of their women, and considered it dishonorable to marry them off to non- Arabs. Moreover, he purposely mistranslated al-Nu‘m Ɨn’s response to this request, in which the Lakhmid king asked, “aren’t the wide- eyed ones (‘Ưn) of the SawƗd and Persia enough to satisfy the king?” By “wide-eyed ones” al- Nu‘mƗn meant women, but Zayd translated this word to mean cows, which deeply offended Khusraw, as Zayd had intended. The vengeful Sasanian king then summoned al- Nu‘mƗn and executed him, dissolving the Lakhmid The buildup to the confrontation 141 state. Most sources claim that the sadistic ParvƯz ordered al-Nu‘m Ɨn to be tram- pled under the hooves of an elephant, although al-৫ abarƯ, Abnj’l-Faraj, and Mis- kawayh state that al- Nu‘mƗn died in Khusraw’s prison.65 In al-Nu‘m Ɨn’s place, ParvƯz installed IyƗs b. QabƯৢa, the chief of the ৫ayyi’ who had assisted him earlier in his reign. IyƗs ruled jointly with a Sasanian marzbƗn. However, upon IyƗs death, the Sasanians annexed al- ণƯra, making it a province administered by a Persian governor.66 According to al-৫ abarƯ and ণamza, years later, al- Nu‘mƗn’s son al-Mundhir briey took control of al-ণƯ ra, but was killed ghting the Muslims in BaতrƗyn at the Battle of JuwƗthƗ in 633.67 The Islamic narrative of the fall of the Lakhmid dynasty is thus enmeshed with the biography of ‘AdƯ b. Zayd. By emphasizing the inuence of renowned Arab scribes like ‘AdƯ and his family at the Sasanian court, one witnesses in the chronicles a demonstration of pride in the JƗhiliyya Arabs’ cultural output and an acknowledgment of their relevance among their powerful neighbors in the pre- Islamic period.

The battle of Dhnj QƗr: the “predecessor” to the Islamic conquest of Iran The Battle of Dhnj QƗr serves as a signicant watershed in the Islamic conquest narrative. The historic Battle of Dhnj QƗr (fought between 604 and 611) was a victory for the Bakr b. WƗ’il confederation over a mixed force composed of regular Sasanian troops and Arabs from Taghlib, IyƗd, and other tribes.68 The Islamic sources for this battle are based on the reports of Ibn al-Kalb Ư and Abnj ‘Ubayda. The Islamic historical tradition frames this battle as being the result of ParvƯz’s execution of al- Nu‘mƗn III and his liquidation of the Lakhmid dynasty.69 (These events, in turn, are portrayed as rst being set in motion by al- Nu‘mƗn’s execution of ‘AdƯ b. Zayd, as we analyzed above). Our sources show how the abolishment of the Lakhmid dynasty paved the way for the tribes which the Lakhmids had previously kept in check, through either diplomacy or military force, to raid and settle Sasanian territory, thus bringing them into direct conict with the Sasanians. One interesting anecdote illustrating these new circum- stances is found in the KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ. Abnj’l-Faraj related that when al-Nu‘m Ɨn was killed, the Bakr b. WƗ’il tribe began to covet the rich lands of the SawƗd. One of their members serving as a Sasanian agent, Qays b. Mas‘njd led an embassy to ParvƯz’s court to request provisions in order to keep his fellow tribes- men from settling the SawƗd. The Sasanian king therefore presented him with 100 camels, offering to replace each camel that they slaughtered. He also pre- sented each member of the embassy with a basket of dates and a ne outt. However, this offer offended two members of Qays’ entourage, named al- ণƗrith b. Wa‘la and al- Mukassir b. ণan਌ala. They refused to accept these items, and stormed out of Khusraw’s court. They then lured some members of their tribe to carry out raids on the SawƗd.70 This anecdote represents a change in the attitude of the Arabs regarding their position vis- à-vis the Sasanian monarchy. The account of this visit stands out in 142 The buildup to the confrontation its portrayal of the tribesmen al-ণƗ rith’s and al- Mukassir’s unprecedented de- ance in the face of the Iranian king at his own court. No explanation is given for their actions, however their intention is made clear by their conduct. On the one hand, ParvƯz’s present of camels, dates, and garments is the standard type of offering that one might expect the Iranian monarch to make to some nomads who have come to his court seeking handouts. Yet, through their recalcitrant conduct, these Arabs make the statement that they are refusing to accept the status of supplicating, inferior nomads. Expecting to be treated on more equal terms, they instead stand up to Khusraw by not gratifying his effort to assuage them with paltry gifts. One surmises from their actions that in their view, such an offer was an insult and a reection of the king’s stinginess, especially consid- ering the vast riches that ParvƯz was known to have possessed. This report thus serves as another instance of Arab ambassadors standing deant in the face of an Iranian monarch who is dismissive of them. Moreover, in their bold rejection of the king’s offer in this account, al-ণƗ rith and al- Mukassir are made to fore- shadow the conduct of the Arab ambassadors to the Sasanians prior to the Islamic conquest of Iran, as I shall analyze in the following chapter. According to Abnj’l-Faraj, ParvƯz became irate when he learned of these raids on the SawƗd.71 However it would appear in the KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ and the other sources describing these events that the main cause of Khusraw’s enmity for the Bakr b. WƗ’il was his learning that a group of them were holding onto the pos- sessions of the deposed al-Nu‘m Ɨn III without his knowledge. For, before making his fateful journey to ParvƯz’s court, it is reported that al-Nu‘m Ɨn depos- ited his family, valuables, and armaments for safekeeping with HƗni’ b. Mas‘njd, chief of the Bannj ShaybƗn (a sub- tribe of Bakr b. WƗ’il). When ParvƯz learned of this, he ordered HƗni’ to send him al-Nu‘m Ɨn’s possessions straightaway. However, fullling the role of the faithful Arab who honors his agreements, HƗni’ refused to relinquish what he had promised to protect. Enraged at what he viewed as insubordination on the part of the Bakr b. WƗ’il tribe, ParvƯz decided to make war on them. Under the advice of an Arab minister of his bent on the destruction of the Bakr b. WƗ’il, he made plans to attack them when they made their summer migration to Dhnj QƗr, a watering hole near what was to become Kufa.72 While the Sasanians’ actual defeat at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr may represent their declining power vis- à-vis the Arabs, it is also the case that its signicance has been blown up retrospectively by the Islamic historical tradition, in which it is portrayed as a predecessor to the Muslim-Arab conquest of Iran.73 The Battle of Dhnj QƗr narrative forms part of the ayyƗm al-‘Arab, a genre of historical writing detailing the battles, raids, and skirmishes among the Arab tribes of the JƗhiliyya and rst days of the Muslim umma. The highly formulaic character of the ayyƗm accounts indicates that they were embellished, and possibly even fab- ricated, in the Islamic period.74 In her recent assessment of the ayyƗm al-‘Arab, Toral- Niehoff makes a convincing case for how this tradition evolved as a genre of Islamic literature. She argues that the ayyƗm began as an oral tradition among north Arabian tribes vaunting their respective group’s exploits and excellences. The buildup to the confrontation 143 In the Marwanid period, these various tales were collected by non- Arab mawƗlƯ rƗwƯs living in the Iraqi garrison towns. Then, early ‘Abbasid period scholars like Abnj ‘Ubayda, in their efforts to codify Arab knowledge, processed this liter- ature into a comprehensive corpus, which in turn was transmitted to our extant adab texts, as well in less complete form to works of ta’rƯkh. Thus, the ayyƗm al-‘Arab was transformed from an oral, particularistic tribal tradition, to a body of high literature dening a universal Arab heritage and identity.75 As such, these tales underscore nostalgic ideals of Bedouin toughness and rugged living, as they were conceptualized in the context of the ‘Abbasid high culture. True to this genre, the account of the Battle of Dhnj QƗr vividly describes acts of valor displayed by the sub- tribes of the Bakr b. WƗ’il and individual Arabs in the thick of ghting, their boasts of courage, the cheers of support they received from their female family members, and poetry extolling the Arabs’ feats in battle. However, the report of the Yawm Dhnj QƗr (Day of Dhnj QƗr) stands out from those of the previous ayyƗm in that it carries a broader signicance. For the descriptions and vaunts of heroic actions contained within it commemorate the Arabs’ victory over a Persian army (even though the latter force was largely Arab in composition),76 whereas for the previous engagements, we are dealing with a tradition mostly limited to contests between the Arab tribes themselves. For example, it is related that at the beginning of the battle, upon viewing the menacing Sasanian allied army, which was equipped with war elephants and advanced equipment, ণan਌ala b. Tha‘laba, who emerges as the hero of this battle in the Islamic tradition, convinced his fellow tribesmen not to ee, and per- suaded them to cut the straps of the litters holding their womenfolk, so as to make them resolute in their stand.77 The reports of this battle are particularly rich with poetry attributed to its participants and their contemporaries, praising Bakr -rƗr78 and the Bannj al-fadd Ɨm,79 both referۊ b. WƗ’il’s victory over the Bannj al-a ences to the Iranian people. ণan਌ala himself is reported by al-৫ abarƯ to have recited verses prior to the battle urging his people on to victory against the Per- sians.80 Al-৫ abarƯ also relates that when the Sasanian commander al-H Ɨmarz called out to the Bakr b. WƗ’il for someone to meet him in single combat (a common theme in the ayyƗm tradition), his challenge was met by Burd b. ণƗritha, whom the Persians assumed was not a suitable challenge because of his small frame. However, Burd emerged victorious in this duel. In celebration of :ram81 poet Surayd b. ‘AbƯ KƗhil recitedڲthis feat, the mukha

Burayd [a diminutive of the name Burd] is one of us. He stood up to your soldiers when you did not [want to] allow him to approach the marzbƗn wearing bracelets [al- musawwaran]. That is [al-৫ abarƯ informs the reader], you did not deem him worthy.82

The phrase “the marzbƗn with bracelets on his arm” refers to the Persian al- HƗmarz, whom the poet denes by his jewelry. Abnj’l-Faraj provides a variant description of this duel, stating that it was one of the Persian cavalry, distin- guished by his bracelets and pearl earrings, who issued this challenge. According 144 The buildup to the confrontation to his account, the one who fought him, and who is mentioned in Abnj KƗhil’s poem, is YazƯd b. ণƗritha of the Bannj Yashkur.83 Both Abnj’l-Faraj and Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih further cite the poet al- A‘shƗ referring to the enemy at Dhnj QƗr in a similar vein as:

Patricians [baܒƗriq] and sons of kingship; marzbƗns from among the a‘Ɨjim who wear pearls in their ears.84

Such poetry reects the JƗhiliyya Arabs’ wonderment at the Persian noblemen’s practice of wearing jewelry into battle. That the term for the Persian cavalry, asƗwira, can also mean bracelets in Arabic, is further indication of the Arabs’ identication of the Persians with their jewelry.85 In this regard, Abnj’l-Faraj plays with this double meaning in his description of the opponent of YazƯd as: uswƗr min al-a‘ Ɨjim musawwar fƯ udhunƯhi durratƗn (a cavalryman of the Per- sians wearing bracelets and a pearl in each ear). From the standpoint of Muslim apologetic memory, the theme of overdressed Persians in battle serves both comical as well as didactic ends. As I will analyze in the following chapter, accounts of the Muslims’ battles with the Sasanians and delegations to their camp portray the Arabs’ shabby dress and shoddy weaponry as an indication of their piety, standing in marked contrast to the extravagance of their foppish Persian adversaries. The account of the Battle of Dhnj QƗr also serves to reinforce notions of the Sasanians’ tyranny, as can be seen with some historians’ description of Khus- raw’s cruel punishment of the informant of his army’s loss at Dhnj QƗr. Accord- ing to this anecdote, in the aftermath of the battle, IyƗs b. QabƯৢa, who had participated on the Sasanians’ side, ed to ParvƯz’s court when the Sasanian force was routed. Knowing that ParvƯz was accustomed to hacking off the shoul- ders of anyone who brought him news of his army’s defeat, IyƗs slyly lied to the king, telling him that his forces were victorious. After being rewarded with a robe of honor by the gullible monarch, IyƗs claimed that his brother in ‘Ayn al- Tamr was sick, and asked for permission to leave to see him, which he was granted. The account continues that the next visitor to Khusraw was a ণƯran man who had been nearby at al- Khwarnaq during the battle. Before entering the king’s presence, he made sure to ask if anyone had yet brought news of the battle. When he was told that IyƗs had already come and brought news, he men- tioned the defeat, not knowing that IyƗs had lied about the outcome. In a t of anger, ParvƯz had this unfortunate fellow’s shoulders removed, which killed him.86 This story serves as another example of ParvƯz’s volatile temper and his sadistic tendencies. His inhumane punishment of removing the shoulders of the informer of his army’s defeat is reminiscent of ShƗpnjr II’s same treatment of his Arab prisoners centuries earlier.87 Finally, the Battle of Dhnj QƗr is made to directly foreshadow the Arab con- quest of Iran in the Muslim religious tradition. For example, in an anachronistic adƯth, the Prophet is reported to have proclaimed upon hearing the outcome ofۊ the battle, “This is the rst day that the Arabs have taken their revenge [inta܈afat] The buildup to the confrontation 145 on the Persians, and it is through me that God has granted them victory.”88 Through its distinctive framing of the forthcoming conquest of Iran as the Arabs’ “revenge” (an idea which was likewise expressed by the old woman in her ,adƯth is, in essenceۊ encounter with ShƗpnjr II, as I analyzed in Chapter 3), this ascribing karma- like agency to the Sasanians for their own fall; the Arabs’ “turning the tables” was the divinely willed result of the Sasanians’ mistreatment of them. Another case of foreshadowing in the account of this battle can be seen by the overcondent Iranians offering the Bakr b. WƗ’il three choices prior to the battle: to submit, to vacate the land, or to prepare for war.89 This ultimatum is clearly intended to foreshadow the three choices that the Muslims would give their enemies prior to battle, which included conversion to Islam, accepting dhimmƯ (people of the book) status and paying the jizya (poll tax), or facing open war. Moreover, the account of the Yawm Dhnj QƗr forms the last “day” of the ayyƗm tradition. It is therefore signicant that the nal ayyƗm battle should be a victory against the Sasanians. For it is an indication that the Arabs would cease their tribal squabbles (at least temporarily) and unify under the banner of Islam to defeat the Iranians and conquer their state.

ParvƯz and Islam It is during the reign of ParvƯz that the early umma coalesced around the Prophet and made the hijra to Medina, where the fundamental practices of Islam crystal- lized. The early Muslim historians thus endeavored to synchronize the narrative of the rise and solidication of the formative Muslim community with the account of the nal decades of the Sasanian dynasty, which was engaged during the early seventh century in a protracted war with the Roman empire.90 For example, al-৫ abarƯ reports that while the Prophet was still residing in Mecca (i.e., before making the hijra), he and his followers took a competitive interest in the wars between the Sasanians and the Romans. The Muslims supported the Romans, because as Christians they were possessors of written scriptures, while the Quraysh rejoiced when the Sasanians defeated the Romans at the Battle of Adhri‘Ɨt in Syria. However, it is at this point that the Prophet received the reve- lation from God, recorded in the Qur’an as the Snjrat al- Rnjm (Chapter on the Romans, XXX), indicating that the Romans, after initially being defeated, would rally to victory in the coming years.91 adƯth in which the Prophetۊ Similarly, I referenced above the widely reported predicted the Arabs’ victory at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr as a forerunner to the Muslim conquest of Iran, even through the umma was not involved in the battle.92 Along these lines, we have the reports of the letter the Prophet sent to ParvƯz calling on him to convert to Islam.93 In this letter, the Prophet addressed the Persian king by his personal name, avoiding any honorics.94 The letter also warns of the dire consequences that would ensue if Khusraw did not submit to the will of God.95 After reading this letter, the enraged king tore it up. When the Prophet learned of this, he stated that the same will happen to his kingdom.96 One khabr in al- ৫abarƯ’s chronicle stemming from YazƯd b. ণabƯb (via Ibn 146 The buildup to the confrontation IsতƗq) reports that ParvƯz stated, “He has written this to me yet he is my slave!”97 This anecdote clearly illustrates Khusraw’s over- condence in his own position vis- à-vis the Prophet of God. The narrative of the Prophet’s letter to Khusraw continues that after reading it, ParvƯz ordered his governor in Yemen, BadhƗn, to deliver the Prophet to his court, as he had the intention of inicting punishment on him.98 When BadhƗn’s envoys came to the Prophet, however, he informed them that it had been revealed to him that the king, in an incredible turn of fortune, had already been murdered by his son ShƯrnjya. The Prophet’s revelation was conrmed when just at that point, a letter arrived from ShƯrnjya announcing that he had killed ParvƯz and taken the crown!99 The Prophet’s miraculous prediction is said to have com- pelled BadhƗn and his men to convert to Islam.100 In the following chapter, I shall analyze accounts of the embryonic Muslim community’s other dealings with the Iranian colonists in the Arabian peninsula.

The omens at Khusraw’s court Just as with the reign of his predecessor, Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn, the Islamic chronicles detail ominous events taking place at ParvƯz’s court heralding the rise of Islam and the subsequent liquidation of the Sasanian dynasty. I mentioned in the previous chapter that al-Mas‘ njdƯ attributed the affair in which the Arab sage Sa৬Ưত interpreted the collapse of the embattlements in the king’s throne room and the other miraculous events occurring simultaneously, to the reign of ParvƯz as opposed to AnnjshirvƗn.101 Al- ৫abarƯ, on the authority of Wahb b. Munnabih (via Ibn IsতƗq), related a similar story in which ParvƯz awoke one morning to nd that both the arched roof of his throne room and the dam which he had con- structed on the Tigris had collapsed. Seeing this as a bad omen, he summoned uzƗt (i.e., prognosticators, which included astrologers, soothsayers, andۊ his 360 magicians) to look into this affair. However, the heavens darkened for all of them, except for a soothsayer from Yemen (which is not surprising considering the source of this anecdote!) known as al- SƗ’ib. He had a vision of a lightning bolt ashing from the direction of the ণijƗz and reaching into the remotest east. The next morning, he beheld a green meadow beneath his feet where there was uzƗt, they conrmed with al- SƗ’ib that hisۊ none prior. After consulting with the vision, along with their inability to access the heavens, meant that a prophet had appeared in the ণijƗz and his coming heralded the destruction of the Sasanian dynasty. However, fearful of ParvƯz’s capricious temper, they decided to lie to him, telling him instead that the collapse of the dam and roof were based on the faulty astrological calculations made in their construction. ParvƯz then com- manded them to rebuild these structures. This account continues that when the dam was completed eight months later, ParvƯz went to sit on its wall, having had carpets and aromatic herbs placed on it, as well as musicians, athletes, and nobles gathered to commemorate the event. Yet when he did so, the dam collapsed again nearly killing him. After executing close to a 100 of his prognosticators, those he spared promised to rectify the The buildup to the confrontation 147 situation by rebuilding the wall of the dam. When it was completed, Khusraw rode out his horse over it, only to have it cave in under him yet again. This time, he uzƗt, saying that he would tear out their shouldersۊ threatened to kill the rest of his and throw them under the feet of elephants if they did not reveal to him the truth of the matter. They therefore nally confessed that the collapse of the dam and palace signied the fall of his kingdom, an event which was close at hand.102 The main theme of this anecdote is the inevitable fall of the House of SƗsƗn and its replacement by a group founded by an Arabian prophet. The darkening of -uzƗt lends cosmic validation to this transۊ the heavens to Khusraw’s legion of ition of power. In this regard, it is signicant that only an Arab soothsayer would have a vision for interpreting these events, whereas the Iranian astrologers would be literally be left in the dark. At the same time, the collapse of Khusraw’s palace and dam symbolizes the futility of the Iranians’ wealth and resources in the face of this fate. In particular, the palace serves as a metaphor for the Sasa- nian dynasty, which can no longer support itself, while the multiple collapses of the dam is an indication that the Sasanians will not be able rebuild their polity. At the same time, this anecdote’s comedic illustration of the caving in of the dam wall under the weight of ParvƯz and his spread carpets, all in the view of his entertainers and nobles, is clearly intended as a mockery of the Iranian’s tradi- tion of pomp and fanfare. That ParvƯz was narrowly saved both times the dam collapsed possibly symbolizes the fact that he would personally miss the Muslim conquest of Iran, but only by a few years. In yet another series of traditions contained in al- ৫abarƯ’s chronicle, ParvƯz is visited by either a man or an angel, enjoining him to submit to God and become a follower of the Prophet. In some of these accounts, when Khusraw tells the messenger to leave, the latter responds by smashing either a stick or a glass bottle, an act which the reader is informed is meant to foreshadow the imminent rebellion which would depose ParvƯz and lead to his execution.103 The under- lying subtext conveyed by the reports of these numinous visits is that it is Khus- raw’s intransigence preventing him from recognizing the truth of the visitor’s message. Self-assured of his own power, Khusraw believes that he can prevent a messenger of God from visiting him by keeping his guards and chamberlains on high alert. But this measure naturally proves futile, and the Iranian king is forced to face the harbinger of his and his kingdom’s fate.

Khusraw’s ignominious fall Of the various misdeeds committed against his own subjects, it would appear in the sources that Khusraw’s imprisonment and order of execution of his troops returning from the Roman front was the denitive catalyst leading to the coup which ousted him, and raised his son ShƯrnjya to the throne. (ShƯrnjya himself was not enthusiastic about this rebellion, but went along with it out of fear of the conspirators). The narrative of Khusraw’s fall relates that Khusraw was taken prisoner to a nobleman’s house, where he engaged in a protracted correspond- ence with ShƯrnjya. In this exchange, the conspirators sent a messenger to the 148 The buildup to the confrontation captive ParvƯz to detail to him the charges for which they held him accountable. The king in turn, composed a response in his defense addressing each one of these charges in kind.104 While it is beyond the scope of this study to analyze the details of this correspondence, it does serve us to highlight the charged symbolic imagery that is illustrated in some of the reports of Khusraw’s meeting with the messenger. According to this narrative, when the messenger entered upon the imprisoned king, he found him seated upon rugs and cushions woven in gold, and a silk carpet. This is truly an ironic image that even after being deposed, the former king of Iran should still be surrounded by such luxuries denoting royalty. So too is the messenger’s prostration in the presence of the condemned king. After ParvƯz ordered him to rise, he placed a quince he had been holding onto the cushion on which he was sitting. However, the quince rolled off of the cushion rst onto the carpet, and then onto the ground, where it became covered in dirt. While this might seem at rst glance as an innocuous event, the close attention given by the historians to describing the quince itself and its trajectory is an indication that we are dealing with a matter of signicant import. For the quince was a symbol of royalty in the Iranian tradition. When the messenger saw what happened he picked up the fruit, brushed it off, and presented it to Khusraw. Yet Khusraw recognized this occurrence as a clear omen. For only now, when he was at the brink of death, did he realize the truth. That the fruit of royalty should roll away from its cushion, which was likewise a symbol of royalty, and get covered with dirt, signied that the House of SƗsƗn will soon be divested of their power, and his family’s rule will pass to another group.105 The rolling away of the quince thus represents the Sasanians’ forfeiture of the farr. Furthermore this event, like the other ominous occurrences at ParvƯz’s court mentioned in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle, serves to herald the forthcoming dawla, i.e., the transition of rule from the Sasanians to the Arab Muslims. At the end of this episode, the weak-minded ShƯrnjya, under pressure from the conspirators, orders the execution of his father. According to most of our sources, the son of a man ParvƯz had executed is the one who kills the deposed king.106 Indeed, this act of both patricide and regicide was seen as a particularly heinous act, by both the characters involved in this drama (inasmuch as several men initially commissioned with this task shrank from carrying it out), as well as by the histori- ans reecting on these events. This would explain FirdawsƯ and al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s our- ish in which ParvƯz meets his end at the hands of a hideously deformed man.107 For as ParvƯz is made to utter in al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s account upon seeing this man, “How appropriate that one whose appearance is so ugly should perform such a blame- worthy act!”108 This abominable act in effect seals the fate of the Sasanian dynasty. For it ushers in the virtual collapse of the Sasanian state and a series of weak rulers with short ineffectual reigns, making Iran ripe for the plucking.

Conclusion Khusraw II ParvƯz is thus characterized as the model of Iranian tyranny in the Islamic historical tradition. He is portrayed as a tragic gure, showing courage The buildup to the confrontation 149 and sound judgment at the beginning of his troubled reign, but becoming cor- rupted by the inuence of power and luxuries once he had consolidated his rule. The Arabs, furthermore, feature prominently in the saga of ParvƯz’s reign. When he was on the brink of being captured by the usurper BahrƗm ChnjbƯn, it was Arab tribesmen who helped the king, offering him their hospitality and protec- tion when he needed it the most. Yet, once Khusraw had regained his crown, he showed contempt for the Arab people. During one of al-Nu‘m Ɨn III’s visits to him, he insulted the Lakhmid king by deriding the Arabs and their culture. He was later dismissive of an embassy of notable Arabs sent by al- Nu‘mƗn, whose purpose was to prove to the Iranian sovereign that the Arabs possessed elo- quence and renement. Despite Khusraw’s condescending treatment of them, these Arab ambassadors stood up to him in a dignied manner. Their speeches, championing the Arabs’ culture and values, project anachronistic ideals of Bedouin existence and the JƗhiliyya Arabs’ sense of collective identity that were imagined in the ‘Abbasid period. The Islamic chronicles then describe how a series of intrigues at the Lakhmid court, involving the murder of the poet ‘AdƯ b. Zayd precipitated the fall of the Lakhmid dynasty, and by extension the Sasanians’ defeat at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr. For the result of ParvƯz’s liquidation of the Lakhmid dynasty, which had served the Sasanians for centuries in its containment of the Arab tribes, was to open the oodgate to Arab raids of the SawƗd. In the Islamic historical tradition, the victory of the Bakr b. WƗ’il over a mixed Sasanian- Arab force at Dhnj QƗr serves as a forerunner to the Muslim conquest of Iran. Forming the last of the ayyƗm al-‘Arab battles, it underlines stereotyped themes of Arab intrepidity in the face of a numerically superior and better equipped Iranian foe. At the same time, woven into the narrative of ParvƯz’s reign is the account of the early umma under the Prophet. In this context, the portrayal of the end of ParvƯz’s reign is lled with ominous events heralding the fall of the House of SƗsƗn and the dawla of the Muslim Arabs. Likewise, contained within the account of Khusraw’s arrest and subsequent execution are clues indicating that the Sasanians’ time was drawing to a close. Khusraw’s reign is thus depicted as a rather formulaic narrative of decline and fall, in which the reader is invited to contemplate how the king’s own actions precipitated his demise and the ensuing chaos plaguing the soon to be defunct Sasanian state. To this end, it seems logical to infer that the narrative of Khusraw’s ignominious fall reects a native discourse among Iranian scholars who had lived through the Muslim conquest, and attempted to come to terms with these changing circumstances by address- ing what factors might have facilitated the fall of the Sasanian state.109 Similarly, refracted through the lens of Islamic kerygmatic memory, Khusraw’s disastrous reign serves as what Donner would refer to as a theme of “preparation,”110 by establishing the necessary circumstances (being the moral and political degener- ation of the Sasanian state) that would help usher in the new world order that would come with Islam. 150 The buildup to the confrontation Notes 1 On BahrƗm ChnjbƯn, see Pourshariati, Sasanian Empire, 397–414; Frye, “The Polit- ical History of Iran under the Sasanians,” 163–165; K. Czeglédy, “BahrƗm ýǀbƯn and the Persian Apocalyptic Literature,” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 8 (1958): 21–43. 2 Bal‘amƯ, II, 286–288; NihƗyat, 371–372. 3 FirdawsƯ, VII, 70–72. Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 1029) alludes to this account on the authority of Abnj ‘Ubayda. See also al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 184; al- DƯnawarƯ, 95. 4 Bal‘amƯ, II, 288; NihƗyat, 372. 5 NihƗyat, 372. 6 Bal‘amƯ, II, 288. 7 Al-‘Iqd, III, 318. 8 See pp. 116–117. 9 Al-‘Iqd, III, 319. 10 Ibid., 396–397. .l al-‘Arab, 63ڲFa 11 12 Ibid., 66. 13 NihƗyat, 373; Bal‘amƯ, II, 289. FirdawsƯ’s (VII, 76–80) rendition of this dialogue makes no mention of the hermit’s prediction of the rise of the Arabs. 14 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1041, 1042–1043. 15 Murnjj, I, 186. The renowned Persian minister Buzurjmihr is generally associated with AnnjshirvƗn. See FirdawsƯ, VI, 190–232, 291–319, 366–378; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 619–625, 633–636; NihƗyat, 336–344; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 73. Buzurjmihr serves as the archetypical Persian scholar-bureaucrat in Islamic memory, whose aphorisms are extensively cited throughout ta’rƯkh and adab (see especially the ‘Uynjn al- akhbƗr for gnomic sayings attributed to Buzurjmihr). In this regard, Sahl b. HƗrnjn, the noted Persophile wazƯr ikma, was given the nickname, Buzurjmihr- i IslƗm for ۉ-and director of the Bayt al his likeness to the Sasanian minister. See Mohsen Zakeri, “ ‘AlƯ ibn ‘Ubaida ar- RaiতƗnƯ: A Forgotten Belletrist (adƯb) and Pahlavi Translator,” Oriens 34 (1994): 89. 16 See below, p. 144. 17 NihƗyat, 425–426. The same gure is provided by Bal‘amƯ II, 328, 331. In their recounting of these events, al-৫ abarƯ (I, 1043) and Miskawayh, (I, 165) claim that Khusraw ordered the death of all 36,000 people languishing in his prison. See also al- DƯnawarƯ, 111. 18 FirdawsƯ, VII, 269–270; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1041. Miskawayh (I, 165) refers to him as “al- FarrkhƗnzƗdh,” whereas in the NihƗyat (425) he is named “KhurdƗdhƯn.” 19 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1041; NihƗyat, 425; FirdawsƯ, VII, 267. FirdawsƯ prefaces his descrip- tion of ParvƯz’s wealth and power with a warning to his reader about becoming too attached to material pleasures and our own temporal existences. 20 This is al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ’s (699–700) description. On ParvƯz’s hanging crown, see also al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1009–1010; FirdawsƯ, VII, 265. 21 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 698; FirdawsƯ, VII, 260–266. This structure most likely dates to the beginning of the Sasanian period, and was expanded by Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn. See Wilhelm Eilers, “Iran and Mesopotamia,” CHI 3, 1: 489; Frye, “The Political History of Iran under the Sasanians,” 162; Shepherd, “Sasanian Art,” 1062–1064. 22 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 698–699; FirdawsƯ, VII, 249–255. On the Takht- i ܑƗqdƯs, see also Morony, Iraq, 31; Shepherd, “Sasanian Art,” 1087, 1101, 1108. 23 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2452–2454. On the BahƗr-i KisrƗ, see Lewental, QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now, 224–227; Shepherd, “Sasanian Art,” 1108. 24 NihƗyat, 425–426. Similar lists are provided by FirdawsƯ, VII, 267–269; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1041; ণamza, 47; and al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 187. 25 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 700–703; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1057; Bal‘amƯ, II, 305; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 186; Ibn Qutayba, al- Ma‘Ɨrif, 371. The buildup to the confrontation 151 26 Bal‘amƯ, II, 304; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 700. 27 Murnjj, I, 187–188. FirdawsƯ (VII, 268) claimed ParvƯz had 1,200 elephants in his possession. 28 Al-‘Iqd, II, 6–18; NihƗyat, 401–413. Both accounts are similar. I use the KitƗb al-‘Iqd al- farƯd’s version for my translations of the statements made in this embassy, as well as in the follow- up delegation sent by al-Nu‘m Ɨn. The speeches given by the Arabs (particularly the notables sent by al-Nu‘m Ɨn) are difcult to render into English due to their frequent use of idiomatic expressions. To this end, while the translations are my own, I am guided by Issa Boullata’s translation of this text. See The Unique Necklace: al-‘Iqd al- FarƯd (3 vols.) (Reading: Garnet, 2006–2012), I, 227–237. 29 Al-‘Iqd, II, 6–7; NihƗyat, 402. 30 See above, p. 31. 31 Al- AghƗnƯ, II, 538. According to this anecdote, a man who was present as this recital retorted, “Our need for our daughters was different than your need!” Abnj’l-Faraj informs the reader that he was referring by this statement to the incestral marriage practices of the pre-Islamic Iranians. 32 See p. 116. 33 See pp. 33, 41, 116, 131. On the identication of groups by their food culture, see Claude Fischler, “Food, Self and Identity,” Social Science Information 27 (1988): 275–293. 34 See pp. 33, 41. 35 KitƗb al- ImtƗ‘ wa’l-mu’Ɨnasa, 49. 36 Al-‘Iqd, III, 393. 37 Ammianus, Book XXXI: Chapter XVI: 5–6, p. 622. David Woods dismissed this act as slander on the part of the author. See, “Ammianus and the Blood-Sucking Saracen,” in Pleiades Setting. Essays for Pat Cronin on his 65th Birthday, ed. K. Sidwell, 127–145 (Cork: University College Cork, 2002). 38 Christa Gray, Jerome, Vita Malchi: Introduction, Text, Translation, and Commen- tary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 83. 39 The Chronicle of Theophanes: Anni Mundi 6095–6305 (A.D. 602–813), ed. and trans. Harry Turtledove (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982), 34. 40 Chronique de Michel le Syrien: patriarche jacobite d’Antioche (1166–1199) (4 vols.), ed. and trans. J. B. Chabot (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1899–1910), vol. 2, Book IX: Chapter XXIX, pp. 246–248. 41 Elizabeth Key Fowden, The Barbarian Plain: Saint Sergius between Rome and Iran (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 143. 42 See above, pp. 128–130. 43 For al- Nu‘mƗn’s retort, see al-‘Iqd, II, 7–10; NihƗyat, 403–405. 44 Al-‘Iqd, II, 11; NihƗyat, 405–406. 45 Al-‘Iqd, II, 11–12; NihƗyat, 406. 46 There are two different versions of this anecdote. According to Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih, (al-‘Iqd, II, 19), ণƗjib offered his bow as a promise that his tribesmen from the TamƯm would not raid Iraq if Khusraw permitted their entry. In the version contained in the NihƗyat (399–401), the bow was a promise of security for Khusraw’s caravan to and from the market of ‘UkƗz. This anecdote is also referenced by al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 690. 47 Al-‘Iqd, II, 13; NihƗyat, 407. 48 Al-‘Iqd, II, 14; NihƗyat, 407. 49 Al-‘Iqd, II, 14. 50 Al-‘Iqd, 16; NihƗyat, 409. 51 Al-‘Iqd, II, 16. In the NihƗyat (408), Qays’ speech precedes ‘Alqama’s. 52 Al-‘Iqd, II, 17–18; NihƗyat, 408. 53 Sizgorich, “ ‘Do Prophets Come with a Sword?’ Conquest, Empire, and Historical Narrative in the Early Islamic World,” American Historical Review 112, 4 (2007) 152 The buildup to the confrontation 113–114; El Cheikh, Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs, 111; Khalidi, Arabic Histor- ical Thought, 103. 54 Al-‘Iqd, II, 17; NihƗyat, 410. 55 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1038; ণamza, 85. 56 Toral- Niehoff, “Late Antique Iran and the Arabs,” 122. 57 KitƗb al- Shi‘r wa’l-shu‘arƗ’ (2 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al-Thaq Ɨfa, 1969), I, 179–180. 58 See p. 35. 59 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1016–1024; al- AghƗnƯ, I, 393–430; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 212–215; Ư ra, 92–99; “Late Antique Iran and the Arabs,” 120–122; Josefۉ-Toral- Niehoff, Al Horovitz, “AdƯ ibn Zeyd, the Poet of Hira,” Islamic Culture 4 (1930): 31–69; F. Gabrieli, “ ‘AdƯ B. Zayd,” EI, 2nd ed. 60 Al- AghƗnƯ, I, 395. According to the NihƗyat (414), however, Zayd and his cousin ‘Amr rst entered the service of ParvƯz’s father, Hurmuz I, who stated, when he wit- nessed their handsomeness and eloquence, “I didn’t think that there were men like this from amongst the Arabs!” 61 Al- AghƗnƯ, I, 396. 62 See Chapter 4, note 57, for sources containing this poem. 63 Modern historians have dismissed this idea, arguing instead that ParvƯz’s reason for liquidating the Lakhmid state was that he simply found it to be too independent, and wanted to take direct control of the area. See James Howard- Johnston, “Al- Tabari on the Last Great War of Antiquity,” in East Rome, Sasanian Persia and the End of Antiquity: Historiographical and Historical Studies (Aldershot: Variorum, 2006) (VI), 21; Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” 608; M. J. Kister, “Mecca and TamƯm (Aspects of their Relations),” JESHO 8, 2 (1965): 114–115; Nöldeke, .miden, 115–119ېGeschichte, 332, n. 1; Rothstein, La 64 According to this narrative, ‘AdƯ sent from his prison cell a poem to his brother residing at Khusraw’s court, asking for help. Khusraw then dispatched a messenger ordering ‘AdƯ’s release. However, when ‘AdƯ’s enemies got wind that this messen- ger was on his way, they convinced al-Nu‘m Ɨn to immediately execute ‘AdƯ while he still had the chance to do so without it being a violation of Khusraw’s order. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1018–1024; al- AghƗnƯ, I, 404–409; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 212–214; Bal‘amƯ, II, 310–311; Miskawayh, I, 153–156; NihƗyat, 414–416. 65 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1024–1030; al- AghƗnƯ, I, 409–412; Miskawayh, 156–159; Bal‘amƯ, II, 311–317; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 322–323; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 214–215; NihƗyat, 416–418. 66 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1038; Bal‘amƯ, II, 317; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 324; ণamza, 86–87, 114; ,On this transition, see further Fred Donner .243 ,ۊNihƗyat, 417; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981), 183–184; Hoyland, Arabia and the Arabs, 30; Abdullah Abu Ezzah, “The Political Situation in Eastern Arabia at the Advent of Islam,” PSAS 9 (1979): 59–60. 67 Al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1038–1039; ণamza, 87. 68 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1015–1016, 1029–1037; al-Agh ƗnƯ, XI, 224–242; al-‘Iqd, V, 226–232; Bal‘amƯ, 309, 317–325; NihƗyat, 413, 417–423; Miskawayh, I, 151–152, 159–162; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 215, 225; YƗqnjt, Mu‘jam al- buldƗn, IV, 293–294; Fred Donner, “The Bakr B. WƗ’il Tribes and Politics in Northeastern Arabia on the Eve of Islam,” Studia Islamica 51 (1980): 5–37; Abu Ezzah, “Political Situ- ation,” 59; L. Veccia-Vaglieri, “Dhnj ঱Ɨr,” EI, 2nd ed.; Bosworth, “Iran and the ,miden, 120–123; Nöldeke, GeschichteېArabs before Islam,” 608; Rothstein, La 332, n. 1. 69 Both Abnj’l-Faraj and ণamza stated “his [al- Nu‘mƗn III’s] being killed was the cause for the Battle of Dhnj QƗr.” See al- AghƗnƯ, I, 412; ণamza, 86. 70 Al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 225–226. 71 Ibid., XII, 226. The buildup to the confrontation 153 72 Ibid., XII, 224–229; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1028–1030; al-‘Iqd, V, 226–227; Bal‘amƯ, II, 316–318; Miskawayh, I, 159–160; NihƗyat, 417–419; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 323; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 215, 225. 73 In his article, “The Bakr B. WƗ’il Tribes,” Donner analyzes several aspects about this battle, most notably the fact that many contingents of the Bakr b. WƗ’il who fought against the Sasanians at Dhnj QƗr were not receptive to Islam, and later sided with the Sasanians. From this, he argues that the battle should not be viewed as part of a larger monolithic Arab scheme to conquer the Sasanians, but rather as a polit- ical feud that must not be studied out of context. 74 See following note and G. Borg, “Battle Days,” in Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, eds. Julie Meisami and Paul Starkey, 141–142 (London: Routledge, 1998); E. Mitt- woch, “AyyƗm al-‘Arab,” EI, 2nd ed.; Werner Caskel, “Aijam al-‘Arab: Studien zur Altarabischen Epik,” Islamica 3, Suppl. (1931): 1–99; Ilse Lichtenstädter, Women in the Aiyâm al-‘Arab: A Study of Female Life during Warfare in Preislamic Arabia (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1935); Retsö, The Arabs in Antiquity, 102, n. 34. 75 Isabel Toral- Niehoff, “Talking about Arab Origins: The Transmission of the ayyƗm al-‘arab in Knjfa, Baৢra and BaghdƗd,” in Contexts of Learning in Baghdad from the 8th to the 10th centuries. Proceedings of the International Conference in Göttingen, 2011, eds. Jens Scheiner and Damien Janos, 43–69. 76 A poem attributed to al- A‘shƗ gives the gures of 3,000 Arab tribesmen and 2,000 Sasanian regulars. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1036. 77 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1031; Bal‘amƯ, II, 321; al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 233, 235; al-‘Iqd, V, 228. 78 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1036, 1037; al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 233, 240. This was a commonplace term that the Arabs used to refer to the Sasanian nobility. According to Abnj ‘AlƯ al- QƗlƯ, rƗr because they were not brown like the Arabs, norۊthe Persians were called a blonde like the Romans, nor black like the Ethiopians, and anything pure of color is free. See KitƗb Dhayl al- amƗlƯ wa’l-nawƗdir, I, 174. On the other hand, Ibn al- FaqƯh l al-‘Arab, 103) wrote that the PersiansڲKitƗb al- BuldƗn, 607) and Ibn Qutayba (Fa) were powerful and took captives, but were never themselves taken captive prior to rƗr (the free). See furtherۊthe Muslim conquest, hence the Arabs called them al- a Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 266–267; Bowsorth, “AতrƗr,” EIr, 1984. 79 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1036; al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 239. Literarily: “the sons of the ones who use cloths to wipe their mouths.” This term, which has a derogatory connotation, refer- ences the Zoroastrian practice to wear a cloth over one’s mouth to avoid contamina- tion when handling sacred objects. See Bosworth, The History of al- ܑabarƯ 5: 367–368, n. 892. 80 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1033. 81 This term applies to individuals (particularly poets) that lived through the last days of the JƗhiliyya and the rise of Islam. See Renate Jacobi, “Muk࡯ h࡯ aঌram,” EI, 2nd ed. 82 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1034. 83 Al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 235–236. For his part, Ibn ‘Abd al- Rabbih (al-‘Iqd, V, 228) states that there is disagreement among scholars as to whether the slayer of al- HƗmarz was YazƯd b. ণƗritha, as Abnj’l-Faraj indicates, or whether it was al-ণ awfzƗn b. SharƯk. Bal‘amƯ (II, 322) names him as MazyƗd b. ণƗritha of the Bannj Yashkur. 84 Al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 241; al-‘Iqd, V, 231. 85 The term asƗwira/uswƗr is a loanword from the Persian language with ancient roots stemming back to Old Persian. See Bosworth, “AsƗwera,” EIr, 1987. 86 Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ (Ta’rƯkh, I, 225) claims that this man was ‘Amr, son of ‘AdƯ b. Zayd. He is unnamed in the KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 238, and the KitƗb al-‘Iqd al-far Ưd, V, 228. 87 See pp. 65–66. 88 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1016; al- AghƗnƯ, XII, 238; al-‘Iqd, V, 226; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 215; NihƗyat, 423. ৫abarƯ and Bal‘amƯ also relate traditions in which the Prophet knows the outcome of the battle on the same day it occurs, despite being miles away from it. For example, al-৫ abarƯ (I, 1031) relates another tradition in which the Prophet 154 The buildup to the confrontation announced on the same day of the battle, “Today the Arabs have taken vengeance on the Persians.” Bal‘amƯ (II, 324–325) similarly wrote that the angel Gabriel visited the Prophet in Medina on the day of the battle, and spread open his wings, revealing to him a vision of the battle. 89 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1030; al-‘Iqd, V, 227. 90 ParvƯz used the murder of the emperor Maurice, who had assisted him to regain his throne, to justify his attack on Byzantium in 603. This protracted but initially suc- cessful campaign brought him to the walls of Constantinople in 626. The emperor Heraclius, however, launched two counter-offensives of his own. The rst one ended (624–625) in his defeat, but his second strategic attack (627–628) succeeded, bring- ing him into the vicinity of Ctesiphon. Khusraw II was deposed in 628 and a peace was worked out between the two exhausted polities in 630. On these wars and their sources, see James Howard- Johnston, “Al- Tabari on the Last Great War of Antiq- uity”; “Heraclius’ Persian Campaigns and the Rise of the East Roman Empire, 622–630,” War in History 6 (1999): 1–44; G. Gnoli, “Pride and Fall: Khusro II and his Regime, 626–628,” in La Persia e Bisanzio (Atti dei Convegni Lincei 201), 93–113 (Rome, 2004); Geoffrey Greatrex and Samuel Lieu, The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars, Part II AD 363–630: A Narrative Sourcebook (London: Routledge, 2002), 182–228. 91 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1005–1007. The Snjrat al- Rnjm is also cited by al-D ƯnawarƯ, 111; and the NihƗyat, 425–425. On the historical signicance of this chapter, see further El Cheikh, Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs, 24–33. 92 See above pp. 144–145. 93 Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 1559–1560, 1571–1572) presents three versions of this incident, two of which he includes the text of the letter. See also Bal‘amƯ, II, 325–326, III, 95; Ibn al- AthƯr, II, 213; NihƗyat, 426; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, IV, 253. This is a well- known tra- dition, in which similar letters were sent to other rulers, including the Byzantine emperor and the negnjs of Ethiopia. 94 Bal‘amƯ (II, 326) states that it much irked Khusraw that the Prophet put his name ahead of his own. 95 Both versions of the letter in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle (I, 1571–1572) warn that the “sin of the Magians” (ithm al- majnjs) will be upon Khusraw if he refuses to submit, whereas Bal‘amƯ’s version (II, 325) warns of a struggle for which Khusraw’s strength will not be enough. 96 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1571, 1572; Bal‘amƯ, II, 326; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, II, 213. 97 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1572. He is reported to have made a similar statement in the NihƗyat, 426. 98 On BadhƗn/BadhƗm, see Chapter 5, note 80. 99 On the account of ShƯrnjya’s coup and murder of his father, see pp. 147–148. 100 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1572–1575, 1763; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 84–85; Bal‘amƯ, II, 426–427, III, 95–97; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, II, 213–215; NihƗyat, 426–428. (Another account on pp. 1731–1732 in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle attributes the conversion of the Iranians in Yemen to ‘AlƯ b. AbƯ ৫Ɨlib). 101 See Chapter 5, note 94. 102 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1009–1013. 103 Ibid., I, 1013–1015. 104 On ShƯrnjya’s rebellion, correspondence with, and execution of his father, see al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1045–1061; Bal‘amƯ, II, 331–346; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 713–727; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 111–115; NihƗyat, 528–538; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 171–172. The identity of this messenger varies across accounts. His position was either the commander of the guard or head of the scribes. 105 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1048–1050; Bal‘amƯ, II, 337; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 719–720; NihƗyat, 432. On the signicance of this anecdote, see Shaul Shaked, “From Iran to Islam,” 84; Shoshan, Poetics of Islamic Historiography, 22. The buildup to the confrontation 155 106 This man (Mihr Hormuz/Mihra//Yazdak) was the son of MardƗnshƗh, who had been Khusraw’s loyal ofcial in NƯmrnjz. On the saga of Khusraw’s removal of the inno- cent MardƗnshƗh’s right hand and his subsequent execution of him (at MardƗnshƗh’s request), see al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1058–1060; Bal‘amƯ, II, 330–331; NihƗyat, 438; al- DƯnawarƯ, 115; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, I, 172. 107 In FirdawsƯ’s account (VII, 318–321), he is named Mihr Hurmuzd. However, he is described as a vagabond with no stated relation to the aforementioned MardƗnshƗh (see previous note). He is unnamed in al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s account (725–727). 108 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 726. 109 Shahbazi (“On the XwadƗy-nƗmag,” 214–215) postulates the existence of an epi- logue to the KhudƗynƗma comprising Rustam’s letter to his brother and the death of Yazdagird. Might one include ParvƯz’s decline and fall as part of this addendum as well? 110 Donner, Narratives, 142–143. 7 The climax The Islamic victory over the Sasanians

I have fought the Arabs and the ‘ajam in both the JƗhiliyya and Islam. By God, one hundred ‘ajamƯs in the JƗhiliyya seemed ercer to me than one thousand Arabs. Yet today one hundred Arabs appear stronger to me than one thousand of the ‘ajam. God has taken away their credibility and has weakened their power of deception. So don’t pay any heed to the large number that you see, nor even a greater multitude, nor their taught bows, nor their long arrows. For, if they are rushed upon or if they lose their arrows, they become like livestock. They will go in the direction that you lead them.1

The climax of the Islamic conquest narrative comprises the confrontation between the Muslim Arabs and the Sasanians, resulting in the liquidation of the Iranian polity. I commence this chapter by examining accounts on the relation- ship between the formative Muslim community and the Iranians residing in the Arabian peninsula, devoting particular attention to memory of the elusive SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ (the Persian), the rst Iranian convert to Islam. I will then analyze portrayals of the Arabs’ initial forays into Iraq during the reign of the rst caliph, Abnj Bakr (r. 632–634). Next, I will investigate the reports of the Muslims’ encounters with the Sasanians occurring under ‘Umar I b. al-Kha ৬৬Ɨb (r. 634–644). In this regard, I deconstruct the formulaic tropes and rhetorical themes contained within the embellished depictions of the embassies which the Arabs sent to the last Sasanian sovereign, Yazdagird III (d. 651), and to his general, Rustam b. FarrukhzƗdh prior to the Battle of al- QƗdisiyya. I will also focus on the epic narrative of the battle itself, followed by the conquest of Ctesi- phon (al-Mad Ɨ’in), the surrender of the Iranian magnate al- HurmuzƗn to ‘Umar, -liter ۊand the murder of Yazdagird. I will conclude with an analysis of the futnj ature on the Muslims’ wars with the Romans, in order to assess the application of similar “Arab versus ‘ajam” tropes from a comparative perspective.

