Firdawsi’s Shahnama in its Ghaznavid context

A.C.S. Peacock1
Abstract
Firdawsi’s Shahnama, the completion of which is traditionally to around 400/1010, is generally
thought to have been a failure at first. It is said by both traditional accounts and much modern
scholarship to have been rejected by its dedicatee Sultan Mahmud of Ghazna, and its contents of
ancient Iranian legends, transmitted from earlier sources, are widely considered to have been out
of step with the literary tastes of the Ghaznavid period. This article reassesses the reception of
the Shahnama in the Ghaznavid period, arguing that evidence suggests neither its style nor
contents were outdated, and that its tales of ancient Iranian heores had a great contemporary
relevance in the context of the Ghaznavid court’s identification of the dynasty as the heir to
ancient Iran. The extent to which Firdawsi can be shown to have relied on pre-Islamic sources is
also reevaluated

Key words
Firdawsi – Shahnama – Ghaznavids – pre-Islamic Iran – Persian poetry

The reception history of few books can be as well-known as the Shahnama: the allegedly cool
reaction of sultan Mahmud of Ghazna (d. 421/1030) when presented with the work around the
year 400/1010, and the biting satire on the ruler Firdawsi is claimed to have penned in response,
together form part of the Shahnama legend.2 Firdawsi’s hostile reception by the rival poets of
Ghazna, for instance, became a topic of miniature painting in manuscripts of the poem,3 and lines
such as the satire were interpolated to underline the point.4 Today, the poem’s initial flop is
usually taken for granted, and has been attributed to both its form and its contents, which are
assumed to be purely antiquarian,5 bereft of any contemporary relevance. Ghazzal Dabiri, for
instance, has compared the Shahnama with other roughly contemporaneous histories, especially
that of Bal‘ami, and poetry. She concludes that Firdawsi’s concentration on Iranian material
without any Islamic leavening must have seemed rather dated. Dabiri writes that, “The
Shahnama was not initially well received in general because, as a history, it differs in aim,

1
content, and execution from the histories that preceded it and immediately succeeded it in the
Samanid and Ghaznavid courts respectively,” while as poetry its form was completely unlike the
qasidas favoured by the Ghaznavid court.6 Even Julie Scott Meisami, who agrees with Rypka– in
my view rightly – in arguing that Firdawsi saw in Mahmud the legendary King from the East
prophesied to restore Iran’s greatness, still regards the poem as “definitely outmoded...something
of an anomaly: not quite literature and not quite history”. The deliberate archaisms of the
Shahnama’s language are seen as further evidence for the anachronistic nature of the work. 7
Rypka, meanwhile, connects the rejection of the Shahnama to the adoption of Arabic as the
Ghaznavid chancery language in place of Persian in 401/1010-11, the year after the conventional
date for the completion of the work.8
Yet there are ample reasons to doubt that the Shahnama was really considered quite as
odd and old fashioned as existing scholarship would insist. There was a tradition of composing
Shahnamas in the tenth century, of which the best known is the now lost prose one
commissioned by the Khurasani nobleman Abu Mansur Ibn ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-Tusi. In addition,
the incomplete efforts of the Samanid poet Daqiqi were purportedly incorporated by Firdawsi
into the Shahnama, while we know of several other Shahnamas that have not come down to us
such as that of Abu’l-Mu’ayyad al-Balkhi. 9 Moreover, we have evidence from the Ghaznavid
period for the enduring popularity of such works. The Abu Mansur Shahnama was evidently still
circulating in the early eleventh century, for is mentioned by the polymath al-Biruni (d.
439/1048), who later himself received the patronage of the Ghaznavid court.10 A certain Karasi-
yi Shahnama-Khwan, or Karasi the Shahnama-reciter, who was eventually promoted to a
provincial governorship, read prose Shahnamas to Mahmud of Ghazna,11 while the
contemporary court poet Farrukhi (d. 439/1037-8) mentions hearing verses from a Shahnama-
khwan.12 Mahmud’s vizier, Fadl b. Ahmad, supported Firdawsi, according to the poet’s own
testimony,13 and Firdawsi himself seems to have certainly had every expectation his work would
be favourably received.14 Mahmud’s brother, Nasr, was the dedicatee of al-Tha‘alibi’s Arabic
Kitab Ghurar Muluk al-Furs, ‘Highlights of the Persian Kings’, which discusses ancient Iranian
history at length, and shares numerous similarities in content with Firdawsi’s work, to the extent
that they are often assumed to have a common source.15 Moreover, the temporary adoption of
Arabic by the Ghaznavid chancery seems to have no wider impact on Ghaznavid literary culture,

2
which continued to be conducted in both languages, albeit predominantly in Persian.16 Court
poets such as ‘Unsuri and Farrukhi both refer to the heroes of the Shahnama, to whom they
compare Mahmud, and on the basis of the allusions in their verses Melikian-Chirvani states that
“Il n’est pas doûteux, en effet, que la version [of the Shahnama] de Ferdowsi a connu un succès
immense, sans doubte immédiat.”17 The Ghaznavid palace at Ghazna was decorated with verse
inscriptions praising the dynasty, some of which emulated the metre of the Shahnama,18 while
Farrukhi too composed verses the metre and form of which were evidently intended to recall
Firdawsi’s epic, even if elsewhere he describes the Shahnama as “lies”.19
The enormous interest in the sort of legendary Iranian history recounted by the Shahnama
is suggested by the slightly later composition in the Ghaznavid lands of secondary epics dealing
with ancient Iranian themes. One example is the verse accounts of the deeds of the Iranian hero
Faramarz (who is also mentioned in the Shahnama), the Faramarznama. This seems to have
been aimed at a Ghaznavid courtly audience, legitimising and extolling the Ghaznavids’ Indian
campaigns through the implicit comparison with those of the legendary Faramarz.20
Significantly, the language of the Faramarznama is characterised, like the Shahnama, by
archaicisms and a lack of Arabic or Islamic influences, while the poet specifically identifies
himself as “a slave (ghulām)” of Firdawsi.21 From the mid eleventh century, both the Tarikh-i
Sistan and the Persian history of Gardizi, the Zayn al-Akhbar, the latter written for a Ghaznavid
patron, sultan ‘Abd al-Rashid, give pre-Islamic Iranian history an important role.
All this suggests that neither its contents nor its form would have necessarily led to the
Shahnama becoming a damp squib, and we should be cautious in crediting the stories of its
contemporary failure. Our earliest source for the legend of Firdawsi’s rejection by Mahmud is
Nizami ‘Arudi’s Chahar Maqala, written in the mid twelfth century, more than a century later.
Certainly, the Turkish ethnicity of the Ghaznavid dynasty was wholly irrelevant to their cultural
patronage,22 and in fact there is every reason why an epic on Iran might well have appealed to
them. The Ghaznavids, although ruling territories which were peripheral to or even outside
traditional definitions of Iranshahr, seem to have identified their lands as Iran, opposed to the
Turan represented by the Al-i Afrasiyab across the Oxus, as the Qarakhanid dynasty was known
at the time, after the Turanian king Afrasiyab of Shahnama fame.23 Indeed, Gardizi, who
dedicated his work to the Ghaznavid sultan ‘Abd al-Rashid, states explicitly states in his section

