This article was downloaded by: [ULPGC. Biblioteca]On: 05 November 2014, At: 09:21Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Iranian StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cist20

Mazdakism, Manichaeism andZoroastrianism: in Search of Orthodoxyand Heterodoxy in Late Antique IranKhodadad RezakhaniPublished online: 23 Oct 2014.

To cite this article: Khodadad Rezakhani (2014): Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism:in Search of Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy in Late Antique Iran, Iranian Studies, DOI:10.1080/00210862.2014.947696

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210862.2014.947696

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Khodadad Rezakhani

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism: in Search of Orthodoxyand Heterodoxy in Late Antique Iran

This paper argues that the designation of heterodoxy for the socio-religious movements oflate antique Iran such as Mazdakism is a misnomer. It suggests that the designation ofMazdakism and similar movements as heterodoxies is in fact the product of an earlyIslamic assessment of post-Sasanian Zoroastrian attempts to create a Zoroastrianorthodoxy which did not exist under Sasanian rule. Pressured by the Abrahamicreligions surrounding them, the followers of Weh Dēn in this period felt the need todemarcate and clarify their beliefs, and to make their own beliefs comprehensible totheir neighbors and rulers. What was then left out of this attempt was labeled adeviation, and heterodoxy, whose fundamental disagreement with Zoroastrianorthodoxy was then reflected back in time.

Introduction

In the history of Sasanian kingship, there often exists a dichotomy between monarchswho, according to Middle Persian and Arabic historiographies, are depicted as strayingfrom the path of the Good Religion at the hands of evil advisors, versus others who arepraised as its upholders thanks to virtuous counselors. Perhaps the most glaringexample of this dichotomy is the one between the kings Kavad I (488–96 and498–531 CE) and his son Khusrow I Anushirvan (531–79): while the former is por-trayed as the worst guided of all the Sasanian monarchs, even being stripped of royalglory and exiled for two years as a result of his ties to the Mazdakite heresy, the latterking is rendered as the prototype for the righteous king who is devoted to the pro-motion of the Good Religion.1 Indeed, it must be kept in mind that the MiddlePersian and Arabic writings which contain negative historiographical attitudes

Khodadad Rezakhani is in the Department of Economic History, London School of Economics. Kho-dadad Rezakhani wishes to thank Michael Morony, Touraj Daryaee, and Arash Zeini for their suggestionson a draft of this essay which greatly improved some of the arguments. He would also like to express hisgratitude to his dear friends and colleagues, David Bennett and Philip Wood, for many hours of enligh-tening discussion on religion, dualism, and history which initiated his interest in the subject. Any mistakesor misunderstandings are of course solely the author’s responsibility.

1See Touraj Daryaee, Sasanian Persia (London, 2009), 26–8. It is curious that in none of the sources isKavad’s restoration said to be a direct result of him actually giving up his heterodox beliefs; rather it issupposed to be an outcome of his outright re-conquest of his kingdom (ibid., 27). It seems that the

Iranian Studies, 2014http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00210862.2014.947696

© 2014 The International Society for Iranian Studies

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

towards Kavad, often produced or edited centuries after his reign, were propagandis-tically driven, occasionally at the instigation of his heir who sought to control hisfather’s legacy. Kavad’s reputation as a Mazdakite sympathizer is, therefore, cloudedby the lateness and ideological motivations of the later authors, a fact which skewsscholars’ historical reconstructions about the socio-religious movement. In a way,the literary opposition between Sasanian monarchs who follow the truth versusthose who do not is a post-Sasanian invention retroactively imposed so as to createa strong line of demarcation between the so-called “orthodox” goals of the Zoroastrianrighteous kings over against the presence of “heterodox” sects such as Manichaeismand Mazdakism. By surveying the key sources on Mazdakism, this article willexplore the late and problematic dichotomy between orthodoxy and heterodoxy asit relates to Mazdakism.

Mazdakism: A Case in Zoroastrian Heterodoxy?

As attested in Arabic, Middle Persian, and Byzantine sources, Mazdakism was a socio-religious movement in the late fifth and sixth centuries which in some way deviatedfrom the official or mainstream forms of Zoroastrianism that the Sasanian authoritiesendorsed. A former Zoroastrian priest named Mazdak produced a cosmography basedon the dichotomy between light and dark, in some ways similar to Manichaean cos-mology.2 Challenging the structures of Sasanian society, Mazdakism sought to redis-tribute land and other property among members of the society regardless of their socialrank. Mazdak also promoted a form of sexual communalism.3 In the literature,Kavad’s downfall is attributed to his affiliation with Mazdakism, the preaching ofwhich brought havoc to the Sasanians’ rule of state. For their part, medieval Islamichistorians, especially al-Tabarī, depict Mazdakism and its offshoots as heresies thatshould be uprooted.4 For the medieval Muslim heresiologists and historians, who

religion was hardly involved in the affair, although the devotional historiography often appears to suggestthat the exile was a period of cleansing, or rather of Kavad realizing the error of his ways.

2See W. Sundermann, “Cosmogony and Cosmology IV: in the Mazdakite Religion,” EncyclopaediaIranica (hereafter, EIr). The authoritative new study on Mazdakite traditions, beliefs, and historiographyis P. Crone, The Nativist Prophets of Early Islamic Iran (Cambridge, 2012).