The early umma and the Iranian colonists in Arabia In the context of their portrayal of the solidication and subsequent expansion of the embryonic Muslim polity based in Medina, the Islamic sources describe the The climax: Islamic victory 157 dealings of the Prophet and his successor, Abnj Bakr, with those colonists of the Sasanian empire inhabiting the Arabian peninsula. They describe how these Ira- nians either fought or came to terms with the Muslim Arabs. For example, some sources mention that the joint rulers of Baতrayn, which included the marzbƗn SƯbukht and a Sasanian appointed Arab ofcial, al-Mundhir b. SƗwƗ, converted to Islam after a mission sent by the Prophet in 629. They state that all of the Arabs and some Iranians living in Baতrayn followed suit, while Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians who remained in their ancestral faiths were compelled to pay the head tax (jizya) of one dinar.2 With regards to ‘UmƗn, it is reported that in 631, the JulandƗ rulers and the tribes of that region joined the Muslim community after negotiations with the Muslim general ‘Amr b. al-‘Ɩৢ, and that the dhimmƯs living there, which included Iranian Zoroastrians, were made to pay the jizya.3 A later ‘UmƗnƯ source states that the Muslim Arabs of ‘UmƗn fought and defeated the Sasanian colonists there shortly after the death of the Prophet. According to this account, the Iranians sued for peace, arranging their own safe conduct on ships to take them away from ‘UmƗn, under the condition that they never return.4 The sources further show that there was a strong Iranian presence in South Arabia stemming from Khusraw I’s annexation of the area, which was a product of the mixing between the Sasanian ofcials and soldiers stationed there and the native inhabitants of Yemen.5 The offspring of these unions were labeled “abnƗ’ al- Furs” (sons of the Persians), a term which became commonplace for denoting South Arabians of Iranian descent during the Islamic period.6 In the previous chapter, I described the account of how the Sasanian governor of Yemen, BadhƗn and his ofcials converted to Islam after witnessing the Prophet’s mirac- ulous prediction of the death of their king.7 The sources describe how the abnƗ’ became enmeshed in the politics of the early umma once they had joined its ranks. Of particular relevance in this regard are the reports of the uprising of ‘Ayhala b. Ka‘b, nicknamed al- Aswad (the swarthy one), who claimed to be a prophet. According to these accounts, the Prophet Muতammad had requested the abnƗ’ to quell al- Aswad’s rebellion. Although they were initially defeated in battle with him, and their leader Shahr (son of the deceased BadhƗn) was killed, another one of the abnƗ’ leaders, FƯrnjz al- DaylamƯ later killed al-Aswad and restored Muslim control in Yemen. After this was accomplished, however, a rivalry developed between the former supporter of al-Aswad, Qays b. Makshnjত and FƯrnjz. Qays killed the abnƗ’ notable DƗdhawayh, forcing FƯrnjz to take refuge in the mountains with the Muslim Bannj KhawlƗn tribe. Qays also arranged to deport FƯrnjz’s allies from Yemen. Before he could implement this plan, however, FƯrnjz returned to defeat Qays and bring the deportees back home.8

SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ The above anecdote shows how the Muslim chroniclers highlighted the role played by Iranian Muslims in the formative community. However, the gure 158 The climax: Islamic victory standing out the most in this regard is SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ, who according to the Islamic tradition, was one of the Prophet’s closest companions and the rst Iranian convert to Islam.9 SalmƗn, the Ethiopian BilƗl b. RibƗত, and the Greek ৡuhayb al- RnjmƯ are referred to as the SƗbiqnjn, i.e., the rst three non- Arab con- verts to Islam. In Persian, SalmƗn is given the epithet pƗk, meaning “pure,” for his renowned piety and chivalry. SalmƗn’s biography is found in several texts.10 According to these traditions, his given name was either “Rnjzbih” or “MƗhbih.” He was born into a prosperous dihqƗn or marzbƗn house at Jayy, the administra- tive center of IৢfahƗn. In his youth, he was a keeper of the re, but became dis- satised with his ancestral religion. He therefore set out on a spiritual quest as a young man, traveling throughout Iraq and Syria, serving various bishops and clerics before being captured and sold into slavery. In Medina, he met the Prophet, upon whom he recognized the prophetic seal. The Prophet purchased SalmƗn’s freedom and he converted to Islam. SalmƗn became an intimate friend of the Prophet and applied his knowledge in the service of the edgling Muslim state. In this context, one of his most notable contributions to the umma high- lighted in the Muslim chronicles was his advice to the Prophet to dig a trench (khandaq) around the perimeter of Medina when the Muslim army was besieged there by a confederacy of Arab and Jewish tribes. This was a tactic which the besiegers had not encountered before, and thus prevented them from taking the city.11 The sources further mention SalmƗn’s participation in the wars against the Sasanians and his service as governor of al-Mad Ɨ’in.12 Finally, SalmƗn was noted for his support of ‘AlƯ b. AbƯ ৫Ɨlib, and his sons al-ণ asan and al-ণ usayn, thus giving him a prominent place in the Shi‘ite tradition.13 Modern historians have expressed difculty in discerning between the histor- ical SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ and the idealized conception of him as a pious Muslim hero and model convert which became commonplace in later times. It has even been argued by one scholar that SalmƗn was the creation of myth,14 though on the whole it is generally accepted that he was a historical gure whose life story has been largely embellished. Yet, just as with other personages that we have ana- lyzed in this study, it is exactly this question of how SalmƗn was remembered by the later generations of Muslim historians that is our primary concern. In the Islamic historical tradition, SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ serves as the paragon convert. His popularity was such that the MuhƗjirnjn (emigrants) and the An܈Ɨr (helpers) are reported to have quarreled over which group SalmƗn belonged to. The Prophet satised both parties by including SalmƗn as a member of his own household.15 According to Ibn Sa‘d furthermore, ‘Umar I honored him by granting him a stipend exceeding that of the caliph’s own son by 500 dinars.16 However, SalmƗn was known to be an ascetic. Anecdotes of his piety and humble lifestyle abound in the sources. For example, according to Abnj Nu‘aym al- IৢbahƗnƯ, ‘Umar gave SalmƗn 5,000 dinars as a gift, which he distributed as charity to the poor of al- MadƗ’in.17 Ibn Sa‘d similarly relates that despite being governor of al- MadƗ’in, SalmƗn made a living there by weaving palm baskets. His purported practice was to purchase the leaves for one dirham, and to sell his product for three, giving one dirham to his wife and one to the cause of Islam.18 Another tradition The climax: Islamic victory 159 reports that he had a house built for himself whose dimensions only permitted him to stand up and lie down.19 In still another anecdote, ‘Umar I asked SalmƗn whether he was a caliph or a king, to which SalmƗn replied, “If you collect from the land of the Muslims one dirham, or less or more, and you use it for some- thing for which it was not intended, then you are a king, not a caliph.” SalmƗn’s words are said to have caused the caliph to weep. 20 Moreover, as the rst Iranian convert to Islam, SalmƗn gures into the Islamic historical tradition as a touchtone for akhbƗrƯs to project arguments and biases rooted in identity-based discourses pervading their own respective societies. In her chapter on the subject, Savant identies a shift in the historiographical recep- tion towards SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ from an Arab- centered narrative, to one that focuses more attention on his Iranian background, as reecting the emergence of a self-con dent Iranian- Islamic community.21 So, for example, in the earliest texts on SalmƗn, which include the works of Ibn IsতƗq and Ibn Sa‘d, SalmƗn’s childhood in Iran is afforded sparse coverage. These authors stress that SalmƗn left his old life behind, and effectively switched identities by virtue of the Proph- et’s adoption of him into his household. In Ibn Sa‘d’s account, the Prophet reies SalmƗn’s new “family” by making his Arab friend Abnj DardƗ’ his brother.22 I would contend, however, that the objective of Ibn IsতƗq, Ibn Sa‘d, and other early chroniclers writing about SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ was not necessarily to show his leaving behind of his homeland, but rather SalmƗn served for them as a proto- type exemplifying how Iranians could be integrated into the universal Islamic society as envisioned in early ‘Abbasid apologetics. It is from this angle, for example, that one may comprehend al-J Ɨতi਌’s reference, in his ManƗqib al- Turk, to SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ as a source of pride for the people of KhurƗsƗn.23 I argue that al- JƗতi਌’s implication was that SalmƗn, as a progenitor of the KhurƗsƗnƯ people, provided them a model for understanding their place in a religion and civiliza- tion born amongst the Arabs. Therefore, while early biographical accounts of SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ provide little more than a skeleton narrative of SalmƗn’s child- hood, SalmƗn’s Iranian heritage in and of itself is nonetheless still a highly signi- cant symbol in these works (he is after all, remembered rst and foremost as “SalmƗn the Persian”). For the Arabs’ acceptance of the foreigner SalmƗn into the umma serves as an indication of the openness of Islam. It is in this context that we may interpret the report of SalmƗn’s conciliatory announcement to the besieged Iranians in the White Palace of al- MadƗ’in that he is of the same origin as they, and that they would be treated equally to the Arabs if they converted to Islam.24 Similarly, another tradition relates that while digging the trench during the Yawm al- Khandaq, ‘Umar asked the Prophet for help to break up a rock. The Prophet struck the rock three blows, each time a ash of lightning appeared from it. SalmƗn then asked the Prophet what this meant, to which the Prophet replied that he had a vision in the rst ash of lightning of the castles of Yemen, in the second ash the castles of Syria, and in the third the White Palace of Khusraw in al- MadƗ’in—all of which were regions which the Muslims were destined to conquer.25 SalmƗn’s presence in this anecdote is essential to its subtext, as through his non- Arab background, he represents the spread of Islam to various 160 The climax: Islamic victory peoples of the Near East, future converts who would sublimate their local identi- ties in order to participate in the universal faith community which was brought by Arabs, but nonetheless open to everyone. Yet SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ also served as a tool, in the atmosphere of intercultural polemic marking the high ‘Abbasid period, for imparting a lesson against those Persians who would come to resent the Arabs, i.e., the partisans of the alleged Shu‘njbiyya movement. An instructive example can be seen with Ibn Qutayba’s adƯth in which the Prophet is purported toۊ l al-‘Arab, to aڲreference, in his Fa have said to SalmƗn, “Do not bear me a grudge lest you separate yourself from your religion.” To this SalmƗn asked, “How could I hate you when God has shown me the right path through you?” The Prophet replied, “If you bear the Arabs a grudge, then you also bear me a grudge.”26 The message of this tradition is overtly anachronistic. SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ was clearly not its intended target, adƯth in the context of its warning to subsequentۊ rather he is injected into this adƯthۊ generations of non- Arabs that might come to resent the Arabs. For this lends prophetic validation to the equation of hatred of the Arabs with hatred of Islam and the Prophet himself, an argument voiced by later scholars of various stripes as we’ve seen.27 Of course, it would be inconceivable to imagine the pious SalmƗn, who converted to Islam out of genuine faith, harboring any ill will towards the Prophet or his Arab coreligionists. According to the logic implied in adƯth, it follows that it would be equally absurd for future non- Arabۊ this Muslims to nurse such a grudge. .adƯthۊ Ibn Qutayba also references what Savant has termed the “Pleiades” l al-‘Arab, the Prophet statedڲAccording to this tradition as it appears in the Fa on an occasion in the presence of SalmƗn, “If faith were hung from the Pleiades, adƯthۊ then a man from Persia [FƗris) would obtain it.” On the surface, this looks like unambiguous propaganda in favor of the Persians, as Ibn Qutayba informs us that it was cited as a point of pride by Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ and the Sahlid brothers, al- Faঌl and al-ণ asan. However, Ibn Qutayba claried that by FƗris, the Prophet was referring specically to the KhurƗsƗnƯ people (as opposed to the natives of FƗrs), who occupied a place of prominence next to the Arabs in his adƯth areۊ estimation.28 Moreover, Savant has shown that other variants of this unclear as to whom exactly the Prophet’s encomium is directed.29 Indeed, it -adƯth would become rmly associۊ would only be in later scholarship that this ated with the Iranian people collectively (see below). With the crystallization of a self-con dent Iranian- Islamic identity and con- comitant historiographical tradition speaking to Iranians rather than just about them, we see emerging, in especially the tenth century, representations of SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ in which his Persian background is more than just a tool to prove the equality of all believers. Savant singles out the biographical diction- aries of Abnj’l-Shaykh al- AnৢƗrƯ (d. 979) and Abnj Nu‘aym al-I ৢbahƗnƯ (d. 1038) as exhibiting a prideful interest in SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ as a native Iranian. She shows how these works ll in the gaps left by earlier accounts by providing more context regarding SalmƗn’s childhood and his Iranian origins. For example, Abnj’l-Shaykh begins his biography of SalmƗn by stating, “Among the ways in The climax: Islamic victory 161 which God has graced IৢfahƗn and its people is his making SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ from them.”30 In their descriptions of SalmƗn’s upbringing, both authors have Iran and Iranians preguring into the rise of Islam, as can be seen in their report of SalmƗn receiving instruction from a hermit dwelling in a cave near his home- town of RƗmhurmuz. This holy man, who wore clothes and sandals of hair, informed SalmƗn of a future prophet named Aতmad (which is a variant of the name Muতammad), and taught him a transmuted ShahƗda claiming Jesus (‘ƮsƗ bin Miryam) to be a prophet (rasnjl AllƗh).31 Regarding Abnj Nu‘aym’s portrayal of SalmƗn, this author emphasizes what is in his estimation, the inextricable link adƯth (including its ambiguous variants)32 with the Persianۊ of the “Pleiades” adƯth, the authorۊ people. Through his lengthy exposé and commentary on this exhibits clear pride in SalmƗn’s Persianness.33 Furthermore, Abnj Nu‘aym’s description of SalmƗn’s genealogy, which stretches to the remote past of Iran, reects an interest in Iran for Iran’s sake that could only be the product of a society that felt fully condent in exploring its own pre- Islamic roots.34 Finally, both Abnj’l-Shaykh and Abnj Nu‘aym write that SalmƗn traveled to IৢfahƗn during the caliphate of ‘Umar, which they evidence with a report of a man claim- ing to have met SalmƗn there.35 SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ thus serves as “a mediator between Iran’s pre- Islamic past and Islamic present.”36 For early ‘Abbasid period authors, he represents a symbol of Islamic pluralism and unity, while for local Iranian historians writing long after the collapse of ‘Abbasid authority, SalmƗn embodies a glorious Iranian heritage.

Sayf b. ‘Umar: a brief assessment Among our sources, al- ৫abarƯ’s chronicle provides by far and away the most detailed narrative of the Arab- Muslim annexation of Iraq and Iran, and the liquidation of the Sasanian state. Al-৫ abarƯ’s account of these events is based mostly on the authority of Sayf b. ‘Umar and, to a lesser extent, Ibn IsতƗq. As I indicated at the beginning of this book, modern scholars have debated the historical reliability of Sayf ’s material, considering his overt bias in favor of his own tribe of TamƯm, his tendency to invent events and rather absurd names, and to fabricate isnƗds. Regarding the latter, Sayf appears to have fabric- ated intermediaries between himself and known transmitters like ‘Ɩmir b. ShurahbƯl al- Sha‘bƯ (d. 721), and to have extended his isnƗd beyond such well- established authorities to earlier imaginary sources. Furthermore, historians have commented on Sayf ’s signature literary embroidery.37 In this regard, Khalidi describes Sayf ’s material as “well crafted, full of drama and moral dialogue, neat and polished in both its facts and gures, often heroic, often contrived, as for instance, in ‘set pieces’ where characters become actors playing roles in a melo- drama.”38 And while one historian has tried to rehabilitate Sayf ’s reputation as a historian among modern scholars, even she conceded that “he certainly picked and chose his material, applied sophisticated methods of editing, reproduced biased accounts and added his own interpretations in the guise of historical reports.”39 162 The climax: Islamic victory Sayf also earned opprobrium both in his own time and in later medieval SunnƯ scholarship. Several biographical sources mention that he was accused of zandaqa during the purges initiated by al- MahdƯ and continued by HƗrnjn al- adƯth, Sayf ’s traditions were roundly rejected byۊ RashƯd.40 When it came to later generations of SunnƯ ‘ulamƗ’.41 This raises the intriguing question of why the tradition-based historian al-৫ abarƯ would put so much stock into Sayf ’s reports for events that were still relatively recent in Muslim collective memory. The answer is that Sayf, quite frankly, tells the story well. Sayf ’s narrative is pleasing from both a literary and ideological perspective. For as a jamƗ‘Ư SunnƯ scholar, al-৫ abarƯ would have been interested in a portrayal of the formative umma that downplayed the simmering sectarian tension that would explode in later generations,42 and rather painted a picture, as does Sayf, of a unied and centrally organized Muslim community, whose members shared in the common vision of expanding the dominion of Islam, either peacefully or by ghting the Muslims’ enemies if necessary. At the same time, Sayf ’s vivid illustration of the contrast between the Persians’ neries at Rustam’s camp and the shabby dress and shoddy weapons of the Arab emissaries, as well as his verbatim recollection of the eloquent, formulaic speeches voiced by the Arabs in response to the Per- sians’ disdainful treatment of them, are necessary components in the Islamic conquest narrative. For Sayf ’s depiction of the conquests reads as an artful, entertaining drama, with clear- cut heroes and villains, validating the Muslims’ triumph over the Sasanians as a product of the moral superiority of the Arabs and Islam. Therefore, in what follows, I follow the approach to the Islamic con- quests pioneered by scholars like Noth, Conrad, Donner, and, most recently, ۊShoshan,43 of deconstructing the relevant themes and topoi pervading the futnj literature, and assessing their ideological value.

Reports of the rst forays into Iraq under Abnj Bakr In this section, I analyze the Islamic accounts of the initial incursions of the Muslim army into Iraq during the reign of Abnj Bakr, resulting in the annexation of al-Ubulla, al- ণƯra, al- AnbƗr, and other districts near or west of the Euphrates. Modern historians are in general conformity that the actual intention of these rst forays was merely to subdue the recalcitrant ridda tribesmen in Iraq, and that they did not involve any major clashes with the Sasanians.44 Yet, in the Islamic historical tradition, they are portrayed as a prelude in the Muslims’ grand design to conquer the Sasanian empire, as the reader is continuously informed that God had promised the Muslims these lands.45 In this context, the exploits of the commander of this campaign, KhƗlid b. al-Wal Ưd are highlighted in this nar- rative, as he is depicted as the hero of this stage of the conquests.

DhƗt al- SalƗsil The rst report that I shall examine in this context details the rst real battle between a Muslim and Sasanian army in the SawƗd, resulting in the Muslim The climax: Islamic victory 163 conquest of al- Ubulla. This encounter was called DhƗt al-Sal Ɨsil (Battle of the Chains) because, according to al-৫ abarƯ, the Iranian soldiers who fought in it were allegedly chained together to prevent them from eeing.46 Bal‘amƯ, on the other hand, states it is because Hurmuz had brought chains with him to shackle the Muslims, as KhƗlid discovered after his victory.47 The report of this fantastic battle is exclusive to Sayf. It appears that he appropriated the name, DhƗt al- SalƗsil from ‘Amr b. al-‘Ɩৢ’ earlier expedition of the same name, and applied it to this battle, which itself was possibly a product of his own imagination.48 Even al-৫ abarƯ himself questions the validity of Sayf ’s report by stating that other writers attribute the conquest of al- Ubulla to ‘Utba b. GhazwƗn during the caliphate of ‘Umar.49 Yet, clearly, this dramatic story was too ideologically pleasing for al-৫ abarƯ to pass up. For example, the cruel and rather impractical tactic of chaining troops together so they would not ee was a conspicuous trope poignantly illustrating the imperial oppression of both the Persians, as well as the Romans, to whom this practice is likewise ascribed.50 Furthermore, the Sasa- nian governor Hurmuz lls the role of the classic villain. Al-৫ abarƯ writes that

he was one of the worst governors of that frontier in terms of his oppression of the Arabs, so that all the Arabs were infuriated against him. They saw him as the model of wickedness, and used to say things like, “more wicked than Hurmuz” and “more ungrateful than Hurmuz.”51

During the battle, Hurmuz allegedly schemed to treacherously trick KhƗlid by calling him out for single combat, but having his bodyguards lying in wait to attack him. However, the Muslim hero al-Qa‘q Ɨ‘ b. ‘Amr saved the day, pre- venting Hurmuz’s bodyguards from carrying out their plan, and allowing to KhƗlid to slay Hurmuz. The Muslims then achieved victory, and captured numerous spoils left behind by the enemy.52 In contrast to the despot Hurmuz, who received due punishment for his treachery, the intrepidity of KhƗlid and the legendary warrior, al- Qa‘qƗ‘ b. ‘Amr is emphasized in a way that is reminiscent of the ayyƗm al-‘Arab tales. The com- plete lack of mention of al- Qa‘qƗ‘ outside of Sayf ’s reports has led some scholars to argue that he is an invention, possibly of Sayf himself, considering that both hero and author conveniently belong to the same sub- tribe of TamƯm, the Usayyids.53 On the contrary, other scholars view separate testimony of the existence of al-Qa‘q Ɨ’s brother, the commander ‘Ɩৢim, and of a possible son named Suwayd as potential indications of al-Qa‘q Ɨ‘ ’s existence.54 Yet, whether a man named al- Qa‘qƗ‘ actually lived or not, we can say that what is recorded of this individual is certainly the stuff of legend. Al- Qa‘qƗ‘ is remembered, as much now55 as in the past, as the paragon Muslim warrior, pious, brave, and a performer of incredible feats in battle, particularly at the Battle of al- QƗdisiyya, as we shall see further below. Another salient image in this anecdote deserving analysis is Hurmuz’s luxuri- ous qalansuwa (pl. qalƗnƯs), a conical cap worn by the Sasanian nobility, that was captured as booty. Al- ৫abarƯ wrote that his was particularly precious, inlaid 164 The climax: Islamic victory with jewels and worth 100,000 dirhams, thus denoting his membership of the highest nobility (al- buynjtƗt).56 Iranian civilization is associated in Islamic his- toriography and adab with a legacy of strict social stratication and hierarchy.57 In the previous chapter, I alluded to the discourse revolving around the Sasani- ans’ reliance upon royal paraphernalia to express their status. In similar regards, Muslim authors recognized that in Sasanian society, dress was a means to distin- guish between the social classes as well as among the ranks of nobles.58 Regarding the qalansuwa, al-৫ abarƯ (on Sayf ) wrote that the value of one’s cap denoted his rank.59 From an ideological standpoint, descriptions of qalƗnƯs in the accounts of the Muslim conquests carry a strong charge, to the extent that they had become popular among Muslim elites as well, for whom they retained their connotation of status and rank.60 This fashion fad was the butt of ridicule for al- Ưs for wearing the tall qalƗnƯs, which made themڲJƗতi਌, who poked fun at the qƗ ”.[amƗrrat al- qayܲۊ] !uncomfortably hot, “like a she- donkey in midsummer heat He also stated that the caliphs were accustomed to wrapping turbans around their qalƗnƯs, “but if the qalƗnƯs are left exposed, then they stand up, becoming so long and pointy that the whole Muslim nation [jamƯ‘ al- umma] could t on top of [one of] them!”61 For al- JƗতi਌, the qalansuwa, like crowns and thrones, was a negative accretion from an outmoded civilization that dened rank and prestige by ostentation and material value, rather than by personal merit.62 There- fore, the signicance of al-৫ abarƯ/Sayf ’s description of Hurmuz’s elaborate qalansuwa comes into focus when one considers the context in which it would have been received, i.e., an ‘Abbasid society in which Persian fashions of clothing like the tall qalansuwa, the qabƗ’ (a coat with narrow sleeves, worn open), sarƗwƯl (trousers), and the wearing of silk, had themselves taken over,63 and where writers like al-J Ɨতi਌ could only express nostalgia for the good old days (as they imagined them), before such decadence in dress had become standard. Hurmuz’s qalansuwa is underlined among the other booty captured in the wake of DhƗt al- SalƗsil as a point of derision, bringing attention to the Irani- ans’ practice of associating rank with the possession of ne clothing and other such luxuries.

Bread after battle The sources report a string of Muslim victories occurring after DhƗt al- SalƗsil. Of particular interest is the Battle of Ullays,64 which details how KhƗlid b. al- WalƯd’s army routed a Sasanian force led by the commander, JƗbƗn.65 According to al-৫ abarƯ/Sayf, when KhƗlid’s army appeared to the soldiers in JƗbƗn’s camp, they decided, against JƗbƗn’s orders, to sit down to their midday repast, so as to show a lack of concern for the Arabs. When KhƗlid initiated his advance against them, the Persian soldiers abandoned their meal, with the hope of returning to nish it after achieving victory. So when the triumphant Arabs entered the Sasa- nian camp, they discovered the remains of the meals that the Iranian troops had left behind, which included roast meat, stew, and atbread. KhƗlid granted this food to his soldiers as part of the spoils. (JƗbƗn had had a premonition of his The climax: Islamic victory 165 army’s defeat, and advised his soldiers to poison their food, but they refused). Those Arabs who had never before visited the Iraqi countryside marveled at what they saw, asking the more experienced soldiers what those “white patches” (i.e., at white breads) were. Those who knew jokingly responded, “Have you ever heard of soft living [raqƯq al-‘aysh]? Well this is it, so it is called al- ruqƗq.”66 This short anecdote thus shows how some of the Arab troops were so far removed from the delicacies associated with settled living that even atbread was unrecognizable to them. Their amazement at this bread’s softness and white- ness is an indication that the bread they were used to eating was coarse and unre- ned. Those who knew what it was equated it with an easy lifestyle that the Arabs were unaccustomed to, hence this type of bread’s name in Arabic (ruqƗq) is derived from the expression for soft living (raqƯq al-‘aysh), so we are informed. More shall be said on the attraction of the Persians’ sumptuous cuisine in what follows.

The Iraqi campaign under ‘Umar I According to our narrative, KhƗlid b. al- WalƯd had been transferred by Abnj Bakr to the Syrian front, leaving al-Muthann Ɨ b. ণƗritha in charge of the Iraqi forces. Upon becoming caliph, ‘Umar I made Abnj ‘Ubayd b. Mas‘njd the commander of the Iraqi frontier, and al- MuthannƗ his lieutenant.67 Their army is reported to have scored a string of small victories over the Sasanians at the latter’s strongholds.

An offering of food in Kaskar Contained within the account of the aftermath of one of these confrontations, the Battle of al- SaqƗ৬iyya (located in the region of Kaskar) is an anecdote of par- ticular relevance for our analysis. According to this report, two local notables (most likely dihqƗns), Farrnjkh and FarwandƗdh approached Abnj ‘Ubayd to submit to the jizya payment in order to obtain the guarantee of security for their lands, the former for BƗrnjsmƗ and the latter for Nahr Jawbar.68 In order to pay homage to the Arab commander, they offered him various foods, including date pastries, cream, and starch. Yet Abnj ‘Ubayd declined the offer, stating that he could not accept something which his whole army could not partake in. It is then stated that another Sasanian commander, al- Andarzaghar, visited Abnj ‘Ubayd with a similar offering. Yet, when Abnj ‘Ubayd asked al- Andarzaghar if he had brought enough for his troops, and the latter informed him that he had not, the Arab commander refused the gift, proclaiming:

We do not need it. What a bad man is Abnj ‘Ubayd to accompany people from their lands and cause them to shed their blood, or even not to shed their blood, and then to appropriate for himself something [which they cannot have]. No by God, he should only eat from what God has granted them as booty that which their average man eats.69 166 The climax: Islamic victory In another version of this story, Abnj ‘Ubayd is made to accept the gift, though he invites a group of his compatriots to join him. Thinking that they were being invited to Abnj ‘Ubayd’s usual rough fare, they were amazed to nd delicate Persian dishes set out for them, inspiring one of them, al- Qa‘qƗ‘ ’s brother ‘Ɩৢim, to recite a poem commemorating the layered pastries served with succu- lent young pigeon, roast meat and mustard, and herbs, that he and his compat- riots so thoroughly enjoyed.70 As Shoshan points out, the correct protocol revolving around the acceptance/ refusal of a non-believer’s gift is a commonplace motif in accounts of the Islamic conquests.71 Similarly, although Morony cites this anecdote as an example of how the dihqƗns treated their new Arab suzerains in the same way as they dealt with their own Iranian leaders, he also cautions that “most of the accounts of such encounters appear to be tendentious in one way or another, usually involving early denitions of piety, and perhaps egalitarian attitudes, in contradistinction to aristocratic Persian practices.”72 To this end, this anecdote’s emphasis on Abnj ‘Ubayd’s sense of egalitarianism is clearly a thematic device demonstrating the superior morality of the Muslims over their ‘ajamƯ counterparts. Furthermore, we have here a poignant illustration contrasting the respective food cultures of the Arabs and the ‘ajam. As with the account of the Battle of Ullays, this report highlights how the Arabs, who were accustomed to the rough fare of the desert, were amazed by the rich, decadent foods they encountered in the settled regions of the Near East.73 On the one hand, the promise of such luxu- ries and the wealth of the fertile countryside could be used by commanders like KhƗlid to motivate their tired, hungry troops.74 Yet, a later Muslim audience would have recognized from a retrospective angle the inherent danger posed by the allure of the Persians’ settled lifestyle, their comfortable, lavish dress, sump- tuous cuisine, and advanced implements and gear; and the role these would play over time in the inevitable “softening” of the Arabs. From this standpoint, the caliph ‘Umar, the embodiment of Muslim piety and Arab steadfastness,75 serves as a rhetorical instrument in ta’rƯkh and adab, warning against the deleterious effects of assimilation. For example, al-J Ɨতi਌’s KitƗb al- BukhalƗ’ contains an excursus against overly rich, decadent meals, in which he cites the philologist, al- Aৢma‘Ư, who rebuked a man for consuming a rich meat relish, calling it “food for the Persians, the diet of KisrƗ.” He then complained, “This was not the suste- nance on which the family of [‘Umar] al- Kha৬৬Ɨb subsisted. Ibn al- Kha৬৬Ɨb would have beaten [someone] for this!”76 In a similar vein, al- ৫abarƯ reports that when ‘Umar inquired of messengers from the Iraqi front why they had become abby, they informed him it was due to the unhealthy atmosphere of the Tigris region. The caliph therefore ordered them to move to the edge of the desert, since “no land suits the Arabs except that which suits their camels.”77 Moreover, ‘Umar is remembered as living up to his own rigorous standards, as can espe- cially be seen in accounts of his visit to Jerusalem, in which he is depicted dress- ing modestly, sticking to his simple fare (barley, dates, meat broth, etc.), and rejecting the offer of any luxuries. His simplicity was such that local ofcials are said to have not even recognized him as the Arabs’ leader when they rst saw The climax: Islamic victory 167 him.78 The portrayal of ‘Umar as a model of austerity who admonishes the Arabs for adopting the creature comforts of the ‘ajam is a recurring theme to which I shall return.

The battles of al-Jisr and al- Buwayb The chronicles relate that Abnj ‘Ubayd’s offensive ended in disaster for the Muslims at the Battle of al- Jisr (the bridge), which took place near the town of Quss al-N Ɨ৬if on the Euphrates.79 They indicate that the Sasanian force was much larger and better equipped than any army that Abnj ‘Ubayd’s soldiers had come up against. In this context, the sources describe the Sasanians’ war elephants and their cavalry’s mailed horses, an innovation which the Arabs of Abnj ‘Ubayd’s army had never encountered before. Though the Arabs inicted many casualties on the enemy, they were ultimately defeated, and ed in disarray. Four thousand Muslim soldiers are reported to have died, including Abnj ‘Ubayd. Al-Muthann Ɨ survived this battle, though he later died from his wounds that he received in it. This battle is shown to have had a deep impact on the collective psyche of the Muslim community, as accounts of subsequent confrontations with the Sasani- ans show that the Arabs invoked this battle like the Alamo, to rally their fellow tribesmen. Soon after the Battle of the Bridge, the Muslims are depicted scoring a major victory against a Sasanian force at the Battle of al- Buwayb, in which the Iranian commander MihrƗn was slain.80 This battle is portrayed in the classic ayyƗm al- ‘Arab epic style, underlining the leadership and bravery of al- MuthannƗ. In accounts of this battle, we read of al-Muthann Ɨ’s dramatic rallying cries to his troops, urging them on to make the decisive attack, as well as of poetry praising his heroism. Donner has questioned the historicity of this battle, seeing it as being drawn into the narrative in order to lessen the disgrace at the Battle of the Bridge and to bolster the reputation of al- MuthannƗ and his tribe, the Bannj ShaybƗn.81 Yet from the perspective of the Islamic conquest narrative, one can appreciate the function of this battle as the epic prelude to the Muslim victory at al- QƗdisiyya. To this end, in the aftermath of the battle, al- MuthannƗ is reported to have said to his comrades:

I have fought the Arabs and the ‘ajam in both the JƗhiliyya and Islam. By God, one hundred ‘ajamƯs in the JƗhiliyya seemed ercer to me than one thou- sand Arabs. Yet today one hundred Arabs appear stronger to me than one thousand of the ‘ajam. God has taken away their credibility and has weakened their power of deception. So don’t pay any heed to the large number that you see, nor even a greater multitude, nor their taught bows, nor their long arrows. For, if they are rushed upon or if they lose their arrows, they become like live- stock. They will go in the direction that you lead them.82

This speech reects the realization amongst the Arabs that the dynamic which had existed between them and the Iranians for so long had changed. Its message 168 The climax: Islamic victory is that with the coming of Islam, the Arabs had nothing to fear from the Sasanian armies, despite the latter’s superior numbers and weaponry. Al- MuthannƗ’s martyrdom (and Abnj ‘Ubayd’s before him) helps paves the way for our narra- tive’s epic climax, to which we now turn.

The lead- up to al- QƗdisiyya: the Arab delegations The chronicles describe how at this point, the Sasanian notables, fearing the advance of the Arabs, rallied around Yazdagird, a grandson of ParvƯz and only remaining royal family member, crowning him king.83 The tale of Yazdagird’s birth belongs to the genre of kerygmatic omens occurring at the Sasanian court presaging the Islamic conquest of Iran. Al-৫ abarƯ, on the authority of Ibn al- KalbƯ, relates that ParvƯz’s astrologers predicted his kingdom’s perdition would come at the hands of a grandson of his who possessed a bodily defect. ParvƯz therefore kept his sons away from the opposite sex so that they would not pro- create. However, his eldest son, ShahriyƗr, begged his mother ShƯrƯn to procure him a mate. ShƯrƯn therefore sent ShahriyƗr a lowborn cupper, who bore him Yazdagird. Yazdagird was born with a defect in his hip. ShƯrƯn kept him secret until he was ve, and then showed the king his grandson. ParvƯz exhibited great affection for the child until he discovered his defect. ShƯrƯn convinced him to spare Yazdagird, telling him that he could not escape what was fated to happen. ParvƯz therefore banished Yazdagird from his court.84 That such an ill-omened individual with his ignominious background should become king is an indication of how far the House of SƗsƗn had degenerated, and a sign anticipating the dynasty’s impending collapse.85 When Yazdagird was later raised to the throne as a young man, he appointed his top general, who was also an astrologer, Rustam b. FarrukhzƗdh, to deal with the Arab threat. Meanwhile, ‘Umar appointed Sa‘d b. AbƯ WaqqƗৢ to lead a new expedition into Iraq.86 What follows in the narrative is a series of Arab delega- tions to Rustam and Yazdagird. The accounts of these momentous encounters form the dramatic lead- up to the epic Battle of al-Q Ɨdisiyya.87 As such, they are especially rich with themes anticipating the imminent Arab dawla as well as tropes drawn from the “Arab versus ‘ajam” discourse.

Rustam and al- MughƯra b. Shu‘ba’s initial encounter It is related that Rustam had established his camp at al- SƗbƗ৬,88 and that Sa‘d in turn, set up his camp near the town of al- QƗdisiyya, a small frontier post located near what was to become Kufa. According to one tradition, a group of Sasanian troops came to taunt the Muslims from across the Euphrates, shouting, “You have no help, nor power nor weapons. What has brought you here? Turn back!” When the Muslims replied that they would not, the Iranians mocked the Arabs by calling their arrows dnjk dnjk, meaning spindles. They then demanded that the Arabs send them an emissary who would explain the reason for their invasion of the Sasanians’ territory. The one- eyed al- MughƯra b. Shu‘ba, our most frequent The climax: Islamic victory 169 visitor to the Sasanian camp, is said to have volunteered for this task.89 When he was brought into the presence of Rustam, he sat on the latter’s throne alongside with him. When the incensed Iranian troops jeered in objection, al- MughƯra told them, “This did not increase my rank, nor did it take away from that of your leader.” He then explained that God had sent the Arabs a prophet who promised them a seed in Persia, so that they desired to live there with their families. This enraged the Iranians, and after some further quarreling between Rustam and al- MughƯra, some of them crossed the river to ght the Arabs and were defeated.90 This anecdote highlights the theme of the Iranians’ overcondence in their superior numbers and weaponry. In this regard, their diminutive comparison of the Arabs’ arrows to spindles occurs elsewhere in the conquest narrative.91 Here, we have the projection of a clear ‘Abbasid era discourse revolving around Arab versus Persian military technology and tactics. In this regard, al-J Ɨতi਌ para- phrases the Shu‘njbƯs ridiculing the Arabs by stating:

You used to ride your horses into battle without saddles. If they did have saddles, then they were made of skins and did not have stirrups. You never used to ght at night, so you knew nothing of night raids nor of ambushes. You knew nothing about the rearguard, nor the vanguard and you knew nothing about implements for advanced warfare, such as ballistae, catapults and testudines. Nor did you know anything about trenches, spikes, zippers, trousers, hanging swords, drums, banners, armor, chain mail, helmets, pulleys, bells, whips, shooting crossbows, nor about hurling Greek re.92

While this sentiment may have been informally expressed by some people in the urban milieu of ‘Abbasid Iraq, it was al- JƗতi਌ and his ilk who fashioned such talking points into part of the Shu‘njbƯs’ ofcial platform, with the intention of eliciting a response and to create the illusion of a debate. To this end, Ibn Qutayba “responded” by arguing that although the Persians possessed superior weaponry and military organization, the Arabs were more intrepid because they went into battle without these things. He proclaimed:

The Persians boast of their asƗwira and their marzbƗns, whom I attest cer- tainly possessed courage and bravery. Yet, the difference between the Arabs and them is that the Persians possessed more wealth, were better equipped and had more solid fortications. They also possessed a more organized society, ghting under the leadership of a king. The Arabs, however, during that time were separated and unorganized. Most of them fought on foot with a blunt sword and bendable spear. Their horsemen fought on Arabian horses with shabby saddles without stirrups, or with no saddles at all. Yet, the Arabs shuddered from ight and prided themselves on their forbearance.93

Similarly, both al- JƗতi਌ and Ibn Qutayba projected upon ‘Umar the idea that the Arabs’ toughness stemmed from their managing just ne without the advanced 170 The climax: Islamic victory gear and conveniences possessed by the ‘ajam. To this end, al-J Ɨতi਌ cites ‘Umar voicing disapproval when he noticed some of the MuhƗjirnjn and An܈Ɨr adopting the ways of the Persians. He therefore ordered them to return to living like the Ma‘ad (tama‘dadnj, i.e., the nomadic northern Arabs), to cut their stirrups so that they have to rattle around in and spring from their saddles, and to walk barefoot or wear sandals.94 Ibn Qutayba likewise quotes ‘Umar commanding the Muslims to act “Ma‘adian” (wa-‘alaykum bil-ma‘adiyya ) by casting off their stirrups so that they have to spring from their saddles, and to avoid the weakening luxuries of the ‘ajam.95 This contrast between the Persians’ overcondence in their material advant- ages versus the unadulterated courage of the poorly equipped Arabs is a commonplace trope in accounts of the Muslims’ nal meetings and battles with the Persians. At the same time, by sitting atop Rustam’s throne alongside him, al- MughƯra is made to project critiques of the Persians for their equating status with the possession of royal markers and ceremonial, and for their predilection for hierarchies. By commenting that his action did not affect his rank nor Rus- tam’s, al- MughƯra echoes al- JƗতi਌’s aforementioned criticism of the Persians kings’ reliance on royal paraphernalia.96 Such instances of the Arabs’ violating the Persians’ protocol likewise pervade our narrative. As for the aftermath of the skirmish which ensued in the wake of this meeting, there is a tradition claiming that some Arabs seized a bag of camphor from the Persians as booty, and tried to put its contents into their food, thinking that it was salt.97 This anecdote provides the reader with a humorous example of the Arabs’ lack of knowledge of the Persians’ luxuries.