3
dealing with the pre-Islamic wars of Iran against Afrasiyab that they continue to the present day
(miyān-i Īrān u Tūrān ta‘aṣṣub u fitna ūftād tā bidīn ghāyat hanūz andarānand).24 Given this, it
can hardly be coincidental that the longest of these panegyrics to Mahmud in the Shahnama
directly precedes Firdawsi’s description of the battle between Kaykhusraw and Afrasiyab, in the
course of which Afrasiyab is defeated,25 suggesting the poet did indeed have an eye to the
potential contemporary relevance of the text. Further, it has been suggested that Firdawsi’s
descriptions of Faramarz’s Indian campaigns may, just like the eponymous later Ghaznavid
secondary epic, be intended to legitimise and celebrate his patron’s military adventures in the
sub-continent.26
As Gardizi’s comments suggest, pre-modern historical writing was undertaken less out of
antiquarian interest than with an eye to the past’s continuing relevance and current meaning. 27
This may be the case even when a historical work makes no explicit link between past and
present. For instance, as I have argued elsewhere, the Persian translation of al-Tabari’s famous
history made for the Samanid dynasty in the mid tenth century by the vizier Bal‘ami was
designed to serve a contemporary political agenda, even though it does not once mention the
Samanids, by promoting the same kind of piety-minded Islam that the dynasty supported.28 The
contemporary relevance of the Shahnama, has, however, remained poorly understood, beyond
the fact that it was evidently intended in part to impart ethical advice.29 In this paper, I wish to
consider the Shahnama in its contemporary environment. Firstly, I wish to compare it with other
historical works composed around the same time, in particular the slightly earlier Arabic Ta’rikh
Sini Muluk al-Ard, which also evinces an interest in the pre-Islamic Iranian past and purports to
be based on Middle Persian sources; I shall also make reference to Bal‘ami’s history and al-
Tha‘alibi’s Ghurar Muluk al-Furs which we have mentioned as having been composed for
Mahmud’s brother. The aim of this comparison is to allow a more accurate assessment of the
extent to which the Shahnama actually is, by the standards of the late tenth and early eleventh
centuries, an archaicising work. Secondly, I wish to offer some reflections on what meaning the
Iranian past might have had in the late tenth and early eleventh century.

The Shahnama’s Contents and Sources in Comparative Perspective

4
As mentioned above, Iranian history was a popular topic not just in the Shahnama but in both the
Arabic and nascent Persian prose historiographical traditions. The latter two, however, parted
company from the Shahnama by interweaving their accounts of Iranian kings with stories of
Prophets, either in a separate section from the Kings of Iran or intermixed with them as in al-
Tabari, Bal‘ami and al-Tha‘alibi.30 Al-Tha‘alibi goes the furthest down this route, by giving
Iranian kings prophetic attributes and as it were annexing them to Islam, while still insisting that
they possess the divine farr necessary for Iranian kingship. These attempts to synthesise the
Iranian and Islamic traditions had been in vogue for a good century, if not longer, in some form
or other. The earliest example in historiography is al-Dinawari, writing in Arabic in the late ninth
century, but ever since the establishment of the ‘Abbasid Caliphate, with its ambitions to
represent itself as the legitimate heir to the Sasanian empire, similar efforts could be observed
more generally in adab and literature. Firdawsi’s concentration on purely Iranian themes without
any prophetic history does seem at first glance quite different from the approach of contemporary
or near contemporary historians, supporting the argument for the “anomalous” nature of the
Shahnama.
The supposedly unfashionable contents of Firdawsi’s text are attributed to him having
followed remarkably closely his sources, most immediately the prose Shahnama commissioned
by Abu Mansur Ibn ‘Abd al-Razzaq, which is thought to have been derived from the khwadāy-
nāmag, the Middle Persian book of kings, today lost in its original form apart from its preface.
However, Firdawsi is generally thought to be an extremely accurate representative of the
contents of this text, although Dick Davis has questioned this. 31 (I wish to leave aside here the
debate as to whether Firdawsi may also have drawn on oral sources, and if so in what form, as I
think it is evident from what follows that even if he did, he certainly had access to a written
tradition too).32 Rypka writes of the Abu Mansur version, which he describes as “the source
actually used by Firdausī” that it was “the product of a group of four Eastern Iranian Zoroastrians
….[who] made use of the Khodāy-nāma in Pahlavi as well as other ancient documents”.33 More
recently, Pourshariati has declared that “Ferdowsi in fact slavishly followed the sources which
had been entrusted to him to compile his opus on Iranian national history”.34
Firdawsi does on occasion claim to be transmitting a “Pahlavi book” (daftar-i pahlavī) or
“an ancient book” (nāma az gah-i bāstān), preserved by Zoroastrian priests (mōbedhs).35

5
However, the internal evidence of Firdawsi’s Shahnama also suggests we should be cautious
about suggesting that either Abu Mansur’s Shahnama or other materials at Firdawsi’s disposal
had a particularly close relationship with Middle Persian texts or with Iranian traditions
circulating in Zoroastrian circles. Davis has noted that, “Ferdowsi did not actually know very
much about the details of Zoroastrian belief; or if he did, he does not appear to have been
interested in structuring his poem according to such beliefs.”36 Although Kolsoum Ghazanfari,
who has researched the references to Zoroastrianism in the Shahnama, is keen to argue for
Firdawsi’s reliance on “accounts of the older works extant from the Sasanian era”,37 she also
notes the inaccuracies the poet’s description of Zoroastrian practices, and the “careful inclusion
of several religious and social elements prevalent at the time of the ŠN [Shahnama]”.38 For
instance, Firdawsi’s presentation of Zoroaster and Zoroastrianism is adapted to suit
contemporary tastes. Zoroaster is shown presenting himself as a prophet (payghāmbar)
39
‫به شاه کییان گفت پیغامبرم سوی تو خرد رهنمون آورم‬

This, in a sense, represents exactly the same tendency as exemplified by al-Tabari, Bal‘ami and
al-Tha‘alibi – the adaption of Iranian history into the framework of an Islamic salvation history
of prophets and king; only here the Islamic prophets are not explicitly present. Moreover, there
are instances where Firdawsi – or Firdawsi’s source, which I shall for brevity in what follows
refer simply to Firdawsi – clearly draws on Islamic traditions, even when these conflict with the
outlines of Iranian national history that we can safely attribute to the khwadāy-nāmags on the
basis of citations and translations from them in other sources.
The best example of this is the story of Alexander,40 whom Firdawsi depicts as a proto-
Muslim, travelling like a hajji to the Ka‘ba.41 Alexander is held to have established the Quraysh
in Mecca, and at the end of his life is depicted travelling east to confront Gog and Magog against
whom he builds a protective wall. This is derived from the Qur’anic figure of Dhu’l-Qarnayn.42
Indeed, in keeping with the Muslim tradition, Alexander is depicted in a broadly positive light,
less as a conquering general than as a searcher after truth, even in the account of his campaigns
in India. Firdawsi also adopts the legend, based ultimately on pseudo-Callisthenes, which gives
Alexander a Persian lineage – and the etymology for his name – through his Greek mother’s
short lived relationship with Darius.43 Firdawsi thus achieves the union of Islam and Persian