3Sexual communalism might have been no more than a regular charge of slander. The charge seems tohave been a standard one, even attributed to the Sufi revolutionary of the early fifteenth century, SheikhBadreddin, who acted against the Ottomans: Michel Balivet, Islam mystique et révolution armée dans lesBalkans ottoman: Vie du cheykh Bedreddîn, le Hallâj des Turcs (Istanbul, 1995). For the case of Mazdak, itmight have carried some symbolic truth though, as I have argued in an unpublished paper, “Sexual Com-munism and the Revolution of Mazdak: Problems in Sasanian Succession.” The charge, in this sense,might have been an exaggeration by Khusrow I to justify the removal of his older brother, Kawus,from the line of succession for his Mazdakite tendencies, and his dubious parentage, as he was supposedlyborn during the time that Kavad was a follower of Mazdak, and thus not in full “possession” of his wife,Kawus’ mother. See now Crone, Nativist Prophets, 391ff.

4Muhammad b. Jarīr al-Tabarī, Tārīkh al-rusul wa-al-mulūk (Beirut, 1407/1986), I: 421–2; andBalʿamī, Tārīkh-i Balʿamī, ed. M.T. Bahār and M. Parvīn Gonābādi (Tehran, 1341/1962, reprint:Tehran, 1386/2008), 844–7; but also see al-Shahrastānī, al-Milal wa-al-nihal, ed. Ahmad Fahmi

2 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

often relate Mazdakism with Manichaeism,5 Mazdak’s ideas apparently posed a criticaldanger to central authority.6 As Kreyenbroek writes in Encyclopaedia Iranica, Arabicsources describe Mazdak as

a Zoroastrian herbed interpreting the religion on the basis of the Zand, whom cir-cumstances caused to emphasize the importance of righteousness (Aša) in the formof social justice. With the exception of the (improbable) charges of advocating thecommon possession of goods and women—which is unlikely to have been met withthe widespread positive response that was accorded to Mazdak—these ideals arefound in mainstream Zoroastrian teaching, although surviving Manichean ideasmay also have been influential.7

In general, one can see how this depiction of Mazdakism as a form of heterodoxyappealing to various social protestors was in circulation in the early Islamic period.This prompts many Islamic historians to associate Mazdakism with the movementsthat followed the death of Abū Muslim.8

In addition to Muslim writers, the Zoroastrian priests in the early Islamic periodwho compiled earlier Zoroastrian traditions portray Mazdakism as one of the majorenemies of the Good Religion.9 In Zoroastrian literature, Mazdakism’s worstoffense is that it breaks up the social classes and mixes people who should remain sep-arated,10 which demonstrates that they emphasized a social element to Mazdakism.

Lastly, although composed from a different vantage point, Byzantine sources fromMazdak’s era also considered his religion to be a heresy.11 For the Byzantine outsiders,Mazdak’s sexual communalism and lack of social order was intolerable.12 In sum, themain sources from the Sasanian and Islamic periods about the Mazdakites tend to

Muhammad (Beirut, 1992), 275–7, who seems not to be as harsh as others, although he is largely con-fusing matters, it seems. On al-Shahrastānī’s account, see Crone, Nativist Prophets, 193ff.

5As in al-Shahrastānī, al-Milal wa-al-nihal.6Al-Bīrūnī, al-Āthār al-bāqiyah, ed. C.E. Sachau (Leipzig, 1923), 29; al-Tabarī, Tārīkh al-rusul wa-al-

mulūk, I: 422, who is quite hostile.7P.G. Kreyenbroek, “Iran ix. Religions in Iran (1) Pre-Islamic (1.1),” EIr.8Al-Shahrastānī, on the Khurramīiniyyah and other Zandiqs. Also al-Isfarāʾīnī lists the Khurramdī-

niyyah as a Majūsī school: Tabsīr al-dīn, ed. el-Hūt (Beirut, 1983), 150. On this, now see Crone, NativistProphets.

9See Jean de Menasce, ed., Le troisième livre du Dēnkart (Paris, 1973), 229; references to Dēnkartoutside of Book 3 are to the book, chapter and paragraph numbers in M.J. Dresden, Dēnkart: APahlavi Text (Wiesbaden, 1966).

10Dresden, Dēnkart, V.31.30.11Procopius, History of the Wars, vols. I–II (Persian Wars), trans. H.B. Dewing (Cambridge, MA,

1914), I: 5, or pseudo-Joshua Chronicle of Pseudo-Joshua the Stylite, trans. Frank R. Trombley andJohn. W. Watt (Liverpool, 2000), 23 (pp. 20–21); notice that none of the sources supposed to be con-temporary with the events of the reign of Kavad ever mention the name Mazdak, although others relatedto the heresy are mentioned, namely Zaradusht son of Khurrag; see further below.

12Procopius,Wars, I: v–xi. but also Theophanes the Confessor, The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor,ed. and trans. Cyril Mango and Roger Scott (Oxford, 1997), AM 5943 and AM 6016, who seems mostconcerned with the social ills caused by Mazdakism.

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

portray them as opponents and heretics who in some way deviated from state-spon-sored forms of Zoroastrianism and who challenged the societal order.