At Yazdagird’s court One of the most momentous meetings between the Arabs and Iranians recorded in the Islamic conquest narrative is that of the Muslim embassy to the Sasanian king Yazdagird,98 which has been likened to the biblical account of Moses’ con- frontation with Pharaoh.99 According to this tradition, ‘Umar ordered Sa‘d to “send him [Yazdagird] men of pleasant appearance, sound judgment, and endur- ance, in order to invite him [to Islam].”100 As commanded by ‘Umar, Sa‘d selected a group of men who were distinguished by such traits in order to dis- patch them to Yazdagird. These Arabs approached Yazdagird’s palace on horse- back, and were told to wait at the gate while the king conferred with his ministers. They had with them extra horses that were causing a commotion by loudly neighing and striking the ground with their hooves, thus annoying the palace occupants. The Arabs are described wearing short garments (muqaܒܒa‘Ɨt), woolen cloaks (burnjd), sandals (ni‘Ɨl), and bearing whips, and appear to have sparked the curiosity of some curious Persian onlookers.101 They were eventually allowed entry. When the emissaries came into the presence of the king, he ordered them to sit. It is said that Yazdagird was a man of bad manners (sayyi’ al- adab). When he asked them about their reasons for coming, the delegation’s leader, al-Nu‘m Ɨn b. Muqarrin responded with an eloquent speech in which he The climax: Islamic victory 171 provided a brief description of the rise of Islam and its basic tenets, a recurring motif Shoshan refers to as the “rise of Islam in a nutshell.”102 Al-Nu‘m Ɨn then invited the king and his people to convert, and gave him the ultimatum of paying the jizya, or facing open war if he did not.103 The outraged king responded by saying:

I do not know of any nation on earth that was more wretched, smaller in numbers, or more prone to discord than you. We used to entrust the outlying villages with our defense against you, and they were sufcient for the task. The Persians did not attack you, and you had no hope of standing your ground against them. Even if your numbers have caught up with ours, do not delude yourselves [into attacking] us. If it is struggle that has caused you [to attack us], then we shall satisfy you with food in order to bring about your prosperity. We shall bestow honor upon your nobles, provide you with clothing, and appoint for you a king who will be kind to you.104

This account continues that in response to this condescending diatribe, al- MughƯra b. ZurƗra (not to be confused with al- MughƯra b. Shu‘ba) delivered a passionate speech, in which he conceded the wretched conditions in which the Arabs had hitherto lived, but then argued that the arrival of the Prophet and his bringing of the true religion to the Arabs had resulted in their spiritual awaken- ing. He then described the basic rudiments of Islam, including the oneness of God, and reiterated the three options which al-Nu‘m Ɨn had already posed to him.105 Even more incensed, the indignant king exclaimed, “You [dare to] con- front me with such things!” To this, al- MughƯra retorted, “I only confronted the one who spoke to me. If someone else had spoken to me, then I would not have confronted you with what I said.” Yazdagird concluded the meeting by telling the Arabs:

Return to your chief and tell him that I am sending you Rustam so that he may bury you and him in the moat of al- QƗdisiyya. He will punish you and your chief severely as an example for others. Then I shall send Rustam to your lands and make you mind your own affairs. For I will deal with you more harshly than ShƗpnjr had!106

In order to disgrace the Arabs, Yazdagird had a load of soil dumped on the head of the noblest member of their party, who was ‘Ɩৢim b. ‘Amr. He then drove them out of the palace. As they departed, ‘Ɩৢim kept the load of soil on his head. He purposely took the soil back to his camp, because he and his Muslim compat- riots knew that this was a sign that the Sasanians’ territory would soon be theirs.107 This account of the Arab delegation to Yazdagird bears a striking resem- blance to the reports of the Lakhmid and Bakr b. WƗ’il embassies to Khusraw II ParvƯz that I analyzed in the previous chapter.108 On the one hand, there is the young Yazdagird, who is portrayed as an immature, pompous king. Mimicking 172 The climax: Islamic victory the rhetoric of ParvƯz’s speech reviling the Arabs in the presence of the Lakhmid king al-Nu‘m Ɨn III, Yazdagird is similarly shown in this account to belittle the Arab people with a cantankerous diatribe. The similarity between both speeches can be seen particularly in Bal‘amƯ’s account, in which Yazdagird compares the Arabs most unfavorably to the other peoples of the world, including the Turks, Daylamites, Slavs, Indians, and others. He then mocks the Arabs for eating mice and snakes, and for having only camel and sheep’s wool to dress themselves.109 At the same time, just as ParvƯz is reported to have done with the Bakr b. WƗ’il delegation, so too does Yazdagird offer his Arab visitors some paltry provisions, assuming that it was their poverty which has driven them to invade his lands. Furthermore, the arrogant, inexperienced young sovereign is shown to be so self- assured in his position of authority that he fails to grasp not only the sincerity of the ambassadors’ message, but also the gravity of the threat that they posed. Indeed, his treatment of his Arab visitors demonstrates that he was unable to come to terms with the fact that the dynamic between the Arab and Iranian people had changed. This would explain his threat that he would deal with the Arabs more harshly than had ShƗpnjr. This, of course, was a reference to ShƗpnjr II, who is remembered in the Islamic historical tradition for his infamously harsh treatment of the Arabs, as I analyzed in Chapter 3. At the end of the meeting, Yazdagird tried to disgrace the Arabs by pouring soil onto the heads of one of them, but as will be shown in short order, this action only serves as an omen indicating his kingdom’s fall. The Arabness of the Muslim delegates is illustrated with their traditional Arabian attire, which appears to have captured the curiosity of the Iranians in the palace and Yazdagird himself, who questioned them about their cloaks and sandals, and the whips they were carrying.110 Just like food, weaponry, and battle tactics, dress was a medium for intellectuals of the ‘Abbasid era remem- bering the pre- and formative Islamic period to distinguish between the Arabs and the ‘ajam. For al- JƗতi਌ and Ibn Qutayba, the Arabs’ simple attire was a sign of their toughness, as compared with the brocades, silks, and other types of ne clothing (zayy) worn by the Persians. Ibn Qutayba cites ‘Umar urging the Arabs to wear their traditional clothing, and avoid the ornate garb of the ‘ajam. He quotes ‘Umar commanding the Muslims, “wear the izƗr, the ridƗ’, and sandals, and discard shoes and other such objects of desire. Avoid the luxuries and ne clothing of the ‘ajam, and don’t wear silk, since the Prophet (SAW) commanded thus.”111 Al- JƗতi਌ similarly distinguished between the Arabs, whose tradition it is to wear sandals, and the Persians, who are accus- -adƯth, in which the companۊ tomed to wearing shoes. In this regard, he cites a ions of the Prophet forbade their women to wear red and yellow shoes, which they disparagingly referred to as among the ornate clothes (zayna) worn by the women of Pharaoh’s family.112 Furthermore, these Arab delegates at Yazdagird’s court resemble the ambas- sadors which al-Nu‘m Ɨn III sent to ParvƯz. Both sets of delegates were selected based on their possession of certain noble characteristics. The difference, however, is that whereas al- Nu‘mƗn insisted that his delegates not appear overly The climax: Islamic victory 173 deant in their demeanor and maintain respect for the king, the Muslim ambas- sadors issue a direct challenge to the king in front of all his attendants and coun- selors. Likewise, their triumphal arrival at Yazdagird’s palace gate mounted atop neighing horses, like conquering heroes, is a clear indication of the challenge the Arabs intended to convey to these Persians. To this end, it would appear that religious symbolism is in play in this anecdote, as according to one tradition, when God created the horse, he said, “I gave you my blessing. I shall frighten the polytheists by your neighing.”113 Finally, as was the case with al- Nu‘mƗn’s envoys, the Muslim emissaries in this account are shown to be eloquent in their speeches, and to comport themselves with dignity in a hostile atmosphere. In this regard, al-Mugh Ưra’s response to Yazdagird that he would have made the same statement that he did to anybody who had addressed him as the king had, is a reection of both his quick wit, and on another level, Arab egalitarian attitudes and Muslim dictates against kingship.

Rustam: a sympathetic villain As a skilled prognosticator, Rustam is depicted exhibiting an uncanny ability to foresee the Sasanians’ fate. It is stated in this account that Rustam came to see Yazdagird after the latter’s meeting with the Muslim embassy. The king bragged to him about how he had soil dumped on the head of one of the Arabs. Yet Rustam realized that this was a bad omen. When he ascertained from one of his messengers that ‘Ɩৢim had returned to the Muslim camp, still bearing the soil on his head, Rustam interpreted this as a sign that the Arabs would conquer the Sas- anian kingdom.114 Being the only individual at the Sasanian court to truly com- prehend the threat posed by the Arabs, Rustam urged Yazdagird to be patient in dealing with the Arabs, advocating a policy of restraint. However, the brash young king did not heed his advice, and ordered Rustam to attack them immedi- ately.115 It is mentioned that Rustam attempted to stall by dragging out his march. While en route to encounter the Muslim army, Rustam interpreted the signs of the zodiac to predict the fall of the Iranian kingdom.116 It is further related that Rustam was plagued by a recurring dream, in which an angel appeared to him with the Prophet and ‘Umar. The angel sealed his army’s weapons and handed them to the Prophet, who in turn, gave them to ‘Umar.117 Rustam recognized this foreboding dream as a clear indication of his imminent defeat at the hands of the Arabs. Rustam’s prediction of the fall of the Sasanian kingdom thus comple- ments previous omens occurring at the Sasanian court presaging the Arab dawla. Rustam’s wisdom is also a recurring theme, as in several instances, he is able to discern the truth of the Arabs’ message, unlike his compatriots. For example, in al-৫ abarƯ’s aforementioned account of Rustam’s initial encounter with al- MughƯra, Rustam admitted the latter was right when he proclaimed that his sitting on his throne alongside him did not affect the rank of either man.118 Fur- thermore, al-৫ abarƯ relates that while in KnjthƗ on his way to al-Q Ɨdisiyya, Rustam conferred with an Arab prisoner, who informed him that it was his [i.e., his peoples’] deeds which had led to the current state of affairs, and that the 174 The climax: Islamic victory Arabs were simply agents of divine will. Thus, when they meet in combat, the Persians will be battling fate itself.119 Later, when he learned that some of his soldiers were looting the countryside, raping women and drinking wine, he admonished his army, telling them that the Arab prisoner was right, and that it was through their own misconduct that God had brought this situation upon them in the rst place. He stated that the Arabs treated the inhabitants of their territory better than they had, and that God would have granted the Persians victory had they been better people and not engaged in such evil actions. He also warned them that God would take away their rule if they didn’t change their ways. Rustam then executed those soldiers whom the locals had complained to him about.120 Rustam’s rebuke of his soldiers is intended to serve as a criticism of the Persian people in general. As such, it embodies the essence of the Islamic con- quest narrative. For Rustam conveys the idea that the once upstanding Persians had so morally degenerated that God was now on the verge of replacing their dawla with that of the virtuous Arabs.121 Rustam’s ability to comprehend the truth of the Arabs’ message makes him a tragic gure in Islamic memory. He is portrayed in the most sympathetic light in the ShƗhnƗma, which records his impassioned letter to his brother lamenting the imminent fall of Iran and predict- ing his own death.122 FirdawsƯ also depicts Rustam dying a heroic death in an epic duel with Sa‘d,123 unlike in other accounts where he meets an ignominious end (see below). In the end, though Rustam is portrayed with much more depth than the other Persians opposing the Muslims, he ultimately remains in the role of the foil. Despite his knowledge of Iran’s fate and his understanding that the Muslims are right, he is unwilling or unable to veer from his doomed path.

The nal meetings with Rustam The sources relate that after a purposefully protracted march, Rustam set up camp on the bank of the al-‘AtƯq canal (a subsidiary rivulet of the Euphrates), across from the Muslim army.124 What follows in al- ৫abarƯ’s chronicle are the embellished reports of the Arab delegations to Rustam that I referenced at the beginning of this study.125 Al- ৫abarƯ recounts akhbƗr on the Arab embassies to Rustam stemming from Sayf and Ibn IsতƗq respectively.126 Sayf ’s reports, which are by far the most descriptive, tell of an informal meeting between Rustam and the TamƯmƯ Zuhra b. ণawiyya,127 and Sa‘d’s dispatch of three single-man dele- gations on each of the three days prior to the battle of al- QƗdisiyya. Ibn IsতƗq on the other hand, along with most of the other sources, only mentions one visit, that of al-Mugh Ưra b. Shu‘ba, occurring on the day before the battle.128 With the exception of al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, all the sources listed in the previous note specify that Rustam had initiated these meetings by sending a message to the Arabs request- ing that they dispatch to him a man with whom he could negotiate. Al-৫ abarƯ, on the authority of Sayf, relates that the Muslims conferred on this matter, and decided to send Rib‘Ư b. ‘Ɩmir, who had volunteered for this task. It is specied in this account that Rustam and his generals decided to treat the ambassador with The climax: Islamic victory 175 disdain, as opposed to giving him an honorable reception. Thus, when the latter came within the vicinity of the Iranian troops, they seized him and brought him into Rustam’s presence.129 Al- ৫abarƯ’s illustration of Rib‘Ư’s arrival at Rustam’s camp exhibits a striking contrast in imagery between the splendor and ceremonial of the Iranians versus the coarseness of the Arab ambassador. For the Iranian camp is described as being adorned with lavish displays of ornaments, carpets, and pillows. Rustam is depicted sitting atop a golden throne, covered with rugs and cushions woven with gold thread.130 Such sumptuous markers of royalty are highlighted to show the Iranians’ predilection towards pomp and decadence. The Arab Rib‘Ư on the other hand, is described riding “on a short hairy mare, having with him a polished sword whose scabbard was made of shabby cloth.” It is further related that:

His spear was bound with a strap, and he had a shield whose surface was red hide resembling a at loaf of bread. He also had with him his bow and arrows. He was the hairiest of the Arabs, and he tied the girth of his camel to his head. On his head he had four braids of hair that stood upright, as if they were the horns of a goat.131

Here, Rib‘Ư is portrayed as the quintessential rugged Arab warrior. His ram- shackle weapons and roughshod clothing are highlighted as a symbol of his toughness and forbearance in contrast to the effeminizing opulence of the Irani- ans. Regarding his appearance, it is possible that the description of his four braids of hair was an embellishment intended to symbolize the four quadrants of the Sasanian empire that the Arabs were destined to conquer.132 Moreover, Rib‘Ư is depicted showing contempt for the Iranians’ luxuries. When the latter ordered him to dismount, he did so only after riding his horse onto Rustam’s spread carpet. He then tied his horses to two cushions, ripping them up so that he could lace his rope through them. As he approached Rustam, he leaned on his spear, piercing the carpets and cushions with it as he passed them.133 From al-৫ abarƯ’s description, it appears as if Rib‘Ư was preparing to address Rustam by leaning on his spear. This image evokes al-J Ɨতi਌’s description in his KitƗb al-‘AsƗ (Treatise on the Stick) of the Arabs’ custom of shaking a stick or leaning on a bow during speeches. According to al- JƗতi਌, the Shu‘njbƯs mocked this custom by pointing out that neither implement had anything to do with speaking. They also claimed that this was a tactic to distract the mind when speaking, preventing one from thinking about what he was actually saying.134 However, al- JƗতi਌ defended this practice by arguing that it was a means for poets to keep tempo. He also cites Solomon’s wielding of a stick during public exhortations. He furthermore por- trayed the Shu‘njbƯs’ defamation of this custom as an attack against the Prophet himself, since the latter was known to go about with a stick or short spear.135 By attempting to lean on his spear to speak therefore, Rib‘Ư is depicted as a typical Arab, engaging in a cultural idiosyncrasy that stood as a focal point of a later polemical discourse. 176 The climax: Islamic victory However, Rustam’s guards prevented Rib‘Ư from getting close to the general to do so, so he plunged his spear into the carpet, and sat down. When the Irani- ans asked him to account for his actions, he responded, “we [Arabs] do not like to sit on this nery of yours.”136 Before departing, Rib‘Ư is also reported to have proclaimed, “Oh people of Persia, you attach great importance to food, clothing and drink, whereas we belittle these things.”137 Through his vandalism of the Sasanians’ luxuries, Rib‘Ư serves as a conduit to express Islamic critiques of the Iranians’ attachment to neries and royal effects. Furthermore, Rib‘Ư’s actions and words reect Islamic egalitarian attitudes and disdain for the notions of royal protocol and rank that were commonplace in the Iranian tradition. This can be seen in Rib‘Ư’s initial refusal to dismount, as well as to surrender his weapons when ordered to do so. When told to lay down his arms, he is reported to have said deantly in response, “I have not come to you so that I should have to lay down my arms at your command, for you have invited me. If you do not allow me to come as I please, then I shall return.”138 Later in the meeting, when asked if he was the chief of the Arabs, he responded by saying, “No, but the Muslims together are like the body, each one a part of the whole. The lowest of them pro- tects the highest.”139 Finally, this account echoes ‘Abbasid era criticisms of the Iranians’ over- condence in their advanced weaponry as well as defenses of the Arabs’ primi- tive arms. This can be seen when towards the end of the meeting, Rustam’s soldiers took hold of some of Rib‘Ư’s weapons, and made fun of them. Rib‘Ư therefore, invited the Sasanian troops to a challenge. He drew an arrow and shot at one of their shields, piercing it, whereas when they shot at his leather shield, it deected the arrow.140 According to this report, Rib‘Ư granted Rustam three days to consider his options, which included the day of their meeting. It is related that when Rustam consulted his ofcers in private, he couldn’t but help to express his admiration for Rib‘Ư’s eloquent, honorable speech. Yet, his men remained entirely unimpressed, telling Rustam, “May God save you from inclining toward something like that and abandoning your religion for this dog! Did you not see his clothing?” Rustam then rebuked these Iranian noblemen for being so supercial as to judge someone based on his clothing rather than his judgment, speech, and behavior.141 Al- ৫abarƯ’s account continues that the day after the meeting with Rib‘Ư, the Iranians requested another audience with him, but this time the Arabs sent ণudhayfa b. Miতৢan. The latter arrived at the Sasanian camp mounted, and dressed similarly as Rib‘Ư. When ordered to dismount, he refused, arguing that he should not have to do so since he did not come to the Persians to ask them for anything. In Rustam’s presence, ণudhayfa is said to have remained mounted on his horse, from where he announced the three options to the general of conver- sion, paying the poll tax, or war.142 By refusing to dismount in the presence of Rustam, ণudhayfa resembles Ribi‘Ư, who drove his horse onto Rustam’s carpet with the intention of disrupting the Iranians’ ceremonial space. On the third day, it is reported that the Iranians called for yet another envoy, so the Arabs sent al- MughƯra b. Shu‘ba. Al-৫ abarƯ provides multiple akhbƗr on The climax: Islamic victory 177 al- MughƯra’s meeting stemming from Sayf. The reports of this encounter emphasize the opulence of Rustam’s camp. According to al-৫ abarƯ’s description,

when al- MughƯra b. Shu‘ba arrived, the people [i.e., the Sasanian nobles] were in their ne attire, wearing crowns and clothing woven with gold. Their carpets were the distance of a bowshot. Nobody could reach their leader without walking this distance.143

For his part, al- MughƯra is described having his hair divided into four braids, like Rib‘Ư.144 Al- BalƗdhurƯ alludes to al-Mugh Ưra approaching Rustam’s camp on a lean horse and wearing a broken sword wrapped in rags.145 According to the ShƗhnƗma, al- MughƯra did not walk onto the Persians’ carpets, but sat on the bare ground before conversing with Rustam.146 Al- ৫abarƯ and other sources, however, state that al- MughƯra approached Rustam to sit on his throne with him, but was seized by Rustam’s guards.147 According to al- ৫abarƯ, the members of Rustam’s entourage dragged him off the throne and beat him. This prompted al- MughƯra to upbraid them. He exclaimed:

It has come to our ears that you were a people of discernment. However, I think that there are no people more foolish than you. We, the Arab people are all equal to each other. We do not enslave each other, except when someone ghts another. I thought that you treated your people equally as we do. Instead of what you did to me, it would have been better for you to have informed me that some of you are masters over others, that you do not deem such behavior [as mine] acceptable, and that we should not engage in it. I have not come to you [on my own initiative], but you have invited me. Today I have learned that your affair will disappear and that you will be defeated. For, a kingdom cannot be based on such conduct, or on such minds [as yours].148

There is a sarcastic tone to al-Mugh Ưra’s above statement, indicating that he feigned ignorance of the Iranians’ protocol, and purposely tried to sit on Rus- tam’s throne, knowing full well that it would anger the Iranians. Indeed, in his rendition of this meeting, Abnj Ynjsuf states that al-Mugh Ưra’s intention in sitting on Rustam’s throne was just that.149 In this context, the Iranians’ hostile treat- ment of al- MughƯra provides him with the excuse to boast of the egalitarian values of the Arabs and to criticize the Iranians’ tradition of rigid social hier- archy. These are commonplace themes in the Islamic conquest narrative as we’ve seen. The equality of all believers in the eyes of God is a fundamental precept in Islam. For the Qur’an itself stipulates that piety is the ultimate gauge -collections of Muতammad b. IsmƗ‘Ưl al ۊƯۊa܇ of nobility.150 Likewise, the adƯthۊ BukhƗrƯ (d. 870) and Muslim b. al- ণajjƗj al-Qushayr Ư (d. 875) record stemming from Abnj Hurayra, who observed the Prophet proclaim that nothing is more despicable in God’s eyes than one who calls himself malik al- amlƗk (king ,adƯth claries that the Prophet said shƗhƗnshƗhۊ of kings). One version of this 178 The climax: Islamic victory thus associating the Persians with kingship, and specifying them as the target of his criticism.151 In terms of later scholarship, the philosopher-theologian Abnj’l- ণasan al-‘ƖmirƯ (d. 992) likewise criticized the Persians for their social hierar- chies, which kept capable individuals in their station, and where heredity trumped merit in determining nobility.152 Yet, al- MughƯra’s behavior and state- ment reect not only Islamic attitudes, but also mirror an ancient Greek dis- course castigating the “Oriental” Persians for their alleged servile tendencies. Indeed, this is a central theme in Aeschylus’ (d. 455 BC) play, The Persians, which also highlights classic stereotypes of Persian decadence and pomp. For al- MughƯra’s explanation of the equality and mutual support of the believers resembles the response that the chorus gives Aeschylus’ Persian queen, Atossa, when she asks concerning the Greeks who is their master: “To no man are they reckoned slaves or in subjection.”153 Al- ৫abarƯ reports that after this exchange, Rustam tried to make light of the situation by playfully ridiculing al- MughƯra’s weapons, which is likewise a common theme in the conquest narrative. He asked him, “What are those spin- dles you have with you?” To which, al-Mugh Ưra responded, “A live coal can still cause damage even though it is not long.” Rustam further asked, “Why is your sword so worn?” Al- MughƯra came back, “The covering is worn, but the blade is sharp!”154 Again here, one witnesses the theme of the Arabs’ worn weapons functioning as a symbol of their steadfastness. This dialogue also represents the short question- and-answer trope, displaying al- MughƯra’s wit in the face of Rus- tam’s ridicule of him. The emphasis on his ability to respond quickly with a clever repartee to Rustam’s condescending questions reects notions of the Arabs’ ability to improvise eloquent words for a given situation, a skill, accord- ing to al-J Ɨতi਌, which was born out of their precarious life on the move.155 Al- MughƯra then bade Rustam to speak, since the latter had invited him. Rustam thus proclaimed:

We are still rmly established in the land. We are victorious over our enemies and noble among the nations. None of the other kings possesses glory, nobility and power as we do. Furthermore, there was never amongst the people a nation smaller of concern to us than you. You were a people who lived in squalor and had a miserable existence. We did not think any- thing about you nor pay you any consideration. When your land did not get any rain and you were stricken with famine, you sought aid in a region of our land. So we commanded for you some dates and barley. Then we returned you to your land. I know that what carries you to do what you have done is only the trouble in your country which has stricken you. I will therefore command for your leader a ne garment, a mule and a thousand dirhams. I will command for each one of you a heavy load of dates and two articles of clothing. Then you will leave us. For I have no desire to imprison you.156

While Rustam may have expressed admiration for the Arabs in private with his generals, in a formal setting like this, he delivered this condescending speech, in The climax: Islamic victory 179 which he comes off as the stereotypical, arrogant Persian tyrant. After vaunting the power and majesty of the Iranian kingdom, he goes on to belittle the Arab nation in a way that is reminiscent of the speeches that Yazdagird and ParvƯz delivered in the presence of the Arab emissaries at their courts. For example, Rustam waxes heavily on the Arabs’ poverty and the difcult circumstances of desert living. Likewise, he offers them some provisions and triing gifts to return to their lands. Furthermore, Rustam’s speech to al-Mugh Ưra evinces his overcondence in the strength of his army. Despite his powers of prognostica- tion and wisdom, this speech at least, reects the attitude of an individual who still cannot fully come to terms with the fact that the Arabs, united under the banners of Islam, no longer occupied the subservient position that they had under the Iranian kings for so many years. Indeed, in his eloquent response, al- MughƯra reminds Rustam that the power which the Iranians had accrued was due to God alone, and scolds him and his people for not showing due gratitude to the almighty for their lofty position. At the end of this meeting, Rustam swore to kill the entire Muslim army.157 The two sides agreed that the Iranians would be the ones to cross the ‘AtƯq canal to ght the Muslims, thus making them responsible for the fate that would befall the Sasanian kingdom.158

The Battle of al- QƗdisiyya The Battle of al- QƗdisiyya is reported to have taken place over a course of three days and a night, with each day having ascribed to it a special name. The rst day was called Yawm ArmƗth (Day of the Rafts), a possible reference to the dyke of soil, reeds, and saddles that Rustam had his troops construct to cross the al-‘AtƯq canal. The second day was named Yawn AghwƗth (Day of Help), an allusion to the Muslim reinforcements that came from Syria. The third day is referred to as Yawm ‘ImƗs (Day of Hard War), and that evening, Laylat al- QƗdisiyya (Night of al- QƗdisiyya), is when the Muslims achieved victory. The Battle of al-Q Ɨdisiyya is remembered as a particularly bloody engagement, resulting in a huge loss of life on both sides. Two thousand Muslims versus ten thousand Sasanian troops are reported to have perished in the ghting.159 On the Muslim side, we encounter gory details of the wounds Muslim warriors suffered. One evocative image that stands out in the al- QƗdisiyya narrative is that of a man who was disemboweled in a ght with a Persian, had a companion help him put his innards back inside him, and attempted to return to the fray, only to die after taking a few steps.160 We also read the poem of a man urging his brother to continue to ght despite losing his leg.161 Moreover, by emphasizing the Arabs’ steadfastness helping them to over- come a better equipped, numerically superior foe in the Sasanian army, the report of the Battle of al- QƗdisiyya is reminiscent of the account of the Yawm Dhnj QƗr. To this end, depictions of courage on the part of Arab warriors and tribes (such as the two examples described above), as well as poetry and per- sonal vaunts of valor pervade the al-Q Ɨdisiyya narrative. Of course, Sayf ’s tribe of TamƯm receives the lion’s share of encomium in his account. Thus, al-Qa‘q Ɨ‘ 180 The climax: Islamic victory b. ‘Amr, who appears from the Syrian front to rally the troops, emerges as the hero of the battle. In a typical ayyƗm al-‘Arab style duel, al- Qa‘qƗ‘ is reported to have slain the Sasanian commanders Bahman JƗdhawayh and BayruzƗn prior to the battle on the second day. Before ghting Bahman, who led the Sasanian army at the Battle of the Bridge, al-Qa‘q Ɨ‘ is depicted calling out for vengeance for his fallen comrades, Abnj ‘Ubayd and SalƯ৬ b. Qays, who were killed ghting at that battle.162 Al- Qa‘qƗ‘ is also said to have killed 30 men on the Yawm AghwƗth while reciting rajaz verse, according to one tradition.163 Likewise, al- Qa‘qƗ‘ ’s brother ‘Ɩৢim is reported to have distinguished himself in battle. In one humorous anecdote, ‘Ɩৢim encountered a horseman with a mule who ed from him. He therefore took as booty the mule and its load, which turned out to contain various types of sweets. For the horseman who ed from him was the king’s baker!164 This account is clearly intended to mock the decadence and peculiar sense of propriety of the Persians for bringing their rich desserts onto the eld of battle. Sayf ’s tradition also highlights the exploits of other tribes, such as the Bannj Nakha‘, Madhতij, and Asad. Regarding the latter, Sayf devotes a signicant chunk of text to describe the AsadƯ ৫ulayতa b. Khuwaylid’s brash pre- battle raid against the Persian camp. A Persian horseman whom ৫ulayতa took captive pro- claimed to the Muslims that he had never encountered anyone show such prowess as ৫ulayতa.165 Another prominent AsadƯ we encounter is GhƗlib b. ‘Abd AllƗh, who is described reciting poetry of his prowess before going out to ght a crown- wearing Iranian nobleman, whom he took captive.166 Among the tales of heroism recorded in the account of the Battle of al- QƗdisiyya, that of Abnj Miতjan al- ThaqafƯ particularly stands out. According to this legendary story, Abnj Miতjan was a poet who had a predilection for wine. Prior to the Battle of al- QƗdisiyya, Sa‘d had put Abnj Miতjan in fetters and imprisoned him in the castle of al-Qudays when he was caught drinking wine. (Sa‘d was likewise conned to the castle, as he had developed a case of boils rendering him unable to mount a horse. He therefore watched the battle from the window of his room, providing the army written orders through his lieutenant KhƗlid b. ‘Urfu৬a).167 On the second night of ghting, Abnj Miতjan became espe- cially desirous to join the fray, so he pleaded with Sa‘d’s wife SalmƗ bt. Khaৢafa to release him from his irons, promising to put them back on when he returned. SƗlma released him, and Abnj Miতjan valiantly hurled himself into battle, garner- ing the admiration of both Sa‘d and the troops. Not realizing who the warrior was, they compared him to the mythical hero of Islamic lore, al- Khidr, as well as to an angel.168 Abnj Miতjan stayed true to his promise, returning to the castle and putting the irons back on. Sa‘d later pardoned him, and Abnj Miতjan promised never to drink wine again.169 For the Iranians’ part, the chronicles paint the picture of a huge, menacing army. According to al-Bal ƗdhurƯ’s account, Rustam’s army numbered 120,000 men while the Muslims were only 9,000 to 10,000.170 The Sasanian troops were shown to be superiorly equipped, as can be seen in Ibn IsতƗq’s description of each side’s respective armaments, which states: The climax: Islamic victory 181 The majority of the Muslims were shielded only with pack- saddle cloths, over which they placed palm branches stripped of their leaves in order to protect themselves. What they put on their heads was only saddle girths. The Persians [on the other hand] were clad in iron and coats of mail.171

The Sasanians’ thirty war elephants bearing palanquins lled with archers are also described to have played a prominent role in the battle, presenting the Muslim army with immense difculty. According to al-Mas‘ njdƯ, the elephants’ trunks were covered in armor and their tusks were decorated with brocade and silk.172 Regarding the splendor of the Sasanian army, one comes across several reports of Muslim soldiers capturing the nery of the elite Sasanian warriors, including golden armbands, earrings, bejeweled belts, brocaded clothing, trou- sers, and armor.173 Rustam is portrayed entering the battle seated on a dais with a parasol, an indelible symbol of Persian hierarchy and decadence targeted by the Muslims throughout the battle.174

Killing Rustam There is confusion in our sources as to the identity of Rustam’s killer, which is likely due to tribal competition. However, in Sayf ’s tradition, which is by far the most descriptive account of Rustam’s death, a young soldier named HilƗl b. ‘Ullafa emerges as the prime candidate.175 It is reported that during the ghting an unusual westerly wind blew into the faces of the Sasanian troops, causing confusion in their ranks and blowing off the parasol of Rustam. The Muslims then rushed Rustam’s dais and al-Qa‘q Ɨ‘ toppled it. Rustam ran away and hid under a mule, which was part of the baggage train. Not noticing Rustam, HilƗl b. ‘Ullafa cut open the bag on the mule under which Rustam was hiding. Its con- tents spilled out on top of the Iranian general, injuring him. At that point, HilƗl took notice of Rustam from the scent of his clothes. Rustam ran into the al-‘AtƯq canal, but HilƗl dragged him out and killed him with his sword. HilƗl then climbed onto Rustam’s dais, seated himself on it, and proclaimed, “By the Lord of the Ka‘ba, I have killed Rustam!”176 According to one of Sayf ’s akhbƗr, before jumping into the al-‘AtƯq, Rustam had thrown off his clothes, on which HilƗl discovered 70,000 dirhams. He was also wearing a qalansuwa worth 100,000 dirhams that HilƗl did not manage to take possession of.177 With the death of Rustam, the Iranians lost heart and took ight. In the ensuing melee, the Arabs seized the banner of KƗbƯ, which according to Iranian lore had belonged to the kings of the legendary KayƗnian dynasty.178 Al-Mas‘ njdƯ described it being covered in rubies, emeralds, and other precious stones, and stated that its value was an astounding 2,200,000 dirhams.179 The account of Rustam’s ignominious end serves as yet another critique of the Iranians for their attachment to luxurious status markers. The description of Rustam’s parasol being blown off by the westerly wind is intended to symbolize divine displeasure with such symbols of rank. It also evokes the gale in Muslim lore which destroyed the rebellious community of ‘Ɩd.180 At the same time, this 182 The climax: Islamic victory account shows that Rustam’s own extravagant possessions are of no avail to him in the end, and in fact, it is these things which help seal his fate. Thus, the smell of his perfumed clothes is what gives him away to HilƗl. Likewise, in an effort to get away from him, Rustam is forced to remove his valuable clothes which contained 70,000 dirhams, an exaggerated amount to be sure, but one that none- theless illustrates the superuous luxury of the Iranian nobility. Finally, the image of the rank and le soldier HilƗl mounting Rustam’s throne and proclaim- ing his feat of killing the Iranian general is a strong statement against the symbols of hierarchy that the Arabs associated with the Iranian tradition.

The conquest of al- MadƗ’in and the Sasanians’ last stand The narrative continues that the Arab victory at al- QƗdisiyya left the Sasanian capital of al-Mad Ɨ’in open for the taking. It describes how after engaging in some skirmishes, Sa‘d marched on al- MadƗ’in. Before the Arabs arrived, Yazda- gird had ed the city with his personal retinue, possessions, and family to ণulwƗn. Sa‘d focused his siege on the western side of the city complex. He took the district of Bih ArdashƯr after it was abandoned by its inhabitants. After a short engagement with the Iranian troops, the caretaker of the city, KhurrazƗdh ed, delivering al-Mad Ɨ’in into the hands of the Muslim army.181 Like the Battle of al-Q Ɨdisiyya, the Muslim conquest of al-Mad Ɨ’in is por- trayed by Muslim historians as a great triumph signaling the victory of Islam over the Sasanian state and its religion. In this regard, the description of Sa‘d’s entry into the White Palace evokes notions of Muslim piety prevailing over the Sasanians’ oppression, of which the grandiose palace was a conspicuous symbol. Thus upon entering, Sa‘d is said to have prayed, performed eight rak‘as, and to have made the great hall of the palace into a congregational mosque.182 At the same time, the sources wax heavily about the immense treasures which the Muslims took as booty at al- MadƗ’in. The total amount given for the spoils seized at al- MadƗ’in is three billion dirhams, and it is said that each horseman who participated in the siege was granted a 12,000 dirham stipend.183 The chron- icles further detail the precious gems, metals, bejeweled gurines, brocades, ornate weapons, crowns, as well as the concubines which the Muslims took at al- MadƗ’in.184 In this regard, particular attention is devoted to describing the bejeweled carpet originally belonging to ParvƯz, which ‘Umar ordered to be cut up and divided amongst the Muslims.185 Such descriptions of the Sasanians’ lavish treasures were intended to underline both their decadence, and their stingi- ness for hoarding such wealth that could have been spent for more practical pur- poses. Thus, upon beholding the spoils taken at al- MadƗ’in, ‘Umar is reported to have criticized the Sasanians by proclaiming, “How stupid is he who accumu- lates wealth for his descendants or for the enemy to make off with!”186 The climax: Islamic victory 183 The NihƗwand embassy According to the sources, Yazdagird desperately tried to assemble the remnants of the Sasanian army to ght the Arabs. First, at the Battle of JalnjlƗ’ (near present day KhƗnaqƯn), an Iranian force commanded by MihrƗn al- RƗzƯ is reported to have been defeated by Sa‘d two months after al- MadƗ’in was taken.187 This victory is said to have solidied the Muslims’ hold over Iraq and southwest Iran.188 The narrative continues that shortly thereafter, Yazdagird, while staying at Rayy, again attempted to rally his forces. The Sasanian army gathered at NihƗwand, located in Media. Several local Iranian sub- rulers who had not participated in the Battle of al-Q Ɨdisiyya came out to join the Sasanian army. The Arab force that set out to meet this threat from Kufa was led by al- Nu‘mƗn b. Muqarrin.189 Some accounts of the Battle of NihƗwand provide a detailed description of yet another Arab embassy to the Sasanian camp prior to the confrontation.190 According to these reports, al-Mugh Ưra b. Shu‘ba was once again selected to represent the Muslims. According to al-৫ abarƯ, when the Sasanian commander BundƗr191 consulted his advisors on how to receive al- al-MughƯra, they pro- claimed, “the best thing is for us to adorn ourselves in splendor and equipment. Let us be well dressed, and when we go out against them, the shine from our spears and lances will almost affect their [the Arabs’] vision.”192 In his reception of al- MughƯra, the Sasanian commander is described seated on a golden throne, wearing a crown, and surrounded by his retinue, who appeared as devils.193 According to al-Mas‘ njdƯ, his entourage included the sons of kings (abnƗ’ al- mulnjk), who wore gold earrings and bracelets, and brocaded clothing.194 As for al- MughƯra, al- BalƗdhurƯ states that when he entered the Iranian camp, he drew his sword and cut the Iranians’ rugs to pieces. He then, in his telltale act of de- ance, proceeded to sit on the commander’s throne alongside him, before his guards dragged him away.195 Al- ৫abarƯ similarly wrote that al- MughƯra, whom he described as being shabbily dressed, was held back by the Iranian guards when he tried to approach BundƗr. When al- MughƯra protested that an emissary should not be treated this way, some members of BundƗr’s entourage responded, “You are nothing but a dog,” and they forced him to sit down.196 BundƗr then said to him:

You Arabs, among all the people are the farthest from anything good. You have been hungry longer than anyone else, you are the most wretched, the dirtiest, and you reside in the remotest areas. Nothing prevents me from ordering these horsemen to cover you with arrows, except the fear of the pollution from your rotting corpses, for you are lth. If you go away, then we will allow you to do so. But if you stay, we will show you the place of your perdition.197

Al- MughƯra eloquently responded with a “rise of Islam in a nutshell” speech, explaining how the Arabs had received a prophet who had ameliorated their con- dition and promised them victory over their enemies.198 The portrayal of this 184 The climax: Islamic victory meeting thus follows an almost identical pattern to that of the al- QƗdisiyya embassies. One sees in it the same telltale themes of Iranian hubris and splendor, including the Iranian nobles insisting on receiving the Arab emissary with a lavish ceremonial so as to intimidate him, as well as the crowned, enthroned Sasanian commander threatening to destroy the Arabs in an invective- lled dia- tribe, which harks on the Arabs’ poverty. At the same time, the emphasis on al- MughƯra’s shabby appearance, his violation of the Iranians’ nery and sense of protocol, and his dignied handling of the Iranians’ mistreatment of him are all familiar themes. The Arabs, of course, are the victors in the ensuing confronta- tion, despite facing an enemy that was as numerous as the one they had encoun- tered at al- QƗdisiyya. According to the narrative, the Sasanians’ power was now broken, and the heartland of Iran was ripe for the Muslim conquest.

Reversing roles: Al- HurmuzƗn’s meeting with ‘Umar Before analyzing the portrayal of the fall of Yazdagird, the conclusion to our dramatic saga, I rst examine a most curious account of the meeting between the Iranian nobleman al-Hurmuz Ɨn and the caliph ‘Umar in Medina. The narrative of al-Hurmuz Ɨn’s arrival at Medina and encounter with the caliph is an embel- lished tale intended to symbolize the clash between two civilizations and their respective values.199 According to the Islamic sources, al- HurmuzƗn was a member of the Iranian high nobility and had participated in the Battle of al- QƗdisiyya. After the Muslim victory there, he assumed rule in his native KhnjzistƗn, from where he launched raids into the Muslim controlled region of al- MaysƗn. ‘Umar ordered al- Nu‘mƗn b. Muqarrin to march against him. After a protracted siege in the citadel at Shustar, al- HurmuzƗn surrendered, under the condition that he be sent to the caliph. Upon entering the city, it is stated that al- HurmuzƗn’s captors dressed him in his most elaborate regalia in order to show him off to the caliph and to the inhabitants of the city. He is described being led into Medina accompanied by twelve of his attendants, and wearing an embroi- dered tunic woven with gold, trousers, a crown encrusted with rubies, a golden belt, bracelets, and other articles of jewelry which had belonged to him.200 When this party arrived at ‘Umar’s residence, the caliph was not to be found there. According to Ibn Sa‘d’s account, al- HurmuzƗn snidely remarked in Persian, “Your king has become lost.”201 At this point, some local boys playing in the road advised this group that ‘Umar was in the mosque. When they came there, they found ‘Umar, alone and asleep in the corner of the mosque, using his cloak as a pillow. His whip was dangling from his hand. When al- HurmuzƗn beheld ‘Umar, he could not believe that he was in the presence of the caliph. Al- HurmuzƗn asked, “Where are his guards and chamberlains?” To which he was told: “He has neither a guard nor a chamberlain, nor a secretary, nor a chancel- lery.”202 Before addressing al-Hurmuz Ɨn, ‘Umar had him stripped of all his nery, and had him dressed in a woolen cloak. When ‘Umar then asked al- HurmuzƗn to reect on his and his peoples’ perdious ways, he responded that in the past, God did not act to affect the relationship between Arabs and Per- The climax: Islamic victory 185 sians, so the Persians occupied a superior position. However, the Arabs now had the upper hand only because God had taken their side. In the process of their heated dialogue, al-Hurmuz Ɨn requested a cup of water, which he was granted. ‘Umar promised that no harm would befall him until he had nished his drink, so al- HurmuzƗn cleverly spilled the water in his cup, thus hoodwinking the caliph into granting him immunity. Al- HurmuzƗn then converted to Islam, became an advisor to the caliph, and was granted a stipend.203 What stands out about this account is that in comparison to the reports of other Arab- Sasanian meetings that we have analyzed, in this one the roles have been reversed. For this anecdote still contains the formulaic emphasis on the Ira- nians’ nery and pomp, but in this case, the well- dressed Iranian lord is por- trayed in a position of weakness, being led as a captive by the triumphant Arabs to the caliph. On the other hand, ‘Umar is depicted in quite humble terms which belie his prominent position as the caliph of Islam. The illustration of him asleep in the mosque, using his cloak as a pillow is an indication of both his piety and lack of pretension. So too is the complete absence of formality in his reception of al- HurmuzƗn, such that the latter does not at rst believe that he is in the pres- ence of the caliph. Furthermore, the image of ‘Umar stripping al- HurmuzƗn of his nery is intended as a critique of Iranian foppishness. All of this imagery comes together for a truly ironic effect. This anecdote serves as a testament of the triumph of Islam and the simple ways of the Arabs over stereotypical Persian decadence and pretension.