6
kingship that his Arabophone contemporary al-Tha‘alibi was striving for, and indeed earlier
Arabic writers like al-Dinawari. This is diametrically opposed to the traditional Iranian depiction
of Alexander, which is given by Hamza al-Isfahani, the mid-tenth century writer whose
surviving Arabic Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard is rich in Iranian traditions, as we will discuss below.
According to Hamza, Alexander was a figure of unspeakable evil who destroyed Iran and killed
its priests: precisely a reflection of the material we find in Zoroastrian sources.44
Until recently, it was thought that there was a Middle Persian tradition about Alexander
which is reflected in Firdawsi.45 Yet this thesis relies on the idea which recent scholarship has
now entirely discredited, that that the Syriac version of the Alexander-Romance was translated
from a Pahlavi original.46 In fact, as Ciancaglini puts it: “there is no trace of any Middle Persian
translation of the Alexander Romance.”47 In other words, the only Middle Persian version of the
Alexander legend for the existence of which there is any evidence is deeply hostile; this is the
tradition preserved by our Zoroastrian sources, and among the Muslim ones, by Hamza, and
indeed also by Gardizi, which confirms that this version was circulating in the eastern Iranian
world where Firdawsi was active.48 Indeed, the presence of certain elements from this tradition
are possibly to be identified in the Shahnama itself,49 but its general contours were rejected by
Firdawsi in favour of the Islamic Alexander.
In this instance, at least, Firdawsi is participating in the same effort to Islamise Iranian
history as Bal‘ami and al-Tha‘alibi, in contrast to the traditional Iranian position adopted by
Hamza. Indeed, surely Firdawsi’s ultimate source, whether first, second or third hand, is actually
Arabic-language. Quite apart from the depiction of Alexander visiting the Ka‘ba, Firdawsi’s
account of great clash between Philip of Macedon and Darius after which Philip surrenders his
daughter to the Persian king is located at Amorium,50 a location of little importance to an Iranian
readership but a vital point on the Byzantine-Arab front line, repeatedly sacked by Arab armies,
most memorably by the Caliph al-Mu‘tasim in 836, whose exploits were commemorated in a
famous qasida by Abu Tammam. An Arabic-language source might therefore well have had
reason to “contemporise” events by placing them at Amorium, the Arabic spelling of which is
preserved in Firdawsi.51 The idea of an Arabic source is strengthened by the brief presence of
Arab raiders at the beginning of the story, led by a certain Shu‘ayb b. Qutayba, again, not likely
to be a name in this spelling inherited from any Middle Persian source.

7
 Alexander is not the only point of comparison between the Shahnama and the Islamic
historiographical tradition.52 The treatment of Yazdagird III, the last shah, shows perhaps the
most striking parallels, for Firdawsi’s text follows the narrative lines set down by Bal‘ami (at
least as represented in the published edition).53 Both Bal‘ami and Firdawsi focus on the two key
events of his battle against the Arabs at Qadisiyya54 and his death in Khurasan, in a mill near
Marv, betrayed by his vassal, Mahuya, governor of Marv.55 Both have very similar accounts of
the letters sent by the Persian general Rustam Farrukhzad to summon help before the battle, and
of the Arab general Sa‘d b. Abi Waqqas’s efforts to persuade the Iranians to convert, promising
them that in that case Yazdagird will keep his throne.56 Although Rustam Farrukhzad’s famous
prophecy of the end Sasanian rule and Iran’s future under the Arabs57 does not have an exact
parallel in Bal‘ami, the prose text of the latter does tell us that he “knew the science of the stars
well, and there was no astrologer like him in that time, and he knew that the rule of the Persians
(‘ajam) would be overthrown”.58 This suggests an awareness of the same tradition of Rustam’s
prophecy. There are of course differences of detail too: Firdawsi has Rustam killed by Sa‘d
himself, whereas Bal‘ami attributes it to an Arab called Hilal,59 while Firdawsi is rather fuller on
the Persian preparations to flee east, although both texts mention Yazdagird’s intention to seek
the help of the Turkish and Chinese rulers.60
As with the story of Alexander, the philological evidence of purely Arab forms of names
suggests the use of an Arabic language source, even if mediated through a New Persian
translation. Firdawsi’s use of the correct spelling of the Arab commander Sa‘d b. Abi Waqqas
with its characteristically Arabic letters ‘ayn and ṣād is unlikely to be derived from any
documents that had been transmitted through Middle Persian. Moreover, the account of the last
days of the Sasanian empire that has come down to us in Hamza al-Isfahani is quite different:
Hamza al-Isfahani mentions Qadisiyya only in passing, and in keeping with his local interests,
has Isfahan as the place where Yazdagird made his last base before retreating to Khurasan.
Rustam Farrukhzad appears as just one among several commanders.61 There were thus
alternative traditions derived from the khwadāy-nāmag literature and related Middle Persian
texts which did not make it into Firdawsi’s Shahnama, nor does it necessarily always represent
the traditional Iranian view of history, as its presentation of the Islamised Alexander suggests.

8
 Firdawsi’s claim to be using ancient sources should perhaps therefore be seen in the light
of his self-conscious antiquarianism, a literary fiction rather than unambiguous evidence of the
use of Middle Persian sources transmitted into New Persian via the Abu Mansur text or other
Shahnamas. Moreover, despite the claim of the Abu Mansur text’s preface that this Shahnama
was based on ‘books of the kings’ collected in Khurasan, it is certain this was supplemented, at
the least, by Islamic material, including some relating to prophets, 62 and Arabic sources such as
Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ (d. 142/759) and Hamza al-Isfahani (d. after 350/961), who composed
translations or adaptations of earlier Persian sources, are specifically mentioned.63 At no point
does the preface explicitly state any sources were Persian language. It is true that the preface
does give an impressive sounding list of textual authorities, but this does not represent an
“authentic” Iranian tradition to which the compilers had access but is simply lifted directly, word
for word from Hamza al-Isfahani’s Arabic Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard: Ibn al-Muqaffa‘,
Muhammad b. al-Jahm al-Barmaki, the book of the “kings of Pars” taken from the library of al-
Ma’mun (al-mustakhraj min khizānat al-Ma’mūn, the identical phrase is used in both the Abu
Mansur Shahnama preface and Hamza), the histories of Zadoy b. Shahoy, Bahram al-Isfahani,
the ‘book of the Sasanians’ of Hashim b. Qasim al-Isfahani, and the history of Musa b. ‘Isa al-
Khusrawi. Thus, if, as the text implies, the authors of the Abu Mansur Shahnama had to resort to
Hamza al-Isfahani to get access to materials dealing with the Iranian past, this suggests that what
was otherwise available was limited and unsatisfactory. Moreover, Hamza is known to have
made a composite text bringing together several earlier khwadāy-nāmags, as well as drawing
extensively on other Arabic sources, 64 so his work does not even purport to represent a verbatim
record of its sources, even if it gives, in some unknown degree, their gist.
Hamza was widely used by later Arabic-language authors. Biruni also cites Zadoy b.
Shahoy’s book ‘Illat A‘yad al-Furs, which he indicates he has seen personally,65 but mentions
other authorities such as the aforementioned Musa b. ‘Isa on the authority of Hamza.66 Hamza’s
materials circulated among Persian authors at an early date. The list of sources presented by the
Abu Mansur Shahnama is also repeated more or less verbatim in Bal‘ami’s translation of al-
Tabari, where the text presents it as a citation from Hamza al-Isfahani on the authority of Ibn al-
Muqaffa‘(dar Shāhnāma-yi buzurg Ḥamza-i Iṣfahānī īdūn gūyad kih pisar-i Muqaffa‘ ya‘nī
‘Abdallāh az gāh-i bīrūn-i Adam...).67 It is possible, though far from certain, that these represent