This conventional understanding of the main features of the Mazdakites stems fromthe literary sources, which are in fact difficult to use for the writing of social history. Tothe extent that none of these sources aboutMazdakism canmake any claim to representMazdakites’ own internal points of view, the study of Mazdakism is quite taxing andcontroversial for modern scholars. The historical context of its rise as a socio-religiousmovementwas clearlymore complicated than such external descriptions attest.Much ofwhat is attributed to themovement in the hostile Zoroastrian and Islamic sources in factappear to be literary topoi rather than historically grounded criticism of the theologicalor ritualistic aspects of the movement as it existed. The general dearth of sources aboutMazdak has led scholars to frequently reconstruct Mazdakism.13 Contrary to howdiverse sources and scholars portray it, Mazdakism was a composite, not unlike Mani-chaeism, and thus was not merely a “heterodox sect.” Indeed, academic debates over theMazdakite movement, which began with Nöldeke and continue until today, have seentheir share of controversy.14 For example, an ex-Soviet school of scholars brazenly castMazdakite beliefs and goals in the mold of “proto-communism”—i.e. arguing that thisSasanian figure’s revolutionary ideals sought to subvert the aristocratic and class-basedsocial model of the Sasanian Empire.15 From this point of view of Soviet scholarship,Mazdakism represented a proto-Marxist cosmography and a type of social movementfavorable to a Plekhanovian “emerging state.”16

In light of these past analytical flaws, for the rest of this article I shall explore theways in which Zoroastrian authors and Muslim historians’ depictions of Mazdkism asheretical and heterodox are problematic as historical sources since they are tainted byearly Islamic proclivities to retroject their orthodox perspectives on a past that was farmore complex. Starting with Nöldeke’s commentary on al-Tabarī and continuing torecent publications on the subject,17 scholarly opinion remains divided on what

13E.g. M. Shaki, “The Cosmogonical and Cosmological Teachings of Mazdak,” Papers in Honour ofProfessor Mary Boyce, Acta Iranica 25 (Leiden, 1985), 527–43.

14T. Nöldeke, Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden (Leiden, 1879). A. Christensen,Le régne du roi Kawādh I. et le communisme mazdakite (Copenhagen, 1925), was a truly ground-breakingwork dedicated to this matter, as was that of O. Klima, Mazdak. Geschichte einer sozialen Bewegung imsasanidischen Persien (Prague, 1957). For a full historiography, see E. Yarshater, “Mazdakism,” in Cam-bridge History of Iran III/2 (Cambridge, 1983), 991–1024; more recently, see Crone, Nativist Prophets.As will become clear, the issue has continued to occupy a central place in the historiography of the Sasa-nian period.

15N. Pigulevskaja, Les villes de l’État iranien aux époques parthe et sassanide (Paris, 1963) is a notableexample, but see also J. Modi, “Mazdak the Iranian Socialist,” in Dastur Hoshang Memorial Volume(Bombay, 1918), 116–31 for a more “native” take on the issue. Extreme cases even go as far as describingMazdak as a “Bolshevik” a good 1400 years before the Russian political party was founded. See Paul Lut-tinger, “Mazdak,” The Open Court 11 (1921): 664–85.

16G.V. Plekhanov, The Materialist Conception of History (London, 1976). See Ameen F. Rihani, TheDescent of Bolshevism (Boston, 1920), where Mazdakism is put as chapter I on the ancestors of themodern political party. Also Luttinger, “Mazdak.”

17For a useful summary, see Yarshater III/2, but now see Crone, Nativist Prophets.

4 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

precisely the movement stood for and, even more crucially, in what ways it affectedlate Sasanian and early Islamic society and religious culture. This article helps toclarify the ties between Mazdakism and Zoroastrianism in the Sasanian and earlyIslamic eras, paying particular attention to the concepts of orthodoxy and heterodoxy,which are misnomers.

Oddly, when one examines more closely the classical age of Mazdakism in the fifthand sixth centuries, one finds precious little evidence of its existence. As mentioned,there are virtually no sources from this time period which include Mazdak’sname;18 nor is there a movement attributed to a single religious reformer, asMazdak is later portrayed. For instance, the sixth-century Monophysite chroniclerJohn Malalas presents a certain Boundos, a purported Manichaean originally livingin Rome, to have been responsible for establishing the movement.19 Later Zoroastrianand Islamic authors, most notably al-Tabarī, also mention an immediate forerunner ofMazdak, a certain Zaradusht Khurragan, as the original initiator of what came to beknown as Mazdakism.20 Interestingly, the person most associated with the movementappears to be the emperor Kavad I, whose deposition from the monarchy in 496 dueto his initial embrace of Mazdakite beliefs was just over three decades removed fromthe year of Mazdak’s execution by Kavad’s successor, Khusrow I, circa 530. In light ofthe difficulties of such dates, scholars have been obliged to reconsider the sourcematerial regarding the chronology of Mazdakism. Crone has suggested that theinitial problems in Kavad’s reign—i.e. the king’s removal in 496 and subsequent res-toration in 498—were Kavad’s own heresy, whereas the troubles in the late 520 swhich resulted in Khusrow’s drastic measures were more directly connected withthe person of Mazdak himself.21 The inherent problems with the chronology confusedthe Islamic historians, and despite the convenient solution provided by Crone, con-tinue to perplex scholars today. The long reign of Kavad, with the life of Mazdak strad-dling both ends, requires an explanation, since if Kavad had indeed repented and wasrestored to his throne in 498, how can we have a resurfacing of the same culprit in the520s? Muslim historians appear to have solved this problem by claiming the existenceof two Mazdaks: i.e. Mazdak the Elder, who was the less zealous figure, and Mazdakthe Younger, who the chief troublemaker persecuted by Khusrow’s drastic measures.22

18Theophanes the Confessor, the ninth-century compiler of a major Byzantine chronicle, who seemsto be aware of the Khurramidiniya as well, is the first Byzantine source who uses the name of Mazdak.