The conclusion: murder at the mill It is beyond the scope of this study to analyze accounts of the continued Islamic conquest of Iran and Transoxiana. However, in what follows I examine the por- trayal of the downfall of Yazdagird. According to the sources, Yazdagird sur- vived ‘Umar, who was himself murdered by his Persian slave, Abnj Lu’lu’a. (El- Hibri shows that on a symbolic level, Abnj Lu’lu’a represents in Islamic memory both lingering resentment of the Persians towards the Arabs and sim- mering ‘Alid discontent).204 However, Yazdagird met his end during the reign of ‘UthmƗn. The historical narrators relate that Yazdagird retreated eastward in front of the advancing Muslim army, attempting to rally the support of the local gentry along the way. According to al-৫ abarƯ, he even sent an ambassador to the emperor of China to request aid, but the latter refused to dispatch an army when he learned about the moral perfection of the Muslims, arguing that such a force could not be stopped.205 Yazdagird is shown to have brought his imperious attitude with him on his ight. According to al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, when Yazdagird originally left al- MadƗ’in, he took with him 1,000 each of his cooks, musicians, cheetah keepers, and falcon- ers, and he felt that this was too little!206 He appears to have run afoul of the local nobility wherever he went. According to al- BalƗdhurƯ, the marzbƗn of KirmƗn drove him from his land when the king refused even to talk to him.207 Yazdagird is furthermore reported to have attracted the enmity of the local rulers 186 The climax: Islamic victory in SijistƗn and Marv for demanding taxes from them.208 Finally, when the Turkish ruler NƯzak requested Yazdagird’s daughter in marriage, the young king refused, referring to him as either his slave or a dog.209 Regarding Yazdagird’s death, the sources are in agreement that the marzbƗn of Marv, MƗhawayh betrayed the king while the latter was under his protection, conspiring with NƯzak to kill him. Learning of their plans, Yazdagird ed, and came to the house of a miller, where he met his end.210 In some accounts, it was the miller who killed Yazdagird, while others specify that was the soldiers of either NƯzak or MƗhawayh. A ubiquitous theme in the accounts of Yazdagird’s murder is the incongruous illustration of the king, still bearing his luxurious royal regalia, including his crown, jewel-studded belt, and signet ring, being reduced to having to hide out in the humble abode of a miller. In this regard, one notices the conspicuous emphasis on the irony that Yazdagird’s possessions were of no avail to him, and in some versions, as was the case with Rustam, they even seal his fate. For example, according to one rendition of his murder, one of the KhurƗsƗnƯ soldiers was alerted to the presence of the king rst by the smell of his perfume, and then by the edge of Yazdagird’s silk brocade that was stick- ing out from his hiding place.211 In other versions, the miller killed Yazdagird out of envy for his rich possessions.212 Yazdagird’s death in the house of a miller expresses the theme of dawla. For as a rotating instrument, the mill itself is a metaphor for the turns of fate.213 Like- wise the river in which Yazdagird’s corpse was dumped symbolizes the ephem- eral nature of this life within the eternal ow of time. In al- ৫abarƯ’s account, the bishop of Marv found and removed Yazdagird’s body from the river and gave it a proper burial.214 This action serves as a symbolic closing of the book of the once proud Sasanian dynasty, sending those kings off with dignity in the same location (KhurƗsƗn) which would witness a glorious rebirth in Islamic times.

Meeting the Romans: a comparative perspective Finally, it suits us to briey examine the accounts of meetings between the Muslims and Romans in the context of the Arabs’ conquests on the Western front, considering the thematic similarities in these reports and those recounting the Muslims’ encounters with the Sasanians. In addition to what is preserved in our annalistic sources and al- BalƗdhurƯ’s chronicle, we also possess a rich body literature focusing on the Muslims’ conquests in Byzantine Syria and ۊof futnj Egypt. The earliest akhbƗrƯs of this genre whose works are extant include Muতammad b. ‘Abd AllƗh al- AzdƯ al-Ba ৢrƯ, Aতmad b. A‘tham al- KnjfƯ, Muতammad b. ‘Umar al- WƗqidƯ, and Ibn ‘Abd al-ণ akam. Space does not permit an analysis of the myriad scholarly debates on these texts regarding issues of transmission, authorship, and dating, but we can safely say that all of them, with -al- ShƗm attributed to al-W ƗqidƯ,215 were com ۊthe likely exception of the Futnj posed within the rst two centuries of ‘Abbasid rule.216 The Romans in these texts exhibit the same style of imperial hubris as do the Sasanians in the reports of their meetings with the Arabs. They are portrayed The climax: Islamic victory 187 casually dismissing the Arabs for their desert lifestyle and habits, while showing an inordinate regard for luxury, pomp, and royal class markers, as well as over- condence in their superior numbers and equipment. For example, psd.-al- WƗqidƯ writes that the Roman emperor Heraclius (Hiraql) asked his nobles why the “naked,” “hungry” Arabs, who were the “weakest of creation,” and lacked numbers and good weapons, defeated his army time and again, despite their being better armed, more numerous, and feared by other nations.217 This author also reports of a contrived dialogue between Heraclius and a Muslim Arab in which the ruler asks why ‘Umar dresses in rags (marqa‘a) when he has captured so many spoils. The Muslim answers that it is due to the caliph’s concern with the hereafter and because of his fear of God. Similarly to al-Hurmuz Ɨn’s asking about ‘Umar’s guards and chamberlains, so too does Heraclius ask this man about his carpet, throne, court dress, and treasure. The Arab responds to each of his questions with a pithy repartee attesting to the caliph’s piety, indicating that he lacks these decadent symbols of royalty.218 Yet on the whole, Heraclius comes off in a much more positive light in Islamic memory than his Persian counterpart Yazdagird. For example, in al- AzdƯ’s account, Heraclius acknowledges the explanation of the fall of ণimৢ given to him by an old man at his court. The Arabs are victorious because they are superior to the Romans in terms of their morality, piety, and comportment, whereas the Roman soldiers act wickedly, drink wine, and fornicate.219 Al- AzdƯ also reports that when Heraclius was informed of his army’s defeat at the Battle of Yarmnjk, he told those present in the assembly that he knew that his army would be defeated. When they asked him how he could have known, he replied:

It is because they [the Arabs] love death as much as you love life, and they are desirous of the hereafter as much as you are desirous for this world. They will therefore continue to be victorious if they act like this.220

Moreover, Heraclius is often portrayed having an uncanny knowledge of and appreciation for Islam. Al- KnjfƯ recounts how Heraclius shows a Muslim delega- tion a box containing an image of all of the prophets including Muতammad. In one version, he tells the Muslims that if it were not for his desire to stay in the comfort of his kingdom, then he would surely join them!221 Similarly, al-K njfƯ has Heraclius expressing praise for the Arab Prophet’s religion, and predicting the Arabs’ victory.222 Likewise, in Ibn IsতƗq’s traditions of Heraclius’ reception of the Prophet’s summons to Islam letter preserved in al-৫ abarƯ’s chronicle, the emperor is made to recognize the legitimacy of the Prophet, and express his desire to convert to Islam. He is prevented from doing so only by the fear of his commanders’ disapproval.223 It is likely that this benevolent portrayal of Hera- clius was intended as a propagandistic tool in a climate of sustained political and ideological competition between the Muslim caliphate and the Christian Byzan- tine empire. For by portraying a Christian emperor as receptive to the Prophet and his mission, the historians were ultimately lending validation to the belief that Islam represented the fulllment of the Abrahamic tradition.224 188 The climax: Islamic victory Heraclius therefore, just like Rustam, is remembered as a possessor of wisdom and, in some cases, divine foresight. Yet he simply cannot bring himself to act upon what he knows is the right course of action. So too does Heraclius’ general engaged against the Muslims, the Armenian ruler MƗhƗn (in variants: BƗhƗn/VƗhƗn), recognize that the Muslims’ moral superiority over his troops will ultimately lead to their victory. For example, just as Rustam is reported to have done when learning of the misconduct of his soldiers, so too is MƗhƗn said to have rebuked the patricians in his army when learning of the atrocities they committed against the local population of Syria, swearing that they will be defeated. He asks them how could they not be afraid that God will take venge- ance upon them for their actions, by taking away what he has given them, and giving it to another people who “command what is good and forbid what is dis- approved by God.”225 Furthermore, just like Rustam, MƗhƗn is also reported to have had a dream predicting his defeat at the hands of the Arabs.226 In their dealings with the Romans, the Arabs in these accounts are portrayed with similar tropes of Bedouin toughness and Muslim virtue as they are in reports of their meetings with the Sasanians. In this regard, their displaying con- tempt for the Romans’ imperial pomp is a pervasive theme. For example, psd.- al- WƗqidƯ writes that during KhƗlid b. al-Wal Ưd’s visit to MƗhƗn’s camp, the Arab commander ignored the Romans’ protocol by cutting through the ranks of patricians and chamberlains before entering MƗhƗn’s tent, which was decorated with cushions, brocades, and rugs. The Muslims rejected the chairs they were offered, removed the rugs, and sat on the ground in protest of such splendor.227 Psd.-al- WƗqidƯ relates a similar case in which the conqueror of Egypt, ‘Amr b. al-‘Ɩৢ rejected Heraclius’ son, Filas৬Ưn’s (Constantine) offer to sit with him on his throne, telling him “AllƗh’s carpet is purer than your carpet because AllƗh ta‘ƗlƗ made the ground a carpet and permitted us to sit on it as equals.”228 So too does al- AzdƯ have the scholar Mu‘Ɨdh b. al-Jabal refuse the offer of pillows and cushions, and choose to sit on the ground during his meeting with the Romans.229 Al- ৫abarƯ, on Sayf ’s authority, relates that Abnj ‘Ubayda and his delegation refused to enter Heraclius’ silken tents. The Muslims explained to him that they considered silk to be unlawful, which afrmed Heraclius’ view that the Arabs’ victory in Syria was inevitable.230 Finally, the chroniclers embellished images of Christian warriors taking their luxuries into battle with them. For instance, psd.- al- WƗqidƯ relates an account of a large- bodied patrician wearing golden armor, and a golden bejeweled cross around his neck, calling out to the Muslims for a man to meet him in single combat. His challenge was met by a convert named RnjmƗs.231 Elsewhere, this author describes the gilded, bejeweled silver cross with which the Romans marched into battle, a clear sign of their decadence.232 The Muslims describing the egalitarianism of their society to the Romans is tradition. Thus, in the aforementioned ۊlikewise a commonplace motif in the futnj account of Mu‘Ɨdh’s meeting, the latter proclaims to the Romans that the ruler of the Muslims is just like any member of the community. He must act accord- ing to the prescripts of the Qur’an and sunna, is subject to the same rules as his fellow Muslims, and does not treat them with disdain.233 Similarly, in al- AzdƯ’s The climax: Islamic victory 189 account of KhƗlid’s visit to the Roman camp, the Christians were unable to tell whether KhƗlid or his companion was the commander.234 In the course of their discussion, KhƗlid proclaimed to the Armenian king that rank in Islam is only determined by piety, and that the Muslims would depose their amƯr if he started to act like a king.235 Regarding portrayals of the Arabs’ superior morality and piety, a distinctive narratives on the Western front is the rhetorical comparison ۊfeature in the futnj of the Muslims with monks and the monastic lifestyle. For example, it is commonplace in these accounts for Christians who observe the Muslims outside of battle fastidiously praying in their camps, to describe them with variations of the formula, “monks by night and warriors by day.”236 Statements such as this serve to propagandize the Muslim warriors as heroes embodying the asceticism and desire for martyrdom idealized in the late antique Christian tradition.237 In this context, the caliph ‘Umar serves not only as the model Arab chieftain in Islamic memory, but also as the archetypical ascetic holy man. While we have seen that ‘Umar is perennially portrayed as a simple-living Arab sheikh in Islamic historiography, it is especially in accounts of his dealings with Christians that the caliph is shown going out of his way to deny himself creature comforts and resisting temptation in the path of God. For example, psd.-al- WƗqidƯ relates that when ‘Umar visited Syria, after stipulating that the poor Muslim households be provided with sufcient food, he was offered white linen robes and a horse. However, after riding the horse for a short distance with one of the robes draped over his shoulder, he returned both the horse and the robes, and put his own patchy woolen garment back on, claiming that his acceptance of such gifts was a mistake of vanity to which he had almost succumbed.238 Following this account, psd.-al- WƗqidƯ relates another anecdote in which an ornately dressed, beautiful woman attempts to seduce ‘Umar. It is clear that the woman in this account is a metaphor for earthly power and pleasures. She proclaims to him that no govern- ment can succeed without decadent clothing and food, and oppression of its sub- jects. Yet, ‘Umar successfully resists this woman’s temptation, telling her that he is not one of her men. Psd.-al- WƗqidƯ likens this encounter to the failed seduc- tion of Ynjsuf, as is described in the Snjrat Ynjsuf.239 Indeed, this anecdote is clearly reective of a classic Christian temptation motif, such as is found in the Life of Saint Anthony, in which the hermit resists the seduction of the devil in the form of a beautiful woman.240 On the whole, Islamic historical portrayals of encounters between Muslims and Romans are thus thematically similar to depictions of Muslim- Sasanian meetings. At the same time, however, it must be pointed out that there is nothing -literature as ideologically rich, in terms of tropes compar ۊin this Western futnj ing ‘ajamƯ decadence and hubris versus the Arabs’ moral superiority and stead- fastness, to compare with al-৫ abarƯ’s exhaustively long and repetitive accounts of the al- QƗdisiyya embassies. The meager attention paid by al-৫ abarƯ and other annalistic historians to the conquests of the Roman lands in comparison to the conquests in Iraq and Iran is a clear reection of where their main interests lay. In this regard, while al-৫ abarƯ’s history of pre- Islamic Iraq is based primarily on 190 The climax: Islamic victory -al ۊthe authority of Ibn al-Kalb Ư, it is telling that he does not utilize the Futnj ShƗm which this author was known to have composed when he arrived at the conquest period.241 The product that emerges from al-৫ abarƯ’s combination of literature, the KhudƗynƗma tradition, and his material on ۊthe Sasanian futnj Arabian antiquities derived largely from Ibn al- KalbƯ and Ibn IsতƗq, is a centuries-long narrative of conquest linking the histories of the Arabs and Iranians.

Conclusion In this chapter, I have analyzed early Islamic historical portrayals of encounters between the Arabs and Iranians in the context of the rise of the early umma, and the Muslim conquest of the Sasanians’ territories and liquidation of their state. I have shown that embassies and other encounters between Muslims and Iranians serve in our narrative as a nal, climactic inter- civilizational dialogue before the change of dawla. To this end, such meetings are heavily embellished with the same formulaic motif of contrast analyzed throughout this study, in which the Iranians are always portrayed donning their nest regalia and showing disdain to the Arabs and their culture. The Arabs, on the other hand, are depicted wearing humble clothing and bearing ramshackle weapons, violating the Irani- ans’ protocol, and eloquently responding to the Iranians’ taunts while nobly describing their religion and mission. Furthermore, I have shown that the accounts of the battles themselves are reminiscent of the ayyƗm al-‘Arab tradi- tion, highlighting the heroism of the Arabs and tribes in the face of a numerically superior and better armed Sasanian army. Finally, I analyzed similar tropes con- tained within accounts of the Muslims’ encounters with the Romans from a com- parative perspective to achieve a better understanding of a historiographical genre that has been largely minimized in the Islamic annalistic tradition. With the fall of al- MadƗ’in and the murder of Yazdagird, our story draws to a close. In the following chapter, I will briey describe the processes which were set in motion during the Islamic conquest that would be signicant in the next phase of Islamic salvation history. I will also discuss this study’s implication for further research in the eld of Islamic historical memory and identity studies.

Notes 1 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2195. This is the advice of the Muslim commander al- MuthannƗ b. ণƗritha to his men prior to the Battle of the Bridge. See p. 167. ,YƗqnjt, Mu‘jam al-buld Ɨn, I, 347–348; al-৫ abarƯ, I ;78–81 ,ۊAl- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 2 1560–1561, 1600; Morony, “Economic Impact,” 27; Abu Ezzah, “Political Situ- ation,” 56–57; Bosworth, “Iran and the Arabs before Islam,” 608–609. al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1601; Wilkinson, “The Julanda of ;76–77 ,ۊAl- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 3 Oman,” 99. 4 See Abu Ezzah’s (“Political Situation,” 56) citation of SarতƗn b. Sa‘Ưd’s Kashf al- ghumma al- jƗmi‘ li- akhbƗr al- umma. The climax: Islamic victory 191 5 Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 309) wrote that AnnjshirvƗn imposed the condition that the Iranians in Yemen were free to marry the native women, but that Yemeni men were forbidden to marry Iranian women. See the following note on the descendants of Vahriz’s original force. Al-৫ abarƯ (I, 985–986) made mention of a similar case of such mixing occurring in Baতrayn. According to this report, the troops which Khusraw I had ordered to construct the al-Mushaqqar castle assimilated with the local population by learning Arabic and joining the ‘Abd al-Qays tribe. 6 Al- AghƗnƯ, IX, 199; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 83. On the abnƗ’ of Yemen, see further Crone, “The ‘AbbƗsid AbnƗ’ and SƗsƗnid Cavalrymen,” 2; Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 265–266; Bosworth, “AbnƗ’,” EIr, 1983. 7 See p. 146. 8 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1851–1867, 1983–2000; Bal‘amƯ, III, 205–206, 230–237, 313–331; al- ,Miskawayh, I, 174–179; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, II, 336–341 ;105–107 ,ۊBalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 374–378; Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 271–272; Bosworth, “AbnƗ’.” 9 On SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ, see Savant, “Muতammad’s Persian Companion, SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ,” in New Muslims, 61–89; Choksy, Conict and Cooperation, 49–50, 70–72, 130; Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 213, 276, 306, 309; Louis Massignon, “SalmƗn PƗk and the Spiritual Beginnings of Iranian Islam,” in Testimonies and Reections: Essays of Louis Massignon. ed. Herbert Mason, 93–110 (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1989); “Nouvelles recherchés sur SalmƗn PƗk,” in A Locust’s Leg: Studies in Honour of S. H. Taqizadeh, eds. W. B. Henning and E. Yarshater, 178–181 (London: Percy Lund, Humphries and Co., 1962); D. M. Donaldson, “Salman the Persian,” The Muslim World 19 (1929): 338–352; Josef Horovitz, “SalmƗn al-F Ɨrisi,” Der Islam 12 (1922): 178–183. 10 Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 53–67; Abnj Bakr Aতmad b. ‘AlƯ al- KhƗ৬ib al- BaghdƗdƯ, Ta’rƯkh BaghdƗd (22 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1997), I, 175–182; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, I, 241–249 et passim; al- BalƗdhurƯ, AnsƗb al- ashrƗf (13 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al- Fikr, N.D.), II, 128–132; Abnj’l-Shaykh al- AnৢƗrƯ, ܑabaqƗt al- -bahƗn wa’l-wƗridƯn ‘alayhƗ (4 vols.) (Beirut: Mu’assasat al܈addithƯn bi- Iۊmu RisƗla, 1987–1992), I, 203–236; Abnj Nu‘aym, Dhikr akhbƗr I܈bahƗn, I, 48–57; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 468. 11 On the Battle of the Trench (Yawm al- Khandaq), see al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1463–1485; Bal‘amƯ, III, 60–68; Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 59; al- KhƗ৬ib al- BaghdƗdƯ, I, 175; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 50–51; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, al- TanbƯh, 331; Ella Landau-Tasseron, “Features of the Pre- Conquest Muslim Armies in the Time of Muhammad,” in The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East. Vol. 3: States, Resources and Armies, 315–316. 12 Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 62–67; al-Kh Ɨ৬ib al- BaghdƗdƯ, I, 175; al- ৫abarƯ. I, 2225–2226; Abnj Nu‘aym, I, 48. 13 SalmƗn’s tomb, located near the ruins of Ctesiphon is a pilgrimage site (mashhad) for Shi‘ites returning from Karbala. See al-Kh Ɨ৬ib al- BaghdƗdƯ, I, 175; Massignon, “SalmƗn PƗk and the Spiritual Beginnings of Iranian Islam,” 103–105; Donaldson, “Salman the Persian,” 351; Choksy, Conict and Cooperation, 71. 14 Horowitz, “SalmƗn al-F Ɨrisi.” 15 Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 59–61; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, III, 175; al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1467; Abnj Nu‘aym, I, 54; Muতammad b. ‘Umar al- WƗqidƯ, KitƗb al- MaghƗzƯ (3 vols.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966), II, 446–447. 16 Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 62. 17 Dhikr akhbƗr I܈bahƗn, I, 48–49. 18 Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 64. 19 Ibid., 63–64. For his austere asceticism, SalmƗn is seen as a founding gure in the Su tradition. He was included as one of the ahl al- ܈uffa (people of the veranda), a group venerated by the Sus which consisted of pious mendicants permitted by the Prophet to inhabit the mosque in Medina. For details on the association of SalmƗn with Susm, see S. H. Nasr, “ৡnjsm,” CHI 4: 446–447; Massignon, 192 The climax: Islamic victory “SalmƗn PƗk and the Spiritual Beginnings of Iranian Islam,” 105–106; Donaldson, “Salman the Persian,” 351. 20 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2753. 21 “Muতammad’s Persian Companion, SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ.” 22 Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 60–61. 23 Al- JƗতi਌ has his anonymous KhurƗsƗnƯ claim that, “We are the men of the moat and the sons of the men of the moat,” ManƗqib al-Turk, I, 16. This is a reference to SalmƗn’s suggestion to the Prophet to build a protective trench around Medina during the Battle of the Trench. On this connection, see further, Lassner, The Shaping of ‘AbbƗsid Rule, 126–127. 24 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2441. Abnj’l-Shaykh (I, 235–236) and Abnj Nu‘aym (I, 55) provide a similar account of SalmƗn’s speech to his fellow Persians, but don’t specify the location. 25 Al- WƗqidƯ, KitƗb al- MaghƗzƯ, II, 449–450. For variants, see Ibn Sa‘d, IV (1), 59–60; Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, III, 171; al-৫ abarƯ, I, 1467–1470. adƯth, see also Abnj Nu‘aym, I, 56; Goldziher, Muslimۊ l al-‘Arab, 93. On thisڲFa 26 Studies (2006), 142. 27 See pp. 34, 36, 70. .l al-‘Arab, 103–104ڲFa 28 adƯth, the Prophet’s words are directed at al- a‘Ɨjim andۊ In other variants of this 29 “some of these men.” Furthermore, Savant’s analysis of the exegetical discussion -of Muslim b. al- ণajjƗj al- QushayrƯ effect ۊƯۊa܇ adƯth in theۊ revolving around this ively shows that there is no evidence denitively showing that Muslim legal scholars thought that the Prophet had the Persians as a group in mind. See Savant, New Muslims, 70–71. .bahƗn, I, 203܈addithƯn bi- IۊabaqƗt al- muܑ 30 31 In this particular tradition, RƗmhurmuz is mentioned as SalmƗn’s place of origin, with IৢfahƗn being the hometown of his father. See Abnj’l-Shaykh, I, 218–220; Abnj Nu‘aym, I, 50–51; Savant, New Muslims, 78 32 See this chapter, note 29. 33 Abnj Nu‘aym, I, 1–9. 34 Ibid., 48. .bahƗn, I, 55܈bahƗn, I, 229; Dhikr akhbƗr I܈addithƯn bi- IۊabaqƗt al- muܑ 35 36 Savant, New Muslims, 88. 37 On the scholarly discussion over Sayf ’s reliability, see Marianne Engle Cameron, “Sayf at First: the Transmission of Sayf ibn ‘Umar in al-৫ abarƯ and Ibn ‘AsƗkir,” in Ibn ‘AsƗkir and Early Islamic History, ed. James E. Lindsay, 62–77 (Princeton: Darwin, 2001); Khalid Blankinship trans., The History of al- ܑabarƯ: The Challenge to the Empires 11 (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993), XV–XXX; Ella Landau-Tasseron, “Sayf ibn ‘Umar in Medieval and Modern Scholarship,” Der Islam 67, 1 (1990): 1–26; Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 63–64; Donner, “Sayf ibn ‘Umar,” EI, 2nd ed.; J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur ältesten Geschichte des Islams, 3–7. 38 Arabic Historical Thought, 63. 39 Landau- Tasseron, “Sayf ibn ‘Umar in Medieval and Modern Scholarship,” 23. u‘afƗ wa’l-matrnjkƯn (3ڲ-addithƯn wa’lۊƯn min al- muۊMuতammad b. ণibbƗn, Majrnj 40 vols.) (Aleppo: DƗr al- Wa‘y, 1982), I, 345–346; Muতammad b. Aতmad al- DhahabƯ, MƯzƗn al- i‘tidƗl fƯ naqd al- rijƗl (4 vols.) (Cairo: ‘IsƗ al- BƗbƯ al- ণalabƯ, 1963), II, 256; Aতmad b. ‘AlƯ b. ণajar al-‘AsqalƗnƯ, TahdhƯb al- tadhƯb (12 vols.) (Hyderbad: DƗ’ira al- Ma‘Ɨrif al- Ni਌Ɨmiyya, 1907–1909), IV, 296; Blankinship, The History of al-ܑ abarƯ 11: XV. 41 Donner, Narratives, 257, n. 8; Blankinship, The History of al-ܑ abarƯ 11: XXVII–XXVIII. 42 On this idea, see Blankinship, The History of al- ܑabarƯ 11: XXVIII. The climax: Islamic victory 193 43 Boaz Shoshan, The Arabic Historical Tradition and the Early Islamic Conquests: Folklore, Tribal Lore, Holy War (London: Routledge, 2016). 44 Donner, Early Islamic Conquests, 173–174, 177; ‘Abd al- ণusayn ZarrƯnknjb, “The Arab Conquest of Iran and its Aftermath,” CHI 4: 4–5; Elias Shoufani, Al- Riddah and the Muslim Conquest of Arabia (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973), 147. 45 The sources on these campaigns include al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2016–2077; al- BalƗdhurƯ, ,Bal‘amƯ, III, 319–347; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 116–118; and al- Ya‘qnjbƯ ;241–250 ,ۊFutnj Ta’rƯkh, II, 131. 46 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2023. The same strategy is reported to have been used by the Persians at the Battle of NihƗwand as well. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2598, 2603; al- BalƗdhurƯ, .303 ,ۊFutnj 47 Bal‘amƯ, III, 324–325. 48 Blankinship, The History of al-ܑ abarƯ 11: 13, n. 86. ‘Amr b. al-‘Ɩৢ’ expedition against a coalition of enemy tribes in Syria that were allegedly planning to attack Medina took place in 629. See Ibn HishƗm, al- SƯra, IV, 269–272; al- WƗqidƯ, al-MaghƗzƯ, II, 769–774; Ibn Sa‘d, II, 131. 49 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2025–2026. Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ (II, 143), Ibn al- KalbƯ (Ёamharat an- nasab, II, 577) and Ibn Sa‘d (III, 98–99) afrm that this general conquered al- Ubulla during ‘Umar’s caliphate. However, Bal‘amƯ (III, 325) insists that KhƗlid was the one who led this campaign. 50 Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 2258, 2294, 2337, 2356, 2598, 2603–2604, 2632), on Sayf, reports the use of this tactic at both the Battles of al-Q Ɨdisiyya and NihƗwand. It appears to be a literary construct that possibly grew out of the Arabs’ observations of the burden- some armor worn by the Persian cavalry, or that the lines of armored cavalry resembled chains from the perspective of the Arabs. See Lawrence Conrad, “The Chain Topos,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 31 (2006): 1–33; ZarrƯnknjb, “The Arab Conquest of Iran and its Aftermath,” 7. 51 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2023–2024. 52 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2024–2025; Bal‘amƯ, III, 324–325. 53 Murtaঌa ‘AskarƯ argued that both al- Qa‘qƗ‘ and his brother ‘Ɩৢim never existed. See qîq fî mâ katabahu al- mu’arrikhûnۊth wa- taۊұAbd Allâh ibn SabaҲ al- madkhal: ba wa’l-mustashriqûn ұan Ibn Saba’ wa- qi܈a܈ Islâmiyya ukhrâ mundhu al-qarn al-thânî at al- NajƗত, 1962), 161–181. See alsoދatta’l-yawm, 2nd ed. (Cairo: Ma৬bnjۊ al- Hijrî Conrad, “The Chain Topos,” 14; and Blankinship, The History of al- ܑabarƯ 11: XXII, XXVI, 8, n. 56. Blankinship also argues that the unusual (though not unheard of ) name al- Qa‘qƗ‘ ts Sayf ’s general tendency to invent silly names, like “Spring Herbage,” “Son of Rain,” “Son of Snow” etc., for TamƯmƯ individuals who likewise never existed. 54 Landau-Tasseron, “Sayf ibn ‘Umar in Medieval and Modern Scholarship,” 19f.; and KitƗb al- Jamal wa- masƯr ‘Ɩ’isha ۊCrone, “Review of KitƗb al- Ridda wa’l-futnj wa-‘AlƯ, by Sayf b. ‘Umar, ed. QƗsim al- SƗmarrƗ’Ư,” JRAS 6, 2 (1996): 240. On ‘Ɩৢim, see KhalƯfa b. KhayyƗ৬ (on Ibn IsতƗq), KitƗb al- Ta’rƯkh (Najaf: Ma৬baދat al- ƖdƗb, 1967), 92–93. On Suwayd, see al-৫ abarƯ, II, 1402. Blankinship, however, thinks it’s possible that the character of al-Qa‘q Ɨ‘ may have grown out of the histor- ical ‘Ɩsim b. ‘Amr. See The History of al- ܑabarƯ 11: 8, n. 56. -Ɨn musalsal (miniseries) devoted to al-Qa‘q Ɨ‘, alڲConsider the 32 episode Rama 55 Qa‘qƗ‘ ibn ‘Amr al-Tam ƯmƯ (Syrian Art Production International, directed by al- MuthannƗ ৡubত, 2010). 56 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2024–2025; Bal‘amƯ, III, 324–325. 57 Several sources credit the legendary ruler JamshƯd with establishing among his sub- jects a four- tier social hierarchy. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 180; FirdawsƯ, I, 34–35; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 12; Ibn al-Ath Ưr, I, 64. In his alleged testament to his son ShƗpnjr (‘Ahd ArdashƯr), ArdashƯr I is likewise reported to have established a quadripartite division 194 The climax: Islamic victory of society. See al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, I, 168; Miskawayh, I, 101f.; KitƗb al- TƗj, 53. ArdashƯr’s four- fold division of society is also mentioned in the TansarnƗma, which purports to be a letter from the chief hƝrbadh (custodian of the sacred re) Tansar to Gushnasp, king of ৫abaristƗn, urging him to accept the sovereignty of ArdashƯr I. It is found in the TƗrƯkh-i ܑabaristƗn, whose author bases his rendition of Tansar’s letter on an Arabic translation of Ibn al- Muqaffa‘. See Ibn IsfandiyƗr, TƗrƯkh-i ܑabaristƗn (Tehran: Muতammad Rama਌ƗnƯ, 1955), 19–20; Boyce, The Letter of Tansar, 37–38. On the Muslim reception of Iranian quadripartite theories of society, see further Louise Marlow, “The Muslim Reception of Iranian Models,” in Hier- archy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 66–90; Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 16–17ff.; Morony, Iraq, 182–183; Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 98–99. For his part, Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn is remembered in Islamic historiography as having striven to maintain the separation between the nobles and commoners. For example, al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ (608) wrote that he prevented plebian children from becoming educated, since, he argued, it would lead to their desire to obtain high positions and contaminate the noble class. According to FirdawsƯ (VI, 415–417), he refused the request of a shoemaker to permit his son to enter the scribal class, even though the latter had promised the king a great sum of money to equip his army against the Romans. 58 Ibn IsfandiyƗr, citing the TansarnƗma, wrote that the nobles were distinguished from the commoners by their ne clothes, as well as by their other posessions, like slaves, horses, gardens, etc. See Ibn IsfandiyƗr, TƗrƯkh-i ܑabaristƗn, 23–24; Boyce, The Letter of Tansar, 44. Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, I, 190) stated that the dihqƗns were arranged into ve classes, each of which had their own form of dress. Finally, Muতammad b. ‘Abdus al- JahshiyƗrƯ wrote that the professional classes in service at the Sasanian court were distinguished by their attire. See KitƗb al- WuzarƗҲ wa’l- kuttƗb (Cairo: Muৢ৬afá al- BƗbƯ al- ণalabƯ, 1938), 3. See the following note on the qalansuwa as an indication of rank. 59 Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 2340) claimed that the Iranian general Rustam likewise possessed a qalansuwa worth 100,000 dirhams, thus indicating his high rank. Elsewhere, (I, 2037) he stated that the Sasanian governor of al-ণƯ ra, ƖzƗdhbih, reached the status of half-noble, and this was indicated by his qalansuwa which was worth 50,000 dirhams. Finally, al-৫ abarƯ (I, 604) and Miskawayh (I, 72) demonstrate that the qalansuwa was an ancient tradition in Iran by relating how the KayƗnian king Kay KƗvus granting the hero Rustam a golden- laced qalansuwa, among other precious gifts. 60 A revealing example of this cultural transmission can be seen in the realm of archi- tecture. Contained within a semi- domed apse of the Umayyad castle, Khirbat al- mafjar is a stone object hanging from a chain and fashioned in the shape of a qalansuwa. This was clearly an emulation of the Sasanian custom of the kings to suspend their crown by a chain to support its weight. See Richard Ettinghausen, From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic World, 23–32. 61 Al- BayƗn, III, 117–118. The qalansuwa came in short and tall varieties. See Reuben Levy, “Notes on Costume from Arabic Sources,” JRAS 67, 2 (1935): 324–325. 62 This connection is evidenced by the placement of al- JƗতi਌’s aforementioned ridicule of the qalƗnƯs in his text, just a few pages after his criticism of the old Persian kings for their use of royal effects to command the obedience of their subjects (on which, see p. 108 of this study). 63 Levy, “Notes on Costume from Arabic Sources,” 324. Levy portrays all these items as ‘Abbasid period innovations, though as Ettinghausen points out, the remains at Khirbat al- mafjar evidence the use of the tall qalansuwa in the Umayyad period as well. See this chapter, note 60. The climax: Islamic victory 195 64 Donner (Early Islamic Conquests, 179) identies Ullays as the old trading empo- rium of Vologesias, located just south of al-ণƯ ra on the west bank of the Euphrates. -al ;242 ,ۊAl- ৫abarƯ, I, 2031–2037; Bal‘amƯ, III, 328–330; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 65 Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 131. 66 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2035. ,Bal‘amƯ ;250–251 ,109 ,ۊAl- ৫abarƯ, I, 2089, 2115, 2160–2162; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 67 III, 347–349, 366–369; al- DƯnawarƯ, 117–118; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 133, 142; Miskawayh, I, 190–192, 195–198; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 468. 68 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2170. 69 Ibid., 2170–2171. 70 Ibid., 2173. 71 The Arabic Historical Tradition and the Early Islamic Conquests, 5–6, and on this particular anecdote, 62. 72 Iraq, 209–210. 73 In Bal‘amƯ’s (III, 373) condensed account of this event, the dihqƗns gifted the Arabs with local pastries and large birds, which the Arabs hadn’t seen before and were afraid to eat, as they mistook them for ostriches! For his part, Miskawayh (I, 200) does not mention the dihqƗns’ offering, but does write that after the victory, the Arabs seized as booty types of foods which they had never seen before. 74 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2031. On the Syrian front, Qays b. Hubayra voiced opposition to retreat, since it meant giving up the water, fruits, and luxuries that the Muslims had acquired, and returning to eating lizards and wearing coarse woolen cloaks! See al-Sh Ɨm (Irbid: Mu’assasat ۊMuতammad b. ‘Abd AllƗh al- AzdƯ al-Ba ৢrƯ, Futnj ণamƗda lil-Dir ƗsƗt al-J Ɨmi‘iyya wa’l-Nashr wa’l-TawzƯ‘, 2005), 269; Aতmad b. ,vols. plus index) (Beirut: DƗr al- AঌwƗ’, 1991), I 8) ۊA‘tham al- KnjfƯ, KitƗb al- Futnj ,al- ShƗm (2 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya ۊPsd.-al- WƗqidƯ, Futnj ;180 1997), I, 152; Shoshan, The Arabic Historical Tradition, 173–174. 75 On the representation of ‘Umar as the quintessential Arab, see Tayeb El-Hibri, Parable and Politics, 84–88. 76 Al- JƗতi਌, al- BukhalƗ’, 157. The context of this exchange was a gathering in which al- Aৢma‘Ư asked those around him what types of food they were accustomed to eating. He criticized each one with the same “Ibn al- Kha৬৬Ɨb would have ” refrain cited above. 77 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2483. 78 On Islamic accounts of ‘Umar’s visit to Jerusalem, see Shoshan, “ ‘Umar in Jerusa- lem,” in The Arabic Historical Tradition, 110–133. -Bal‘amƯ, III, 374–381; al ;251–252 ,ۊAl- ৫abarƯ, I, 2174–2184; al- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 79 DƯnawarƯ, 118–119; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 468–469; Miskawayh, I, 201–203; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 142; Abnj Ynjsuf Ya‘qnjb b. IbrƗhƯm, KitƗb al- KharƗj, trans. E. Fagnan as Le livre de l’impôt foncier (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1921), 45; ZarrƯnknjb, “The Arab Conquest of Iran,” 8–9; Donner, Early Islamic Conquests, 192. -Bal‘amƯ, III, 381–383; al ;253–254 ,ۊAl- ৫abarƯ, I, 2184–2201; al- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 80 DƯnawarƯ, 119–121; Miskawayh, I, 203–207; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 470–471; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 143; Abnj Ynjsuf, 45. 81 Early Islamic Conquests, 198–200. 82 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2195. 83 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2163, 2209–2010; Bal‘amƯ, III, 384; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 143; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 737–738; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 125. 84 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1044–1045. 85 In this regard, al-৫ abarƯ (I, 2244), in his account of the Muslim delegation to the Sasanian court (see below), relates that after nding out that Yazdagird had signaled his kingdom’s doom by dumping soil on the Arabs to take back to their camp, his general Rustam proclaimed in frustration to one of his messengers, “These people [al- qawm, i.e., the Muslims] have taken away your land without doubt. For kingship 196 The climax: Islamic victory (al- mulk) is not a matter for the son of a woman cupper! They have taken away the keys to our land!” 86 Al- ৫abarƯ writes that ‘Umar’s decision to remain in Medina, and not lead the cam- paign himself, was due to his advisors’ counsel that his presence on the battleed would only embolden the enemy. Thus the caliph was conveniently absolved of cowardice. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2213–2220ff. On ‘Umar’s commissioning of Sa‘d, see also al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 143; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 738; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 125. 87 On the events surrounding the Battle of al- QƗdisiyya, see Lewental, QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now, 9–11; L. Veccia- Vaglieri, “Al-঱Ɨ disiyya,” EI, 2nd ed.; S. M. Yusuf, “The Battle of Al- QƗdisiyya,” Islamic Culture 19 (1945): 1–28; Donner, Early Islamic Conquests, 202–209; ZarrƯnknjb, “The Arab Invasion of Iran,” 10–13. 88 Al- SƗbƗ৬ was one of the seven cities of al- MadƗ’in. It was located on the west bank of the Tigris. See Yohanan Friedmann trans., The History of al-ܑ abarƯ: The Battle of al- QƗdisiyyah and the Conquest of Syria and Palestine 12 (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992), 29–30, n. 122; Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 388. 89 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2236. 90 Ibid., 2236–2237. .259–260 ,ۊSee below p. 178 and al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 91 92 Al- BayƗn, III, 16–18. In this vein, al- JƗতi਌ (ibid., 15) also quotes the poem of an alleged Shu‘njbƯ who makes fun of the Arabs’ tactic of throwing stones in battle. The Shu‘njbƯs’ points about military technology can be classied under their broader dis- course of the ingenuity and knowledge of the ‘ajamƯ peoples. According to Ibn ‘Abd al- Rabbih, the Shu‘njbƯs boasted of their peoples’ inventions, like embroidery, chess, and their accomplishments in the eld of architecture. The Shu‘njbƯs also bragged about the ‘ajamƯs’ contribution to elds of knowledge, like philosophy and astrol- ogy. They claim that the Arabs on the other hand, left no trace in these regards. See al-‘Iqd, III, 392–393. .l al-‘Arab, 83–84ڲFa 93 94 Al- BayƗn, III, 23–24. 95 ‘Uynjn, I, 132. Ibn Qutayba species that ‘Umar either said ‘alaykum bil- ma‘adiyya or more generically, ‘arabiyya. 96 See p. 108. On the subject of the possession of thrones among the Iranian nobility, al-৫ abarƯ (I, 604, 864), Miskawayh (I, 72), and ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ (45) describe examples of rulers of Iran honoring nobles by granting them silver thrones. Al- BƯrnjnƯ (al-Ɩ thƗr al- bƗqiyya, 312) relates an anecdote in which as a reward for his helping to save people from being consumed by the evil ঋaততƗk’s serpents, AfrƯdnjn granted ArmƗ‘Ưl a golden throne and made him governor of the region of DumbƗwand. The Sasanian general Rustam’s throne was likewise made of gold (see below). 97 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2237; Abnj Ynjsuf, 46–47. 98 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2235–2236, 2238–2243. Condensed versions are found in Bal‘amƯ, III, who ,257 ,ۊal- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 143–144; and al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj ;386–388 speaks of a delegation comprising ‘Amr b. Ma‘dƯ Karib and al-Ash‘ath b. Qays. 99 El-Hibri, Parable and Politics, 99; Lewental, QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now, 88. 100 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2235. 101 Ibid., I, 2238–2239; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 143. 102 The Early Arabic Historical Tradition, 89. 103 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2239–2240; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 143. 104 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2240–2241. 105 Ibid., I, 2241–2243. 106 Ibid., 2242–2243. 107 Ibid., 2243; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 143–144. Bal‘amƯ (III, 388) wrote that Yazda- gird loaded a sack of soil onto the heads of each of the fourteen ambassadors, which The climax: Islamic victory 197 they packed onto their camels and carried back to the Muslim camp. In al- the ambassadors met with Rustam prior to going ,(257 ,ۊBalƗdhurƯ’s account (Futnj to Yazdagird’s court. According to his rendition of these events, Rustam dumped soil on the Muslims and ‘Amr b. Ma‘dƯ Karib (instead of ‘Ɩৢim), collected it in his cloak. He explained to his comrades that his reason for doing so was that he saw it as a good omen indicating that the Persians’ lands will soon be theirs. (Al-৫ abarƯ (I, 2238) also mentions that the embassy rst passed by Rustam before heading to meet Yazdagird, but does not provide details). 108 See pp. 133–139, 141–142. 109 Bal‘amƯ, III, 387. 110 Yazdagird took the Arabic name of each item as a bad omen, deriving meaning in Persian from its Arabic sound. To take one example, he derived from ni‘Ɨl (sandals), the Persian word nƗla, meaning, “sigh.” He then proclaimed that this must mean, “Sigh, sigh for our land!” See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2239; Bal‘amƯ, III, 387. 111 ‘Uynjn, I, 132. The izƗr and the ridƗ’ are wrap garments without seams. The izƗr is a waist wrapper and the ridƗ’ is a loose outer cloak. 112 Al- BayƗn, III, 106. Based on his illustrated manuscript containing portraits of the Sasanian kings, ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ (49) writes that they all wore red shoes. On red footwear as a mark of royalty for both the Sasanians and Byzantines, see Canepa, The Two Eyes of the Earth, 201–204. 113 This is Friedmann’s translation of Ibn Juzayy’s KitƗb al- Khayl, in The History of al- ܑabarƯ 12: 34, n. 141. 114 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2243–2244; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 144. 115 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2247–2249; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 738–739; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 144. 116 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2251; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 144. 117 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2250, 2256–2257, 2286; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 741. 118 Al- ৫abarƯ, I 2236–2237. 119 Ibid., 2254. 120 Ibid., 2255–2256. 121 On this interpretation of Rustam’s rebuke, see El- Hibri, Parable and Politics, 97–98. 122 FirdawsƯ, VII, 350–357. Al- ৫abarƯ (I, 2251) reports Rustam sending two letters to his brother. In this second letter, he prognosticates the fall of the Sasanian empire based on the zodiac. A similar letter to this one is contained in al- Ya‘qnjbƯ’s account (Ta’rƯkh, II, 144) as well. 123 FirdawsƯ, VII, 363–366. .al- DƯnawarƯ, 127 ;255 ,ۊAl- ৫abarƯ, I, 2265–2267, 2351; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 124 125 See p. 1. 126 On Ibn IsতƗq’s tradition, see al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2348, 2350–2353. 127 Ibid., 2267–2269. In this meeting, Zuhra gives Rustam a “rise of Islam in a nutshell” speech, and responds to Rustam’s questions about Islam. Rustam shows himself to be most impressed by each of Zuhra’s answers. -FirdawsƯ, VII, 361–363; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 739–740; al ;256–257 ,ۊAl- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 128 DƯnawarƯ, 127–128; NihƗyat, 253–255; Abnj Ynjsuf, 46. Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ (Ta’rƯkh, II, 144) mentions that after al- Nu‘mƗn’s embassy to Yazdagird, Sa‘d dispatched nine men (including al- MughƯra b. Shu‘ba) who met with Rustam one by one, but does not provide much detail on these encounters. Al-৫ abarƯ (I, 2269–2270), on the authority of Sayf, states that Sa‘d had originally planned to send these same nine men with one minor difference in his list. (Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ writes that one of them was named Shu‘ba b. Murra, whereas al- ৫abarƯ says it was Ma‘bad b. Murra). However, Rib‘Ư advised Sa‘d to send him alone, so as not to show the Persians undue honor. For his part, Miskawayh (I, 210) states that Sa‘d sent al- MughƯra along with other clever Arabs, but glosses over these embassies in a few lines, indicating to the reader that he does not wish to dwell on these accounts. 198 The climax: Islamic victory 129 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2269–2270. 130 Ibid., 2270. 131 Ibid., 2270–2271. The Zoroastrian text, the DƝnkard, similarly describes the Arab conquerors as “those with disheveled hair.” See Robert Hoyland, Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writ- ings on Early Islam (Princeton: Darwin, 1997), 323–324, 326–327. 132 On the fourfold division of the Sasanian state, see p. 103. 133 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2270–2271. 134 Al- BayƗn, III, 12. See Goldziher, Muslim Studies (2006), 156–157 for an elucidation of this custom. 135 Al- BayƗn, III, 30, 89. 136 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2271. 137 Ibid., 2273. 138 Ibid., 2271. 139 Ibid., 2272. 140 Ibid., 2273. 141 Ibid., 2272–2273. 142 Ibid., 2273. 143 Ibid., 2274. 144 Ibid., 2274, 2351. .257 ,ۊAl- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 145 146 FirdawsƯ, VII, 255. 147 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2274. According to al- ৫abarƯ, al-Mugh Ưra tried to sit with Rustam on his throne during their rst encounter as well (see pp. 168–169 above). Rustam does not appear to recognize al- MughƯra from their rst encounter in this account. See .Abnj Ynjsuf, 46 ;256 ,ۊalso Al-BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 148 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2274–2275. 149 Abnj Ynjsuf, 46. 150 See Chapter 2, note 40 on Verse 49:13. -al-Bukh ƗrƯ (9 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr ܑawq al ۊƯۊa܇ ,Muতammad b. IsmƗ‘Ưl al- BukhƗrƯ 151 Muslim (5 ۊƯۊa܇ ;(NajƗh, 2001), Vol. 8, Book 78: Chapter 114, p. 45 (#6205, 6206 vols.) (Beirut: DƗr IতyƗ’ al- TurƗth al-‘ArabƯ, 1954), Vol. 3, Book 18: Chapter 4, p. 1688 (#2143). I obtained both sources from www.shamela.ws. 152 KitƗb al- I‘lƗm bi-man Ɨqib al- IslƗm (Cairo: DƗr al- KƗtib al-ދArabƯ lil- ৫ibƗދa wa’l- Nashr, 1967), 159–160, 174–176; Marlow, Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought, 88–89. 153 C. E. S. Headlam, trans., The Persians of Aeschylus (London: George Bell & Sons, 1909), 8. 154 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2275. 155 See p. 72 on this theme. 156 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2275–2276. Similar speeches attributed to Rustam are also contained in ,al- DƯnawarƯ, 127; Abnj Ynjsuf, 46; and FirdawsƯ, VII ;257 ,ۊal- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 362–363. .al- DƯnawarƯ, 128 ;257 ,ۊAl- ৫abarƯ, I, 2277–2278, 2353; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 157 158 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2286. 159 Ibid., 2316. 160 Ibid., 2310. 161 Ibid., 2328–2229. 162 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2306, 2309; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 472. In the Arab tradition, Bahman Ɨjib (possessor of the eyebrow) because he tied together hisۉ-is known as Dhnj’l .251 ,ۊeyebrows. See al- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 163 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2311. 164 Ibid., 2296–2297. 165 Ibid., 2263. On ৫ulayতa’s raid, see 2260–2265. The climax: Islamic victory 199 166 Ibid., 2296. 167 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2287–2288, 2351; al-Ya‘q njbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 144; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 740–741; .al- DƯnawarƯ, 128 ;258 ,ۊal- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 168 Al- Khidr (The Green One) is most generally associated with the Snjrat al- Kahf (Sura of the Cave, 18:65), in which he serves as a spiritual guide to Musa (Moses). See Irfan Omar, “Khidr in the Islamic Tradition,” The Muslim World 83, 3–4 (1993): 279–294. 169 On the Abnj Miতjan saga, see al- AghƗnƯ, X, 7–9; al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2288, 2312–2316, ,al- DƯnawarƯ, 128–129; al- Mas‘njdƯ ;258 ,ۊal- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj ;2354–2355 ,2351 Murnjj, II, 473–374. .255–256 ,ۊFutnj 170 171 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2353–2354. 172 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 472. On the use of war elephants as a possible literary topos in the conquest accounts, see Lewental, QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now, 197–208. 173 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2297–2298, 2341–2342; 2356; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 130. 174 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2287; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 144; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 475. On the Sasanian custom of the commander to go into battle atop a dais, see Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, 211. 175 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2336–2338, 2340, 2343–2344, 2356–2357. Al-Ya‘q njbƯ (Ta’rƯkh, II, 145) names HilƗl b. ‘Ullafa and Zuhayr b. ‘Abd al- Shams as possible candidates for killing Rustam. Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 476) states that most people think it was HilƗl b. ‘Alqama, but others believe that it was an AsadƯ, because of ‘Amr b. ShƗs’ poem attributing the killing of Rustam to his fellow tribesmen of the Bannj Asad. Interestingly, this poem is contained in al-৫ abarƯ’s account (I, 2301–2303), on .states it was either Zuhayr b (259 ,ۊSayf ’s authority, as well. Al-Bal ƗdhurƯ (Futnj ‘Abd al- Shams, his brother ‘AwwƗm, or HilƗl b. ‘Ullafa. 176 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2336–2337; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 145. In an alternate account of Rustam’s killing provided by Sayf, HilƗl killed Rustam after the latter shot an arrow at him. See al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2343–2344, 2356–2357. 177 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2340. 178 Ibid., 2337. On the banner of KƗbƯ, see Chapter 2, note 100. 179 Murnjj, II, 476. 180 On this connection, see Friedmann, The History of al- ܑabarƯ 12: XVII; Lewental, QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now, 105–110. ,ۊOn the conquest of al- MadƗ’in, see al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2431–2456; al- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 181 263–264; al- DƯnawarƯ, 133–134; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 145; Avinoam Shalem, “The Fall of al- MadƗ’in: Some Literary References Concerning Sasanian Spoils of War in Medieval Islamic Treasures,” Iran 32 (1994): 77–81; Donner, The Early Islamic Conquests, 209–210; ZarrƯnknjb, “The Arab Conquest of Iran,” 11–13. 182 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2441, 2443. 183 Ibid., 2434, 2450–2451. .al- DƯnawarƯ, 134 ;264 ,ۊIbid., 2444–2456; al- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 184 185 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2453–2554. See also pp. 132–133 on this carpet. 186 Ibid., 2455. -al- DƯnawarƯ, 134–135; al ;264–265 ,ۊIbid., 2456–2474; al- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 187 Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 741. 188 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 741. ,ۊOn the Battle of NihƗwand, see al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2596–2633; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 189 302–306; al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 478–479; al- DƯnawarƯ, 141–145; al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Ta’rƯkh, II, 156. Albrecht Noth has demonstrated the thematic similarities between the narratives of the engagements at IৢfahƗn (whose analysis I have omitted) and NihƗwand. See “IৢfahƗn-NihƗwand: A Source- Critical Study in Early Islamic His- toriography,” in The Expansion of the Early Islamic State, ed. Fred Donner, 241–262 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008). 200 The climax: Islamic victory .al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 478 ;303 ,ۊAl- ৫abarƯ, I, 2601–2603; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 190 191 This report mentioning BundƗr is a non- Sayf tradition which al-৫ abarƯ claims origi- nates with Jubayr b. ণayya. Elsewhere however, al-৫ abarƯ (I, 2596) provides a report stemming from Ibn IsতƗq naming the magnate of NihƗwand only by his epithet, Dhnj’l- -Ɨjib. In al-Bal ƗdhurƯ’s (303) account, the Iranian commander is MardƗnshƗh Dhnj’lۉ .(Ɨjib, and similarly he is is MardƗnshƗh b. Hurmuz according to al- DƯnawƗrƯ (141ۉ .(ayn (Possessor of the WingsۊYet, al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 478) calls him Dhnj’l-JanƗ It is likely that this epithet comes from the discussion between ‘Umar and the Iranian convert al-Hurmuz Ɨn as to whether, in the Muslims’ invasion of Iran, they should attack the wings (ƖdharbayjƗn and FƗrs) rst, or go straight for the head (IৢfahƗn). On .303 ,ۊthis discussion, see also al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2600–2601; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj 192 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2601–2602. Al-Mas‘ njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 478) similarly states that when ayn sought the advice of his men, they opted to show the Arab emissaryۊDhnj’l-JanƗ a splendid ceremonial. 193 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2602; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 478. 194 Al- Mas‘njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 478. .303 ,ۊFutnj 195 196 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2602. 197 Ibid., 2602. Al- Mas‘njdƯ (Murnjj, II, 478) provides a truncated version of this speech. 198 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2602–2603; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 478. 199 On al-Hurmuz Ɨn and his meeting with the caliph, see al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2557–2560; Ibn Sa‘d, V, 64–65; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 139–140; El- Hibri, Parable and Politics, 100–105; Shoshan, Arabic Historical Tradition, 134–135; Veccia- Vaglieri, “Al- HurmuzƗn,” EI, 2nd ed. 200 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2557; al-D ƯnawarƯ, 139–140; Ibn Sa‘d, V, 64. 201 Ibn Sa‘d, V, 64. 202 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2557–2558. In Ibn Sa‘d’s account (V, 64), al-Hurmuz Ɨn is told that “AllƗh is his guard.” 203 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2558–2560; Ibn Sa‘d, V, 65. 204 El- Hibri, Parable and Politics, 108–114. On Abnj Lu’lu’a’s murder of ‘Umar, see al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2722–2728; al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Murnjj, II, 477; al-‘Iqd, IV, 261–262. 205 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2690–2692. 206 Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 742. .315 ,ۊFutnj 207 208 Ibid., 315–316; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, 745. .al-৫ abarƯ, I, 2879; al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ, 745–746 ;315 ,ۊAl- BalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 209 210 On the murder of Yazdagird, see al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2690, 2872–2884; al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, -al-D ƯnawarƯ, 148; El ;316 ,ۊFirdawsƯ, VII, 392–398; al-Bal ƗdhurƯ, Futnj ;746–748 Hibri, Parable and Politics, 120–121. 211 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2280. Similarly, it was the smell of Rustam’s perfumed clothes that gave him away to HilƗl. See above, p. 181. 212 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2872 (in this version it is a stonecutter who kills Yazdagird), 2882; al- .al- DƯnawarƯ, 148 ;316 ,ۊBalƗdhurƯ, Futnj 213 On this connection, see El-Hibri, Parable and Politics, 121. 214 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2874–2875, 2881. -al ۊShoshan (Arabic Historical Tradition, 13) convincingly shows that the Futnj 215 ShƗm is a product of the Crusades era that was attributed to al-W ƗqidƯ. 216 For analyses of this genre, see Shoshan, Arabic Historical Tradition, 7–15; Jens works by al-Azd Ư, Ibn-ۊThe futnj .ۊScheiner, “Writing the History of the futnj Aޏtham, and al- WƗqidƯ,” in The Lineaments of Islam. Studies in Honor of Fred McGraw Donner, ed. Paul Cobb, 151–176 (Leiden: Brill, 2012); Suleiman Mourad, ”,al- ShƗm ۊOn Early Islamic Historiography: Abnj IsmƗ‘Ưl al- AzdƯ and His Futnj“ JAOS 120 (2000): 577–593; Donner, Narratives, 175, 224–228, 245–248, 258–260, et passim; Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 65–68. The climax: Islamic victory 201 al- ShƗm, I, 148–149. The trope of the “naked” Arabs likewise appears in the ۊFutnj 217 ShƗhnƗma (VII, 356), where Rustam refers to the Arabs as such in his letter to his brother. It also occurs in the chronicles of al- TawতƯdƯ and Ammianus, as cited above on pp. 33, 134–135. .al- ShƗm, I, 289 ۊFutnj 218 .al- ShƗm, 245–246 ۊAl- AzdƯ, Futnj 219 220 Ibid., 343–344. .I, 103–105 ,ۊAl- KnjfƯ, KitƗb al- Futnj 221 222 Ibid., 83. 223 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1565–1567. Ibn IsতƗq provides various accounts describing Heraclius having obtained in some way, such as through a dream or from a book, knowledge of the Prophet’s mission and the forthcoming Islamic conquest of Syria. See al- ৫abarƯ, I, 1560–1565, 1567–1568. 224 On the positive portrayal of Heraclius in Islamic historiography, and his recognition of Islam’s legitimacy, see Conrad, “Heraclius in Early Islamic Kerygma”; El Cheikh, Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs, 39–54. I, 188) relates a harrowing tale in which a patrician pillaged ,ۊPsd.-al- WƗqidƯ (Futnj 225 a man’s livestock, raped his wife, killed his son, and cut off this man’s hand. The man went to complain to MƗhƗn, and when MƗhƗn asked him to point out the guilty party, the patricians became angry and killed the accuser right in front of MƗhƗn. On .274–276 ,ۊthis account, see also al-Azd Ư, Futnj .313 ,ۊAl- AzdƯ, Futnj 226 I, 175. FirdawsƯ (VII, 359) similarly wrote that al- MughƯra sat ,ۊPsd- al-WƗqidƯ, Futnj 227 on the ground in the presence of Rustam. 228 Ibid., II, 18. .203–205 ,ۊAl- AzdƯ, Futnj 229 230 Al- ৫abarƯ, I, 2103. .I, 182–183 ,ۊPsd.-al- WƗqidƯ, Futnj 231 232 Ibid., 182. .207–208 ,ۊAl- AzdƯ, Futnj 233 234 Ibid., 300. 235 Ibid., 303. On KhƗlid’s statement of the equality of Muslims to MƗhƗn, see also .I, 189 ,ۊI, 175; al- KnjfƯ, al- Futnj ,ۊpsd.-al- WƗqidƯ, Futnj ,I, 119–120; ৫abarƯ, I (Ibn IsতƗq), 2126 ,ۊal- KnjfƯ, al- Futnj ;183 ,ۊAl- AzdƯ, Futnj 236 (Sayf ), 2395. 237 On the application of Christian idioms and ideals in the depiction of early Muslim warriors, see Sizgorich, “Narrative and Community in Islamic Late Antiquity”; “ ‘Do Prophets Come with a Sword?’ Conquest, Empire, and Historical Narrative in the Early Islamic World.” .I, 230–231 ,ۊFutnj 238 239 Ibid., 231. On this account’s reference to the temptation of Ynjsuf, see Shoshan, Arabic Historical Tradition, 115; Sulayman al- Kindi trans., The Islâmic Conquest of Syria: A Translation of Futûܵushâm (London: Ta-Ha Publishers, 2005), 397. 240 St. Athanasius: The Life of St. Anthony, trans. Robert Meyer (New York: Paulist Press, 1978; repr. of 1950 ed.), 5. The conception of women as a source of tempta- tion and instrument used by the devil to lead souls astray was a commonplace idea expressed by the Church fathers, particularly Tertullian. See Leila Ahmed, Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate (New Haven: Yale Uni- versity Press, 1992), 35–36. al- ShƗm served as an ۊJens Scheiner makes a strong case that Ibn al-Kalb Ư’s Futnj 241 chronicles to the ۊintermediary source, linking psd.-al- WƗqidƯ and al-K njfƯ’s Futnj The .ۊal- ShƗm of Abnj Mikhnaf (d. 774). See “Writing the History of the futnj ۊFutnj .tham, and al-W ƗqidƯ,” 165ffޏworks by al- AzdƯ, Ibn A-ۊfutnj 8 Conclusion