9
part of the original composition of Bal‘ami, which was begun in 352/962, two years after Hamza
completed his own book. This must also have been roughly the date the Abu Mansur preface
was composed, given its references to Hamza, although elsewhere the compilation of the Abu
Mansur materials is dated to 346/957.68 However, given the numerous interpolations into
Bal‘ami’s text, which cannot be certainly reconstructed in its tenth century form or forms,69 it is
equally, if not more likely, that these texts were inserted later, just as, for example, variant texts
of Bal‘ami offer alternative accounts of Yazdagird’s end.70
Without getting too bogged down in an intractable discussion as to who borrowed what
from where, which may never be proved owing to the absence of contemporary manuscripts of
any of these works and the extensive interpolations to which Bal‘ami and Firdawsi’s works can
be clearly demonstrated to have been subjected, one key point stands out. Material from the Abu
Mansur Shahnama tradition, which itself drew on Hamza as a source (although, in fairness, we
cannot know for sure precisely for which passages it used Hamza), was considered suitable for
incorporation into Bal‘ami’s synthesis of Iranian and Islamic history. This underlines the lack of
a rigid distinction between the archaicising Abu Mansur/Firdawsi tradition and the Islamising,
pietistic agenda of Bal‘ami. Whether or not whether Firdawsi may have used Bal‘ami as a source
– which should not be excluded from possibility –his narrative is, at least in part, evidently based
on the same sources and follows the same lines as one which was incorporated into works by
authors that were paragons of Islamic, Sunni piety.
It is worth underlining that there is no necessary connection between the language in
which an author wrote and the sources at his disposal or his attitude towards the past.71 Hamza,
writing in Isfahan in Arabic, seems to preserve, albeit it in attenuated form, some of the
viewpoint of the Zoroastrian tradition and the khwadāy-nāmags. Similarly, the earliest prose
work associated with the Ghaznavid court to attempt to link the dynasty with ancient Iran, al-
Tha‘alibi’s Ghurar Muluk al-Furs, was written in Arabic.72 In contrast, the language of the
Persian version of al-Tabari disguises the opposite extreme - the more or less total absence of
anything specifically Persian about these works other than the language. Al-Tabari was freely
adapted by Bal‘ami, but if anything it was to diminish the Persian role in history rather than to
enhance it: the evidence of extant manuscripts of Bal‘ami suggests he devoted if anything less
space to Iranian history than al-Tabari had.73 In all likelihood it simply did not seem very

10
important to the translators of these works that were meant to inculcate Islamic piety, not Persian
national feeling. Thus merely the fact of Firdawsi writing in Persian does not imply he had any
special access to written Persian language accounts of Iranian national history handed down from
posterity. Indeed, the image of Firdawsi as a passionate traditionalist seeking to preserve his
country’s dying culture and keeping rigorously to the traditions inherited from the Iranian
forefathers is not entirely borne out. The evidence of the Abu Mansur preface suggest that these
ancient traditions were in sufficiently short supply that they had to be reimported into Persian
from Arabic intermediary texts. One of the most important of these intermediaries, cited by
Bal‘ami, the Abu Mansur preface and Biruni, was Hamza al-Isfahani, seems to be the major
source for the transmission of Iranian materials back into Persian as well as to later Arabic-
language writers, albeit in a new garb. Hamza, as we shall see, was also writing with an eye to
contemporary concerns.

The meaning of the Iranian past in the tenth to eleventh centuries

Hamza’s Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard exemplifies some of the ways in which an Iranian
antiquarianism could be combined with contemporary political concerns and a certain local
patriotism. The work contains much information about the author’s hometown of Isfahan, and
particular concern of Hamza is to associate the foundation of various villages, districts and fire
temples with pre-Islamic Iranian rulers, usually the legendary Kayanids rather than the
Sasanids.74 The interest in fire temples is particularly telling when put alongside other passages
in which Hamza seems to predict the imminent end of Islam.75 Yet the Prophet and the history of
Islam are included too, albeit it in rather brief form, and his account of hijri history culminates in
the humiliating murder of the Caliph al-Muqtadir and the exposure of his naked body.76 If
anything, this seems like a riposte to al-Dinawari, the ninth-century historian who was one of the
first to attempt to create an Irano-Islamic synthesis in his history, which ends with the killing and
exposure of the naked body of Afshin, the ‘Abbasid general exposed as a heretic for his
sympathies for the old Iranian faith, symbolising the victory of Islam.77
From the very start of his work, Hamza emphasises that his theme is above all the rise
and fall of states, the transfer of power. Yet he also clearly has a particular target in mind. When

11
dealing with the Prophet’s birth, he describes the planetary conjunctions that foretell the end of
Islam in his own lifetime, referring to the Zoroastrian apocalyptic tradition that a force from the
west would destroy Islam. His account of Islamic history is devoted above to unusual events,
such as earthquakes, which we know from other contemporary sources, like Maqdisi’s Kitab al-
Bad’ wa-l-ta’rikh (composed 355/966), were seen as portents of the end of days.78 Yet Hamza’s
work concludes with praises of the nascent Buyid empire: it is hard to avoid the conclusion that
he saw in Hasan and ‘Ali b. Buya a hope for the revival of the past traditions of Iranian kingship
and end to Arab rule, and of course as is well known, the Buyids did indeed adopt some of the
trappings of Iranian kingship such as the title of shāhanshāh.79
If Hamza’s sympathies were with the old faith, he remained a Muslim and of course he
wrote in Arabic, and we must not forget this side of Hamza’s literary persona. Alongside the
Ta’rikh with its stridently Iranocentric focus, apparently an interpretation of Isfahan’s dying pre-
Islamic culture for, presumably, an Arabic-speaking Isfahani audience that did not know Middle
Persian but remained conscious of its Iranian roots, Hamza composed a collection of Arabic
proverbs, and an early edition of the poems of Abu Nuwas.80 Thus despite Hamza’s
antiquarianism he was also a fully fledged participant in the Arabic literary culture in which he
himself expressed himself. Nor were his sympathies unique. As mentioned, apocalyptic
prophecies are well known from Zoroastrian texts, but they also seem to have been current
among individuals in Khurasan with Muslim names. Al-Biruni provides some useful titbits of
information on this in his al-Athar al-Baqiyya which was composed ten years before the
traditional completion date of the Shahnama. In 319/931, a certain Ibn Abi Zakariyya’ appeared,
who “ordered [his followers] to worship fire and honour it, and cursed the Prophets of old and
their companions.”81 Around the same time, Abu ‘Abdallah al-‘Adi whom al-Biruni describes as
“an open partisan of Zoroastrianism, who hoped for the appearance of the resurrected saviour”
wrote a book on planetary conjunctions82 – the same theme that Hamza had treated – apparently
predicting that “a man would emerge who would restore the Zoroastrians’ state (dawlat al-
majūsiyya), and conquer the entire earth, and bring an end to the rule of the Arabs and so on”. As
al-Biruni sarcastically comments, some of his calculations about the return of Sasanian rule
failed to work out, but he too put his hope in the Buyid dynasty. Al-Biruni says: “When the
Buyid dynasty of ‘Ali b. Buya, called ‘Imad al-Dawla, appeared in the planetary conjunctions,

12
[he said] this is the one promised with regard to the return of kingship to the Persians”.83
Similarly, Mardawij, founder of the Ziyarid dynasty of Gilan, seems to have hoped to destroy not
just Arab hegemony but also Islam, and aimed to reconstitute an Iranian empire.84 Moreover,
those hoping for a revival of ancient Iranian rule were not the only ones harbouring apocalyptic
expectations around this date: the Ismailis were another growing constituency in Khurasan, and
their theologians sought to incorporate Zoroaster into their own cosmology.85 It is striking that
many historians active in the eastern Islamic world show a great interest in the timespan allotted
to the world: Bal‘ami, al-Maqdisi, Hamza, among others. Perhaps one intention of these works
is either to promote or rebut these apocalyptic predictions, depending on their viewpoint.
With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that the more extreme political manifestations of
these hopes had waned by the eleventh century, although Ghaznavid authors do mention the
continued existence in their own time of small groups of followers of the ninth-century anti-
Muslim rebel al-Muqanna‘.86 The Buyids also sought a Shahnama hero as their ancestor to mask
their humble origins, even if their efforts ending in confusion, with the Iranian Bahram Gur
proclaimed to be their ancestor as well as asserting a noble Arab descent. Indeed, numerous
rulers or rulers of the period linked themselves to heroes of the Shahnama.87 Al-Biruni tells us
that Abu Mansur Ibn ‘Abd al-Razzaq’s Shahnama explicitly asserted the latter’s descent from
Manuchichr.88 The Samanids claimed descent from Bahram Chubin, the Sasanian general, while
the Ziyarids of Gilan ultimately traced their ancestry back on their maternal side to Qubad, father
of Anushirwan.89 As noted above, the Qarakhanids seem to have claimed descent from
Afrasiyab. Such pretensions to inherit ancient Iranian kingship on the part of their
contemporary rivals and predecessors may have presented a serious challenge to the Ghaznavid
efforts to portray themselves as rulers of Iran outlined above, 90 and the dynasty sought to
compete. Juzjani, writing in the early thirteenth century, citing the lost chronicle of Abu’l-Qasim
‘Imadi, says of Mahmud of Ghazna’s father Sebüktegin that