19F. Altheim and R. Stiehl, “Mazdak und Porphyrios,” La nouvelle Clio 5 (1953): 356–76; J. Malalas:Ioannis Malalae, Chronographia, ed. Ludwig Dindorf (Bonn, 1831), 309–10. On the interpretation ofthis evidence in Malalas, see Yarshater, “Mazdakism,” 995.

20Al-Tabarī, Tārīkh al-rusul wa-al-mulūk, Ι: 421; Pseudo-Joshua refers to the socio-religious contro-versy as the “deplorable beliefs of Zaratushtakan” (the original Syriac, zrtštkana, suggesting a plural, andnot purely a Syriac rendering of the Middle Persian patronymic). Procopius similarly considers the wholething to be related more to Zaradusht Khurragan and never mentions the name of Mazdak. The same istrue for the continuators of Procopius’ history, Agathias and Menander Protector; see Yarshater, “Maz-dakism,” 995–96.

21P. Crone, “Kavad’s Heresy and Mazdak’s Revolt,” Iran 29 (1991): 21–42 and “Zoroastrian Com-munism,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 36, no. 3 (1994): 447–62.

22Ibn al-Nadīm, al-Fihrist (Tehran, 1971), 406.

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

This Islamic narrative, which may stem from an originally Middle Persian (MP)version of the story,23 conveniently solves the chronological inconsistencies presentedby the first reign of Kavad. Lastly, in another important article on Mazdakism, Gaubeoffers a radical solution to the problem of Mazdak’s historicity—namely that thisperson never existed.24 According to this argument, Mazdak is a creation of the his-torians of the Islamic period who needed a scapegoat on whom to blame socio-reli-gious upheavals.25 If Gaube is correct, then the depiction of the Mazdakitemovement as a socio-religious rebellion at the end of the fifth and beginning of thesixth centuries was only centuries thereafter attributed to the figure of Mazdak.

A Zoroastrian Orthodoxy?

In the so-called “salvation histories” of the Arabic historians or Zoroastrian priests of theearly Islamic era, the Sasanian kings of kings, fromArdashir I to Yazdgerd III, are portrayedas protectors and upholders of the Good Religion.26 For instance, in al-Tabarī, the founderof the Sasanian dynasty, Ardashir, is given a sacred genealogy that establishes him as theupholder of the Good Religion (weh dēn) and the descendant of the elusive Sasan.27

Additionally, a letter by Ardashir’s supposed high priest Tansar, included in a thirteenthcentury work of regional history called the History of Tabaristan,28 affirms not only thetrue beliefs of Zoroastrianism, but also the antiquity of the office of the high priest (mow-bedān mowbed) and its close bond with the Sasanian kingship. Most importantly, the pro-

23ThiswouldmainlybeacertainMazdak-Nāmag,anon-extantMiddlePersian“romance”whichreportedlywasusedbytheMuslimhistorianstowritethehistoryofMazdak(Yarshater,“Mazdakism,”994–5).

24H. Gaube, “Mazdak: Historical Reality or Invention?, “ Studia Iranica 11 (1982): 111–22.25Indeed, it is interesting to note that the same line of reasoning can be developed for Zoroastrianism

as well in that the name Zarathushtra is rarely mentioned in the early sources pointing to the religion.This would mean that the religion, which only later, and externally, came to be associated with thename of a prophet called Zarathushtra was in fact never credited to him in the Achaemenid throughto the Sasanian periods. Exceptions to this, showing Zarathushtra as the figurehead of Mazda-worshipdo exist, as in Y. 12.1: frauuarānēmazdaiiasnō zaraθuštriš “I profess myself a Mazda-worshiper, a followerof Zaraθuštra...” I wish to thank my friend and colleague, Arash Zeini, for this point.

26See in particular Book 4 of the Dēnkart.27Al-Tabarī (I/388–89) considers Sasan, Ardashir’s supposed grandfather, to have been the caretaker

(Ar. mutawwali) of the temple of Anahita in Istakhr. The undetermined status of Sasan has been dis-cussed before, including the fact that none of the Sasanian primary sources (e.g. Shapur Ka’abeh-iZardusht (ŠKZ)) call him a grandfather of Ardashir. On the connections of Sasan with a Semitic god,see M. Schwartz, “Sesen: A Durable East Mediterranean God in Iran,” in Proceedings of the Third Euro-pean Conference of Iranian Studies held in Cambridge, 11th to 15th September 1995, ed. N. Sims-Williams(Wiesbaden: Reichert 1998), 1: 9–13. Other evidence from the Sasanian period exists as well. The coinsof Ardashir and his successors, up to the fifth century, identify the king of kings as a mazdēsn, a “MazdaWorshipping” Lord (MP bay); see Robert Göbl, Sasanian numismatics (Braunschweig, 1971), now largelysuperseded by Michael Alram and Rika Gyselen, Sylloge Nummorum Sasanidarum, vol. I (Vienna, 2003)and vol. II (Vienna, 2012), as well as Nikolaus Schindel, Sylloge Nummorum Sasanidarum, vol. III(Vienna, 2004).

28This letter is quoted in the thirteenth centuryHistory of Tabaristan by Ibn Isfandiyar. The letter wasedited and published by M. Monovi and translated based on that edition by Mary Boyce, (trans.)M. Minovi, ed., The Letter of Tansar, trans. Mary Boyce (Rome, 1968).