In this study, I have investigated how early Muslim authors living between the years 750 and 1050 streamed together the histories of the Arab and Iranian peoples into a four- centuries-long didactic drama culminating with the Islamic conquest of the Sasanian empire. I prefaced my examination of the “Islamic con- quest narrative” with a contextual analysis of how the re-centering of identity and politics within the Muslim oikumené towards the Iranian orbit occurring over the course of these three centuries would have, in turn, shaped how Muslim akhbƗrƯs and writers of adab thought about Middle Eastern history from ArdashƯr I’s founding of the Sasanian dynasty to the murder of the Yazdagird III. I argued that akhbƗrƯs writing in the cosmopolitan environment of early ‘Abbasid Iraq sought to project the existence of an Arab “civilization” in their writings of the JƗhiliyya era, and to justify the rise of the Arabs over a rival civi- lization possessing a longstanding imperial heritage. The authors of the post- imperial period, on the other hand, who were mostly of Iranian descent, combined this material of the early ‘Abbasid akhbƗrƯs, in which the Sasanians appear as foils, with what they inherited (either directly or through translation) of the KhudƗynƗma, the Sasanians’ own royal chronicle tradition. Their purpose for so doing, I argued, was to internalize the lessons warning against the Sasani- ans’ oppression and hubris conveyed by previous Muslim historians for a native Iranian audience, while creating the conditions for the following sequence in their texts witnessing the triumphal re- emergence of Iran in an Islamic context. In order to convey their intended lessons, historians made use of stock imagery and rhetorical themes contained within an “Arab versus ‘ajam” literary discourse contrasting stereotypical notions of Persian grandeur and hierarchy with concep- tualizations of the Arabs’ Bedouin existence circulated among intellectuals living in urban environments that, were needless to say, far removed from desert nomads. In Chapter 3, we saw how our historical drama was set in motion by the northward migration of South Arabian tribes and the rise of the Sasanian dynasty occurring around the same time. In this context, I analyzed accounts of the rst Sasanian rulers’ dealings with the Arabs of Iraq and the Arabian peninsula, focusing particularly on ShƗpnjr II’s punitive expedition against the Arabs, which clearly illustrate the power imbalance between the two peoples. However, Conclusion 203 al- Mas‘njdƯ’s and al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ’s reports of ShƗpnjr’s meeting with an Arab sheikh(a) provide us with clues to the upcoming Arab dawla that was still centuries off. In the next chapter, I examined Islamic historical memory of the Sasanians’ relationship with the early Lakhmids, focusing on the historical portrayal of the Sasanian hero BahrƗm V Gnjr who, growing up around Arabs in the Lakhmid capital of al-ণƯ ra, serves as a prototype of the accommodation that was possible between Arab and Iranian culture. This chapter also analyzed the depiction of the Sasanians’ rst major defeat at the hands of the HayƗܒila as a thematic fore- runner to the Islamic conquest of the Sasanian empire. In Chapter 5, I assessed the incorporation of the ণimyarite tradition into the Islamic conquest narrative by analyzing the portrayal of the ণimyarite embassies to Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn in search of aid to expel the Abyssinians, and the sub- sequent joint ণimyarite-Sasanian annexation of Yemen. It is at this point in our narrative that the history of the Prophet ofcially appears on the horizon of Islamic collective memory, as can be seen with the apocalyptic accounts of the omens occurring at Khusraw’s court coinciding with the Prophet’s birth. Chapter 6 assessed the depiction of the troubled reign of Khusraw II ParvƯz, the last effective ruler of the Sasanian empire, who serves in Islamic memory as the model of stereotypical Iranian monarchical decadence, avarice, and oppres- sion. To this end, I examined the portrayal of ParvƯz’s dealings with the Lakhmids of al-ণƯ ra in the context of the degeneration of his character. I demon- strated how, through a complicated chain of events stemming to the murder of the poet of al-ণƯ ra, ‘AdƯ b. Zayd, ParvƯz is remembered as being responsible for setting in motion processes that would eventually lead to his own kingdom’s demise by deposing the last Lakhmid king, al-Nu‘m Ɨn III, enabling the con- ditions for the Sasanians’ drastic defeat at the Battle of Dhnj QƗr. ParvƯz’s reign also runs parallel with the SƯra of the Prophet and the solidication of the umma in the Islamic historical tradition. In this context, reports of the portentous events occurring toward the end of his life as well as his ignominious fall and execution herald the liquidation of the Sasanian state occurring only a few years after his death. Finally, in Chapter 7, I analyzed the portrayal of the epic confrontation between the Sasanian empire, whose ruling house was in disarray, and the young, vibrant Muslim state, unied under the shaykhayn (Abnj Bakr and ‘Umar). As the climax of our narrative, we saw how the accounts of the myriad embassies shared between the two sides and battles between them embellished the contrast between the Arabs’ toughness and piety despite their lack of resources, versus the Persians’ attachment to luxuries and arrogance, a telltale motif drawn from the “Arab versus ‘ajam” discourse. The anticipated conclusion of our narrative, the fall of al- MadƗ’in and subsequent murder of Yazdagird, which appears to the reader as long in the making, signals the turn to a new era. The Arab dawla had arrived. 204 Conclusion Anticipating the revival of Iran After Yazdagird’s murder, the annalistic chronicles focus on the Muslims’ con- tinued advance into the heart of Iran and Central Asia. However, at this point, we are no longer dealing with the formation of an empire, but rather the expan- sion of a global enterprise on multiple fronts, as well as the crystallization of imperial institutions. Likewise, the reemergence of Iran becomes a prominent theme in the universal chronographies. Even before al- MadƗ’in’s fall, we are provided with clues pointing in this direction, such as in the ShƗhnƗma, where Rustam, as a result of his observation of the stars, vaguely predicts an Iranian revival in 400 years time.1 From the early days of Islamic history, one encoun- ters in our texts Iranians who joined the Muslim- Arabs and were instrumental in helping the umma build an empire. For example, in the knowledge he imparted to his fellow Muslims by advising them to dig a trench around their perimeter while besieged by the enemy, SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ anticipated the Iranian soldiers who would later join the umma and lend their military and technical skills in the service of the young caliphate. In this regard, our chronicles describe the aid that amrƗ’ and the AsƗwira, Iranian military unitsۉ the Muslims received from the that fought alongside the Muslims, converted to Islam and joined the TamƯm, and settled in the garrison and conquered cities in Iraq and Iran. Both groups quickly became immersed in the politics of the early caliphate.2 Similarly, we encountered in the previous chapter the Iranian magnate al- HurmuzƗn, who con- verted to Islam and became an advisor to ‘Umar. However, he was never trusted by ‘Umar, and was ultimately killed by the deceased caliph’s son, ‘Ubayd AllƗh, who accused him of being complicit in his father’s murder. ‘Ubayd AllƗh is also reported to have killed Abnj Lu’lu’a’s daughter, and to have threatened to kill all the Iranians in Medina. Upon becoming caliph, ‘UthmƗn, wishing to avoid a civil war, made ‘Ubayd AllƗh pay the blood money for al- HurmuzƗn, rather than execute him for these murders.3 The simmering factionalism in the umma between the An܈Ɨr and the non- Arab Muslims, versus the old Meccan elite came to a head during the caliphate of ‘AlƯ. ‘AlƯ had the support of the non-Arabs, and was a close friend of SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ. Al- BalƗdhurƯ reports that ‘AlƯ vowed to kill ‘Ubayd AllƗh if given the chance, in retribution for the latter’s murder of the Iranian al-Hurmuz Ɨn, whom he called a “Muslim without blame.”4 (In a way, his threat was carried out, since ‘Ubayd AllƗh was killed at the Battle of ৡiffƯn).5 Indeed, out of the historical relationship between Iranian converts and the ahl al- bayt evolved an indelible “Persian Shi‘i historical consciousness”6 within later Shi‘ite communities. For example, much has been written on how SalmƗn al- FƗrisƯ serves as a site of memory for successive generations of Iranian Shi‘ites, connecting them with ‘AlƯ, the wa܈iyy (legatee) of the Prophet.7 A similar example can be seen with the account of a Sasanian princess who is reported to have married ‘AlƯ’s son al- ণusayn, and bore him his son ‘AlƯ, known as Zayn al-‘ƖbidƯn. There are a number of variants on this tradition, and some early sources merely state that Zayn al-‘ƖbidƯn’s mother was a female slave (umm walad), without indicating Conclusion 205 that she was Yazdagird’s daughter. However, this narrative of the fourth imam’s mother crystallized into the legendary biography of ShahrbƗnnj, who is a holy gure venerated in the Shi‘ite tradition.8 What is intriguing about this “Sasanian princess” narrative is that it only rst appears in sources dating from the late ninth century, the same time witnessing the crystallization of a fully self- condent Muslim- Iranian identity. It thus served as a way for later Iranian Muslims to “Persianize” their belief system by injecting Sasanian royal DNA into the bloodline of the venerable imƗms.

Potential paths for future research In this book, I have attempted to show what a memory- narrative-based approach to early Islamic historiography can reveal about identity construction in the early Islamic world. To this end, there are several other potential avenues for one to explore in analyzing Islamic memory of the pre- Islamic period and Sasanian Iran in particular. Indeed, while scholars often allude to the ways in which the Sasa- nian and Islamic periods serve as “double- mirrors” for each other in Islamic his- toriography, there are no concerted studies focusing on this subject. From a literary perspective, for example, we see similarities between portrayals of the two eras in terms of narrative plots, representations of individuals (such as rulers, ministers, religious and military heroes, heretics, rebels, etc.) and processes, and a host of other themes which provide the reader of annalistic chronicles and adab the distinct sense of déjà vu when reading about the Sasanians and Islamic history in tandem. Likewise, a more comprehensive analysis of memory of the Sasanian era will reveal how numerous other discourses with respect to govern- ment organization and political theory, as well as the role of religion in state and society, were projected by Muslim authors in their depiction of the Sasanian period. Finally, an even broader study that makes use of a wider source base, including medieval Persian and Turkish historiography, to compare Islamic memory of the pre- Islamic Arabs, Iranians, and Turkic peoples through the lens of later discourses, would provide a signicant contribution for understanding how Muslim peoples living in diverse contexts conceptualized the time before Islam, and to what ends.

Notes 1 FirdawsƯ, VII, 351. 2 On both groups, see Zakeri, SƗsƗnid Soldiers, 114–120, et passim; Morony, Iraq, 197–198. 3 On this affair, see El-Hibri, Parable and Politics, 110–111, 138–141. 4 Al- BalƗdhurƯ, AnsƗb al- ashrƗf, VI, 130; El- Hibri, Parable and Politics, 139. 5 Al- BalƗdhurƯ, AnsƗb al- ashrƗf, III, 101ff. 6 I borrow this term from Savant, New Muslims, 107. 7 See Chapter 7, note 9, for scholarship on SalmƗn al-F ƗrisƯ. 8 Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ (Ta’rƯkh, II, 303), who is possibly the earliest extant source on this narrative, writes that ‘Umar granted two of Yazdagird’s daughters to al-ণ usayn, and one of them, named GhazƗla, bore him ‘AlƯ. Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ also mentions an alternate 206 Conclusion tradition stating that ‘AlƯ b. al-ণ usayn’s mother was a captive taken from Kabul. A contemporaneous account, provided by Abnj Ja‘far al- ৡaffƗr al- QummƯ (d. 902–903), speaks of a captive daughter of Yazdagird brought to Medina whose face radiated light. She married al-ণ usayn, and the Muslims named her ShahrbƗnawayh (a variant of ,ammad (Qum: ৫ƗlƯ‘at al- NnjrۊƗ’il Ɩl MuڲƗ’ir al- darajƗt fƯ fa܈ShahrbƗnnj). See Ba 2005), 439. For a full treatment of this narrative and its respective sources, see Savant, New Muslims, 102–108; Mohammad Ali Amir- Moezzi, “ShahrbƗnnj, Dame du pays d’Iran et Mère des Imams: Entre l’Iran préislamique et le Shiisme Imamite,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 27 (2002): 497–549. I am also grateful to Dr. Michael Bates, who graciously provided me draft notes of his forthcoming paper analyzing the Sasanian princess narrative as well as evidence on PƝrǀz III, the son of Yazdagird who served the Chinese empire, and attempted to establish his rule in SƯstƗn. Bibliography