“he was one of the descendants of the emperor Yazdagird [III], and when Yazdagird was
killed in a mill in the land of Merv, at the time of the Caliphate of the Commander of the
Faithful ‘Uthman, the followers and partisans of Yazdagird fled to Turkestan and intermarried
with [the local people]. And in two or three generations they became Turks. Their palaces still

13
 stand in that place, and their genealogy is as follows... Amir Sebüktegin b. Juq Qarabjikim b.
Qara Arslan b. Qara Milat (?) b. Qara Yaghman b. Firuz b. Yazdagird [b.] the emperor of
Persia [shahriyār al-fārs].”91

It seems, however, that such a genealogy did not play a prominent role in Ghaznavid efforts to
legitimate themselves in the eleventh century, given the lack of explicit references to Yazdagird
in contemporary Ghaznavid panegyrics, which prefer to compare the dynasty to figures such as
Alexander and Anushirwan rather than explicitly claim descent from them.92 Firdawsi, for his
part, calls Mahmud a new Faridun, the embodiment of justice and generosity who overthrew the
Arab tyrant Zahhak:
‫خروشی شنیدم ز گیتی بلند * که اندیشه شد تیز و تن بی گزند‬
‫که ای نامداران و گردن کشان * که جست از فریدون فرخ نشان‬
‫فریدون بیدار دل زنده شد * زمان و زمین پیش او بنده شد‬
‫به داد و بخشش گرفت این جهان * سرش بر تر آمد ز شاهنشاهان‬
93
‫فروزان شد آثار تاریخ او * که جاوید بادا بن و بیخ او‬

I heard a cry from on high, at which my thoughts quickened and my body revived,
“Oh famous and proud men who sought a sign of Faridun the fortunate,
Faridun of the wakeful heart has come to life, time and earth are slaves before him.
With his justice and generosity he has seized this world, his head is higher than the kings of
kings!
His annals are radiant, may his root and foundation be eternal.”

Even if such claims for the Ghaznavids were restricted to the realms of poetic simile, the dynasty
was surrounded by contemporaries, rivals and immediate predecessors who sought to use the
Iranian past as a means of legitimising their own rule, and in the case of Abu Mansur of Tus,
using precisely a Shahnama to accomplish this.

Conclusion

14
The present article has attempted to establish that in neither form nor content was the Shahnama
as old fashioned or antiquarian as commonly believed. In form, the work found emulations in the
works of Ghaznavid court poets like Farrukhi and the verses decorating Ghaznavid palaces,
while later works composed in the Ghaznavid territories such as the Faramarznama confirm the
enduring popularity of epics on ancient Iranian themes. It is true that we do not have an extant
work from the turn of the eleventh century that closely resembles the Shahnama in form, but this
could be said for almost any other work of Ghaznavid or even Samanid literature beyond
panegyric poetry. One searches in vain for an exact equivalent to Tha‘alibi’s Ghurar, Bayhaqi’s
History of Mas‘ud, or al-‘Utbi’s great Kitab al-Yamini denouncing the Ghaznavid dynasty.
Perhaps just not enough material has survived to allow us to assess anachronism or otherwise,
Furthermore, the Shahnama drew on the same corpus of sources used by other writers in the
Islamic tradition at the time, and Firdawsi did not enjoy some sort of privileged access to ancient
Iranian materials, which, in any event, were in good measure transmitted to early New Persian
writers through their Arabic translations or adaptations by Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ and Hamza al-
Isfahani. In sum, then, the evidence does not support the traditional accounts of the Shahnama’s
failure. Certainly, it may have been the subject of negative reactions on the part of certain rival
court poets, but the very existence of such allusions in the works of Farrukhi suggests that the
Shahnama was already well-known to both the poet and his audience.
In terms of content, the Shahnama could have had relevance to a Ghaznavid audience in
multiple ways. On the one hand it could be read as an allegory for Mahmud, with various of its
heroes standing for the sultan. Stories of Kaykhusraw with his wars against Afrasiyab, Faramarz
with his campaigns into India, and Faridun, the reviver of Iranian kingship, could all have played
a role in legitimising Ghaznavid rule and military exploits across the Oxus and into India. The
verses cited above comparing Mahmud to Faridun are the most direct instance of this, but the
placement of panegyrics of Mahmud suggests such an allegorical reading is likely elsewhere.
This supposition is strengthened by the existence of another, slightly later, eleventh-century
Persian epic, Gurgani’s Vis and Ramin (composed c. 441/1050), dedicated to the Seljuq Sultan
Tughril, which also claimed to draw on ‘Pahlavi’ legends but was evidently intended to be read
as an allegory on contemporary politics.94 Doubtless one reason for the composition of such texts
was the interest in the revival of Iranian kingship in the tenth century among dynasties such as

15
the Ghaznavids’ Buyid rivals, and rulers’ or nobles’ search for genealogies linking themselves to
Shahnama heroes, as with Abu Mansur Ibn ‘Abd al-Razzaq. This would have given the topic of
ancient Iranian kingship a distinct contemporary relevance, and indeed, possibly stimulated
demand for a Ghaznavid court version of the epic. Clearly, the Shahnama cannot simply be
reduced to a piece of contemporary political propaganda, but nor can this aspect of it be
overlooked in interpreting the poem.

Bibliography

Allegranzi, Viola. “The Use of Persian in Monumental Epigraphy from Ghazni (Eleventh-
Twelfth Centuries),” Eurasian Studies 23 (2015), pp. 23-41.

Ashtiyani, ‘Abbas Iqbal. “Karasi-yi Shahnama-khwan,” Yadgar 20/3 (1325), pp. 20-22.

Askari, Nasrin. The Medieval Reception of the Shāhnāma as a Mirror for Princes, Leiden, Brill,
2016.

Bal‘ami, Abu ‘Ali. Tarikhnama-ial-Tabari gardanida-i mansub bi-Bal‘ami, ed. Muhammad

Rawshan, Soroush, Tehran, 1999.

al-Biruni, Abu Rayhan Muhammad b. Ahmad. al-Athar al-Baqiyya ‘an al-Qurun al-Khaliyya,
ed. Parviz Azdhka’i, Mirath-i Maktub, Tehran, 1380.

Bombaci, Alessio. The Kufic Inscription in Persian Verses in the Court of the Royal Palace of
Mas‘ud III at Ghazni, Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome, 1966.

Bosworth, C.E.. “The Banū Ilyās of Kirmān,” Iran and Islam, in memory of the late Vladimir
Minorsky, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 1971, pp. 107-24.

16
Bosworth, C.E. “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran and the Search for Dynastic
Connections with the Past,” Iran 11 (1973), pp. 51-62.