6 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

minent inscriptions of the high priest Kerdīr,29 carved during the latter half of the thirdcentury CE, discusses the true religion and rail against heresy. In his inscriptions, Kerdīrboasts about persecuting the Jews, Christians, and heretics.30 Later tomes, such the semi-mystical work of Ardaviraz, evidently a fifth century priest,31 show the continuation ofthe efforts to protect the positions of the Good Religion seen in earlier centuries. Thiseffort of striving towards orthodoxy also compelled Adurbad Mahrspandan, another highpriest, to undergo trial by molten lead in order to show the righteousness of his interpret-ation of Zoroastrianism and its validity within the contemporary religious tradition inwhich he was working.32 Arda Wirāf, who took a journey to the other world, is also com-memorated with legends and histories from later centuries which are relevant for under-standing Zoroastrianism.33 Although these sources each distinctively purport to representalready existing Zoroastrian beliefs and practices in the Sasanian period, they collectivelydemonstrate that in both thepriestly and imperial sourcesZoroastrian leaders sought to con-struct the boundaries of their orthodox theologies and rituals which the empire used as thebasis of its social organization. Mazdak’s differing interpretation of the religion, with itssocial dimension in tow, thus challenged the priestly and imperial boundaries. In the end,it is the Zoroastrianism as represented by these Sasanian-era traditions from which ManiandMazdakpurportedlydeviated, causing the infamous social upheaval in Iran.34Moreover,Mazdak’s goals of reformwere counteredbyKhusrow I, the Sasanianmonarchmade famousby his own institutional reforms of the empire that centered on, amongother things,mattersof justice as a means of satisfying public needs,35 albeit unsuccessfully.36

29E. Honigmann and André Maricq, Recherches sur les “Res gestae divi Saporis” (Bruxelles, 1953); ZeevRubin, “Res Gestae Divi Saporis: Greek and Middle Iranian in a Document of Sasanian Anti-RomanPropaganda,” in Bilingualism in Ancient Society: Language Contact and the Written Word, ed. J.N.Adams, Mark Janse and Simon Swain (Oxford, 2002), 267–97.

30See Philippe Gignoux, Les quatre inscriptions du mage Kirdīr: textes et concordances (Paris, 1991),especially 69–70 for reference to the persecution of Jews and other religious minorities.

31P. Gignoux, Le livre d’Arda Viraz (Paris, 1984).32Greater Bundahishn; Dēnkard (in ed. J. de Menasce, Le Troisième livre du Denkart (Paris, 1973),

208–10); A. Tafazzoli, “Ādurbād ī Mahrspandān,“ Encyclopaedia Iranica, Vol. 1, 1983. The presenceof Adurbād is of course only verifiable through references to him in the early Islamic encyclopaedicworks such as Dēnkard and Bundahišn or through Hamzah al-Isfahānī and other Muslim historians:see Tafazzoli, “Adūrbād ī Mahrspandān.”

33Arda Wiraf’s adventures are told in a ninth–tenth century book called Ardaviraz Namag, edited byP. Gignoux (Le livre d’Arda Viraz). His journey to the other world is apparently a Zoroastrian literary andreligious topos; see P.O. Skjærvø, “Kirdir’s Vision: Translation and Analysis,” Archäologische Mitteilungenaus Iran 16 (1983): 269–206, and P. Gignoux, “La signification du voyage extra-terrestre dans l’eschato-logie mazdéenne,” in Mélanges offerts a Ch.-H. Puech (Paris, 1974), 63–89.

34In the Dēnkard, the “evil” words of Mani are set directly opposite the good advice and utterances ofAdurbād ī Mahrspandān, in order to clearly demonstrate the contrast.

35Of course, this has been the subject of many studies and speculations, most of which also do pointout that the reforms start with Kavad, although they take the name of Khusrow. See Zeev Rubin, “TheReforms of Khusro Anushirwan,” The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East 3 (1995): 227–97. For aclassic study, see F. Altheim and R. Stiehl, Finanzgeschichte der Spätantike, with contributions fromR. Göbl and H.W. Haussig (Frankfurt/M, 1957).

36Assuming that one of the major targets of the Mazdakite revolt was to break the back of the nobilityand its inheritance of property and privilege, we can observe that it succeeded in fact in that aspect, as we

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Underlying all the arguments regarding Mazdakism is the assumption that ancientZoroastrianism, before but more so after the Islamic conquests, strove towards“orthodoxy,” for lack of a more precise term (see discussion below).37 Viewing theZoroastrian belief system from the vantage point of Abrahamic religions, the suppo-sition is that this religion also possessed a theological mainstream represented by atext (in this case the Zand-Avesta) and a clerical structure conforming to a singleinterpretation in its administration of the imperial institutions (e.g. the mowbedswho acted as judges and ritual priests, among other jobs). In the Zoroastrian histor-iography, the version of the Avesta that is available today is imagined as a segment ofa greater body of works which contained not only the pillars of the religion, but alsoall related matters of theology, cosmology, and ritual.38 From within these series oftexts, the clerical establishment of the religion sought an original set of guidelinesused to establish proper conduct, laws, and other cultural expectations.39 As Boyceargues, Zoroastrian authors were sometimes responding to the presence of monothe-ism, in particular after the Islamic conquests, by framing the Good Religion as anoriginally monotheistic one, even though Sasanian religious culture was morediverse and heterodox.40 At the heart of these arguments lies the Gathas, the linguis-tically most ancient section of the Yasnas, and their attribution to Zarathushtrahimself. Much like the books of Moses, or the Qur’ān, the Gathas were seen asthe pure expression of the Zoroastrian faith, the ultimate yardstick of correctbelief within the religion.41 The strength of this eagerness to uphold the Gathasas the original expressions of faith, and the only reliable reflections of the “ortho-doxy,” has resulted in much controversy within the religion itself, continuing evento this day.42