‘AbbƗs, IতsƗn, Ed. ‘Ahd ArdashƯr. Beirut: DƗr al-ৡƗ dir, 1967. Abbott, H. Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 2008. Abu Deeb, K. “Abu’l-Faraj EৢfahƗnƯ.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1983. Abu Deeb, K. “Literary Criticism.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles-Lettres . Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 339–387. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Abu Ezzah, Abdullah. “The Political Situation in Eastern Arabia at the Advent of Islam.” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 9 (1979): 53–64. Abnj Nu‘aym al- IৢbahƗnƯ. KitƗb Dhikr akhbƗr I܈bahƗn. 2 Vols. Leiden: Brill, 1931–1934. bahƗn wa’l-wƗridƯn ‘alayhƗ. 4܈addithƯn bi- IۊAbnj’l-Shaykh al- AnৢƗrƯ. ܑabaqƗt al- mu Vols. Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Ris Ɨla, 1987–1992. Abnj Ynjsuf Ya‘qnjb b. IbrƗhƯm. KitƗb al-Khar Ɨj. Translated by E. Fagnan as Le livre de l’impôt foncier. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1921. Aeschylus. The Persians of Aeschylus. Translated by C. E. S. Headlam. London: George Bell & Sons, 1909. Afsaruddin, Asma. The First Muslims: History and Memory. Oxford: Oneworld, 2008. Agha, Saleh Said. “Abnj Muslim’s Conquest of Khurasan: Preliminaries and Strategy in a Confusing Passage of the AkhbƗr Al-Dawlah Al-‘AbbƗsiyyah.” Journal of the Ameri- can Oriental Society 120, 3 (2000): 333–347. Agha, Saleh Said. The Revolution which Toppled the Umayyads: Neither Arab nor ‘AbbƗsid. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Agius, Dionisius. “The Shu‘njbiyya Movement and its Literary Manifestation.” Islamic Quarterly 24, 3–4 (1980): 76–88. Aতmad, S. Maqbnjl and RaতmƗn, A. Eds. Al- Mas‘njdƯ Millenary Commemoration Volume. Calcutta: The Indian Society for the History of Science and The Institute of Islamic Studies, Aligarh Muslim University, 1960. Ahmed, Leila. Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992. Akar, Sylvia, Hämeen-Anttila, Jaakko and Nokso- Koivisto, Inka, Eds. Travelling through Time: Essays in Honour of Kaj Öhrnberg. Helsinki: Finnish Oriental Society, 2013. Al- Askar, Abdullah. Al- Yamama in the Early Islamic Era. Reading: Ithaca Press in association with King Abdul Aziz Foundation for Research and Archives, 2002. Allen, Graham, Intertextuality: The New Critical Idiom. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2011. Alram, M. “Early Sasanian Coinage.” In The Idea of Iran, Vol. 3: The Sasanian Era. Edited by V. Sarkhosh Curtis and S. Stewart, 17–30. London: I. B. Tauris, 2008. 208 Bibliography Altheim, F. and Stiehl, R. Eds. Ein asiatischer Staat: Feudalismus unter den Sasaniden und ihren Nachbarn. Wiesbaden: Limes-Verlag, 1954. Altheim, F. and Stiehl, R. Eds. Die Araber in der alten Welt. 5 Vols. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1964–1969. Amanat, Abbas and Vejdani, Farzin. Iran Facing Others: Identity Boundaries in a Histor- ical Perspective. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2012. .Ɨ al- IslƗm. 3 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al-Kit Ɨb al-‘ArabƯ, 1933–1936ۊuڱ .AmƯn, Aতmad Amir- Moezzi, Mohammad Ali. “ShahrbƗnnj, Dame du pays d’Iran et Mère des Imams: Entre l’Iran préislamique et le Shiisme Imamite.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 27 (2002): 497–549. Al-‘ƖmirƯ, Abnj’l-ণasƗn. KitƗb al-I‘l Ɨm bi-man Ɨqib al- IslƗm. Cairo: DƗr al- KƗtib al-ދArabƯ lil-৫ ibƗދa wa’l-Nashr, 1967. Ammianus Marcellinus. Roman History of Ammianus Marcellinus during the Reigns of the Emperors Constantius, Julian, Jovianus, Valentinian, and Valens. Translated by C. D. Yonge. London: George Bell & Sons, 1902. Amoretti, B. S. “Sects and Heresies.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 481–519. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Antrim, Zayde. Routes and Realms: The Power of Place in the Early Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Arazi, Albert. “Abnj NuwƗs fut- il Šu‘njbite?” Arabica 26 (1979): 1–61. Arjomand, Said Amir. “Perso-Indian Statecraft, Greek Political Science and the Muslim Idea of Government.” International Sociology 16, 3 (2001): 455–473. Arkoun, M. “Miskawayh.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Asatrian, Mushegh. “Iranian Elements in Arabic: The State of Research.” Iran and the Caucasus 10, 1 (2006): 87–106. Asha, Raham, Ed. The Book of the Acts of ArdašƯr Son of PƗbag: KƗrnƗmag Ư Ardašir Ư PƗbagƗn: Text, Transcription and Translation. Vincennes: IrmƗn, 1999. Ashcroft, Bill, Grifths, Gareth, and Tifn, Helen, Eds. The Post- Colonial Studies Reader. London: Routledge, 1995. Ashcroft, Bill, Grifths, Gareth, and Tifn, Helen, Eds. Post- Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge, 2000. Ashtiany, Julia, Johnstone, T. M., Latham, J. D., Serjeant, R. B., and Smith, G. R., Eds. Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1990. qîq fî mâ katabahuۊth wa- taۊAl-‘AskarƯ, Murtaঌa. ұAbd Allâh ibn SabaҲ al- madkhal: ba al- mu’arrikhûn wa’l-mustashriqûn ұan Ibn Saba’ wa- qi܈a܈ Islâmiyya ukhrâ mundhu .at al-NajƗত, 1962ދatta’l-yawm. 2nd ed. Cairo: Ma৬bnjۊ al- qarn al- thânî al- Hijrî Assmann, Jan. “Collective Memory and Cultural Identity.” New German Critique 65 (1995): 125–133. Assmann, Jan. “Mnemohistory and the Construction of Egypt.” In Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism, 1–22. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997. Atallah, W. “al-Kalb Ư.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Athanasius. St. Athanasius: The Life of St. Anthony. Translated by Robert Meyer. 1950. Repr. New York: Paulist Press, 1978. al- ShƗm. Irbid: Mu’assasat ণamƗda ۊAl- AzdƯ al- BaৢrƯ, Muতammad b. ‘Abd AllƗh. Futnj lil- DirƗsƗt al-J Ɨmi‘iyya wa’l-Nashr wa’l-TawzƯ‘, 2005. Bibliography 209 Al- Azmeh, Aziz. The Emergence of Islam in Late Antiquity: Allah and His People. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Badawi, M. M. “ ‘Abbasid Poetry and its Antecedents.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 146–166. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Bafaqih, M. A. “New Light on the Yazanite Dynasty.” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 9 (1979): 5–9. .al- buldƗn. Leiden: Brill, 1866 ۊAl- BalƗdhurƯ, Aতmad b. YaতyƗ. Futnj al- buldƗn. Tranlated by Philip Hitti as The Origins ۊAl- BalƗdhurƯ, Aতmad b. YaতyƗ. Futnj of the Islamic State. Beirut: Khayats, 1966. Al- BalƗdhurƯ, Aতmad b. YaতyƗ. AnsƗb al- ashrƗf. 13 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al-Fikr, N.D. Bal‘amƯ, Abnj ‘AlƯ Muতammad. TƗrƯkhnƗma. Translated by H. Zotenberg as Chronique de Abou Djafar-Mo‘hammed- Ben-Djarir- Ben-Yezid Tabari, Traduite sur la Version Persane d’Abou-Bal‘ami ‘Ali Mo‘hammed Bel‘ami. 4 Vols. 1867–1874. Repr. Paris: G. P. Maisonneuve: Editions Besson et Chantemerle, 1958. Barthold, Wilhelm. “Das persische Šu‘njbƯja und die moderne Wissenschaft.” Zeitschrift für Assyriologie 26 (1912): 249–266. Bashear, Suliman. Arabs and Others in Early Islam. Princeton: Darwin, 1998. BayhaqƯ, Abnj’l-FaĪl. TƗrƯkh-i BayhaqƯ. Mashhad: Mashhad University Press, 1971. Becker, Carl L. The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth- Century Philosophers. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003. Beeston, A. F. L., Ed. Selections from the Poetry of BaššƗr. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1977. Beeston, A. F. L. “NemƗra and Faw.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 42, 1 (1979): 1–6. Beeston, A. F. L. “Al-Hamadh ƗnƯ, Al- ণarƯrƯ and the MaqƗmƗt Genre.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 125–135. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1990. Beeston, A. F. L. and ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. “Al-ণƯ ra.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Beeston, A. F. L., Johnstone, T. M., Serjeant, R. B., and Smith, G. R., Eds. Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Bellamy, James. “Imru’ ul- Qays I and Imru’ ul- Qays II.” Journal of Semitic Studies 32, 2 (1987): 315–318. Bennison, Amira K. The Great Caliphs: The Golden Age of the ‘Abbasid Empire. London: I. B. Tauris, 2009. Bergé, M. “Abnj ণayyƗn al- TawতƯdƯ.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 112–124. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Berkey, Jonathan. The Formation of Islam: Religion and Society in the Near East, 600–1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Bernards, M., Ed. ‘Abbasid Studies, Vol. 4, Occasional Papers of the School of ‘Abbasid Studies. Exeter: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2013. Bernards, M. and Nawas, J., Eds. Patronate and Patronage in Early and Classical Islam. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Bernheimer, Teresa and Silverstein, Adam, Eds. Late Antiquity: Eastern Perspectives. Exeter: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2012. 210 Bibliography Bichler, Reinhold and Rollinger, Robert. “Greece V–VI: The Image of Persia and Per- sians in Greek Literature.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 2012 Bier, Lionel. “The Sasanian Palaces and their Inuence in Early Islam.” Ars Orientalis 23 (1993): 57–66. Al- BƯrnjnƯ, Abnj’l-RƗyতƗn. KitƗb al-Ɩ thƗr al- bƗqiyya ‘an al-qar njn al- khƗliyya. Paris: Dar Biblion, 2009. Bivar, A. D. H. “HayƗ৬ila.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Blankinship, Khalid. “The Tribal Factor in the ‘AbbƗsid Revolution: The Betrayal of the Imam IbrƗhƯm b. Muতammad.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 108, 4 (1988): 589–603. Blankinship, Khalid, Trans. The History of al- ܑabarƯ, Vol. 11: The Challenge to the Empires. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993. Blankinship, Khalid. The End of the JihƗd State: The Reign of HishƗm Ibn ‘Abd al- Malik and the Collapse of the Umayyads. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. Bonebakker, S. A. “Adab and the Concept of Belles-Lettres .” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant and G. R. Smith, 16–30. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1990. Borg, G. “Battle Days.” In Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature. Edited by Julie Meisami and Paul Starkey, 141–142. London: Routledge, 1998. Börm, Henning and Wiesehöfer, Josef, Eds. Commutatio et Contentio: Studies in the Late Roman, Sasanian, and Early Islamic Near East. In Memory of Zeev Rubin. Dusseldorf: Wellem, 2010. Borrut, Antoine. Entre mémoire et pouvoir: L’espace syrien sous les derniers Omeyyades et les premiers Abbassides (v. 72–193/692–809). Leiden: Brill, 2011. Bosworth, C. E. The Ghaznavids: Their Empire in Afghanistan and Eastern Iran, 994–1040. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1963. Bosworth, C. E. “The ৫Ɨhirids and Arabic Culture.” Journal of Semitic Studies 14 (1969): 45–79. Bosworth, C. E. “The Early Ghaznavids.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 162–197. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Bosworth, C. E. “The ৫Ɨhirids and the ৡaffƗrids.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 90–135. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Bosworth, C. E. “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran and the Search for Dynastic Connections with the Past.” Iranian Studies 11, 1 (1978): 7–34. Bosworth, C. E. “Iran and the Arabs before Islam.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 593–612. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Bosworth, C. E. “AbnƗ’.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1983. Bosworth, C. E. “AfšƯn.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1984. Bosworth, C. E. “AতrƗr.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1984. Bosworth, C. E. “ ‘Ajam.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1984. Bosworth, C. E. “AsƗwera,” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1987. Bosworth, C. E. The History of the Saffarids of Sistan and the Maliks of Nimruz (247/861–949/1542–3). Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers in association with Bibliotheca Persica, 1994. Bibliography 211 Bosworth, C. E. “The Persian Contribution to Islamic Historiography in the pre-Mongol Period.” In The Persian Presence in the Islamic World. Edited by Richard Hovannisian and George Sabagh, 218–236. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Bosworth, C. E., Trans. The History of al- ܑabarƯ, Vol. 5: The SƗsƗnids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. Bosworth, C. E., Issawi, C., Savory, R., and Udovitch, A. L., Eds. The Islamic World, from Classical to Modern Times: Essays in Honor of Bernard Lewis. Princeton: Darwin, 1989. Boyce, Mary. The Letter of Tansar. Rome: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1968. Boyce, Mary. A History of Zoroastrianism. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Boyce, Mary. Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979. Boyce, Mary. “Iranian Festivals.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 2: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 792–815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Brockelmann, Carl. History of the Islamic Peoples. Translated by Joel Carmichael and Moshe Perlmann. New York: Capricorn Books, 1939. Brockelmann, Carl. “Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Brown, Peter. Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1992. Browne, Edward G. “Some Account of the Arabic Work entitled ‘Niháyatu’l-irab fí akhbári’l-Furs wa’l-‘Arab,’ particularly of that part which treats of the Persian Kings.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 32, 2 (1900): 195–259. Browne, Edward G. A Literary History of Persia. 4 Vols. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1928. Brunner, Christopher. “Geographical and Administrative Divisions: Settlements and Economy.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 2: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasa- nian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 747–777. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. ,al- BukhƗrƯ. 9 Vols. Beirut: DƗr ৫awq al- NajƗh ۊƯۊa܇ .Al- BukhƗrƯ, Muতammad b. IsmƗ‘Ưl 2001. Obtained from www.shamela.ws. Bulliet, Richard. Conversion to Islam in the Medieval Period: An Essay in Quantitative History. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979. Bulliet, Richard. Islam: The View from the Edge. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994. Busse, Heribert. “The Revival of Persian Kingship under the Bnjyids.” In Islamic Civiliza- tion 950–1150. Edited by D. S. Richards, 47–69. Oxford: Cassirer, 1973. Busse, Heribert. “Iran under the Bnjyids.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 250–304. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Cahen, C. “Points de vue sur la Révolution abbaside.” Revue Historique 230 (1963): 295–338. Calder, Norman. Studies in Early Muslim Jurisprudence. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. Cameron, Averil. “Images of Authority: Elites and Icons in Late Sixth- Century Byzan- tium.” Past and Present 84 (1979): 3–35. Cameron, Averil. Christianity and the Rhetoric of Empire: The Development of Christian Discourse. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. 212 Bibliography Cameron, Averil, Conrad, Lawrence, and King, G. R. D. The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 2: Land Use and Settlement Patterns. Princeton: Darwin, 1994; Vol. 3: States, Resources and Armies. Princeton: Darwin, 1995. Cameron, Marianne Engle. “Sayf at First: the Transmission of Sayf ibn ‘Umar in al- ৫abarƯ and Ibn ‘AsƗkir.” In Ibn ‘AsƗkir and Early Islamic History. Edited by James E. Lindsay, 62–77. Princeton: Darwin, 2001. Canary, Robert and Kozicki, Henry, Eds. The Writing of History: Literary Form and Historical Understanding. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1978. Canepa, Matthew. The Two Eyes of the Earth: Art and Ritual of Kingship between Rome and Sasanian Iran. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2009. Cannadine, David and Price, Simon, Eds. Rituals of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Caskel, Werner. “Aijam al-‘Arab: Studien zur Altarabischen Epik.” Islamica 3, Suppl. (1931): 1–99. ammadۊCaskel, Werner. Ёamharat an-nasab: das genealogische Werk des Hišam Ibn Mu al- KalbƯ. 2 Vols. Leiden: Brill, 1966. Caskel, Werner. “The Bedouinization of Arabia.” In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Edited by F. E. Peters, 34–44. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999. Chaumont, M. L. “A propos de la chute de Hatra et du couronnement de Shapur Ier.” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 27 (1979): 207–237. Chokr, Melhem. Zandaqa et zindƯqs en Islam au second siècle de l’hégire. Damascus: Presses de l’Ifpo, 1993. Choksy, Jamsheed. “Sacral Kingship in Sasanian Iran.” Bulletin of the Asia Institute 2 (1988): 35–52. Choksy, Jamsheed. Conict and Cooperation: Zoroastrian Subalterns and Muslim Elites in Medieval Iranian Society. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997. Choueiri, Youssef, Ed. A Companion to the History of the Middle East. Malden: Black- well, 2005. Christensen, Arthur. “La princesse sur la feuille de myrte et la princesse sur le pois.” Acta Orientalia 24 (1936): 241–257. Christensen, Arthur. L’Iran sous les Sassanides. 1936. Repr. Osnabrück: Otto Zeller, 1971. Clarke, Nicola. The Muslim Conquest of Iberia: Medieval Arabic Narratives. London: Routledge, 2012. Clover, F. M. and Humphreys, R. S., Eds. Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989. Cobb, Paul, Ed. The Lineaments of Islam: Studies in Honor of Fred McGraw Donner. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Conno, Alon. “Memory and the History of Mentalities.” In A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies, 77–84. Edited by Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nünning, 333–343. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010. Conrad, Lawrence. “The Conquest of ArwƗd: A Source- Critical Study in the Histori- ography of the Early Medieval Near East.” In The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 1: Problems in the Literary Source Material. Edited by Averil Cameron and Lawrence Conrad, 317–340. Princeton: Darwin, 1992. Conrad, Lawrence. “Heraclius in Early Islamic Kerygma.” In The Reign of Heraclius (610–641): Crisis and Confrontation. Edited by Gerrit Reinink and Bernard Stolte, 113–156. Leuven: Peeters, 2002. Bibliography 213 Conrad, Lawrence. “The Chain Topos.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 31 (2006): 1–33. Cotton, Hannah, Hoyland, Robert, Price, Jonathan, and Wasserstein, David, Eds. From Hellenism to Islam: Cultural and Linguistic Change in the Roman Near East. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Crone, Patricia. Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1980. Crone, Patricia. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987. Crone, Patricia. “On the Meaning of the ‘AbbƗsid Call to al- RidƗ.” In The Islamic World, from Classical to Modern Times: Essays in Honor of Bernard Lewis. Edited by C. E. Bosworth, C. Issawi, R. Savory, and A. L. Udovitch, 95–111. Princeton: Darwin, 1989. Crone, Patricia. “KavƗd’s Heresy and Mazdak’s Revolt.” Iran 29 (1991): 21–42. Crone, Patricia. “Were the Qays and Yemen of the Umayyad Period Political Parties?” Der Islam 71 (1991): 1–57. and KitƗb al- Jamal wa- masƯr ۊCrone, Patricia. “Review of KitƗb al-Ridda wa’l-futnj ‘Ɩ’isha wa-‘AlƯ, by Sayf b. ‘Umar. Edited by QƗsim al- SƗmarrƗ’Ư.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 6, 2 (1996): 237–240. Crone, Patricia. “The ‘AbbƗsid AbnƗ’ and SƗsƗnid Cavalrymen.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 8, 1 (1998): 1–19. Crone, Patricia. “Ninth Century Muslim Anarchists.” Past and Present 167 (2000): 3–28. Crone, Patricia. “The Signicance of Wooden Weapons in al- MukhtƗr’s Revolt and the ‘AbbƗsid Revolution.” In Studies in Honour of Clifford Edmund Bosworth, Vol. 1: Hunter of the East: Arabic and Semitic Studies. Edited by I. R. Netton, 174–187. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Crone, Patricia. “MawƗlƯ and the Prophet’s Family: An Early Shi‘ite View.” In Patronate and Patronage in Early and Classical Islam. Edited by M. Bernards and J. Nawas, 167–194. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Crone, Patricia. Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005. Crone, Patricia. “Imperial Trauma: The Case of the Arabs.” Common Knowledge 12, 1 (2006): 107–116. Crone, Patricia. “Post-Colonialism in Tenth-Century Islam.” Der Islam 83, 1 (2006): 2–38. Crone, Patricia. From Arabian Tribes to Islamic Empire: Army, State and Society in the Near East c. 600–850. Aldershot: Variorum, 2008. Crone, Patricia. The Nativist Prophets of Early Islamic Iran: Rural Revolt and Local Zoroastrianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Crone, Patricia and Cook, Michael. Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. Crone, Patricia and Hinds, Martin. God’s Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centu- ries of Islam. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Crone, Patricia and Wensinck, A. J. “MawlƗ.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Crosby, Elise. The History, Poetry, and Genealogy of the Yemen: The Akhbar of Abid b. Sharya al- Jurhumi. Piscataway: Gorgias Press, 2007, 1st Gorgias Press ed. Curtis, John, Ed. Mesopotamia and Iran in the Parthian and Sasanian Periods: Rejection and Revival c.238 BC–AD 642. London: British Museum Press, 2000. Curtis, V. Sarkhosh and Stewart, S., Eds. The Idea of Iran, Vol. 3: The Sasanian Era. London: I. B. Tauris, 2008. 214 Bibliography Czeglédy, K. “BahrƗm ýǀbƯn and the Persian Apocalyptic Literature.” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 8 (1958): 21–43. Daftary, Farhad and Meri, Josef, Eds. Culture and Memory in Medieval Islam: Essays in Honour of Wilferd Madelung. London: I. B. Tauris, 2003. Daniel, Elton L. The Political and Social History of Khurasan under Abbasid Rule 747–820. Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1979. Daniel, Elton L. “Arabs, Persians, and the Advent of the Abbasids Reconsidered.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 117, 3 (1997): 542–548. Daniel, Elton L. “The SƗmƗnid ‘Translations’ of al-৫ abarƯ.” In Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and His Work. Edited by Hugh Kennedy, 263–297. Princeton: Darwin, 2008. Daniel, Elton L. “The Rise and Development of Persian Historiography.” In Persian His- toriography. Edited by Charles Melville, 101–154. London: I. B. Tauris, 2012. Danner, Victor. “Arabic Literature in Iran.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 566–594. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1975. Daryaee, Touraj. “National History or Keyanid History? The Nature of Sasanid Zoroas- trian Historiography.” Iranian Studies 28 (1995): 129–141. Daryaee, Touraj. “The Persian Gulf Trade in Late Antiquity.” Journal of World History 14, 1 (2003): 1–16. Daryaee, Touraj. Sasanian Iran (224–651 CE): Portrait of a Late Antique Empire. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 2008. Davaran, Fereshteh. Continuity in Iranian Identity: Resilience of a Cultural Heritage. London: Routledge, 2010. Davidson, Olga. Poet and Hero in the Persian Book of Kings. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013. Davis, Dick. “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s Sources.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 116, 1 (1996): 48–57. Davis, Dick. Epic and Sedition: The Case of Ferdowsi’s ShƗhnƗmeh. 1992. Repr. Wash- ington, D.C.: Mage Publishers, 2006. Davis, Dick. “Iran and Aniran: The Shaping of a Legend.” In Iran Facing Others: Iden- tity Boundaries in a Historical Perspective. Edited by Abbas Amanat and Farzin Vejdani, 37–48. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, 2012. Dennett, Daniel. Conversion and Poll Tax in Early Islam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1950. Al- DhahabƯ, Muতammad b. Aতmad. MƯzƗn al- i‘tidƗl fƯ naqd al-rij Ɨl. 4 Vols. Cairo: ‘IsƗ al- BƗbƯ al-ণ alabƯ, 1963. Dignas, Beate and Winter, Engelbert. Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity: Neighbours and Rivals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Dijkstra, Jitse H. F. and Fisher, Greg, Eds. Inside and Out: Interactions between Rome and the Peoples on the Arabian and Egyptian Frontiers in Late Antiquity. Leuven: Peeters, 2014. Al- DƯnawarƯ, Abnj ণanƯfa. KitƗb al- AkhbƗr al- ܒiwƗl. Leiden: Brill, 1888. Diodorus Siculus. Diodorus of Sicily. Translated by C. H. Oldfather et al. 12 Vols. Cam- bridge: Harvard University Press, 1933–1967. Dirven, Lucinda. “Hatra: A Pre- Islamic Mecca in the Eastern Jazirah.” ARAM Periodical 19 (2007): 363–380. Donaldson, D. M. “Salman the Persian.” The Muslim World 19 (1929): 338–352. Bibliography 215 Donner, Fred. “The Bakr B. WƗ’il Tribes and Politics in Northeastern Arabia on the Eve of Islam.” Studia Islamica 51 (1980): 5–37. Donner, Fred. The Early Islamic Conquests. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981. Donner, Fred. “The Formation of the Islamic State.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 56 (1986): 283–296. Donner, Fred. Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing. Princeton: Darwin, 1998. Donner, Fred. “The Role of Nomads in the Near East in Late Antiquity.” In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Edited by F. E. Peters, 21–33. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999. Donner, Fred. “The Islamic Conquests.” In A Companion to the History of the Middle East. Edited by Youssef Choueiri, 28–51. Malden: Blackwell, 2005. Donner, Fred. Ed. The Expansion of the Early Islamic State. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. Donner, Fred. Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010. Donner, Fred. “Sayf ibn ‘Umar.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Donohue, John. The Buwayhid Dynasty in Iraq 334H./945 to 403H./1012: Shaping Insti- tutions for the Future. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Drory, Rina. “The Abbasid Construction of the Jahiliyya: Cultural Authority in the Making.” Studia Islamica 83 (1996): 33–49. Duchesne- Guillemin, J. “La Royauté iranienne et le XࢷarΩnah.” In Encyclopaedia Iranica. Edited by G. Gnoli and A. V. Rossi, 375–386. Naples: Istituto per lo Studio del Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1979. Duchesne- Guillemin, J. “Zoroastrian Religion.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 2: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 866–908. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Dundes, Alan, Ed. Sacred Narrative: Readings in the Theory of Myth. Berkeley: Univer- sity of California Press, 1984. Dunlop, D. M. “Bal‘amƯ,” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Al- DnjrƯ, ‘Abd al-‘AzƯz. “The Iraq School of History to the Ninth Century: A Sketch.” In Historians of the Middle East. Edited by B. Lewis and P. M. Holt, 46–53. London: Oxford University Press, 1962. Al- DnjrƯ, ‘Abd al-‘AzƯz. Al- Judhnjr al-ta’r Ưkhiyya lil-Shu ұnjbƯyya. Beirut: DƗr al- ৫alƯދa, 1962. Al- DnjrƯ, ‘Abd al-‘AzƯz. The Rise of Historical Writing among the Arabs. Edited by Fred Donner and translated by Lawrence Conrad. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983. Al- DnjrƯ, A. A. and al- Mu৬৬alibƯ, A. J., Eds. AkhbƗr al- dawla al-‘AbbƗsiyya wa- fƯhi akhbƗr al-‘AbbƗs wa- waladihi. Beirut: Dar al-৫ alƯ‘a, 1971. Eilers, Wilhelm. “Iran and Mesopotamia.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 481–504. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. El Cheikh, Nadia. “Muতammad and Heraclius: A Study in Legitimacy.” Studia Islamica 89 (1999): 5–21. El Cheikh, Nadia. Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004. El- Hibri, Tayeb. Reinterpreting Islamic Historiography: HƗrnjn al-Rash Ưd and the Nar- rative of the ‘AbbƗsid Caliphate. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. El- Hibri, Tayeb. “The Redemption of Umayyad Memory by the ‘AbbƗsids.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 61, 4 (2002): 241–265. 216 Bibliography El- Hibri, Tayeb. Parable and Politics in Early Islamic History: The Rashidun Caliphs. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010. El- Shami, A. and Serjeant, R. B. “Regional Literature: The Yemen.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 442–468. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1990. El- Tayib, A. “Pre- Islamic Poetry.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period. Edited by A. F. L. Beeston, T. M. John- stone, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 27–114. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. El- Tayib, A. “Abnj FirƗs al- ণamdƗnƯ.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 315–327. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Elad, Amikam. “Aspects of the Transition from the Umayyad to the ‘Abbasid Caliphate.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 19 (1995): 89–132. Enderwitz, S. “Al-Shu‘ njbiyyah.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Enderwitz, S. Gesellschaftlicher Rang und ethnische Legitimation: Der arabische Schrift- iܲ (gest. 868) über die Afrikaner, Perser und Araber in der ۊmƗn al-öƗܔsteller Abnj ‘U islamischen Gesellschaft. Freiburg im Breisgau: Schwarz, 1979. Erll, Astrid and Nünning, Ansgar. “Communicative and Cultural Memory.” In A Com- panion to Cultural Memory Studies. Edited by Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nünning, 1–15. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010. Erll, Astrid and Nünning, Ansgar, Eds. A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010. Ettinghausen, Richard. From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic World: Three Modes of Artistic Inuence. Leiden: Brill, 1972. Ettinghausen, Richard. “Bahram Gur’s Hunting Feats or the Problem of Identication.” Iran 17 (1979): 25–31. Ettinghausen, Richard, Grabar, Oleg, and Jenkins-Madina, Marilyn. Islamic Art and Architecture: 650–1250. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001. Fariq, K. A. “An Early Muslim Judge, Shurayh.” Islamic Culture 30 (1956): 287–308. Fentress, J. and Wickham, C. J. Social Memory: New Perspectives on the Past. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992. FirdawsƯ, Abnj’l-QƗsim. ShƗhnƗma. Translated by J. Mohl as Le Livre des rois. 7 Vols. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1876–1878. Fisher, Greg, Ed. Between Empires: Arabs, Romans and Sasanians in Late Antiquity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Fisher, Greg, Ed. “Kingdoms or Dynasties? Arabs, History, and Identity before Islam.” Journal of Late Antiquity 4, 2 (2011): 245–267. Fisher, Greg, Ed. Arabs and Empires before Islam. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Fischler, Claude. “Food, Self and Identity.” Social Science Information 27 (1988): 275–293. Foss, Clive. “The Persians in the Roman Near East (602–630 AD).” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 13, 2 (2003): 149–170. Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. 2nd ed. Translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: Random House, 1995. Fouchécour, Charles- Henri de. Moralia: les notions morales dans la littérature persane de 3e/9e au 7e/13e siècle. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les civilisations, 1986. Bibliography 217 Fowden, Elizabeth Key. The Barbarian Plain: Saint Sergius between Rome and Iran. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. Fowden, G. Qusayr ‘Amra: Art and the Umayyad Elite in Late Antique Syria. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004. Frye, R. N. “The Role of Abnj Muslim in the ‘AbbƗsid Revolt.” The Muslim World 37 (1947): 28–38. Frye, R. N. The Heritage of Persia. New York: World Publishing Co., 1963. Frye, R. N. “The Charisma of Kingship in Ancient Iran.” Iranica Antiqua 4 (1964): 36–54. Frye, R. N., Ed. Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Frye, R. N. The Golden Age of Persia: The Arabs in the East. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1975. Frye, R. N. “The SƗmƗnids.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Inva- sion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 136–161. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Frye, R. N. “Bahrain under the Sasanians.” In Dilmun; New Studies on the Archaeology and Early History of Bahrain. Edited by Daniel Potts, 167–170. Berlin: Reimer, 1983. Frye, R. N. “The Political History of Iran under the Sasanians.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yar- shater, 116–180. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Gabrieli, Francisco. “Adab.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Gabrieli, Francisco. “ ‘AdƯ b. Zayd.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. GardƯzƯ, Abd al-ণ ayy. Zayn al- akhbƗr. Tehran: DunyƗ-yi KitƗb, 1984/1985. Gaube, H. “Mazdak: Historical Reality or Invention?” Studia Iranica 11 (1982): 111–122. Gazakova, Zuzana. “Remarks on Arab Scholarship in the Arabic Popular Síra and the Sírat Sayf ibn Dí Yazan.” Asian and African Studies 14, 2 (2005): 187–195. Gibb, H. A. R. “The Fiscal Rescript of Umar II.” Arabica 2 (1955): 1–16. Gibb, H. A. R. “Arab-Byzantine Relations under the Umayyad Caliphate.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 12 (1958): 221–233. Gibb, H. A. R. “The Evolution of Government in Early Islam.” In Studies on the Civili- zation of Islam. Edited by S. Stanford and W. Polk, 34–46. Boston: Beacon Press, 1962. Gibb, H. A. R. “The Social Signicance of the Shuubiya.” In Studies on the Civilization of Islam. Edited by S. Stanford and W. Polk, 62–73. Boston: Beacon Press, 1962. Gignoux, Philippe. “La liste des provinces de l’ƜrƗn dans les inscriptions de Šabnjhr et de KirdƯr.” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 19 (1971): 83–94. Gignoux, Philippe. “AnƝrƗn.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1985. Gilliot, Claude. “Creation of a Fixed Text.” In The Cambridge Companion to the Qur’Ɨn. Edited by Jane Dammen McAuliffe, 41–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Gnoli, Gherardo. The Idea of Iran: An Essay on its Origin. Leiden: Brill, 1989. Gnoli, Gherardo. “Farr(ah).” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1999. Gnoli, Gherardo. “Pride and Fall: Khusro II and his Regime, 626–628.” In La Persia e Bisanzio (Atti dei Convegni Lincei 201), 93–113. Rome, 2004. Göbl, Robert. “Sasanian Coins.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 322–339. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Goitein, S. D. Studies in Islamic History and Institutions. Leiden: Brill, 1966. 218 Bibliography Goldziher, Ignaz. “Islamisme et Parsisme.” Revue de l’histoire des religions 43 (1901): 1–29. Goldziher, Ignaz. Muslim Studies. 2 Vols. Translated by S. M. Stern and C. R. Barber. London: Allen and Unwin, 1967–1971. Vol. 1 repr.: New Brunswick: Aldine Trans- action, 2006. Grabar, Oleg. The Formation of Islamic Art. New Haven, 1973. Grabar, Oleg, and Hill, Derek. Islamic Architecture and its Decoration, A.D. 800–1500: A Photographic Survey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964. Gray, Christa. Jerome, Vita Malchi: Introduction, Text, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Greatrex, Geoffrey, and Lieu, Samuel. The Roman Eastern Frontier and the Persian Wars, Part II. AD 363–630: A Narrative Sourcebook. London: Routledge, 2002. Green, Nile. “The Religious and Cultural Roles of Dreams and Visions in Islam.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 13, 3 (2003): 287–313. Grenet, F. “Regional Interaction in Central Asia and Northwest India in the Kidarite and Hephthalite Periods.” In Indo- Iranian Languages and Peoples. Edited by Nicholas Sims- Williams, 203–224. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Grignaschi, Mario. “Les ‘RasƗ’il ’Aris৬Ɨ৬ƗlƯsa ’ilƗ-l-Iskandar’ de SƗlim Abnj-l-‘AlƗ’ et l’activité culturelle à l’époque omayyade.” Bulletin d’études orientales 19 (1965–1966): 7–83. Grignaschi, Mario. “Quelques spécimens de la littérature sassanide conservés dans les bibliothèques d’Istanbul.” Journal asiatique 254 (1966): 1–142. Grignaschi, Mario. “La NihƗyatu-l-’Arab fƯ AপbƗri-l- Furs wa- l-‘Arab.” Part 1. Bulletin d’études orientales 22 (1969): 15–67. Grignaschi, Mario. “La NihƗyatu-l-’Arab fƯ AপbƗri-l-Furs wa- l-‘Arab et les Siyaru Mulnjki- l-‘A÷am du Ps. Ibn- al-Muqaffa‘.” Bulletin d’études orientales 26 (1973): 83–184. Gruen, Erich, Ed. Cultural Borrowings and Ethnic Appropriations in Antiquity. Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 2005. Gruendler, Beatrice. “Meeting the Patron: An AkhbƗr Type and its Implications for dath Poetry.” In Ideas, Images, and Methods of Portrayal: Insights into ClassicalۊMu Arabic Literature and Islam. Edited by Sebastian Günther, 59–88. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Günther, Sebastian, Ed. Ideas, Images, and Methods of Portrayal: Insights into Classical Arabic Literature and Islam. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Gutas, Dimitri. “Classical Arabic Wisdom Literature: Nature and Scope.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 101, 1 (1981): 49–86. Gutas, Dimitri. Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco-Arabic Translation Move- ment in Baghdad and Early ‘AbbƗsid Society (2nd–4th/8th–10th centuries). London: Routledge, 1998. Gyselen, Rika, Ed. Des Indo-Grecs aux Sassanides: Données pour l’histoire et la géogra- phie historique. Bures- sur-Yvette: Groupe pour l’étude de la civilisation du Moyen- Orient, 2007. Gyselen, Rika, Ed. Sources for the History of Sasanian and Post- Sasnian Iran. Bures- sur- Yvette: Groupe pour l’étude de la civilisation du Moyen-Orient, 2010. Halbwachs, Maurice. On Collective Memory. Edited by Lewis Coser. Chicago: Univer- sity of Chicago Press, 1992. Al- HamdƗnƯ, al-ণ asan b. Aতmad. The Antiquities of South Arabia; Being a Translation from the Arabic with Linguistic, Geographic, and Historic Notes of the Eighth Book of al-Hamd Ɨni’s al- IklƯl. Translated by Nabih Faris. London: H. Milford, Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1938. Bibliography 219 Al- HamdƗnƯ, al-ণ asan b. Aতmad. Al- IklƯl (al-Juz’ al-Th Ɨmin). Princeton: Princeton Uni- versity Press, 1940. shiyya and his NabateanۊHämeen-Anttila, Jaakko. The Last Pagans of Iraq: Ibn Wa Agriculture. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Hämeen-Anttila, Jaakko. “Al-Kisraw Ư and the Arabic Translations of the KhudƗynƗmag.” In Travelling through Time: Essays in Honour of Kaj Öhrnberg. Edited by Sylvia Akar, Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila, and Inka Nokso-Koivisto, 65–92. Helsinki: Finnish Ori- ental Society, 2013. Hamori, A. “Love Poetry (Ghazal).” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant and G. R. Smith, 202–218. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Hamori, A. “Al- MutanabbƯ.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles-Lettres . Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant and G. R. Smith, 300–314. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Hana, Sami A. and Gardner, George H. “Al- Shu‘njbiyyah Up- dated: A Study of the 20th Century Revival of an Eighth Century Concept.” Middle East Journal 20, 3 (1966): 335–352. Hanaway Jr., W. L. “BahrƗm V Gǀr in Persian Legend and Literature.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1989. Harb, F. “Wine Poetry (KhamriyyƗt).” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 219–234. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. and Kitâb al- Jamal wa- masîr ۊHawting, Gerald. Review of Kitâb al- Ridda wa’l-futû ‘Â’isha wa-‘Alî, by Sayf b. ‘Umar. Edited by QƗsim al- SƗmarrƗ’Ư. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 60, 3 (1997): 546–547. Hawting, Gerald. The First Dynasty of Islam: The Umayyad Caliphate AD 661–750. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2000. Hawting, Gerald. “The Rise of Islam.” In A Companion to the History of the Middle East. Edited by Youssef Choueiri, 9–27. Malden: Blackwell, 2005. Helms, S. Early Islamic Architecture of the Desert: A Bedouin Station in Eastern Jordan. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1990. Herman, David, Ed. The Cambridge Companion to Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Hillenbrand, Robert. Islamic Art and Architecture. London: Thames and Hudson, 1999. Al-ণ illƯ, Abnj’l-BaqƗ’ Hibbat AllƗh. KitƗb al- ManƗqib al-mazyadiyya fƯ akhbƗr al- mulnjk al- Asadiyya. 2 Vols. Al-‘Ayn: Markaz Zayid lil-Tur Ɨth Wa’l-Ta’rƯkh, 2000. Hinds, M. “Knjfan Political Alignments and their Background in the Mid-Seventh Century A.D.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 2 (1971): 346–367. Hinds, M. “Sayf ibn ‘Umar’s Sources on Arabia.” In Studies in Early Islamic History. Edited by Jere Bacharach, Lawrence Conrad and Patricia Crane, 143–159. Princeton: Darwin, 1996. Hobsbawm, E. Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Hopwood, Derek, Ed. The Arabian Peninsula: Society and Politics. London: Allen and Unwin, 1972. Horovitz, Josef. “SalmƗn al-F Ɨrisi.” Der Islam 12 (1922): 178–183. Horovitz, Josef. “AdƯ ibn Zeyd, the Poet of Hira.” Islamic Culture 4 (1930): 31–69. Hovannisian, Richard and Sabagh, George, Eds. The Persian Presence in the Islamic World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 220 Bibliography Howard- Johnston, J. D. “Heraclius’ Persian Campaigns and the Rise of the East Roman Empire, 622–630.” War in History 6 (1999): 1–44. Howard- Johnston, J. D. East Rome, Sasanian Persia and the End of Antiquity: Historio- graphical and Historical Studies. Aldershot: Variorum, 2006. Howard- Johnston, J. D. “Al-Tabari on the Last Great War of Antiquity.” In East Rome, Sasanian Persia and the End of Antiquity: Historiographical and Historical Studies (VI), 1–22. Aldershot: Variorum, 2006, Howard- Johnston, J. D. Witnesses to a World Crisis: Historians and Histories of the Middle East in the Seventh Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Hoyland, Robert, G. Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Chris- tian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam. Princeton: Darwin, 1997. Hoyland, Robert, G. Arabia and the Arabs: From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam. London: Routledge, 2001. Hoyland, Robert, G. “Language and Identity: The Twin Histories of Arabic and Aramaic (and: Why did Aramaic Succeed where Greek Failed?).” Scripta Classica Israelica 23 (2004): 183–199. Hoyland, Robert, G. Ed. Muslims and Others in Early Islamic Society. Aldershot: Vari- orum, 2004. Hoyland, Robert, G. “Epigraphy and the Emergence of Arab Identity.” In From Al- Andalus to Khurasan: Documents from the Medieval Islamic World. Edited by Petra Sijpesteijn, Lennart Sundelin, Soa Tovar, and Amalia Zomeño, 219–242. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Hoyland, Robert, G. “Arab Kings, Arab Tribes, and the Beginnings of Arab Historical Memory in Late Roman Epigraphy.” In From Hellenism to Islam: Cultural and Lin- guistic Change in the Roman Near East. Edited by Hannah Cotton, Robert Hoyland, Jonathan Price, and David Wasserstein, 374–400. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. .udnjd al-‘Ɩlam: ‘The Regions of the World’: A Persian Geography 372 A.H./982 A.Dۉ Translated by V. Minorsky. London: Messrs. Luzac and Co., 1937. Humbach, H. and Skjaervø, P. O. The Sassanian Inscription of Paikuli. 4 Vols. Wies- baden: Dr Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 1978–1983. ণusayn, ৫ƗhƗ. FƯ’l-shi‘r al- JƗhilƯ. Cairo: DƗr al-Ma‘ Ɨrif, 1925. .r wa-akb ƗruhƗ. Leiden: Brill, 1920܈Mi ۊIbn ‘Abd al- ণakam. KitƗb Futnj Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih, Aতmad b. Muতammad. KitƗb al-‘Iqd al- farƯd. 6 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al- Arqam ibn AbƯ al-Arqam, 1999. Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih, Aতmad b. Muতammad. The Unique Necklace: al-‘Iqd al-Far Ưd. 3 Vols. Translated by Issa Boullata. Reading: Garnet, 2006–2012. Vols. Hyderbad: Osmania Oriental Publications 8 .ۊIbn A‘tham, Aতmad. KitƗb al- Futnj Bureau, 1968–1975. Ibn al- AthƯr, Muতammad. KitƗb al- KƗmil fƯ’l-ta’rƯkh. 13 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al-ৡƗ dir, 1965–1967. Ibn Durayd, Abnj Bakr Muতammad b. al-ণ asan. KitƗb al- IshtiqƗq. Beirut: DƗr al- JƯl, 1991. Ibn al- FaqƯh al- HamadhƗnƯ, Abrégé du livre des pays. Translated by Henri Massé. Damas- cus: Institut français de Damas, 1973. Ibn al- FaqƯh al- HamadhƗnƯ, Aতmad b. Muতammad. KitƗb al- BuldƗn. Beirut: ‘Ɩlam al- Kutub, 1996. Ibn ণajar al-‘AsqalƗnƯ, Aতmad b. ‘AlƯ. TahdhƯb al- tadhƯb. 12 Vols. Hyderbad: DƗ’ira al- Ma‘Ɨrif al-Ni ਌Ɨmiyya, 1907–1909. Bibliography 221 .Leiden: Brill, 1939 .ڲ njrat al-ar܇ Ibn ণawqal, Abnj’l-QƗsim. KitƗb u‘afƗ wa’l-matrnjkƯn. 3ڲ-addithƯn wa’lۊƯn min al- muۊIbn ণibbƗn, Muতammad. Majrnj Vols. Aleppo: DƗr al- Wa‘y, 1982. Ɨq’sۊIbn HishƗm, ‘Abd al-Malik. The Life of the Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Is SƯrat Rasnjl AllƗh. Translated by A. Guillaume. 1955. Repr. Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2006. imyar. Sana‘a: Markaz al- DirƗsƗtۉ Ibn HishƗm, ‘Abd al-Malik. KitƗb al- TƯjƗn fƯ mulnjk wa’l-AbতƗth al-Yamaniyya, 1979. Obtained from www.shamela.ws. Ibn HishƗm, ‘Abd al- Malik. KitƗb al- SƯra al- nabawiyya li- Ibn HishƗm. 4 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al- KitƗb al-‘ArabƯ, 1990. Ibn IsfandiyƗr, Muতammad b. al- ণasan. TƗrƯkh-i ܑabaristƗn. Tehran: Muতammad Rama਌ƗnƯ, 1955. Ibn KhallikƗn, Abnj’l-‘AbbƗs Shams al-D Ưn. KitƗb WafayƗt al- a‘yƗn. Translated by Bn. de Slane as Ibn Khallikan’s Biographical Dictionary. 4 Vols. 1871. Repr. New York: Johnson Reprint Corp., 1961. Ibn KhayyƗ৬, KhalƯfa. KitƗb al- Ta’rƯkh. Najaf: Ma৬baދat al-Ɩ dƗb, 1967. -Ɨba. Translated by Charles Pellat as Ibn alۊa܈-Ibn al- Muqaffa‘, ‘Abd AllƗh. RisƗla fƯ’l Muqaffaұ: mort vers 140/757, “Conseilleur” du Calife. Paris: Maisonneuve et Larose, 1976. Ibn al- Muqaffa‘, ‘Abd AllƗh. Kalila and Dimna. Translated by Thomas Irving. Newark, DE: Juan de Cuesta, 1980. Ibn al- NadƯm, Muতammad b. IsতƗq. The Fihrist: A 10th Century AD Survey of Islamic Culture. Edited and translated by Bayard Dodge. 1970. Repr. Chicago: Great Books of the Islamic World, Inc., 1998. Ibn Qutayba, Muslim. KitƗb al-‘Arab aw al-radd ‘alƗ’l-Shu‘njbiyya. In RasƗ’il al- bulaghƗ’. Edited by Muতammad Kurd ‘AlƯ, 269–295. Cairo: DƗr al- Kutub al-‘Arabiyya al- KubrƗ, 1913. Ibn Qutayba, Muslim. KitƗb ‘Uynjn al- akhbƗr. 4 Vols. Cairo: DƗr al- Kutub al- Miৢriyya, 1925–1930. Ibn Qutayba, Muslim. KitƗb al-Shi‘r wa’l-shu‘arƗ’. 2 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al- ThaqƗfa, 1969. Ibn Qutayba, Muslim. KitƗb al- Ma‘Ɨrif. Beirut: DƗr al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1987. -l al-ұArab wa’l-tanbƯh ұalƗ ұulnjmihƗ. Abu Dhabi: alڲIbn Qutayba, Muslim. Fa Mujamma‘ al-Thaq ƗfƯ, 1998. Ibn Sa‘d, Muতammad. KitƗb al- TabaqƗt al- kubrƗ. 9 Vols. Leiden: Brill, 1904–1940. .and Kitâb al-Jamal wa- masîr ‘Â’isha wa-‘Alî ۊIbn ‘Umar, Sayf. Kitâb al- Ridda wa’l-futû A Facsimile Edition of the Fragments Preserved in the University Library of Imam Muhammad Ibn Sa‘ud Islamic University in Riyadh. 2 Vols. Edited by QƗsim al- SƗmarrƗ’Ư. Leiden: Smitskamp Oriental Antiquarium, 1995. Irwin, Robert. Night and Horses and the Desert: An Anthology of Classical Arabic Liter- ature. New York: Penguin, 2000, reprint. Isaac, Benjamin. The Limits of Empire: The Roman Army in the East. Rev. ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000. Isaac, Benjamin. The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004. Al- IৢfahƗnƯ, Abnj’l-Faraj. KitƗb al- AghƗnƯ. 24 Vols. Beirut: DƗr IতyƗ’ al- TurƗth al-‘ArabƯ, 1997. -wa’l-anbiyƗ’. Beirut: DƗr Maktabat al ڲAl- IৢfahƗnƯ, ণamza. Ta’rƯkh sinƯ mulnjk al- ar ণayƗt, 1990. 222 Bibliography Al- Iৢ৬akhrƯ, Abnj IsতƗq IbrƗhƯm b. Muতammad al- FƗrisƯ. KitƗb al- MasƗlik wa’l-mamƗlik. Leiden: Brill, 1927. Jackson Bonner, Michael. “Six Problèmes d’interprétation historiographique dans les règnes de PƝrǀz, BalƗš, JƗmƗsp, et KavƗd.” Historia i ĝiwat 4 (2015). Jackson Bonner, Michael. “Sasanian Propaganda in the Reign of ঩usraw ƖnnjšƯrvƗn.” In Husraw Ier: Reconstruction d’un règne: Sources et documents. Edited by C. Jullien, 1–25. Paris: Peeters, 2015. Jacobi, Renate. “Muk࡯ h࡯ aঌram.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Jafri, S. H. M. Origins and Early Development of Shi‘a Islam. 1978. Repr. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Al- JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr. ThalƗth rasƗ’il. Cairo: al-Ma ৬baދa al-Sala yya, 1926. ,ayawƗn. 7 Vols. Beirut: DƗr IতyƗ’ al-Tur Ɨth al-‘ArabƯ ۉ-Al- JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr. KitƗb al 1969 reprint. Al- JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr. KitƗb al- BayƗn wa’l-tabyƯn. 4 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al-J Ưl, 1990. Al- JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr. The Book of the Misers: A Translation of al-Bukhal Ɨ’. Translated by R. B. Serjeant. Reading: Garnet, 1997. .iܲ. 4 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2000ۊAl- JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr. RasƗ’il al- JƗ Al- JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr. KitƗb al- BukhalƗ’. Beirut: DƗr al-ৡƗ dir, N.D. Al- JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr. Pseudo- al-JƗতi਌. KitƗb al- TƗj  akhlƗq al- mulnjk. Translated by Charles Pellat as Le livre de la couronne. Paris: Société d’édition “Les belles lettres,” 1954. Al- JahshiyƗrƯ, Muতammad b. ‘Abdus. KitƗb al- WuzarƗҲ wa’l-kuttƗb. Cairo: Muৢ৬afá al- BƗbƯ al-ণ alabƯ, 1938. JanMohamed, Abdul. “The Economy of Manichean Allegory.” In The Post- Colonial Studies Reader. Edited by Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Grifths, and Helen Tifn, 18–23. London: Routledge, 1995. Jawad, Ferida. “The Triumph of Arabism: The Shu‘njbiyya Controversy and the National Identity of Modern Iraq.” Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 13 (1997): 53–87. Jayyusi, Lena. The Adventures of Sayf Ben Dhi Yazan: An Arab Folk Epic. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999. Jenkins, Keith. “A Postmodernist Reply to Perez Zagorin.” History and Theory 39, 2 (2000): 181–200. Joshua the Stylite. The Chronicle of Joshua the Stylite, Composed in Syriac A.D. 507 with a Translation into English and Notes. Translated by W. Wright. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1882. Joyce, Patrick, and Kelly, Catriona. “History and Post- Modernism.” Past and Present 133 (1991): 204–213. Jullien, C., Ed. Husraw Ier: Reconstruction d’un règne: Sources et documents. Paris: Peeters, 2015. Jung, Carl. Man and his Symbols. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964. JnjzjƗnƯ, MinhƗj-i SirƗj. ܑabaqƗt-i NƗ܈irƯ. 2 Vols. Tehran: AsƗ৬Ưr, 2010/2011. Kanga, M. “Kingship and Religion in Iran.” Acta Iranica 3 (1974): 221–231. Karbowska, A. “Einige Bemerkungen über BahrƗm Gur; Epos und Geschichte.” Folia Orientalia 22 (1984): 97–109. Kassock, Zeke. The Greater Iranian Bundahishn: A Pahlavi Student’s 2013 Guide. Fred- ericksburg: Kassock Bros. Publishing Co., 2013. Kaster, Robert. Guardians of Language: The Grammarian and Society in Late Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988. Bibliography 223 Keaney, Heather. Medieval Islamic Historiography: Remembering Rebellion. London: Routledge, 2013. Kennedy, Hugh, Ed. The Early Abbasid Caliphate: A Political History. London: Croom Helm, 1981. Kennedy, Hugh, Ed. The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the Early Islamic State. London: Routledge, 2001. Kennedy, Hugh, Ed. The Court of the Caliphs: When Baghdad Ruled the Muslim World. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2004. Kennedy, Hugh, Ed. “The Decline and Fall of the First Muslim Empire.” Der Islam 81 (2004): 3–30. Kennedy, Hugh. “The Caliphate.” In A Companion to the History of the Middle East. Edited by Youssef Choueiri, 52–67. Malden: Blackwell, 2005. Kennedy, Hugh, Ed. The Great Arab Conquests: How the Spread of Islam Changed the World We Live in. Philadelphia: Da Capo Press, 2007. Kennedy, Hugh, Ed. Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and His Work. Princeton: Darwin, 2008. Kennedy, Philip. Abu Nuwas: A Genius of Poetry. Oxford: Oneworld, 2005. Kennedy, Philip. Ed. On Fiction and Adab in Medieval Arabic Literature. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2005. Kennet, Derek. “The Decline of Eastern Arabia in the Sasanian Period.” Arabian Archae- ology and Epigraphy 18 (2007): 86–122. Khaleghi- Motlagh, Djalal. “AždahƗ in Persian Literature.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1987. Khalek, Nancy. Damascus after the Muslim Conquest: Text and Image in Early Islam. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011. Khalidi, Tarif. Islamic Historiography: The Histories of Mas‘njdƯ. Albany: State Univer- sity of New York Press, 1975. Khalidi, Tarif. Ed. Land Tenure and Social Transformations in the Middle East. Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1984. Khalidi, Tarif. Arabic Historical Thought in the Classical Period. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Al- Khalili, Jim. The House of Wisdom: How Arabic Science Saved Ancient Knowledge and Gave Us the Renaissance. New York: Penguin, 2011. Khanam, R., Ed. Encyclopaedic Ethnography of Middle-East and Central Asia. 3 Vols. New Delhi: Global Vision, 2005. Al-Kh Ɨ৬ib al- BaghdƗdƯ, Abnj Bakr Aতmad b. ‘AlƯ. Ta’rƯkh BaghdƗd. 22 vols. Beirut: DƗr al- Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1997. Khoury, Nuha. “The Dome of the Rock, the Ka‘ba, and Ghumdan: Arab Myths and Umayyad Monuments.” Muqurnas 10 (1993): 57–65. Khusraw ud RƝdag. Edited and translated by J. M. Unvala as The Pavlavi Text: “King Husrav and His Boy.” Paris: P. Geuthner, 1921. Kilpatrick, Hilary. Making the Great Book of Songs: Compilation and the Author’s Craft in Abnj l- Faraj al- I܈bahƗnƯ’s KitƗb al- aghƗnƯ. London: Routledge, 2003. Kinberg, Leah. “Literal Dreams and Prophetic ণadƯth in Classical Islam: A Comparison of Two Ways of Legitimation.” Der Islam 70 (1993): 279–300. Kister, M. J. “Mecca and TamƯm (Aspects of their Relations).” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 8, 2 (1965): 113–163. Kister, M. J. “Al-ণƯ ra: Some Notes on its Relation with Arabia.” Arabica 15, 2 (1968): 143–169. 224 Bibliography Kister, M. J. “Do not Assimilate Yourselves LƗ tashabbahnj ” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 12 (1989): 321–370. Kister, M. J. “ ‘The Crowns of this Community.’ Some Notes on the Turban in the Muslim Tradition.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 24 (2000): 217–245. Klima, O. “BahrƗm V Gǀr.