Busse, Heribert. Calif und Grosskönig: Die Buyiden im Iraq (945-1055), Franz Steiner Verlag,
Beirut and Wiesbaden, 1969.

Ciancaglini, C.A. “The Syriac Version of the Alexander Romance,” Le Muséon 114 (2001), pp.
121-140.

Crone, Patricia. The Nativist Prophets of Early Islamic Iran: Rural Revolt and Local
Zoroastrianism, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012.

Dabiri, Ghazzal. “The Shahnama: Between the Samanids and the Ghaznavids,” Iranian Studies
43 (2010), pp. 13-28.

Daftary, Farhad. The Ismā‘īlīs: Their History and Doctrines, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 1990.
.
Daftary, Farhad. “Cyclical Time and Sacred History in Medieval Ismaili Thought,” In K.
D'hulster and J. Van Steenbergen (eds), Continuity and Change in the Realms of Islam: Essays in
Honour of Professor Urbain Vermeulen, Peeters, Leuven, 2008, pp. 151-158.

Davidson, Olga M., Poet and Hero in the Persian Book of Kings, Ithaca: Cornell University
Press, 1994.

Davidson, Olga M. “A Pictorial Aetiology of Ferdowsi as a Transcendent Poet” in Robert

Hillenbrand, A.C.S. Peacock and Firuza Abduallaeva (eds), Ferdowsi, the Mongols and the
History of Iran: Art, Literature and Culture from Early Islam to Qajar Persia, I.B. Tauris,
London, 2013, pp. 245-248.

17
Davis, Dick, “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s Sources,” Journal of the American Oriental Society
116 (1996), pp. 48-57.

Davis, Dick. “Religion in the Shahnama,” Iranian Studies 48 (2015), pp. 337-348.

al-Dinawari, Abu Hanifa b. Da’ud. Al-Akhbar al-Tiwal, ed. ‘Abd al-Mun‘im ‘Amir and Jamal al-
Din Shayyal, Dar Ihya’ al-Kutub al-‘Arabiyya, Cairo, 1960.

Farrukhi. Diwan-i Hakim Farrukhi Sistani, ed. Muhammad Dabir-Siyaqi, Intisharat-i Zawwar,
Tehran, 1371.

Firdawsi, Abu’l-Qasim, Shahnama, ed. Jalal Khaliqi-Mutlaq, Bibliotheca Persica, New York,
1987-2007.

Frye, R.N.. “Two Iranian Notes,” in Papers in Honour of Professor Mary Boyce, Leiden, 1985.

Ghazanfari, Kolsoum. Perceptions of Zoroastrian Realities in the Shahnameh. Zoroaster,

Beliefs, Rituals, Logos Verlag, Berlin, 2011.

Hamza b. al-Hasan al-Isfahani. Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard wa’l-Anbiya’, Manshurat Dar
Maktabat al-Hayah, Beirut, nd.

Hanaway, W. “Iskandar-nama,” Encyclopaedia Iranica VIII, pp. 609-612.

Juzjani, Minhaj-i Siraj. Tabaqat-i Nasiri ya Tarikh-i Iran wa Islam, ed. ‘Abd al-Hayy Habibi,
Dunya-yi Kitab, Tehran, 1363.

Hillenbrand, Robert, “The Iskandar Cycle in the Great Mongol Shahnama”. In M. Bridges and
J.Ch.Bürgel (eds), The Problematics of Power. Eastern and Western Representations of
Alexander the Great, Bern: Peter Lang, 1996, pp. 203-30.

18
Khaleghi-Motlagh, Djalal. “Ferdowsi. ii. Hajw-nāma,” Encyclopeadia Iranica IX, 523-4.

Madelung, W.L.. “The Assumption of the Title Shāhānshāh by the Būyids and "The Reign of the
Daylam (Dawlat Al-Daylam),” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 28 (1969), pp. 84-108, 168-183.

Manteghi, Haila. “Alexander the Great in the Shāhnāmeh of Ferdowsī,” in Richard Stoneman,
Kyle Erickson and Ian Netton (eds), The Alexander Romance in Persia and the East, Barkhuis
Publishing, Groningen, 2012, pp. 161-174.

Meisami, Julie Scott. Persian Historiography To the End of the Twelfth Century, Edinburgh
University Press, Edinburgh, 1999.

Melikian-Chirvani, A.S.. “Le livre des rois, mirroir du destin,” Studia Iranica 17 (1988), pp. 7-
46.

Melikian-Chirvani, A.S., “Conscience du passé et resistance culturelle dans l’Iran mongole”. In

Denis Aigle (ed.), L’Iran face à la domination mongole, Bibliothèque iranienne, Tehran, 1997,
pp. 137-177.

Melville, Charles, “The Historian at Work”. In Charles Melville (ed.), Persian Historiography,
vol. X of A History of Persian Literature, London: IB Tauris, 2012, pp. 56-100.

Minorsky, Vladimir. “The Older Preface to the Shāh-nāma” in Studi orientalistici in onore di
Giorgio Levi della Vida, Istituto per l’Oriente, Rome, 1956, vol. II, pp. 159-79. Reprinted in
Minorsky, V., Iranica: Twenty Articles, University of Tehran, Tehran, 1964.

Molé, M., “Vis u Ramin et l'histoire seldjoukide,” Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 9
(1960): 1-30.

19
Mottahedeh, Roy P.. “Finding Iran in the Panegyrics of the Ghaznavid Court” in A.C.S. Peacock
and D.G. Tor (eds), Medieval Central Asia and the Persianate World: Iranian Tradition and
Islamic Civilisation, I.B. Tauris, London, 2015, pp. 129-142.

Nöldeke, Theodor. Das Iranische Nationalepos, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin and Leipzig, 1920.

Omidsalar, Mahmoud. Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, the Shāhnāmeh, Palgrave
Macmillan, New York, 2011.

Peacock, A.C.S. Mediaeval Islamic Historiography and Political Legitimacy: Bal‘amī’s

Tārīkhnāma, Routledge, London, 2007.

Peacock, A.C.S. “‘Utbī’s al-Yamīnī: Patronage, Composition and Reception,” Arabica 54

(2007), pp. 500-525.

Peacock, A.C.S. “Early Persian Historians and the Heritage of Pre-Islamic Iran,” in Edmund
Herzig and Sarah Stewart (eds), The Idea of Iran, Vol. V, Early Islamic Iran, I.B. Tauris,
London, 2012, pp. 59-75.

Pourshariati, Parvaneh. “Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī and Sāsānid Historical Geography of Sinī Mulūk al-
Arḍ w’al-Anbiyā’,” Res Orientales 17 (2007), pp. 111-140.

Pourshariati, Parvaneh. Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy
and the Arab Conquest of Iran, I.B. Tauris, London, 2008.

Rosenthal, Franz. “Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī,” Encyclopaedia of Islam2, III

Rubanovich, J. “Tracking the Shāhnāma Tradition in Medieval Persian Folk Prose” in Charles
Melville and Gabrielle van den Berg (eds), Shāhnāma Studies II: The Reception of Firdausi’s
Shahnama, Brill, Leiden, 2012, pp. 11-34.

20
Rypka, Jan. History of Iranian Literature, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1968.

Ṣafa, Zabihallah. Hamasa-surayi dar Iran, Amir Kabir, Tehran, 1387.

Shahbazi, A. Sh. “On the Xwadāy-nāmag,” Papers in Honor of Professor Ehsan Yarshater, Acta
Iranica 30, Leiden, 1990, pp. 208-29

Shahbazi, A. Shapur. Ferdowsi: A Critical Biography, Harvard University, Cambridge MA,

1991.