When used in reference to the Zoroastrianism of this time period, the term “ortho-doxy” is problematic. The major issue, as suggested by scholars and affirmed here, isthat we have come to think of Zoroastrianism in terms of a “religion,” as the

are not to hear of them much after this point. Some have hypothesized that the problem might lie else-where: P. Pourshariati, Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire (London, 2008). The case of WahramCōbin (VI) might have been an exception: A. Christensen, Romanen om Bahram Tchobin (Copenhagen,1907).

37On this, again see the case of Adurbād īMahrspandān whose trial serves to show a continuity of hisreligious tradition of which he was a caretaker.

38Dēnkart, Book VIII; M. Shaki, “The Dēnkard Account of the History of the Zoroastrian Scrip-tures,” Archív Orientalní 49 (1981): 114–25. For a discussion of the historicity of this claim, seeHarold Bailey, Zoroastrian Problems in the Ninth-century Books (Oxford, 1971).

39For an accessible translation of the Gathas, see Helmut Humbach and Pallan Ichaporia, The Heri-tage of Zarathustra, A New Translation of his Gathas (Heidelberg, 1998).

40Mary Boyce, Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices (London, 2007), 19–20.41See the discussion in W. Malandra, “Gathas II: Translations,” Encyclopaedia Iranica, 2000. See the

issues involved with the matters of authorship of the Gathas, central to the discussion, in J. Kellens andE. Pirart, Les textes vieil-avestiques, 3 vols. (Wiesbaden, 1988–89). Richard Foltz, Spirituality in the Landof the Noble (Oxford, 2004), 22ff. for a general summary of the traditional history of Zoroastrianism.

42Michael Stausberg,Die Religion Zarathustras, 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 2002), particularly volume II for thestate of the study, and the continuing debates about the Zoroastrian cosmography.

8 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

concept is defined based on the criteria for the Abrahamic religions.43 The case is com-parable to the history of the formation of Hinduism as a product of colonial Britishscholarship.44 In that instance, the various belief systems and cosmographies, and theirrelated or sometimes independent ritualistic activities, which existed in parallel inIndian society were lumped together by nineteenth and twentieth century scholarsof European descent into a single religion called Hinduism. Similar belief systems,most importantly Sikhism and Jainism, which could boast an identifiable founder,were given independent status and occasionally even called offshoots of the main-stream Hinduism.45 The actual case, as we now know from the better studies ofthe various belief systems of South Asia, was that a single religion called Hinduismnever existed. Instead, a series of ritual behaviors, with devotions to various deitiesthat could be elevated or lowered in rank, depending on the situation, formed the reli-gious atmosphere of the non-Muslim population of South Asia. In fact, the roots ofthe nomenclature Hindu to refer to the adherents of these henotheistic belief systemswent back to the pre-colonial period, when the title, taken from the Persian wordHind, was used for all those who were not Muslim.46

Indeed, revisionist historians of religion and philologists have pointed out the essen-tial problems with imagining the antiquity of an Ahura Mazda-centered orthodoxywithin Zoroastrianism, particularly during the Sasanian period.47 There was consider-able multiplicity within the faith, and, as Shaked and others have noted, most of thesources which point to the presence of a mainstream and state-sponsored form of reli-gion during the Sasanian period are written many years, indeed centuries, after the fall

43For various critiques of this, see Kellens’ works, including J. Kellens, “Characters of Ancient Mazda-ism,” History and Anthropology 3 (1987): 239–62; on Zoroastrianism’s ritual character, see Clarisse Her-renschmidt and Jean Kellens, “La Question du rituel dans le mazdéisme ancien et achéménide,” Archivesde sciences sociales des religions (1994): 45–67.

44Geoffrey A. Oddie, Imagined Hinduism: British Protestant Missionary Constructions of Hinduism,1793–1900 (New Delhi, 2006).

45On a collection of texts which show the gradual process through which this was done, see J. Marshall,ed., The British Discovery of Hinduism in the 18th Century (Cambridge, 1970).

46This was in fact done as early as the eleventh century, when al-Bīrūnī was writing his treatise onIndia: Kitāb Tahqīq mā lil-Hind, ed. C.E. Sachau (London, 1887).

47Boyce’s re-telling of the history is quite close to the traditional Zoroastrian one: Boyce, Zoroastrians.Problems with the narrative were spotted early on, with Nyberg taking the position that the “prophet” ofthe religion, Zarathushtra, was nothing but a shaman of a nomadic pagan cult: Henrik S. Nyberg, DieReligionen des alten Irans (Leipzig, 1938). This was of course famously debunked, along with Herzfeld,by that giant of Iranian studies W.B. Henning in his Zoroaster: Politician or Witchdoctor (Oxford,1951). Revisionism, in the denial of the existence of Zoroaster and hypothesizing the composition ofthe Gathic corpus by a group of poets (or poet-sacrificers) has come in the form of Jean Kellens’ Lestextes veiel-avestiques I (Wiesbaden, 1988), and is supported by his articles, including the translation ofthem by his most prominent promoter in the Anglophone world, P.O. Skjærvø: J. Kellens, Essays on Zar-athustra and Zoroastrianism, trans. and ed. Prods Oktor Skjærvø (Costa Mesa, CA, 2000); Skjærvøhimself is of course a major figure of the revisionist trend on whose ideas part of this essay is based: P.O. Skjærvo, “The State of Old Avestan Scholarship,” Journal of the American Oriental Society (1997):103–14, among many other works.