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1989. Knauf, E. A. “The Persian Administration in Arabia.” Transeuphratène 2 (1990): 202–217. Korangy, A., Thackston, W. M., Mottahedeh, R., and Granara, W., Eds. Essays in Islamic Philology, History, and Philosophy: A Festschrift in Celebration and Honor of Pro- fessor Ahmad Mahdavi Damghani’s 90th Birthday. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2016. Kraemer, Joel. Humanism in the Renaissance of Islam: The Cultural Revival during the Buyid Age. 2nd ed. Leiden: Brill, 1992. Kristó-Nagy, István T. La pensée d’Ibn al-Muqaffa‘: un “agent double” dans le monde persan et arabe. Versailles: Éditions de Paris, 2013. -Vols., plus index. Beirut: DƗr al 8 .ۊAl- KnjfƯ, Aতmad b. A‘tham. KitƗb al- Futnj AঌwƗ’, 1991. Kurd ‘AlƯ, Muতammad, Ed. RasƗ’il al- bulaghƗ’. Cairo: DƗr-al- Kutub al-‘Arabiyya al- KubrƗ, 1913. Labib, Tahar, Ed. Imagining the Arab Other: How Arabs and Non-Arabs View Each Other. London: I. B. Tauris, 2008. Lachmann, Renate. “Mnemonic and Intertextual Aspects of Literature.” In A Companion to Cultural Memory Studies. Edited by Astrid Erll and Ansgar Nünning, 301–310. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010. Lambton, A. K. S. “Justice in the Medieval Persian Theory of Kingship.” Studia Islamica 17 (1962): 91–119. Lammens, Henri. La Mecque à la veille de l’Hégire. Beirut: Imprimerie catholique, 1924. Landau- Tasseron, Ella. “Sayf ibn ‘Umar in Medieval and Modern Scholarship.” Der Islam 67, 1 (1990): 1–26. Landau- Tasseron, Ella. “Features of the Pre-Conquest Muslim Armies in the Time of Muতammad.” In The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 3: States, Resources and Armies. Edited by Averil Cameron, Lawrence Conrad, and G. R. D. King, 299–336. Princeton: Darwin, 1995. ,imyariyya de NašwƗn b. Sa‘Ưdۊ Ưda܈Larcher, Pierre. “L’Ode à Himyar: Traduction de la qa avec une introduction et des notes.” Middle Eastern Literatures 6, 2 (2003): 159–175. Larsson, Göran. Ibn García’s Shu‘njbiyya Letter: Ethnic and Theological Tensions in Medieval al-Andalus . Leiden: Brill, 2003. Lassner, Jacob. The Shaping of ‘AbbƗsid Rule. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980. Lassner, Jacob. Islamic Revolution and Historical Memory: An Inquiry into the Art of ‘AbbƗsid Apologetics. New Haven: Eisenbrauns, 1986. Lassner, Jacob. “The ‘Abbasid Dawla: An Essay on the Concept of Revolution in Early Islam.” In Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity. Edited by F. M. Clover and R. S. Humphreys, 247–270. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989. Lassner, Jacob. The Middle East Remembered: Forged Identities, Competing Narratives, Contested Spaces. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000. Latham, J. D. “The Beginnings of Arabic Prose Literature: the Epistolary Genre, ‘Abd al- ণamƯd al-K Ɨtib.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period. Edited by A. F. L. Beeston, T. M. Johnstone, R. B. Ser- jeant, and G. R. Smith, 154–179. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Bibliography 225 Latham, J. D. “Ibn al- Muqaffa‘ and Early ‘Abbasid Prose.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 48–77. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1990. Lazard, G. “The Rise of the New Persian Language.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 595–632. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Lecker, Michael. “Biographical Notes on Abnj ‘Ubayda Ma‘mar b. al- MuthannƗ.” Studia Islamica 81 (1995): 71–100. Lecker, Michael. “The Conversion of ণimyar to Judaism and the Jewish Bannj Hadl of Medina.” Die Welt des Orients 26 (1995): 129–136. Lecomte, G. Ibn Qutayba (mort en 276/889): L’homme, son oeuvre, ses idées. Damascus: Institut français de Damas, 1965. Lecomte, G. “Ibn Kutayba.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Leder, Stefan. “Features of the Novel in Early Historiography: The Downfall of XƗlid al- QasrƯ.” Oriens 32 (1990): 72–96. Leder, Stefan, Ed. “The Literary Use of Khabar: A Basic Form of Historical Writing.” In The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 1: Problems in the Literary Source Material. Edited by Averil Cameron and Lawrence Conrad, 277–315. Princeton: Darwin, 1992. Leder, Stefan. “The Paradigmatic Character of MadƗ’inƯ’s ‘shnjrƗ-Narration’.” Studia Islamica 88 (1998): 35–54. Leder, Stefan. Story- telling in the Framework of non-Fictional Arabic Literature. Wies- baden: Harrassowitz, 1998. Leder, Stefan. “Conventions of Fictional Narration.” In Story- telling in the Framework of non- Fictional Arabic Literature, 34–60. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998. Leder, Stefan. “The Use of Composite Form in the Making of the Islamic Historical Tra- dition.” In On Fiction and Adab in Medieval Arabic Literature. Edited by Philip Kennedy, 125–148. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2005. Levy, R. “Notes on Costume from Arabic Sources.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 67, 2 (1935): 319–338. Levy, R. “Persia and the Arabs.” In The Legacy of Persia. Edited by A. J. Arberry, 60–88. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1953. Levy- Rubin, Milka. Non- Muslims in the Early Islamic Empire: From Surrender to Coexistence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Lewental, D. Gershon. QƗdisiyyah, Then and Now: A Case Study of History and Memory, Religion, and Nationalism in Middle Eastern Discourse. Waltham: Brandeis University Dissertation, 2011. Lewis, Bernard. Islam in History: Ideas, People, and Events in the Middle East. 2nd ed. Chicago: Open Court, 1993. Lewis, Bernard. The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 Years. New York: Scribner, 1995. Lewis, Bernard and Holt, Peter, Eds. Historians of the Middle East. London: Oxford University Press, 1962. Lichtenstädter, Ilse. Women in the Aiyâm al-‘Arab: A Study of Female Life during Warfare in Preislamic Arabia. London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1935. Lindsay, James E., Ed. Ibn ‘AsƗkir and Early Islamic History. Princeton: Darwin, 2001. Litvinksi, B. A. “The Hephthalite Empire.” In History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Vol. 3: The Crossroads of Civilizations: A.D. 250–750. Edited by B. A. Litvinski, Zhang Guang- da, and R. Shabani Samghabadi, 135–162. Paris: Unesco, 1996. 226 Bibliography Litvinksi, B. A., Guang- da, Zhang, and Samghabadi, R. Shabani, Eds. History of Civiliza- tions of Central Asia, Vol. 3: The Crossroads of Civilizations: A.D. 270–750. Paris: Unesco, 1996. Løkkegaard, Frede. Islamic Taxation in the Classical Period. Copenhagen: Branner & Korch, 1950. Lukonin, V. G. “Political, Social and Administrative Institutions: Taxes and Trade.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 2: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 681–746. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Macdonald, M. C. A. Literacy and Identity in Pre- Islamic Arabia. Farnham: Vari- orum, 2009. Macdonald, M. C. A. “Reections on the Linguistic Map of Pre- Islamic Arabia.” In Lit- eracy and Identity in Pre-Islamic Arabia, (III) 28–79. Farnham: Variorum, 2009. Macdonald, M. C. A. “Some Reections on Epigraphy and Ethnicity in the Roman Near East.” In Literacy and Identity in Pre- Islamic Arabia, (IV) 177–190. Farnham: Vari- orum, 2009. Macdonald, M. C. A. “Arabs, Arabias, and the Greeks: Contact and Perceptions.” In Lit- eracy and Identity in Pre-Islamic Arabia, (V) 1–33. Farnham: Variorum, 2009. Macdonald, M. C. A. “On Saracens, the RawwƗfah Inscription and the Roman Army.” In Literacy and Identity in Pre-Islamic Arabia, (VIII) 1–26. Farnham: Variorum, 2009. Macdonald, M. C. A. “Arabs, Arabias, and Arabic before Late Antiquity.” Topoi 16 (2009): 277–332. Macdonald, M. C. A. “Ancient Arabia and the Written Word.” In The Development of Arabic as a Written Language (Supplement to the Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 40), 5–28. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2010. Macdonald, M. C. A. “ ‘Romans Go Home’? Rome and Other ‘Outsiders’ as Viewed from the Syro-Arabian Desert.” In Inside and Out: Interactions between Rome and the Peoples on the Arabian and Egyptian Frontiers in Late Antiquity. Edited by Jitse H. F. Dijkstra and Greg Fisher, 145–163. Leuven: Peeters, 2014. Macdonald, M. C. A., Corcella, A., Daryaee, T., Fisher, G., Gibbs, M., Lewin, A., Violante, D., and Whately, C., “Arabs and Empires before the Sixth Century.” In Arabs and Empires before Islam. Edited by Greg Fisher. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Mackenzie, D. N. “ƜrƗn, ƜrƗnšahr.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1998. Madelung, Wilferd. “The Assumption of the Title ShƗhƗnshƗh by the Bnjyids.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 28, 2–3 (1969): 84–108. Madelung, Wilferd. “The Reign of the Daylam (Dawlat al- Daylam).” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 28, 2–3 (1969): 168–183. Madelung, Wilferd. “The Minor Dynasties of Northern Iran.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 198–249. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Madelung, Wilferd. “Abnj ‘Ubayda Ma‘mar b. al-Muthann Ɨ as a Historian.” Journal of Islamic Studies 3 (1992): 47–56. Margoliouth, D. S. “The Origins of Arabic Poetry.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 57, 3 (1925): 417–449. Maricq, André. “Hatra de Sanatrouq.” Syria 32, 3–4 (1955): 273–288. Maricq, André. “Res Gestae Divi Saporis.” Syria 35 (1958): 295–360. Marín-Guzmán, Roberto. Popular Dimensions of the ‘Abbasid Revolution: A Case Study of Medieval Islamic Social History. Cambridge: Fulbright- LASPAU, afliated with Harvard University, 1990. Bibliography 227 Marlow, Louise. “Kings, Prophets and the ‘UlamƗ’ in Mediaeval Islamic Advice Liter- ature.” Studia Islamica 81 (1995): 101–120. Marlow, Louise. Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1997. Marsham, Andrew. Rituals of Islamic Monarchy: Accession and Succession in the First Muslim Empire. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009. Mason, Herbert, Ed. Testimonies and Reections: Essays of Louis Massignon. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1989. Massignon, L. “al- K࡯ hawarnaল.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Massignon, L. “SalmƗn PƗk and the Spiritual Beginnings of Iranian Islam.” In Testimo- nies and Reections: Essays of Louis Massignon. Edited by Herbert Mason, 93–110. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1989. Massignon, L. “Nouvelles recherchés sur SalmƗn PƗk.” In A Locust’s Leg: Studies in Honour of S. H. Taqizadeh. Edited by W. B. Henning and E. Yarshater, 178–181. London: Percy Lund, Humphries, 1962. Al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Abnj’l-ণasan. KitƗb al- TanbƯh wa’l-ishrƗf. Translated by B. Carra de Vaux as Le Livre de l’avertissement et de la revision. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1896. Al-Mas‘ njdƯ, Abnj’l-ণasan. Murnjj al- dhahab wa- ma‘Ɨdin al- jawhar. 4 Vols. Beirut: Dar IতyƗ’ al- TurƗth al-‘ArabƯ, 2002. McAuliffe, Jane Dammen, Ed. The Cambridge Companion to the Qur’Ɨn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Megill, Allan. “History, Memory, Identity.” History of the Human Sciences 11, 3 (1998): 37–62. Meisami, J. S. “The Past in Service of the Present: Two Views of History in Medieval Persia.” Poetics Today 14, 2 (1993): 247–275. Meisami, J. S. Persian Historiography: To the End of the Twelfth Century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1999. Meisami, J. S. “Mas‘njdƯ and the Reign of al-Am Ưn.” In On Fiction and Adab in Medieval Arabic Literature. Edited by Philip Kennedy, 149–176. Wiesbaden: Harrassow- itz, 2005. Meisami, J. S. “History as Literature.” In Persian Historiography. Edited by Charles Melville, 1–55. London: I. B. Tauris, 2012. Meisami, Julie and Starkey, Paul, Eds. Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature. London: Routledge, 1998. Melchert, Christopher. Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Oxford: Oneworld, 2006. Mélikoff, I. Abnj Muslim: le “porte- hache” du Khorassan dans la tradition épique turco- iranienne. Paris: A. Maisonneuve, 1962. Melville, Charles, Ed. Persian Historiography. Vol. 10 of A History of Persian Liter- ature. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater. London: I. B. Tauris, 2012. de Menasce, J. “Zoroastrian Literature after the Muslim Conquest.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 543–565. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Mercer, Kobena. “Welcome to the Jungle: Identity and Diversity in Postmodern Politics.” In Identity: Community, Culture, Difference. Edited by Jonathan Rutherford, 43–71. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1990. Meri, Josef, Ed. Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia. 2 Vols. London: Routledge, 2006. Merten, Elke. Zwei Herrscherfeste in der Historia Augusta; Untersuchungen zu den pompae der Kaiser Gallienus und Aurelianus. Bonn: R. Habelt Verlag, 1968. 228 Bibliography Michael the Syrian. Chronique de Michel le Syrien: patriarche jacobite d’Antioche (1166–1199). 4 Vols. Edited and translated by J. B. Chabot. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1899–1910. Miles, Richard, Ed. Constructing Identities in Late Antiquity. London: Routledge, 1999. Millar, Fergus. “The Theodosian Empire (408–450) and the Arabs: Saracens or Ishmael- ites?” In Cultural Borrowings and Ethnic Appropriations in Antiquity. Edited by Erich Gruen, 297–317. Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 2005. Millar, Fergus. “Rome’s Arab Allies in Late Antiquity: Conceptions and Representa- tions from within the Frontiers of the Empire.” In Commutatio et Contentio: Studies in the Late Roman, Sasanian, and Early Islamic Near East, In Memory of Zeev Rubin. Edited by Henning Börm and Josef Wiesehöfer, 199–226. Dusseldorf: Wellem, 2010. Mink, Louis. “Narrative Form as a Cognitive Instrument.” In The Writing of History: Lit- erary Form and Historical Understanding. Edited by Robert Canary and Henry Kozicki, 129–149. Madison: University of Wisocnsin Press, 1978. Minorsky, V. La domination des Dailamites. Paris: E. Leroux, 1932. Minorsky, V. “The Older Preface to the ShƗh-nƗma.” In Studi orientalistici in onore di Giorgio Levi Della Vida. 2 Vols. Edited by Giorgio Levi Della Vida, II, 159–179. Rome: Istituto per l’Oriente, 1956. Miskawayh, Aতmad b. Muতammad. KitƗb TajƗrib al- umam. 7 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al- Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2003. Mittwoch, E. “AyyƗm al-‘Arab.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Moawiyah, M., Ed. Arabian Studies in Honour of Mahmoud Ghul. Wiesbaden: Har- rassowitz, 1989. Moazami, Mahnaz. “঳usraw-Ư KawƗdƗn ud rƝdak-Ɲw.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 2014. Monroe, James. The Shu‘ubiyya in al- Andalus: The RisƗla of Ibn García and Five Refu- tations. Berkeley: Univerity of California Press, 1970. Morony, Michael. “Religious Communities in Late Sasanian and Early Muslim Iraq.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 17, 2 (1974): 113–135. Morony, Michael. “The Effects of the Muslim Conquest on the Persian Population of Iraq.” Iran 14 (1976): 41–59. Morony, Michael. “Bayn al- Fitnatayn: Problems in the Periodization of Early Islamic History.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 40, 3 (1981): 247–251. Morony, Michael. “Continuity and Change in the Administrative Geography of Late Sas- anian and Early Islamic al-‘Iraq.” Iran 20 (1982): 1–49. Morony, Michael. Iraq after the Muslim Conquest. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984. Morony, Michael. “Landholding and Social Change: Lower al-‘Iraq in the Early Islamic Period.” In Land Tenure and Social Transformations in the Middle East. Edited by Tarif Khalidi, 209–222. Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1984. Morony, Michael. “Syria under the Persians 610–629.” Proceedings of the Second Sym- posium on the History of BilƗd al- ShƗm during the Early Islamic Period up to 40 A.H./640 A.D. Edited by M. Adnan Bakhit, 87–95. Amman, 1987. Morony, Michael. “The Arabisation of the Gulf.” In The Arab Gulf and the Arab World. Edited by B. R. Pridham, 3–28. London: Croom Helm, 1988. Morony, Michael.“Commerce in Early Islamic Iraq.” Asien, Afrika, Lateinamerika: Zeitschrift des Zentralen Rates für Asien-, Afrika- und Lateinamerikawissenschaften in der DDR 20 (1993): 699–720. Bibliography 229 Morony, Michael. “Land Use and Settlement Patterns in Late Sasanian and Early Islamic Iraq.” In The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 2: Land Use and Settlement Patterns. Edited by A. Cameron, L. Conrad, and G. R. D. King, 221–229. Princeton: Darwin, 1994. Morony, Michael. “The Late Sasanian Economic Impact on the Arabian Peninsula.” NƗme-ye IrƗn-e BƗstƗn 1, 2 (2001–2002): 25–37. Morony, Michael. “Economic Boundaries? Late Antiquity and Early Islam.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 47, 2 (2004): 166–194. Morony, Michael. “SƗsƗnids.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Morony, M. and Guidi, M. “Mazdak.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Mottahedeh, Roy. “The ‘Abbasid Caliphate in Iran.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 57–89. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Mottahedeh, Roy. “The Shu‘ûbîyah Controversy and the Social History of Early Islamic Iran.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 7, 2 (1976): 161–182. ۊMourad, Suleiman. “On Early Islamic Historiography: Abnj IsmƗ‘Ưl al-Azd Ư and His Futnj al- ShƗm.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 120 (2000): 577–593. Muslim. 5 Vols. Beirut: DƗr IতyƗ’ al- TurƗth ۊƯۊa܇ .Muslim b. al-ণ ajjƗj al- QushayrƯ al-‘ArabƯ, 1954. Obtained from www.shamela.ws. Nagel, T. Untersuchungen zur Entstehung des abbasidischen Kalifates. Bonn: Selbstver- lag des Orientalischen Seminars der Universität, 1972. Nallino, C. A. La Littérature arabe des origines à l’époque de la dynastie umayyade. Translated by Charles Pellat. Paris: G. P. Maisonneuve, 1950. Nallino, C. A. “Abnj’l-Faradj al-I ৢfahƗnƯ,” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Nasr, S. H. “ৡnjsm.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 442–463. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1975. Netton, I. R., Ed. Studies in Honour of Clifford Edmund Bosworth, Vol. 1: Hunter of the East: Arabic and Semitic Studies. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Neumann, Birgit. Erinnerung-Identität-Narration: Gattungstypologie und Funktionen kanadischer “Fictions of Memory.” Berlin: De Gruyter, 2005. Neumann, Birgit. “The Literary Representations of Memory.” In A Companion to Cul- tural Memory Studies. Edited by A. Erll and A. Nünning, 333–343. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2010. Neuwirth, A. and Pitsch, A., Eds. Crisis and Memory in Islamic Societies. Beirut: Ergon Verlag Würzburg in Kommission, 2001. Neuwith, A., Embaló, B., Günther, S., and Jarrar, M., Eds. Myths, Historical Archetypes and Symbolic Figures in Arabic Literature: Towards a New Hermeneutic Approach. Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1999. Nevo, Yehuda, and Koren, Judith. Crossroads to Islam: The Origins of the Arab Religion and the Arab State. Amherst: Prometheus Books, 2003. Newby, G. H. “Abraha and Sennacherib: A Talmudic Parallel to the TafsƯr on SurƗt al- FƯl.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 94 (1974): 431–437. Nicholson, Reynold. A Literary History of the Arabs. 1907. Repr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. NihƗyat al-irab fƯ akhbƗr al-Furs wa’l-‘Arab. Tehran: Anjuman-i ƖthƗr va MafƗkhir-i FarhangƯ, 1997. Ni਌Ɨm al-Mulk. The Book of Government or Rules for Kings: The SiyƗsatnƗma or Siyar al- Mulnjk. Translated by Hubert Darke. 1960. Repr. London: Routledge, 2001. 230 Bibliography Nöldeke, Theodor. Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden. 1879. Repr. Leiden: Brill, 1973. Nöldeke, Theodor. The Iranian National Epic or The Shahnamah. Translated by Leonid Bogdanov. 1930. Repr. Philadelphia: Porcupine Press, 1979. Nora, Pierre. “Between Memory and History: Les lieux de mémoire.” Translated by Marc Roudebush. Representations, 26 (1989): 7–21. Norris, H. T. “Fables and Legends.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles-Lettres . Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 136–145. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Norris, H. T. “Shu‘njbiyyah in Arabic Literature.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Liter- ature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 31–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Noth, Albrecht, and Conrad, Lawrence. The Early Arabic Historical Tradition: A Source- Critical Study. Translated by Michael Bonner. Princeton: Darwin, 1994. Noth, Albrecht, and Conrad, Lawrence. “IৢfahƗn-NihƗwand: A Source-Critical Study in Early Islamic Historiography.” In The Expansion of the Early Islamic State. Edited by Fred Donner, 241–262. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. Nyberg, H. S. “Sassanid Mazdaism According to Moslem Sources.” Journal of the K. R. Cama Oriental Institute 39 (1958): 1–63. Olinder, Gunnar. The Kings of Kinda of the Family of Ɩkil al- MurƗr. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1927. Omar, Irfan. “Khidr in the Islamic Tradition.” The Muslim World 83, 3–4 (1993): 279–294. Omidsalar, Mahmoud. “Unburdening Ferdowsi: Poet and Hero in the Persian Book of Kings.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 116, 2 (1996): 235–242. Omidsalar, Mahmoud. “Could al-Tha‘âlibî Have Used the Shâhnâma as a Source?” Der Islam 75, 2 (1998): 338–346. Omidsalar, Mahmoud. Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, the ShƗhnƗmeh. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. Orfali, Bilal. The Art of Anthology: al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ and his YatƯmat al- Dahr. New Haven: Yale University Dissertation, 2009. Orfali, Bilal. “The Works of Abnj Manৢnjr al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ (350–429/961–1039).” Journal of Arabic Literature 40 (2009): 273–318. Orfali, Bilal. “The Sources of al-Tha‘ ƗlibƯ in YatƯmat al-Dahr and Tatimmat al- YatƯma.” Middle Eastern Literatures: Incorporating Edebiyat (2013): 1–47. Osman, Ghada. “Oral vs. Written Transmission: The Case of ৫abarƯ and Ibn Sa‘d.” Arabica 48, 1 (2001): 66–80. Partt, Tudor, Ed. Israel and Ishmael: Studies in Muslim-Jewish Relations. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. Peacock, A. C. S., Mediaeval Islamic Historiography and Political Legitimacy: Bal‘amƯ’s TƗrƯkhnƗma. London: Routledge, 2007. Peacock, A. C. S. and Tor, Deborah, Eds. Medieval Central Asia and the Persianate World: Iranian Tradition and Islamic Civilisation. London: I. B. Tauris, 2015. Peck, Elsie. “Crown II: From the Seleucids to the Islamic Conquest.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1993. Pellat, Charles. “Variations sur le thème de l’adab.” Correspondance d’Orient 5–6 (1964): 19–37. Pellat, Charles. “Al- JƗতi਌.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 78–95. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Bibliography 231 Pellat, Charles. “Al-ৡƗত ib Ibn ‘AbbƗd.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 96–111. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Perikhanian, A. “Iranian Society and Law.” In Cambridge, History of Iran, Vol. 3, 2: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 627–680. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Peters, F. E., Ed. Mecca: A Literary History of the Muslim Holy Land. Princeton: Prince- ton University Press, 1994. Peters, F. E., Ed. Muhammad and the Origins of Islam. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. Peters, F. E., Ed. The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999. Piacentini, V. Fiorani. “ArdashƯr I PƗpakƗn and the Wars against the Arabs: Working Hypothesis on the Sasanian Hold on the Gulf.” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 15 (1985): 57–77. Pohl, Walter, Ed. Kingdoms of the Empire: The Integration of the Barbarians in Late Antiquity. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Pohl, Walter, Ed. Strategies of Distinction: The Construction of Ethnic Communities, 300–800. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Pope, Arthur Upham. Introducing Persian Architecture. Shiraz: The Asia Institute, Pahlavi University, 1969. Popovic, Alexandre. The Revolt of African Slaves in Iraq in the 3rd/9th Century. Tran- lated by Leon King. Princeton: Markus Wiener, 1999. Potts, D. T., Ed. Dilmun: New Studies in the Archaeology and Early History of Bahrain. Berlin: D. Reimer, 1983. Pourshariati, Parveneh. Iranian Tradition in Tnjs and the Arab Presence in KhurƗsƗn. New York: Columbia University Dissertation, 1995. Pourshariati, Parveneh. “Local Histories of KhurƗsƗn and the Pattern of Arab Settlement.” Studia Iranica 27 (1998): 41–81. Pourshariati, Parveneh. “Local Historiography in Early Medieval Iran and the TƗrƯkh-i Bayhaq.” Iranian Studies 33, 1–2 (2000): 133–164. Pourshariati, Parveneh. Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian Parthian- Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran. London: I. B. Tauris, 2008. Pourshariati, Parveneh. “The AkhbƗr al-৫ iwƗl of Abnj ণanƯfa DƯnawarƯ: A Shu‘njbƯ Trea- tise on Late Antique Iran.” In Sources for the History of Sasanian and Post- Sasnian Iran. Edited by Rika Gyselen, 201–289. Bures-sur-Yvette: Groupe pour l’étude de la civilisation du Moyen-Orient, 2010. Pridham, B. R., Ed. The Arab Gulf and the Arab World. London: Croom Helm, 1988. :sƗn ‘AbbƗs. BeirutۊAl- QƗঌƯ, WadƗd, Ed. Studia Arabica et Islamica: Festschrift for I American University of Beirut, 1981. Al- QƗlƯ, Abnj ‘AlƯ. KitƗb Dhayl al- amƗlƯ wa’l-nawƗdir. 2 Vols. Beirut: al-Maktab al- TijƗrƯ, 1965. Al- Qur’an. Translated by Ahmed Ali. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001. Radkte, Bernd. “Towards a Typology of Abbasid Universal Chronicles.” In Occasional Papers of the School of Abbasid Studies, Vol. 3. Edited by D. Jackson, W. Heinrichs, P. M. Holt, H. N. Kennedy, and L. Richter-Bernburg, 1–18. St. Andrews: University of St. Andrews Press, 1991. Rapp, Claudia. Holy Bishops in Late Antiquity: The Nature of Christian Leadership in an Age of Transition. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. Reade, J., Ed. The Indian Ocean in Antiquity. London: Routledge, 1996. 232 Bibliography Reinink, Gerrit, and Stolte, Bernard, Eds. The Reign of Heraclius (610–641): Crisis and Confrontation. Leuven: Peeters, 2002. Retsö, Jan. The Arabs in Antiquity: Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayyads. London: Routledge, 2003. Retsö, Jan. “In the Shade of Himyar and Sasan: The Political History of Pre- Islamic Arabia According to the ‘AyyƗm al-‘arab- Literature.” Arabia: Revue de Sabéologie 2 (2004): 111–118. Retsö, Jan. “Arabs in Pre- Islamic South Arabia.” Archäologische Berichte aus dem Yemen 10 (2005): 127–130. Retsö, Jan. “Wahb b. Munabbih, the KitƗb al- tƯjƗn and the History of Yemen.” Arabia 3 (2005–2006): 227–236. Richards, D. S., Ed. Islamic Civilisation 950–1150. Oxford: Cassirer, 1973. Richter-Bernburg, Lutz. “Linguistic Shu‘njbƯya and Early Neo- Persian Prose.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 94, 1 (1974): 55–64. Ricoeur, Paul. Time and Narrative. 3 Vols. Translated by K. McLaughlin and D. Pellauer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. Robin, Christian. “Du noveau sur les Yaz‘anides.” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 16 (1986): 181–197. Robin, Christian. “Aux origines de l’état Himjarite: Himyar et Dhû Raydân.” In Arabian Studies in Honour of Mahmoud Ghul. Edited by M. Moawiyah, 104–112. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1989. Robin, Christian. “Les Arabes de ণimyar, des ‘Romains’ et des Perses (IIIe–VIe siècles de l’ère chrétienne).” Semitica et Classica 1 (2008): 167–208. Robinson, Chase. Empire and Elites after the Muslim Conquest: The Transformation of Northern Mesopotamia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Robinson, Chase. Islamic Historiography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Robinson, Chase. “The Conquest of Khnjzistan: A Historiographical Reassessment.” Bul- letin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 67, 1 (2004): 14–39. Robinson, Chase. ‘Abd al- Malik. Oxford: Oneworld, 2007. Rosenthal, Franz. A History of Muslim Historiography. Leiden: Brill, 1968. Rosenthal, Franz. “Dawla.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Rosenthal, Franz. “ণamza al-I ৢfahƗnƯ.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Rosivach, Vincent. “The Romans’ View of the Persians.” The Classical World 78, 1 (1984): 1–8. -îra: Ein Versuch zur arabisch ۉ-miden in alېRothstein, Gustav. Der Dynastie der La persischen Geschichte zur Zeit der Sasaniden. Berlin: Reuther and Reichard, 1899. Rowson, E. K. “al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. ammad as Viewed by the EarlyۊRubin, Uri. The Eye of the Beholder: The Life of Mu Muslims, A Textual Analysis. Princeton: Darwin, 1995. Rubin, Zeev. “Judaism and Rahmanite Monotheism in the Himyarite Kingdom of the Fifth Century.” In Israel and Ishmael: Studies in Muslim- Jewish Relations. Edited by Tudor Partt, 32–51. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. Rubin, Zeev. “ণamza al- IৢfahƗnƯ’s Sources for Sasanian History.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 35 (2008): 27–58. Rubin, Zeev. “Al-৫ abarƯ and the Age of the Sasanians.” In Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and His Work. Edited by Hugh Kennedy, 41–71. Princeton: Darwin, 2008. Rubin, Zeev. “The Reforms of Khusro AnnjshirwƗn.” In The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 3: States, Resources and Armies. Edited by A. Cameron, L. Conrad, and G. R. D. King, 227–297. Princeton: Darwin, 1995. Bibliography 233 Rubinacci, R. “Political Poetry.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles-Lettres . Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 185–201. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Rutherford, Jonathan, Ed. Identity: Community, Culture, Difference. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1990. Ryan, Marie- Laure. “Toward a Denition of Narrative.” In The Cambridge Companion to Narrative, 22–35. Edited by David Herman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Al-ৡƗ bi’, HilƗl. Rusnjm DƗr al- KhilƗfah: The Rules and Regulations of the ‘AbbƗsid Court. Translated by E. Salem. Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1977. Sadan, Joseph. “The ‘Nomad versus Sedentary’ Framework in Arabic Literature.” Fabula 15, 1–2 (1974): 59–86. Sadan, Joseph. “An Admirable and Ridiculous Hero: Some Notes on the Bedouin in Medieval Arabic Belles Lettres, on a Chapter of Adab by al-Râghib al-Isfahânî, and on a Literary Model in Which Admiration and Mockery Coexist.” Poetics Today 10, 3 (1989): 471–492. Sadighi, G. H. Les Mouvements religieux iraniens au IIe et au IIIe siècle de l’hégire. Paris: Les Presses modernes, 1938. :ammad. QumۊƗ’il Ɩl MuڲƗ’ir al- darajƗt fƯ fa܈Al-ৡ affƗr al- QummƯ, Abnj Ja‘far. Ba ৫ƗlƯ‘at al-N njr, 2005. Al- SƗmarrƗ’Ư, QƗsim. “Sayf ibn ‘Umar and ibn Saba’: A New Approach.” In Israel and Ishmael: Studies in Muslim- Jewish Relations. Edited by Tudor Partt, 52–58. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000. Sánchez, Ignacio. “Ibn Qutayba and the Ahl KhurƗsƗn: The Shu‘njbiyya Revisited.” In ‘Abbasid Studies, Vol. 4, Occasional Papers of the School of ‘Abbasid Studies. Edited by M. Bernards, 232–244. Exeter: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2013. Sartre, Maurice. The Middle East under Rome. Translated by C. Porter and E. Rawlings. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2005. Savant, Sarah Bowen. “Isaac as the Persians’ Ishmael: Pride and the Pre- Islamic Past in Ninth and Tenth-Century Islam.” Comparative Islamic Studies 2, 1 (2006): 5–25. Savant, Sarah Bowen. “Forgetting Ctesiphon: Iran’s Pre-Islamic Past, c.800–1100.” In History and Identity in the Late Antique Near East. Edited by Philip Wood. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Savant, Sarah Bowen. The New Muslims of Post- Conquest Iran: Tradition, Memory, and Conversion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Savant, Sarah Bowen. “Genealogy and Ethnogenesis in al-Mas‘udi’s Muruj al- dhahab.” In Genealogy and Knowledge in Muslim Societies: Understanding the Past. Edited by Sarah Bowen Savant and Helena de Felipe, 115–130. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014. Savant, Sarah Bowen. “Naming Shu‘njbƯs.” In Essays in Islamic Philology, History, and Philosophy: A Festschrift in Celebration and Honor of Professor Ahmad Mahdavi Damghani’s 90th Birthday. Edited by A. Korangy, W. M. Thackston, R. Mottahedeh, and W. Granara, 166–184. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2016. Savant, Sarah Bowen, and de Felipe, Helena, Eds. Genealogy and Knowledge in Muslim Societies: Understanding the Past. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014. Savran, Scott. “Cultural Polemics in the Early Islamic World: The Shu‘ubiyya Contro- versy.” Journal for the Study of Peace and Conict (2007–2008): 42–52. Savran, Scott. “The al- Qadisiyya Embassies: Cultural Polemics at Work in Early Islamic Historiography.” Encounters: An International Journal for the Study of Culture and Society 1 (2009): 119–139. 234 Bibliography Schaeder, H. H. “SawƗd.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. works by al- AzdƯ, Ibn-ۊThe futnj :ۊScheiner, Jens. “Writing the History of the futnj Aޏtham, and al- WƗqidƯ.” In The Lineaments of Islam: Studies in Honor of Fred McGraw Donner. Edited by Paul Cobb, 151–176. Leiden: Brill, 2012. Schoeler, Gregor. “Verfasser und Titel des dem öƗতi਌ zugeschriebenen sog. KitƗb al- TƗ÷.” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 130 (1980): 217–225. Schoeler, Gregor, “BashshƗr b. Burd, Abnj’l-‘AtƗhiyah and Abnj NuwƗs.” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles- Lettres. Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 275–299. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press, 1990. Schoeler, Gregor. The Genesis of Literature in Islam: From the Aural to the Read. In col- laboration with and translated by Shawkat Toorawa. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009. ammad: Nature and Authenticity. Translated byۊSchoeler, Gregor. The Biography of Mu Uwe Vagelpohl and edited by James Montgomery. London: Routledge, 2010. Schott, Jeremy. Christianity, Empire and the Making of Religion in Late Antiquity. Phila- delphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008. Segal, J. B. “Arabs at Hatra and the Vicinity: Marginalia on New Aramaic Texts.” Journal of Semitic Studies 31 (1986): 58–80. Sellheim, Rudolf. “Prophet, Chalif, und Geschichte: die Muhammed- Biographie des Ibn Isতâq.” Oriens 18–19 (1965–1966): 33–91. Shaban, M. A. The ‘AbbƗsid Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970. Shahbazi, A. Shahpur. “On the XwadƗy-nƗmag.” Acta Iranica 30 (1990): 208–229. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. “The Arabs in the Peace Treaty of A.D. 561.” Arabica 3, 2 (1956): 191–213. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. “Theodor Nöldeke’s ‘Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasa- niden’: An Evaluation.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 8, 1 (1977): 117–122. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. “Two Qur’anic Snjras: al-F Ưl and Qurayš.” In Studia Arabica et Islamica: sƗn ‘AbbƗs. Edited by WadƗd al- QƗঌƯ, 429–436. Beirut: AmericanۊFestschrift for I University of Beirut, 1981. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century. Washington, D.C.: Dum- barton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1984. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fifth Century. Washington, D.C.: Dum- barton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1989. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century. 2 Vols. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1995. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. “Byzantium and the Arabs during the Reign of Constantine: The NamƗra Inscription.” Byzantinische Forschungen 26 (2000): 81–86. ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn. “Lakhmids.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Shaked, Shaul. “From Iran to Islam: Notes on Some Themes in Transmission.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 4 (1984): 31–67. Shaked, Shaul. “From Iran to Islam: On Some Symbols of Royalty.” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 7 (1986): 75–91. Shaked, Shaul. Dualism in Transformation: Varieties of Religion in Sasanian Iran. London: Routledge, 1994. Shalem, Avinoam. “The Fall of al-Mad Ɨ’in: Some Literary References Concerning Sasa- nian Spoils of War in Medieval Islamic Treasures.” Iran 32 (1994): 77–81. Bibliography 235 Sharon, Moshe. Black Banners from the East, 2 Vols. Vol. 1: The Establishment of the ‘AbbƗsid State: Incubation of a Revolt. Leiden: Brill, 1983. Vol. 2: Revolt: The Social and Military Aspects of the ‘AbbƗsid Revolution. Jerusalem: Max Schloessinger Memorial Fund, 1990. Shboul, Aতmad. Al- Mas‘njdƯ and his World: A Muslim Humanist and His Interest in Non- Muslims. London: Ithaca Press, 1979. Shepherd, Dorothy. “Sasanian Art.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 2: The Seleu- cid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 1055–1112. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Shoshan, Boaz. Poetics of Islamic Historiography: Deconstructing ܑabarƯ’s History. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Shoshan, Boaz. The Arabic Historical Tradition and the Early Islamic Conquests: Folk- lore, Tribal Lore, Holy War. London: Routledge, 2016. Shoufani, Elias. Al- Riddah and the Muslim Conquest of Arabia. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973. Sidwell, K., Ed. Pleiades Setting. Essays for Pat Cronin on his 65th Birthday. Cork: Uni- versity College Cork, 2002. Sijpesteijn, Petra, Sundelin, Lennart, Tovar, Soa, and Zomeño, Amalia, Eds. From Al- Andalus to Khurasan: Documents from the Medieval Islamic World. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Sims- Williams, Nicholas, Ed. Indo- Iranian Languages and Peoples. Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press, 2003. Sizgorich, Thomas. “Narrative and Community in Islamic Late Antiquity.” Past and Present 185 (2004): 9–42. Sizgorich, Thomas. “ ‘Do Prophets Come with a Sword?’ Conquest, Empire, and Histor- ical Narrative in the Early Islamic World.” American Historical Review 112, 4 (2007): 993–1015. Sizgorich, Thomas. Violence and Belief in Late Antiquity: Militant Devotion in Christian- ity and Islam. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009. Skjærvø, P. O. “AždahƗ in Old and Middle Iranian.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1987. Smith, G. R. “Hunting Poetry (ܑardiyyƗt).” In Cambridge History of Arabic Literature: ‘Abbasid Belles-Lettres . Edited by Julia Ashtiany, T. M. Johnstone, J. D. Latham, R. B. Serjeant, and G. R. Smith, 167–184. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Smith, Sidney. “Events in Arabia in the 6th Century A.D.” Bulletin of the School of Orien- tal and African Studies 16, 3 (1954): 425–68. Sommer, Michael. Hatra: Geschichte und Kultur einer Karawanenstadt im römisch-par- thischen Mesopotamien. Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern, 2003. Soudavar, Abolala. The Aura of Kings: Legitimacy and Divine Sanction in Iranian King- ship. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers, 2003. Sourdel, Dominique. Le vizirat ‘abbƗside de 749 à 936 (132 à 324 de l’hégire). 2 Vols. Damascus: Institut français de Damas, 1959–1960. Sourdel, Dominique. “Questions de cérémonial ‘abbaside.” Revue des études islamiques 28 (1960): 121–148. Sperl, Stefan. “Islamic Kingship and Arabic Panegyric Poetry in the Early Ninth Century.” Journal of Arabic Literature 8 (1977): 20–35. 236 Bibliography Sprengling, M. “From Persian to Arabic.” The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 56, 2 (1939): 175–224; (conclusion) 56, 3: 325–336; (critical notes) 57, 3 (1940): 302–305. Spuler, Bertold. Iran in früh-islamischer Zeit: Politik, Kultur, Verwaltung und öffentli- ches Leben zwischen der arabischen und der seldschukischen Eroberung, 633 bis 1055. Wiesbaden: F. Steiner, 1952. Stepaniants, Marietta. “The Encounter of Zoroastrianism with Islam.” Philosophy East and West 52, 2 (2002): 159–172. Stern, S. M. “Ya‘qnjb the Coppersmith and Persian National Sentiment.” In Iran and Islam: In Memory of the Late Vladimir Minorsky. Edited by C. E. Bosworth, 535–555. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 1971. Stetkevych, S. P. The Poetics of Islamic Legitimacy: Myth, Gender, and Ceremony in the Classical Arabic Ode. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002. Al- ৫abarƯ, Abnj Ja‘far Muতammad b. JarƯr. Ta’rƯkh al- rusul wa’l-mulnjk or Annales quos scripsit Abu Djafar Mohammed Ibn Djarir at-Tabari. 15 Vols. in 3 series. Leiden: Brill, 1879–1901. Al- ৫abarƯ, Abnj Ja‘far Muতammad b. JarƯr. The History of al- ܑabarƯ, Vol. 1: General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood. Translated by Franz Rosenthal. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1989. Al- ৫abarƯ, Abnj Ja‘far Muতammad b. JarƯr. The History of al- ܑabarƯ, Vol. 5: The SƗsƗnids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen. Translated by C. E. Bosworth. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. Al- ৫abarƯ, Abnj Ja‘far Muতammad b. JarƯr. The History of al-ܑ abarƯ, Vol. 11: The Chal- lenge to the Empires. Translated by Khalid Blankinship. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993. Al- ৫abarƯ, Abnj Ja‘far Muতammad b. JarƯr. The History of al-ܑ abarƯ, Vol. 12: The Battle of al- QƗdisiyyah and the Conquest of Syria and Palestine. Translated by Yohanan Friedmann. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992. Tafazzoli, Ahmad. “Arabic Language II: Iranian Loanwords in Arabic.” Encyclopaedia Iranica. Online ed., 1986. Tafazzoli, Ahmad. Sasanian Society. New York: Bibliotheca Persica Press on behalf of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University, 2000. Talib, Adam. “Topoi and Topography in the Histories of al-ণƯ ra.” In History and Identity in the Late Antique Near East. Edited by Philip Wood, 123–147. Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press, 2013. Taqizadeh, S. H. “The Early Sasanians: Some Chronological Points which Possibly Call for Revision.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 11, 1 (1943): 6–51. The TƗrikh-e SistƗn. Translated by Milton Gold. Rome: Istituto italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1976. TƗrƯkh-i SƯstƗn. Tehran: IntishƗrƗt-i Mu‘Ưn, 2002. Tavakoli-Targhi, Mohamad. “Contested Memories: Narrative Structures and Allegorical Meanings of Iran’s Pre- Islamic History.” Iranian Studies 29, 1–2 (1996): 149–175. Al- TawতƯdƯ, Abnj ণayyƗn. KitƗb al-‘ImtƗ‘ wa’l-mu’Ɨnasa. Beirut: DƗr al-Ma‘rifa, 2004. Al- Tha‘ƗlibƯ, ‘Abd al-Malik b. Muতammad. KitƗb Ghurar akhbƗr mulnjk al-Furs wa- siyarihim. Translated by H. Zotenberg as Histoire des rois des Perses. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1900. Theophanes. The Chronicle of Theophanes: Anni Mundi 6095–6305 (A.D. 602–813). Edited and translated by Harry Turtledove. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1982. Bibliography 237 Thompson, Stith. Motif- Index of Folk-Literature: A Classication of Narrative Elements in Folktales, Ballads, Myths, Fables, Medieval Romances, Exempla, Fabliaux, Jest- Books, and Local Legends. 6 Vols. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1955–1958. Toorawa, Shawkat. Ibn AbƯ ܑƗhir Tayfnjr and Arabic Writerly Culture: A Ninth- Century Bookman in Baghdad. London: Routledge, 2005. Tor, Deborah. “An Historiographical Re- examination of the Appointment and Death of ‘AlƯ al- RiঌƗ.” Der Islam 78, 1 (2001): 103–128. Tor, Deborah. “Historical Representations of Ya‘qnjb b. al- Layth: A Reappraisal.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 12, 3 (2002): 247–275. Tor, Deborah. “The Islamisation of Iranian Kingly Ideals in the Persianate Fürsten- spiegel.” Iran 49 (2011): 115–122. Tor, Deborah. “The Long Shadow of Pre- Islamic Iranian Rulership: Antagonism or Assimilation.” In Late Antiquity: Eastern Perspectives. Edited by Teresa Bernheimer and Adam Silverstein, 145–163. Exeter: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2012. Tor, Deborah. “The Importance of KhurƗsƗn and Transoxiana in the Persianate Dynastic Period (850–1220).” In Medieval Central Asia and the Persianate World: Iranian Tra- dition and Islamic Civilisation. Edited by A. C. S. Peacock and Deborah Tor, 1–12. London: I. B. Tauris, 2015. Toral- Niehoff, Isabel. “Talking about Arab Origins: The Transmission of the ayyƗm al- ‘arab in Knjfa, Baৢra and BaghdƗd.” In Contexts of Learning in Baghdad from the 8th to the 10th centuries. Proceedings of the International Conference in Göttingen, 2011. Edited by Jens Scheiner and Damien Janos, 43–69. Toral- Niehoff, Isabel. “Late Antique Iran and the Arabs: the Case of al- Hira.” Journal of Persianate Studies 6 (2013): 115–126. .Ư ra: Eine arabische Kulturmetropole im spätantiken Kontextۉ-Toral- Niehoff, Isabel. Al Leiden: Brill, 2014. Treadwell, W. L. The Political History of the SƗmƗnid State. Oxford: Oxford University Dissertation, 1991. Treadwell, W. L. “ShƗhƗnshƗh and al- Malik al- Mu’ayyad: The Legitimation of Power in SƗmƗnid and Bnjyid Iran.” In Culture and Memory in Medieval Islam: Essays in Honour of Wilferd Madelung. Edited by Farhard Daftary and Josef Meri, 318–337. London, I. B. Tauris, 2003. Turner, John. “The abnƗ’ al- dawla: The Denition and Legitimation of Identity in Response to the Fourth Fitna.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 124, 1 (2004): 1–22. Turner, John. “Ishaq ibn Ibrahim.” In Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia, Vol. 1. Edited by Josef Meri, 402. London: Routledge, 2006. Turner, John. “AbnƗ’.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 3rd ed. ‘Umar, FƗrnjq. The ‘AbbƗsid Caliphate. Baghdad: Badhdad National Print and Pub. Co., 1969. Urban, Elizabeth. The Early Islamic MawƗlƯ: A Window onto Processes of Identity Con- struction and Social Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Dissertation, 2012. Vajda, G. “Les zindƯqs en pays d’Islam au début de la période abbaside.” Revista degli Studi Orientali 17 (1938): 173–229. Van Vloten, G. De opkomst der Abbasiden in Chorasan. Leiden: Brill, 1890. Veccia-Vaglieri, L. “Dhnj ঱Ɨr.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Veccia-Vaglieri, L. “Al-Hurmuz Ɨn.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Veccia-Vaglieri, L. “Al-঱Ɨ disiyya.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. 238 Bibliography Von Grunebaum, G. E. “The Nature of Arab Unity before Islam.” Arabica 10, 1 (1963): 5–23. Von Kremer, A. The Orient under the Caliphs. Translated by S. Khuda Bakhsh. Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1920. Waines, David. “The Third Century Internal Crisis of the Abbasids.” Journal of the Eco- nomic and Social History of the Orient 20, 3 (1977): 282–306. Waldman, Marilyn. Toward a Theory of Historical Narrative: A Case Study in Perso- Islamicate Historiography. Columbus: Ohio State University Press 1980. Wansbrough, John. Qur’anic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977. Wansbrough, John. The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978. Al- WƗqidƯ, Muতammad b. ‘Umar. KitƗb al- MaghƗzƯ. 3 Vols. London: Oxford University Press, 1966. .al- ShƗm. 2 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1997 ۊPsd.-al- WƗqidƯ. Futnj Psd.-al- WƗqidƯ. The Islâmic Conquest of Syria: A Translation of Futûܵushâm. Translated by Sulayman al-Kindi. London: Ta-Ha Publishers, 2005. Watt, W. M. Muhammad at Mecca. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1953. Watt, W. M. Muhammad at Medina. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956. Wellhausen, Julius. Skizzen und Vorarbeiten. 6 Vols. Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1884–1899. Wellhausen, Julius. The Arab Kingdom and its Fall. Translated by Margaret Weir. Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1927. Wendell, Charles. “BaghdƗd: Imago Mundi, and Other Foundation- Lore.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 2, 2 (1971): 99–128. Whately, Conor. “Arabs, Outsiders, and Stereotypes from Ammianus Marcellinus to The- ophylact Simocatta.” In Inside and Out: Interactions between Rome and the Peoples on the Arabian and Egyptian Frontiers in Late Antiquity. Edited by Jitse H. F. Dijkstra and Greg Fisher, 215–233. Leuven: Peeters, 2014. White, Hayden. Tropics of Discourse: Essays in Cultural Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978. White, Hayden. The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Repres- entation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987. Whitehouse, David. “Sasanian Maritime Activity.” In The Indian Ocean in Antiquity. Edited by J. Reade, 339–349. London: Routledge, 1996. Whitehouse, David, and Williamson, Andrew. “Sasanian Maritime Trade.” Iran 11 (1973): 29–49. Wiesehöfer, Josef. “Die Anfänge sassanidischer Westpolitik und der Untergang Hatras.” Klio; Beiträge zur alten Geschichte 64 (1982): 437–447. Wiesehöfer, Josef. Ancient Persia from 550 BC to AD 650. Translated by Azizeh Azodi. London: I. B. Tauris, 1996. Wiet, Gaston. Baghdad: Metropolis of the Abbasid Caliphate. Translated by Seymour Feiler. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1971. Wilkinson, J. C. “The Origins of the Omani State.” In The Arabian Peninsula: Society and Politics. Edited by Derek Hopwood. London: Allen and Unwin, 1972. Wilkinson, J. C. “Arab-Persian Land Relationships in Late Sasanid Oman.” Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 3 (1973): 40–51. Wilkinson, J. C. “The Julanda of Oman.” The Journal of Oman Studies 1 (1975): 97–108. Wirth, Albrecht. “The Tale of the King’s Daughter in the Besieged Town.” American Anthropologist 7, 4 (1894): 367–372. Bibliography 239 Wood, Philip, Ed. History and Indentity in the Late Antique Near East. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Woods, David. “Ammianus and the Blood- Sucking Saracen.” In Pleiades Setting: Essays for Pat Cronin on his 65th Birthday. Edited by K. Sidwell, 127–145. Cork: University College Cork, 2002. Woodward, Kathryn. Identity and Difference. London: SAGE Publications, 1997. Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Aতmad b. AbƯ Ya‘qnjb. Ta’rƯkh al- Ya‘qnjbƯ. 2 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al- ৡƗdir, 1960. Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Aতmad b. AbƯ Ya‘qnjb. KitƗb al- BuldƗn. Leiden, Brill: 1892. Al- Ya‘qnjbƯ, Aতmad b. AbƯ Ya‘qnjb. Translated by Gaston Wiet as Les Pays. Cairo: Insti- tut français d’archéologie orientale, 1937. YƗqnjt b. ދAbd AllƗh al-ণ amawƯ. Mu‘jam al al- udabƗ’. 20 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al- Fikr, 1980. YƗqnjt b. ދAbd AllƗh al-ণ amawƯ. Mu‘jam al- buldƗn. 5 Vols. Beirut: DƗr al-ৡƗ dir, N.D. Yarshater, Ehsan. “Iranian National History.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods, 359–366. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1983. Yarshater, Ehsan, “Were the Sasanians Heirs to the Achaemenids?” In La Persia Nel Medioevo: Atti del Convegno Internazionale, 517–531. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1971. Yarshater, Ehsan, Ed. Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1–2: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Yarshater, Ehsan. “Iranian Common Beliefs and World- View.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods, 343–358. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Yarshater, Ehsan. “Iranian National History.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 1: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods, 359–477. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 1983. Yarshater, Ehsan, “Mazdakism.” In Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3, 2: The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanian Periods, 991–1024. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Yarshater, Ehsan, “The Persian Presence in the Islamic World.” In The Persian Presence in the Islamic World. Edited by Richard Hovannisian and George Sabagh, 4–125. Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Yücesoy, Hayrettin. “Ancient Imperial Heritage and Islamic Universal Historiography: al- DƯnawarƯ’s Secular Perspective.” Journal of Global History 2 (2007): 135–155. Yule, Paul. Himyar: Spätantike im Jemen/Late Antique Yemen. Aichwald: Linden Soft, 2007. Yusuf, S. M. “The Battle of Al-Q Ɨdisiyya.” Islamic Culture 19 (1945): 1–28. Zagorin, Perez. “History, the Referent and Narrative: Reections on Postmodernism Now.” History and Theory 38, 1 (1999): 1–24. Zagorin, Perez. “Rejoinder to a Postmodernist.” History and Theory 39, 2 (2000): 201–209. Zahran, Yasmine. The Lakhmids of Hira: Sons of the Water of Heaven. London: Stacey International, 2009. Zakeri, Mohsen. “ ‘AlƯ ibn ‘Ubaida ar- RaiতƗnƯ: A Forgotten Belletrist (adƯb) and Pahlavi Translator.” Oriens 34 (1994): 76–102. Zakeri, Mohsen. SƗsƗnid Soldiers in Early Muslim Society: The Origins of ‘AyyƗrƗn and Futuwwa. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1995. 240 Bibliography Zakeri, Mohsen. “Arabic Reports on the Fall of Hatra to the Sasanids: History or Legend?” In Story- Telling in the Framework of non- Fictional Arabic Literature. Edited by Stefan Leder, 158–167. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998. Zakeri, Mohsen. “Al- ৫abarƯ on Sasanian History: A Study in Sources.” In Al-ܑ abarƯ: A Medieval Muslim Historian and His Work. Edited by Hugh Kennedy, 27–40. Prince- ton: Darwin, 2008. Zaman, Muhammad Qasim. Religion and Politics under the Early ‘AbbƗsids: The Emer- gence of the Proto-Sunn Ư Elite. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Zaman, Muhammad Qasim. “Al-Ya‘ লnjbƯ.” Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. ZarrƯnknjb, ‘Abd al-ণ usayn. “The Arab Conquest of Iran and its Aftermath.” In Cam- bridge History of Iran, Vol. 4: From the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs. Edited by R. N. Frye, 1–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Zerubavel, Eviatar. “Social Memories: Steps to a Sociology of the Past.” Qualitative Sociology 19, 3 (1996): 283–299. Zerubavel, Yael. Recovered Roots: Collective Memory and the Making of Israeli National Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. Index