Simpson, Marianna Shreve, “From Tourist to Pilgrim: Iskandar at the Ka‘ba in Illustrated
Shahnama Manuscripts,” Iranian Studies 43 (2010), pp. 126-146.

Tahmi, Mahmoud, 1998. L’Encyclopédisme musulman a l’âge classique: Le Livre de la création

et de l’histoire de Maqdisî, Maisonneuve et Larose, Paris.

al-Tha‘âlibî, Aboû Manṣoûr ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Muḥammad ibn Ismâ‘îl. Histoire des Rois de
Perse, ed. and tr. H. Zotenberg, Imprimerie Nationale, Paris, 1900.

Wood, Philip. “The Christian Reception of the Xwadāy-nāmag: Hormizd IV, Khusrau II and
their Successors,” JRAS series 3, 26 (2016), pp. 407-422.

Yarshater, Ehsan. “Iranian National History” in The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. III, ed.
Ehsan Yarshater, The Seleucid, Parthian and Sasanid Periods, Part 1, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge (1983), pp. 359-478.

Van Zutphen, Marjolijn. Farāmarz, the Sistāni Hero: Texts and Traditions of the Farāmarznāme
and the Persian Epic Cycle, Brill, Leiden, 2014.

21
Yamamoto, Kumiko. The Oral Background of Persian Epics: Storytelling and Poetry, Leiden,
Brill, 2003.

1 It is an honour to dedicate this article to the memory of Edmund Bosworth. A preliminary

version was presented at the The Shahnama Millennium Conference organised by the
Shahnama Centre, University of Cambridge, in 2010. I am also grateful to Charles Melville for
comments on a draft of this paper.
2 For the traditional account of the work’s reception see Nöldeke, Das Iranische Nationalepos,

26-34; Safa, Hamasa-sarayi dar Iran, 184-190; Shahbazi, Ferdowsi, 2-8; for surveys of the
mediaeval reception see Rubanovich, “Tracking the Shāhnāma Tradition” and Askari, The
Medieval Reception of the Shāhnāma, 8-85.
3 See Davidson, “A Pictorial Aetiology of Ferdowsi.”
4 Shahbazi, Ferdowsi, 97-103; Meisami, Persian Historiography, 44, 46 n. 13, 51-3; Omidsalar,

Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, 85-86; for a review of debates on this issue, see
Khaleghi-Motlagh, “Ferdowsi. ii. Hajw-nāma”.
5 E.g. Nöldeke, Das Iranische Nationalepos, 35-36, 47
6 Dabiri, “The Shahnama,” 26.
7 Meisami, Persian Historiography, 53; cf. Rypka, History of Iranian Literature, 156-7, 161.
8 Rypka, History of Iranian Literature, 157.
9 Minorsky, “The Older Preface to the Shāh-nāma”; Safa, Hamasa-sarayi dar Iran, 160-171;

Shahbazi, Ferdowsi, 33-38; Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, 48-61; van
Zutphen, Farāmarz, the Sistāni Hero, 22-25; on the Daqiqi section see Davis, “Religion in the
Shahnama,” 340.
10 Al-Biruni, al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 45.
11 Ashtiyani, “Karasi-yi Shahnama-khwan”; on the post of Shahnama-khwan, which seems to

have also existed at royal courts in the twelfth century, see also Melkian-Chirvani, “Le livre des
rois,” 33-37.
12 Melikian-Chirvani, “Le livre des rois,” 20; Farrukhi, Diwan, 65.
13 Firdawsi, Shahnama, IV, 171, l. 27.
14 Firdawsi, Shahnama, IV: 171, ll. 32-3:

‫پیوستم این نامه باستان * پسندیده از دفتر راستان‬

‫که تا روز پیری مرا بر دهد * بزرگی و دینار و افسر دهد‬
15 al-Tha‘âlibî, Histoire des Rois de Perse, v-vi; Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National

Epic, 50-53; Peacock, “Early Persian Historians,” 66-67; also Davis, “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s
Sources”.
16 The principal exception is ‘Utbi’s Arabic al-Yamini, a highly complex work devoted to the

exploits of Mahmud and his father Sebüktegin; however, this was certainly destined, at least in
the form in which it has reached us, for an audience of fellow bureaucrats (see Peacock, “‘Utbī’s
al-Yamīnī”).
17 Melikian-Chirvani, “Le livre des rois,” 15.
18 Bombaci, The Kufic Inscription in Persian Verses; Allegranzi, “The Use of Persian in

Monumental Epigraphy from Ghazni,” 26-27.

22
19 Melikian-Chirvani, “Le livre des rois,” 19-20; Farrukhi, Diwan, 248-249; cf. Farrukhi, Diwan,
344, a panegyric to Mahmud in the form of a dialogue between the poet and his beloved:
‫ چنو دگر به جهان شه بود؟ * گفتم ز من مپرس به شهنامه کن نگاه‬:‫گفتا‬
‫ که شاهنامه دروغست سربسر * گفتم تو راست گیر و دروغ از میان بکاه‬:‫گفتا‬
He said, “Is there another king like him in the world?”; I said, “Don’t ask me, look in the
Shahnama”.
He said, “The Shahnama is full of lies”; I said, “Do what’s right and get rid of the lies.”
20 Van Zutphen, Farāmarz, the Sistāni Hero, 539-546, 557-561.
21 Van Zutphen, Farāmarz, the Sistāni Hero, 336, 338.
22 Cf. Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, 100-106.
23 Cf. Mottahedeh, “Finding Iran in the Panegyrics of the Ghaznavid Court,” 131-3; Omidsalar,

Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, 104-105; Omidsalar cites and translates a passage
from the Ghaznavid panegyrist Farrukhi’s Diwan (Farrukhi, Diwan, 256-257) that in his
translation attacks the ‘Turks’; however, the original text makes it clearer that the target of
Farrukhi’s wrath is the Qarakhanids, referred to by their titles of khan (az khānān dūstī
nabāyad.... nayarzad īn khānān ba-pāk andīsha-yi khusraw). The poet warns against the
Qarakhanid offer of friendship, motivated by their desire for a clear southern front while they
campaign against China. Farrukhi’s point is the untrustworthy nature of the Qarakhanids, not a
more general desire to attack ‘Turks’ as a group. The Qarakhanids themselves (or at least their
court poets in their panegyrics) accepted and adopted this identification with Afrasiyab, see
Melikian-Chirvani, “Le livre des rois,” 25-30; Melikian-Chirvani, “Conscience du passé,” 146-147.
24 Gardizi, Zayn al-Akhbar, 75.
25 Firdawsi, Shahnama, IV: 170, l. 20-174, l. 72.
26 Van Zutphen, Farāmarz, the Sistāni Hero, 557.
27 Cf. Meisami, Persian Historiography, 6-13, 283-286; Melville, “The Historian at Work”.
28 Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography.
29 Askari, The Medieval Reception of the Shāhnāma.
30 Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography; Peacock, “Early Persian Historians”.
31 On the khwadāy-n̄amags see Shahbazi, . “On the Xwadāy-nāmag”, Omidsalar, Poetics and

Politics of Iran’s National Epic, 36-39, Wood, “The Christian Reception of the Xwadāy-nāmag”;
for the arguments against Firdawsi’s use of Abu Mansur see Davis, “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s
Sources”.
32 For the debate on Firdawsi’s sources and orality see Yamamoto, The Oral Background of

Persian Epics; Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic; Davidson, Poet and Hero
and Davis, “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s Sources”.
33 Rypka, History of Iranian Literature, 152.
34 Pourshariati , Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire, 13; cf. Shahbazi, Ferdowsi, 57,

Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, 63-69.