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

of the Sasanians themselves.48 Mainly deduced from the Middle Persian commentariesas well as encyclopedic collections written by Zoroastrian priests in the early centuriesof Islam, these sources have obvious anachronistic tones to them. Contributing to thisproblem, the oldest manuscript of the Avesta dates to the thirteenth century, despitethe antiquity of its composition.49 Manuscripts of most Middle Persian commentariesand collections also belong to the same period and later. However, philological studiessuggest that major collections such as Bundahishn or Denkard belong to the eighth totenth centuries CE, and were mainly composed in Kerman, Yazd, and Fars, localeswith a high concentration of Zoroastrian communities—some of which continueeven to this day.50 Other texts, including the important law collection from theseventh century called the Mādayān ī Hazār Dādestān, as well as a number ofworks of legend and history, originated in the late Sasanian period, with final editionshaving been made again in the Islamic period to reach us in the current form.51

Contemporary to these sources is a set of works written by Muslim historians,which provide occasional details about the religious environment of the Sasanianrealm, with reference to Mazdakism’s ties to the state religion. Among these are theworks of al-Tabarī, al-Masʿūdī, al-Bīrūnī, Hamzah al-Isfahānī, and Dīnawarī. In lessideological works such as that of al-Masʿūdī or Hamzah al-Isfahānī, modern historiansfind fascinating references to the wonders witnessed by the author himself. Theseinclude archives and records of old families, the doyens of dehqān families like AbūMansūr (see below), who have guarded them jealously, revealing them only tocareful and trustworthy historians.52 Through the lens of Hamzah or al-Masʿūdī,

48Shaked, Dualism in Transformation. See also W. Malandra, “Zoroastrianism i: Historical Review,”under “sources.” The dominant narrative easily leads one to reconstruct the events, even when a “source”such as the letter of Tansar belongs to the thirteenth century!

49The arguments about the age of the Avestan corpus abound. The earliest parts, the Gathas, mighthave been composed as early as 1200 BCE, while the Younger Avestan texts belong to the later periods,but most likely no later than the Achaemenid one. An easy summary is J. Kellens, “Avesta,” EIr. 1987;more discussion of the issues of the composition of the text can be found in Bailey, Zoroastrian Problems,and Skjærvø, “The State of Old Avestan Studies.”

50Admittedly, the oldest Dēnkard MS seems to have been composed in Baghdad, and AdurfarnbaγFarrukhzādān, its composer, was a contemporary of the Abbasid caliph al-Ma’mūn: J.P. de Menasce,Une encyclopédie mazdéenne, le Dēnkart (Paris, 1958). From the testimonies of Hamzah al-Isfahānīand others, however, we know of the major Zoroastrian communities in Fars/Persis Kerman, Yazd,and indeed Sistan. The Bundahišn, despite its patchy structure, seems to be more comfortable witheastern Iranian geography, and its authorship is also closely related to that of theDēnkard: D. Niel MacK-enzie, “Bundahišn,” EIr, 1989; see C. Cereti, “Middle Persian Geographic Literature: The Case of theBundahišn,” in R. Gyselen, ed., Contributions à l’histoire et la géographie historique de l’empire sassanide,Res Orientales 16 (2004), 11–34 and part II of the same article in Res Orientales 17 (2007) for a study ofthe geography of the Bundahišn.

51M. Macuch, “Mādayān ī Hazār Dādestān,” EIr, 2005, and of course Macuch’s own Rechtskasuistikund Gerichtspraxis zu Beginn des siebenten Jahrhunderts in Iran: Die Rechtssammlung des Farrohmard iWahrāmān (Wiesbaden, 1993).

52See Hamzah al-Isfahānī’s tales of his exclusive access to several otherwise lost histories of the Sasa-nian kings, including an illustrated one: Hamzah al-Isfahānī, Taʾrīkh sinī mulūk al-ard wa-al-anbiyāʾ(Cairo, nd), 38ff.

10 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

the modern historian gazes upon the archives that are missing and tries to record asmuch as possible about the details of the life and rule of the Sasanians.53 These nar-rative histories similarly provide us with a picture of the Sasanian kings as divinelyappointed rulers of the Iranian realm (Ērānšahr) whose role was to protect therealm against foreign enemies, uphold the Good Religion, and keep order among itscitizens by ruling justly and according to the principles of Good Religion.54 Inaddition, one of the richest sources that attests to the existence of a state-sponsoredZoroastrianism during the Sasanian period is the Shahnameh of Ferdowsi.55 Ferdow-si’s work was based on a collection made by Abū Mansūr ʿAbd al-Razzāq, a local gov-ernor of Ferdowsi’s hometown, who himself belonged to an old dehqān family of theregion, probably tracing their ancestry to the Sasanian period.56 In the Shahnameh, theSasanian state, and indeed all those before it, carry the responsibility of protecting andupholding a certain kind of religious-ethical orthodoxy. In Ferdowsi’s work, the divinefavor is bestowed by god and god alone, in the form of the farrox,57 which the kingsneed to possess, with god’s blessing, in order to rule.58