‘Abbasid akhbƗrƯs 35, 202 adab: as a code of manners/system of ‘Abbasid Caliphate 8, 26–30, 39–40, 75, knowledge 15, 16, 27, 31, 49n9, 87–9, 111; admiration of Arab culture 30–1; 136, 139, 170; as a genre of Islamic African (zanj) slaves, revolt of 39–40; literature 8, 14, 16–17, 26–7, 35, 44, Arabism, idea of 28–9; cosmopolitan 116–17, 143, 164, 166, 202, 205 culture 29; ethnic identity 28; ideology Adhri‘Ɨt, battle of 145 of 28; Iranian inuence on 26–9; ‘AdƯ b. Zayd 88, 139–41, 149, 203 na policy 39, African (zanj) slaves, revolt of 39–40ۊKhurƗsƗn province 28; mi dath poets 29; patronization AfrƯdnjn 6, 41, 43, 60, 103, 196n96ۊ54n69; mu of works of history 30–1, 37; revolution ahl al-bayt 204 28, 73; scholarship on Arabian ahl al-buynjtƗt 103, 104, 164 antiquities 30–1 ahl al-dawla 28 ‘Abbasid Iraq 2, 26, 169, 202 ahl KhurƗsƗn 28–9 ‘Abd AllƗh b. ৫Ɨhir 40 Aতmad b. ণanbal 34, 54n69 ‘Abd al-ণamƯd b. YaতyƗ 26–7 ‘ajamƯ (non-Arab) civilizations 11, 25, ‘Abd al-MasƯত 117–18 31 ‘Abd al-Mu৬৬alib b. HƗshim 73, 112–14 ‘ajamƯ culture 26, 33, 36 ‘AbƯd b. Sharya 112, 125n58 AkhbƗr al-Furs (History of the Persians) al-‘ƖbidƯn, Zayn 204 37, 54–5n81, 55n84 abnƗ’ al-dawla (sons of the revolution) 29 akhbƗrƯs 13, 26, 35–7, 46–8, 63, 71, 87, abnƗ’ al-Furs (sons of the Persians) 157 89, 104, 111, 112, 115, 119, 159, 186, Abnj’l-‘AlƗ’, SƗlim 26–7 202; depiction of Sasanians 38; focus on Abnj Bakr 156–7; conquest of al-Ubulla 163; Iraq 15, 17 Dhat al-Salasil (Battle of the Chains) AkhshunvƗr 92–5; variants on name 92 163; forays into Iraq under 162–5 Alexander 60, 105 Abnj’l-Faraj 17, 115, 134, 139, 141–4 ‘Alqama b. ‘UlƗtha 137 Abnj Hurayra 177 amƯr al-shu’arƗ’ (prince of poets) 42 Abnj Miতjan al-ThaqafƯ 180 al-‘ƖmirƯ, Abnj’l-ণasan 178 Abnj Murra 107–9 ‘Amr b. ‘AdƯ 82–3 Abnj Muslim 28 ‘Amr II b. Hind 139 Abnj NuwƗs 29, 32 ‘Amr b. TamƯm b. Marr 67–9, 71, 73, 90, amƗsa 30 91, 94, 118ۉ-Abnj TammƗm 30; al Abnj ‘Ubayd b. Mas‘njd 165–8, 180 andarz (wisdom literature) 26, 27, 35–6, Abnj ‘Ubayda (b. al-JarrƗত) 188 46, 116 Abnj ‘Ubayda (Ma‘mar b. al-MuthannƗ) al-AnৢƗrƯ, Abnj’l-Shaykh 160–1 15, 32, 37, 52n42, 55n83, 141, 143 Arab “civilization,” concept of 25, 31, Abnj Ynjsuf 177 111–12, 202 Abyssinian conquest of Yemen 82, 106–7, Arab culture 25, 29–34, 38, 117, 122n21, 111–12 135, 138 242 Index “Arab” history 61 ƖzƗdmardiyya 70 Arab-Iranian legacy, in Islamic narrative al-AzdƯ al-BaৢrƯ, Muতammad b. ‘Abd 60–3; conquest of al-MaysƗn and AllƗh 186–9 al-ণaঌr 62–3 Arab-Islamic identity 25, 41; ‘Abbasid BadhƗn 146, 157 caliphate 26–30; abnƗ’ al-dawla (sons Baghdad 15, 27, 29, 39–40 of the revolution) 29; Arab and ‘Ajam BahƗr-i KisrƗ (Khusraw’s Spring) 133, 30–5; construction of 30, 39; cultural 182 heritage and 31; rst generation (of BahrƗm V Gnjr (Sasanian king) 88–90, 93, akhbƗrƯs) 26–38; ণimyarite saga and 139; account of the reign of 85; akhbƗrƯs 111–17; Sasanians in Islamic views on 89–90; “Arab” attributes 89; historiography 35–8 Arab upbringing of 88–91; biography of Arab paganism 139 84–5, 88; depiction as romantic hero 84; Arab sciences, concept of 31 education of 87, 90; hunting and ghting Arab tribes 9, 31, 32, 38, 39, 47, 48, on camelback 89; learning of furnjsiyya 59–64, 66, 68, 71, 73, 75, 82, 84, 86, (horsemanship) 89; lion ordeal 85, 88; 111, 141, 142–3, 149, 157, 158, 179, loyalty of the Arabs to 88; al-Mundhir’s 180, 190, 202; warrior-tribesmen rearing of 84, 90–1; reciting of Arabic (muqƗtilnjn) 10; see also Bakr b. WƗ’il, poetry 90; victory against Turks 89–90 Bannj; TamƯm, Bannj; Tayyi’, Bannj Baতrayn 60, 62–5, 67, 82, 105, 106, 115, Arabian antiquities 15, 31–2, 34, 37, 114, 141, 157 190 Bakr b. WƗ’il, Bannj 63, 65, 66, 133, Arabian monotheistic movement 4 141–3, 145, 149, 171–2 Arabic language and linguistics 31, 44, al-BalƗdhurƯ, Aতmad b. YaতyƗ 15, 32–3, 71–2, 90 177, 180, 183, 185–6, 204 Arabism, idea of 28–9 Bal‘amƯ, Abnj ‘AlƯ Muতammad 16, 35, 42, Arabs: versus ‘ajam discourse 33–4, 38, 45, 46, 62–3, 86–8, 94–5, 104, 108–9, 46, 59, 68, 156, 168, 202, 203; 117, 129–30, 163, 172 association with camels 10, 30, 33, 89, Bannj ‘AbbƗs (sons of ‘Abbas) 29 rƗr 143ۊBedouin lifestyle Bannj al-a ;134–5 ,130 ,117–18 86, 118; eloquence, notions of 71–2; Bannj al-faddƗm 143 identity of 61; Islamic values of 26; BayhaqƯ, Abnj’l-FaĪl 8, 45; TƗrƯkh-i massacre of 63, 64–6, 114–15; Bayhaq (TƗrƯkh-i Mas‘njdƯ) 8, 45 ikma (House of Wisdom) 28ۉ-migration 60–1, 82; proto-/original Bayt al versus Arabized 86, 125n58; QubƗdh, Bedouin Arabs 33, 70–2, 134 Khusraw, and 104–11; Al-BƯrnjnƯ, Abnj’l-RayতƗn 35, 42, 44, 46 Arabs’ superior morality and piety, Bridge (al-Jisr), battle of 167, 180, 190n1 portrayals of 189 al-BukhƗrƯ, Muতammad b. IsmƗ‘Ưl 177 Arazi, Albert 32 Burd, BashshƗr b. 29, 32–3, 36, 41, 134 ArdashƯr I: Arabian campaign 62; conquest al-Buwayb, battle of 167–8 of al-MaysƗn and al-ণaঌr 62–3; Buyid dynasty 16, 17, 40, 42 KarnƗmag-i ArdashƯr/‘Ahd ArdashƯr 46, 193–4n57 camels, Arabs association with 10, 30, 33, AsƗwira 94, 115, 144, 169, 204 89, 117–18, 130, 134–5 AshkƗnians 6, 59–60 Christianity 14, 83, 139 ashrƗf 28, 39, 87 ChnjbƯn, BahrƗm 42, 128–9, 131, 135, 149 ‘Ɩৢim b. ‘Amr 171 collective memory, notion of 2–7, 11–12, al-Aৢma‘Ư, ‘Abd al-MƗlik 30, 32, 34, 36, 17n1, 36, 38, 41–8, 162, 203 166; al-A܈ma‘ ƯyyƗt 30 Constantinople 104, 131, 140, 154n90 Assmann, Jan 3 Crone, Patricia 4, 28, 43 al-Aswad’s rebellion 157 Ctesiphon (al-MadƗ’in), 17n6, 27, 57n118, ‘Ayhala b. Ka‘b, uprising of 157 82, 92, 103, 128, 132, 154n90, 156, 182, ayyƗm al-‘Arab (battle days) 15, 17, 30, 191n13; conquest of 182 90, 118, 128, 142–3, 149, 163, 180 cultural memory, notion of 3, 11 Index 243 al-ঋabbƯ, al-Mufaঌঌal 30 Goldziher, Ignaz 4 ঋaততƗk, legend of 60 ,adƯth (traditions) 4, 15, 31, 36, 37, 130ۊ DƗr al-IslƗm (Abode of Islam) 2 da‘wa 28 172, 177–8; on Dhnj QƗr, battle of dawla 13, 29, 59, 68, 72–5, 91, 118, 138, 144–5; on SalmƗn al-FƗrisƯ 160–1; of 148, 149, 168, 173, 174, 186, 190, 203 Sayf b. Umar 162 al-DaylamƯ, FƯrnjz 157 ণƗjib b. ZurƗra 137 DhƗt al-SalƗsil (Battle of the Chains) Halbwachs, Maurice 3 162–4 Hall, Stuart 5 Dhnj QƗr, battle of 14, 91, 93, 94, 128, 133, al-HamdƗnƯ, Al-ণasan b. Aতmad 114; as 139, 140, 141–5, 149, 179, 203 LisƗn al-Yaman (tongue of Yemen) 114 amrƗ’ 204ۉ ,dihqƗns 16, 103, 104, 158, 165–6, 194n58 195n73 HƗni’ b. Mas‘njd 142 aqq al-‘Arab (law of the Arabs) 34ۊ ,al-DƯnawarƯ, Abnj ণanƯfa 15, 43, 45, 47 62, 82–3, 87, 89, 91–3 al-ণƗrith b. ‘Amr 104–5, 122n21 Donner, Fred 149, 162, 167 HƗrnjn al-RashƯd 28, 30, 36, 162 Drory, Rina 31 Hawdha b. ‘AlƯ 115–16 Durkheim, Émile 3 Hephthalites, confederation of (al-HayƗܒila/“White Huns”) 13, 81, El-Hibri, Tayeb 8, 47, 185 91–5, 103, 104, 203 ethnic “Arabism” 28 Heraclius (Hiraql) 132, 187–8 ethnic identity 28, 61 HijƗz 41, 63, 82, 91, 105, 112, 146 HilƗl b. ‘Ullafa 181 l al-‘Arab 32, 58n131, 74, 88, 91, 94, ণimyarite saga: Arab-Islamic historicalڲFa 130, 160 tradition 111–17; conversion to Judaism al-FƗrisƯ, SalmƗn 15, 156, 157–61, 204; 106; embassies to Sasanian court childhood in Iran 158–61; contribution 106–11; GhumdƗn (palace of Yemen) in Yawm al-Khandaq (Battle of the 87, 113–14; Kindite “interregnum” 104; Trench) 158–9, 204; as rst Iranian legendary world conquest 60, 104–5; convert to Islam 158; as governor of reconquest of Yemen 106–7, 110–11, ,adƯth 160–1; 114; Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan 107–10ۊ al-MadƗ’in 158; in meeting with Prophet 158; participation 112–14, 119; Tubba‘ kings 104, 114 in ghting against the Sasanians 158, al-HƯra: establishment of Lakhmids at 62, 159; popularity of 158; in Shi‘ite 82–3; high culture 87–8, 139–40; tradition 158, 191n13, 204; on spread of al-Khwarnaq palace 87–8; social Islam 159–60; in Su tradition network of tribes 86; upbringing of 191–2n19 BahrƗm V Gnjr 84–90 FƗrs (southwestern Iran) 17n1, 63–5, 117, HishƗm b. ‘Abd al-MƗlik 35 130, 160 Hormuz IV 128 female infanticide, practice of 134 Hoyland, Robert 61, 82, 85–6 FirdawsƯ, Abnj’l-QƗsim 16, 42, 45, 46, 47, ণudhayfa b. Miতৢan 176 62, 89, 93, 100n84, 106, 129, 132, 148, al-HurmuzƗn 156, 184–5, 204 174 Fisher, Greg 61, 93 Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih 17, 71, 118, 130, 137, tnas (civil wars) 48 144 “free-spirited” Arabs, notion of 34, 86, 136 Ibn al-AnbƗrƯ 44 Frye, R. N. 104 Ibn Durayd 44 literature 1, 156, 162, 186, 188, 189, Ibn FƗris 44 ۊfutnj 190 Ibn HishƗm 14, 111 ,al-ShƗm, of Ibn al-KalbƯ 186; of Ibn IsতƗq 12, 14, 31, 35, 37, 81–2, 106–9 ۊFutnj Psd.-al-WƗqidƯ 190 111, 112, 118, 139, 145–6, 159, 161, 174, 180, 187, 190; redactions of his GhumdƗn (palace of Yemen) 87, 113–14 work 14; as representative of ‘Abbasid Gibb, H. A. R. 43 historiography, 35; SƯra of 14, 37, 118 244 Index Ibn al-KalbƯ (HishƗm b Muতammad) 2, 15, dividing 12; and Iranian renaissance 31, 36–7, 62, 66, 81–4, 104, 106–9, 111, 38–48; on Lakhmids of al-ণƯra 81–4; 114, 131, 133, 141, 168, 190; on and memory 4–5; and narrative 8; Arabian antiquity 31; on Iran 36–7 origins and development of 4; Ibn KhallikƗn 37 Sasanians, representation of 25; ShƗpnjr Ibn KhurradƗdhbih 66 II, potrayal of 70; “skeptical” approach Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ 27, 35–7, 45–6, 54n76, to 4; ‘ulnjm al-‘Arab (Arab sciences) 31 130, 160 Islamic pluralism 161 Ibn al-NadƯm 35, 37, 46 IyƗs b. QabƯৢa 128–31, 141, 144 Ibn Qutayba 32–3, 36, 37, 44, 45, 70, 74, 86, 88, 91, 94, 130, 131, 160, 169–70, JadhƯma al-Abrash 82 l al-‘Arab 32, 94, 74, 88, 91, JƗhilƯ poetry 30–1ڲFa ;172 130, 160; and Shu‘njbiyya “movement” JƗhiliyya 9, 11, 25, 28, 30, 31, 34, 38, 61, 32–3 75, 110, 130, 134, 139, 141, 142, 144, Ibn Sa‘d 15, 158–9, 184 149, 156, 167, 202; ‘Abbasid Imrnj’l-Qays 61, 83 scholarship on 30–1; debate regarding inter-civilizational competition 26, 33–4, Arab identity 30, 61; history of 38; 38, 48, 66, 90, 108, 134 polytheistic religion of 31; practice of Iran: AnƯrƗn versus 97–8n25; inuence on female infanticide 134 ‘Abbasid caliphate 26–9; Islam versus, al-JƗতi਌, ‘Amr b. Baতr 17, 31–3, 36, 39, notion in modern scholarship 43–5; 44, 50n18, 70, 72, 90, 93, 108–9, 111, Islamic principalities 40–2; in Islamic 134–5, 159, 164, 166, 169–70, 172, 175, salvation history 45–8; merger with 178; and Shu‘njbiyya “movement” 32–3 Islamic-biblical tradition in Islamic JalnjlƗ’, battle of 183 historiography 43–4; and Persia/Persian Jamharat al-nasab 31 in modern usage 17n1; revival of 204–5 JamshƯd 6, 40, 43–4, 60, 193n57 Iranian-Arab army 110 al-JanƗh, Shamir Dhnj 104, 112 Iranian colonists in Arabia: early umma jizya tax 1, 145, 157, 165, 171 and 156–7 Judaism 14, 106, 139 Iranian renaissance 38–42 JulandƗ 106, 157 Iranian-Islamic community 159 Iranian-Islamic identity 26, 38, 40, 160 KƗbƯ, banner of 40–1, 56n100, 181 Iranian-Yemeni campaign, of South Arabia kƗhin 82, 112, 118 106–7, 110–11, 114 KalƯla wa-Dimna 35, 42, 45, 46 Iraq, Muslim conquest of: under Abnj Bakr Karib, Ma‘dƯ 107, 109, 110 162–5; Bridge (al-Jisr) and al-Buwayb, KayƗnians 6, 43, 60, 181 battles of 167–8; DhƗt al-SalƗsil (Battle KhƗlid b. al-WalƯd 162–6, 188–9 of the Chains) 162–4; lead-up to Khalidi, Tarif 161 al-QƗdisiyya 168–79; al-MadƗ’in, KhƗqƗn 85, 90, 92–3, 103 conquest of 182; al-QƗdisiyya, battle of khƗܒib 116–17, 130, 135 179–82; Ullays, battle of 164–5; under Khoury, Nuha 112–13 ‘Umar I 165–8 KhudƗynƗma (Book of Kings) 35, 43, al-IৢbahƗnƯ, Abnj Nu‘aym 158, 160–1 45–7, 53n61, 69, 103, 105, 115, 190, al-IৢfahƗnƯ, ণamza 16, 35, 42, 46, 53n61, 202 82, 83, 141 KhurƗsƗn 13, 26–9, 37, 39, 45, 47–8, 74, Islam: versus Iran, notion of in modern 159–60, 186; physical appearance of scholarship 43–5; Khusraw II ParvƯz inhabitants 50n18; in Islamic “salvation and 145–7 history” 46–8; revolutionary army of 28 Islamic civilization 16, 25, 27, 29, 34, 39, Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn 102–4, 119, 146; 43, 46–7 and the Arabs 105–11; fourfold division Islamic conquest narrative 6–12 of empire 103; inauspicious omens Islamic empire 26, 43, 131 117–18; massacre of zindƯqs 105–6; Islamic historiography: and Arab-Islamic military triumphs 104; Sasanian tax identity 26–38; classication schemes system, overhaul of 103; state Index 245 centralization and prosperity under 104; al-MadƗ’in: see Ctesiphon Yawm al-Safqa 114–16; Yemeni madhhab (school of Islamic jurisprudence) embassies 106–11 15 Khusraw II ParvƯz 13–14, 128–49, 171–2, MadƯnat al-SalƗm (City of Peace) 27 203; BahƗr-i KisrƗ (Khusraw’s Spring) MƗhƗn 188 (see for variants on name) 133; collection of taxes 132; “cosmic Maতmnjd of Ghazna 16, 42 throne” (Takht-i ܑƗqdƯs) 132; decadence majlis 36, 139 and cruelty of 131–3, 144; Dhnj QƗr, al-MakhznjmƯ, Makhznjm b. HƗni’ 118 battle of 141–2, 144; disdain for his malik al-amlƗk (king of kings) 177 subjects 132; execution of al-Nu‘mƗn III mamlnjks 39, 42 and liquidation of the Lakhmid state al-Ma’mnjn 28, 34, 39–40, 46, 54n69 140–1; ight from BahrƗm ChnjbƯn ManƗqib al-Turk 93, 111, 159 128–9; and Islam 145–7; IyƗs b. QabƯৢa’s al-Manৢnjr (‘Abbasid caliph) 14, 27, 30–1, rescue of and hospitality towards 128–31; 36, 39 Lakhmid embassies to court of 133–9; Manৢnjr b. Nnjh (Samanid amƯr) 16, 42 omens at court of 146–7; Prophet’s letter Marcellinus, Ammianus 33, 93, 135 to and his response 145–6; regicide of marzbƗns (frontier governors) 110, 140–1, 147–8; TƗq-i KisrƗ palace 132; throne 143–4, 157–8, 169, 185–6 room 132–3; “treasure of the wind” Masrnjq 107 ,Yazdagird III’s ill- al-Mas‘njdƯ, Abnj’l-ণasan 13, 16, 32, 35 ;133 (ۊKanz al-RƯ) omened birth 168 37, 39, 43–4, 46, 59–60, 66–8, 72–4, 75, al-Khwarnaq 84–5, 87–8, 113, 140, 144 86, 90, 116–17, 132–3, 136, 146, 183, Kinda confederation 85, 104 203 KitƗb al-AghƗnƯ 17, 110, 141, 142 mawƗlƯ 27–9, 31, 39, 143 KitƗb al-‘AsƗ 175 Maymnjn b. Qays al-A‘shƗ 139 KitƗb al-BayƗn wa’l-tabyƯn 32 al-MaysƗn and al-ণaঌr, conquest of 62–3 KitƗb al-BukhalƗ’ 70, 166 Mazdakite heresy 103, 105–6 Mecca 35, 112, 125–6n64, 145, 204 14 ۊKitƗb al-Futnj ,al-kabƯr wa’l-ridda, 15 Medina 14, 64–5, 111, 145, 156, 158, 182 ۊKitƗb al-Futnj KitƗb al-IklƯl 114 204 KitƗb al-‘Iqd al-farƯd 116, 133, 134 Meisami, Julie 6 KitƗb al-Mubtada’ 14 MihrjƗn festival 15, 42 KitƗb al-TanbƯh wa’l-ashrƗf 16 military technology and tactics, Arab KitƗb al-TƯjƗn 111, 114, 118, 125n56, versus Persians 158, 168–70 125n58 MiskawƗyh, Aতmad b. Muতammad 16, 42, Kufa 1, 15, 142, 168, 182 46, 62, 69, 89, 92, 104, 141 al-KnjfƯ, Aতmad b. A‘tham 186–7 mǀbadhƗn mobƗdh 95, 117, 118 aliyyƗt, origin of 30ڲڲkuttƗb 27, 36, 70, 89 al-Mufa al-MughƯra b. Shu‘ba 168–70, 173–4, Lakhmids of al-ণƯra: ‘AdƯ b. Zayd and the 176–9, 183–4 fall of 139–41; BahrƗm and 84–5; al-MughƯra b. ZurƗra 171 dath poets 29ۊDawsar (military regiment) 84; mu education of BahrƗm at Lakhmid court mulk, concept of 68, 74–5, 114, 131 87, 90; embassies to Khusraw II 133–9; mulnjk al-ܒawƗ’if (party kings) 60 in Islamic historical tradition 81–4; al-Mundhir I 81, 84, 90–1; rearing of Khusraw I’s restoring of Lakhmids to BahrƗm V Gnjr 84, 87–91; role in power 105–6; Kindite “interregnum” Sasanian politics 91 104; NamƗra inscription 83; notion of al-Mundhir III b. al-Nu‘mƗn 105–6 the continuity 83; origins and rise of Murnjj al-dhahab 16, 59 81–4; position as Sasanian vassals 82–3; al-Mushaqqar castle 102, 115 ruggedness and renement at Lakhmid Muslims–Romans meetings, account of Court 85–8; al-ShahbƗ’ (military 186–90 regiment) 84; social network of tribes 86 Mu‘tazilite doctrine, of createdness of LisƗn al-‘Arab (tongue of the Arabs) 34 Qur’an 34, 54n69 246 Index al-MuthannƗ b. ণƗritha 165, 167–8 Qaত৬aba b. ShabƯb 74 qalansuwa 163–4, 181, 194n59 NamƗra funerary inscription, of Imrnj’l-Qays al-Qa‘qƗ‘ b. ‘Amr 73, 163, 179–81 61, 83 Qays b. Mas‘njd 137, 141 Nawrnjz festival 15, 42 QubƗdh I 102–5, 112, 119; and the Arabs NihƗwand: battle of 183–4; embassy 104–5; and the Mazdakite heresy 103, 183–4 105; as a proto-Shu‘njbƯ 122n21 NihƗyat al-irab 15, 45, 62, 87, 89–90, Qur’an 4, 11, 31, 36, 44, 73, 95, 145, 177, 92–3, 112, 129, 132, 133 188; Mu‘tazilite doctrine 34; Snjrat non-Arab civilization, notion of superiority al-Rnjm (Chapter on the Romans) 145; over Arab 31 Snjrat Ynjsuf (Chapter on Ynjsuf) 189; Noth, Albrecht 8, 162 Verse 49:13 51–2n40 al-Nu‘mƗn I 84, 87–8, 140 al-QushayrƯ, Muslim b. al-ণajjƗj 177 al-Nu‘mƗn III b. al-Mundhir 107–8, 123n33, 128, 133–6, 138–42, 149, RabƯ‘a b. Naৢr 82, 112, 118 172–3, 203; embassies to Khusraw II rƗwƯ 111–12, 143 ParvƯz 133–6, 138; execution of ‘AdƯ b. al-RƗzƯ, MihrƗn 183 Zayd 139–41; Khusraw II ParvƯz’s religious conversion 28–9 execution of 141 Retsö, Jan 83 al-Nu‘mƗn b. Muqarrin 170–1, 183–4 Ribi‘Ư b. ‘Ɩmir 10, 174–7, 197n128 ridda tribesmen 162 Ɨba (Treatise on the Royalۊa܈-Omidsalar, Mahmoud 42, 46 RisƗla fƯ’l Entourage) 27 ParvƯz: see Khusraw II ParvƯz Roman (Byzantine) empire 1, 83 Persian: inuence of Persian language on Rustam (hero of Iranian lore) 60, 139, Arabic 139; Intermezzo 40; and Iranian 194n59 in modern usage 17n1; literature 41; rise Rustam b. FarrukhzƗdh (Sasanian general) of new Persian language 40, 41 156, 168, 173–4; Arab embassies to piety and religious devotion, Islamic prior to al-QƗdisiyya 174–9; initial values of 10 encounter with al-MughƯra 168–70; PƯrnjz I 81; death of 91–2; defeat of 93; and killing of 181–2; prediction of Sasanian the HayƗܒila 91–5 defeat 173–4; speech to al-MughƯra Prophet Muতammad: biography of see 178–9; sympathetic villain 173–4 SƯra; birth of and omens at Khusraw’s court 117–18; dealings with Iranians in Sa‘d b. AbƯ WaqqƗৢ 168, 180, 182–3 Arabia 156–7; and Dhnj QƗr, battle of Saffarid dynasty 40–1 144–5; and Heraclius 187; letter to Samanid dynasty 16, 40–2, 44–5 Khusraw II ParvƯz 145–6; praise of the Samarqand, legendary Himyarite conquest Arabs 130; and SalmƗn al-FƗrisƯ of 104, 112 158–61; statements against kingship SƗsƗn 44; House of 147, 148, 149, 168 177–8 Sasanian empire 1, 33, 44, 60; andarz (wisdom literature) 26–7, 35–6, 46, QƗbnjs b. al-Mundhir 139 116; BahrƗm ChnjbƯn rebellion 128–9; al-QƗdisiyya, battle of (AD 636) 1–2, 8, 41, connection with Lakhmids 82–3; 110, 156, 163, 167, 179–82, 184; Arab fourfold division of 103, 175; in embassies to Rustam prior to battle 174–9; Islamic historiography 6, 25, 35–8; Arab embassy to Yazdagird’s court 45–7; joint conquest of Yemen 105–6, 170–3; duration of 179; killing Rustam 110; Khusraw I AnnjshirvƗn 102–6; last 181–2; Laylat al-QƗdisiyya (Night of stand against Arab invasion 182–4; al-QƗdisiyya) 179; lead-up to 168–79; al-MaysƗn and al-ণaঌr conquest 62–3; Rustam and al-MughƯra’s initial encounter Mazdakite heresy 103, 105–6; 168–70; Yawn AghwƗth (Day of Help) obsession with royal markers 108; 179; Yawm ArmƗth (Day of the Rafts) PƯrnjz I’s defeat at the hands of the 179; Yawm ‘ImƗs (Day of Hard War) 179 HayƗܒila 91–5; al-QƗdisiyya, battle of Index 247 179–82; regicide of Khusraw II ParvƯz al-৫abarƯ, Abnj Ja‘far Muতammad b. JarƯr 147–8; rise of 60; ShƗpnjr II’s Arabian 1–2, 11, 15, 62–4, 91, 118, 161–3, 168, campaign 59, 63–6; social hierarchy in 174, 178; approach to historical writing 164, 193–4n57; war with Romans 145; 15, 162; on Arab delegations to Rustam see also SƗsƗn 174–9; on degeneration of Khusraw II Sa৬Ưত 82, 112, 113, 118, 119, 147 ParvƯz’s character 131–2; focus on Iraq Savant, Sarah Bowen 4–5, 6, 25, 32, and Iran 15; on Himyarite embassies 159–60 106–9; report of ShƗpnjr II ’s campaign SawƗd (of Iraq) 64–5, 104, 140–2, 149, against the Arabs 63–6; use of Sayf b. 162 ‘Umar 162; use of Ibn al- KalbƯ 37, Sayf b. DhƯ Yazan 107–10, 112–14, 119 189–0 Sayf b. ‘Umar 1–3, 12, 15, 161–2, 163; TafsƯr 42, 44 bias towards TamƯm 161, 163 Tahirid dynasty 40–1 al-Sha‘bƯ, ‘Ɩmir b. ShurahbƯl 112, 161 TamƯm, Bannj 59, 63, 65, 67, 73, 90, 102, ShƗfƯ‘Ư, Abnj ‘Abd AllƗh 34 118, 119, 174, 179, 204; massacre of ShahƗda 113, 161 during Yawm al-Safqa 115; Sayf b. shƗhƗnshƗh 42, 177 ‘Umar’s bias towards 161, 163 ShahƯd, ‘IrfƗn 6 Tannjkh confederation 60, 82, 84–6 ShƗhnƗma (Book of Kings, of FirdawsƯ) Ta’rƯkh al-khulafƗ’ 14 16, 42, 60, 85, 93, 106, 129, 174, 177, Ta’rƯkh al-rusul wa’l-mulnjk 1 204; of Abnj Manৢnjr DaqƯqƯ 16; of Abnj ta’rƯkh scholarship 37 Manৢnjr Ma’marƯ 16 al-TawতƯdƯ, Abnj ণayyƗn 71, 134 ShƗpnjr I 62; affair with al-NaঌƯra 62–3; Tayyi’, Bannj 128–9, 135, 141 conquest of Hatra 62–3; killing of al-Tha‘ƗlibƯ, Abd al- Malik b. Muতammad al-ঋayzan 63; massacre of the Arabs 13, 16, 26, 43, 45–7, 59, 64–6, 68–9, 63 71–2, 74–5, 116, 142, 158, 174, 185, ShƗpnjr II 59, 69; Arabian campaign 59, 203 63–6; brutality towards the Arabs Trench (al-Khandaq), battle of 158–9, 204 63–71, 172; Dhnj’l-AktƗf (possessor of the shoulders) 65–6; meeting with the ‘Ubayd AllƗh 204 sheikh(a) 66–72; reign of 69 ‘ulamƗ’ 33, 34, 37, 39, 44, 162 shari‘a, codication of 34 ‘ulamƗ’ min al-Furs (scholars of the Shiqq 82, 112, 113, 118 Persians) 45 ShƯrnjya 146–8 Ullays, battle of 164–5, 166 Shoshan, Boaz 162, 166, 171 ‘ulnjm al-‘Arab (Arab sciences) 31 Shu‘njbƯs 32, 36, 70, 72, 134, 169, 175, ‘UmƗn 62, 105, 106, 123, 157 196n92 ‘Umar I b. al-Kha৬৬Ɨb 108, 156, 159; Shu‘njbiyya “movement” 31–3, 70, 72, 160 al-HurmuzƗn’s meeting with 184–5; Siculus, Diodorus 34, 86–7, 89, 136 Iraqi campaign under 165–8; as model Sifn, battle of 204 of Arab-Muslim simplicity and piety SƯra (of the Prophet) 13–14, 37, 111, 108–9, 166–7, 169–70, 172, 189; visit to 117–18, 203; SƯrat al-NabƯ 117; SƯrat Syria and Jerusalem 166, 189 Rasnjl AllƗh 14 Umayyad caliphate 26, 27, 28, 30, 35, 37, SƯrat AnnjshirvƗn 46 73, 74, 86, 111 Siyar al-mulnjk (Siyar al-mulnjk al-‘ajam, umma 8, 9, 61, 73, 142, 145, 149, 158, Siyar al-‘ajam) 35, 45, 58n131, 84 159, 162, 164, 190, 203, 204; and social hierarchy 27, 33–4, 43, 164, 177–8 Iranian colonists in Arabia 156–7 social stratication 9, 164 sunna 54n76, 188 Von Grunebaum, G. E. 30, 61 SunnƯ scholarship 44, 162 Snjrat al-Rnjm (Chapter on the Romans) Wahb b. Munabbih 111, 114, 125n58, 145 146 Snjrat Ynjsuf (Chapter on Ynjsuf) 189 Waldman, Marilyn 8 Surayd b. ‘AbƯ KƗhil 143 al-WƗqidƯ, Muতammad b. ‘Umar 186 248 Index wars and battles, of the Arabs: Adhri‘Ɨt Yawm al-Khandaq: see Trench battle 145; Bridge (al-Jisr) battle (al-Khandaq), battle of 167–8, 180, 190n1; al-Buwayb battle Yawm al-Safqa 102, 114–17, 119, 126n80 167–8; DhƗt al-SalƗsil (Battle of the Yazdagird I 84–7, 89 Chains) 162–4; Dhnj QƗr battle 141–5; Yazdagird III 14, 42, 156; Arab embassy JalnjlƗ’ battle 183; NihƗwand battle to 170–3; ill-omened birth of 168; 183–4; al-QƗdisiyya battle, see murder of 185–6; al-QƗdisiyya, battle of (AD 636); Yemen: Abyssinian conquest of 82, 106–7, Sifn battle 204; Trench (al-Khandaq) 111–12; GhumdƗn (palace of Yemen) battle 158–9, 204; Ullays battle 164–5, 87, 113–14; Iranians of and the umma 166; see also ayyƗm al-‘Arab (battle 146, 157; reconquest of 106–7, 110–11, days) 114; Yemeni embassies, portrayal of Well of Zamzam 44 106–11; see also Himyarite saga Wellhausen, Julius 3–4 al-ZabbƗ’ bint ਋Ɨrib (Zenobia) 82, 86 al-Ya‘qnjbƯ, Aতmad b. AbƯ Ya‘qnjb 15, zandaqa 36, 54n69, 102, 105, 162; zindƯqs 17n6, 69, 77, 89, 117, 205–6n8 36, 104–6 YƗqnjt b. ދAbd AllƗh al- ণamawƯ 114 Zerubavel, Eviatar 12 Yawm Dhnj QƗr see Dhnj QƗr, battle of Zoroastrianism 118, 139