35 Firdawsi, Shahnama, I: 12, 14. Also on Firdawsi’s references to his sources see Davis, “The

Problem of Ferdowsî’s Sources” and Omidsalar , Poetics and Politics of Iran’s National Epic, 56-
57.
36 Davis, “Religion in the Shahnama,” 338.
37 Ghazanfari, Perceptions of Zoroastrian Realities in the Shahnameh, 35.
23
38 Ghazanfari, Perceptions of Zoroastrian Realities in the Shahnameh, 243.
39 Firdawsi, Shahnama, V: 80; cf. Ghazanfari, Perceptions of Zoroastrian Realities in the
Shahnameh, 39.
40 Firdawsi, Shahnama, V: 3-129.
41 Firdawsi, Shahnama, VI: 48-52. For a discussion of this episode see Simpson, “From Tourist to

Pilgrim.”
42 See Hillenbrand, “The Iskandar Cycle,” and Hanaway, “Iskandar-nama” for the Shahnama’s

presentation of Alexander.
43 Firdawsi, Shahnama, V: 522-3. In Bal‘ami, Alexander is depicted as marrying Darius’s

daughter (Bal‘ami, Tarikhnama, I: 487, 488).

44 Hamza al-Isfahani, Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard, 33-4; Yarshater, “Iranian National History,” 377-

378.
45 See Manteghi, “Alexander the Great in the Shāhnāmeh” with references to earlier

scholarship.
46 Ciancaglini, “The Syriac Version of the Alexander Romance”; cf. Frye, “Two Iranian Notes”;

Hanaway, “Iskandar-nama”.
47 Ciancaglini, “The Syriac Version of the Alexander Romance,” 138. My comments in Peacock,

Mediaeval Islamic Historiography, 117 should be adjusted in light of this.

48 Gardizi, Zayn al-Akhbar, 81-2.
49 Manteghi, “Alexander the Great in the Shāhnāmeh,” 164-168.
50 Firdawsi, Shahnama, V: 519-520.
51 Manteghi, “Alexander the Great in the Shāhnāmeh,” 165-166 attempts to prove a

connection between Amorium and Zoroastrianism, suggesting a means of transmission, but

this seems extremely unlikely to me, and the preservation of the initial ‘ayn of the Arabic
spelling of the name (‘Amuriyya) confirms conclusively Firdawsi’s ultimately Arabic source.
52 Cf. Davis, “Religion in the Shahnama,” 340-341.
53 Firdawsi, Shahnama, VIII: 409-488; Bal‘ami 1999, III: 441-454, 490-501, 506-541. See also

discussion of this by Wood, “The Christian Reception of the Xwadāy-nāmag.”

54 Firdawsi, Shahnama, VIII: 412, l. 31-439, l. 329; Bal‘ami, Tarikhnama, III: 441-2, 444-6, 451-

452.
55 Firdawsi, Shahnama, VIII: 457, l. 545-468, l. 683.
56 Firdawsi, Shahnama, VIII: 425, l. 178-426, l. 193; Bal‘ami, Tarikhnama, III: 444-5.
57 Firdawsi, Shahnama, VIII: 413, l. 35-421, l. 131
58 Bal‘ami, Tarikhnama, III: 446.
59 Bal‘ami, Tarikhnama, III: 451; see also the discussion in Melville, “The Historian at Work,” 89-

91.
60 Firdawsi, Shahnama, VIII: 441, l. 342; Bal‘ami, Tarikhnama, III: 538.
61 Hamza al-Isfahani, Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard, 48-49
62 Minorsky, “The Older Preface to the Shāh-nāma,” 141-3: the Abu Mansur preface associates

the Islamic Adam with Iranian Kayumarth, and remarks on the regular appearance of prophets;
cf. Davis, “The Problem of Ferdowsî’s Sources,” 51-2.
63 Minorsky, “The Older Preface to the Shāh-nāma,” 136; Omidsalar, Poetics and Politics of

Iran’s National Epic, 50-51. 24

64 Hamza al-Isfahani, Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard, 10, 50, and see also Pourshariati , “Ḥamza al-
Iṣfahānī and Sāsānid Historical Geography,” 119-121; Peacock, “Early Persian Historians,” 62-63.
65 al-Biruni, al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 53, 163, 263, 267.
66 al-Biruni, al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 135.
67 Bal‘ami, Tarikhnama, I: 5; Minorsky, “The Older Preface to the Shāh-nāma,” 269.
68 Minorsky, “The Older Preface to the Shāh-nāma,” 266, 269 n. 5.
69 See Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography, chapter 2.
70 Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography, 143.
71 Cf. Peacock, “Early Persian Historians”.
72 Although al-Tha’alibi makes no reference to the legend of the Ghaznavids’ descent from the

Sasanian Yazdagird III (see Bosworth, “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran,” 61), he
achieved this by representing the Ghaznavids as the latest dynasty in a series stretching back to
Kayumarth/Adam.
73 Peacock, Mediaeval Islamic Historiography.
74 Hamza al-Isfahani, Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard, 31-32; Pourshariati, “Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī and

Sāsānid Historical Geography,” 114-117.

75 Hamza al-Isfahani, Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard, 124, and the discussion in Peacock, “Early

Persian Historians,” 64-65.

76 Hamza al-Isfahani, Ta’rikh Sini Muluk al-Ard, 163.
77 al-Dinawari, Al-Akhbar al-Tiwal, 402-406.
78 On al-Maqdisi’s account of the signs of the end of time see Tahmi, L’Encyclopédisme

musulman a l’âge classique, 103-125

79 Madelung, “The Assumption of the Title Shāhānshāh”; Bosworth, “The Heritage of Rulership

in Early Islamic Iran,” 57.

80 Rosenthal, “Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī”; Pourshariati, “Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī and Sāsānid Historical

Geography,” 118-119.
81 al-Biruni al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 260.
82 al-Biruni, al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 260.
83 al-Biruni al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 260.
84 Madelung, “The Assumption of the Title Shāhānshāh,” 86-7; Bosworth, “The Heritage of

Rulership in Early Islamic Iran,” 56-7.

85 See Daftary, The Ismā‘īlīs, 235-246 on the eastern Ismailis in this period, esp. 239-40 for

Zoroaster in their cosmology. Daftary states of two tenth century Ismail Khurasani dā‘īs that,
“Al-Nasafi and al-Razi also devoted much energy and creative thinking to accommodating a
number of pre-Islamic religions, notably those of the Zoroastrians, Manichaeans and Sabaeans,
within their scheme of the seven revelational eras of sacred history, assigning these religions to
specific dawrs and natiqs.” (Daftary, “Cyclical Time and Sacred History”).
86 Crone, The Nativist Prophets of Early Islamic Iran, 179-180.
87 al-Biruni, al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 45-46; Bosworth, “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic

Iran”.
88 al-Biruni, al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 45: ...kamā fu‘ila li-Ibn ‘Abd al-Razzāq al-Ṭūsī min ifti‘āl nasab

lahu fi al-Shāhnāma yantamī bihi ilā Manūshjihr.

25
89 al-Biruni, al-Athar al-Baqiyya, 45-46. For further examples and discussion see Bosworth, “The
Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran”.
90 For Ghaznavid-Buyid rivalry, which was especially intense over Kirman, see Busse, Calif und

Grosskönig, 92, 165, 215; Bosworth, “The Banū Ilyās of Kirmān”.

91 Juzjani, Tabaqat-i Nasiri, I: 226; cf. Bosworth, “The Heritage of Rulership in Early Islamic Iran,”

61.
92 Melikian-Chirvani, “Le livre des rois,” 14-16.
93 Firdawsi, Shahnama, IV: 172, l. 45ff.
94 Molé, “Vis u Ramin et l'histoire seldjoukide”.

26