In sum, we can see how Zoroastrian priestly writings and Islamic historians are of asimilar mind about the Sasanian rulers’ ties to the Good Religion. The Kārnāmag andal-Tabarī both agree, for instance, that Ardashir was divinely appointed and sanc-tioned through the bestowing of the farrox. Moreover, both Dīnawarī and theDēnkard portray Shapur I as a true Mazdēsn who was led astray by Mani, while al-Tabarī, Masʿūdī, and others claim that Kavad was a heretic for following Mazdak.These types of parallels reaffirm the validity of past research which argues that Zoroas-trian and Muslim authors in the first centuries of Islamic rule were working from ashared tradition, and perhaps also similar sources or narrative strands. Indeed, pastresearch shows how Islamic histories of the Sasanians are based on a set of MiddlePersian historical compositions, now missing, that were prevalent and widely availablein the early Islamic period,59 especially the Khwadāy-Nāmag, which included a legend-ary history of pre-Islamic Iran, including the role of the Sasanians.60 Noticing thebewildering variety of details in the narratives presented by various Muslim historians,

53Al-Masʿūdī, al-Tanbīh wa-al-ishrāf, trans. A. Payandeh (Tehran, 1970), 106.54Hamzah again is quite adamant about this, and most of the sources to which he refers are apparently

composed or preserved by Mōbeds of various kinds.55The standard edition, with the most reliable inclusion or exclusion of problematic verses, is now Jalāl

Khāliqī Mutlaq, ed., Shahnameh (Costa Mesa, CA, 1988–2009).56M.A. Riahi, Sarcheshmehaa-ye Ferdowsi Shenasi (the Sources of the Study of Ferdowsi) (Tehran, 1382/

2004), 138ff.57Richard N. Frye, “The Charisma of Kingship in Ancient Iran,” Iranica Antiqua 6 (1964), 36–54.58Ibid.59It is often assumed that some manner of a Khwaday-Namag text was hidden behind all of the early

Islamic historiographical works about Iran. See A.C.S. Peacock, “Early Persian Historians and the Heri-tage of Pre-Islamic Iran,” in Early Islamic Iran, vol. V, Idea of Iran, ed. E. Herzig and S. Stewart (London,2012), 61. The curious disappearance of this text (or texts) or any sort of direct Arabic translation(including that of Ibn Muqaffaʿ) is among the mysteries of Islamic historiography.

60E. Yarshater, “Iranian National History,” in Cambridge History of Iran III/1 (Cambridge, 1983),366.

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

some have further suggested that the Khwadāy-Nāmag was not in fact the name of atext or texts, but rather the name of a genre of legendary history writing.61 Whateverthe case might be, scholars take for granted that these narratives existed, some of whichwere translated into Arabic by Ibn Muqaffaʿ.62 In this characterization of the originalsource, it is natural that texts written in the late Sasanian period would reflect a sort ofSasanian moral code, including that of the orthodox-striving Zoroastrianism prevalentat the court of kings such as Khusrow I Anushirvan. In fact, the composition of theearliest versions of many of the extant Middle Persian treatises is attributed to thecourt of this very king, making their historical dating to the late Sasanian period rela-tively plausible.63 Khusrow I is applauded in a wide range of texts as the ultimaterestorer of the Good Religion, after his elimination of Mazdak and the Mazdakites,and thus was thought of as the perfect ruler to sponsor such “orthodox” versions ofSasanian history.64 This can perhaps also be seen as yet another natural conclusionfrom the narrative presented in the early Islamic Middle Persian commentaries,65

the authors of which were attempting to preserve what was left of their religiouslaws and codes from the late Sasanian era.66 After the state and Zoroastrian clergycooperated in destroying the Mazdakite menace, Zoroastrianism was consolidatedand transformed into the morals and values presented in the extant historical narra-tives in the aforementioned sources and the Khwadāy-Nāmag. The religious commen-taries, and judicial rulings, that form the bulk of the Middle Persian textual output of

61For an updated discussion of the Khwadāy-Nāmag genre, and the research associated with it, seeA. Shapur Shahbazi, Tarikh-e Sasanian [Sasanian history] (Tehran, 1389/2010), 72–81.

62J. Derek Latham, “Ebn Moqaffa,” EIr; also Peacock, “Early Persian Historians,” 61, 64 (onHamzah’s claims to have Ibn Muqaffa‘ as his source). Also Shabazi, Tarikh, 81–91 for a study of theArabic sources that are based on Sasanian sources, including the Khwadāy-Nāmag. However, Shahbazialso assumes the existence of the Khawadāy-Nāmag as a text, although he calls it khoday-nāmeh-hā(Khwadāy-Nāmags, in plural) thus suggesting implicitly that there was not one single text: Shahbazi,Tarikh-e Sasanian, 73.

63Mary Boyce, “Middle Persian Literature,” Hdb. d. Orientalistic, 2. Absch., Literature (Leiden, 1968),31–66. Some of the surviving Middle Persian texts, most prominently Khusraw-ī Kawādān ud Rēdak,obviously hearken back to the time of Khusrow I. Even the completion of a “definitive” corpus of theAvesta itself is associated with Khusrow I: Bailey, Zoroastrian Problems, 173.

64Ibn Balkhi, Fārsnāme, ed. G. Lestrange and R.A. Nicholson (Cambridge, 1921, reprint Tehran,1385/2006), 89–93. Of course, the same praise is bestowed upon him by all other historians of theperiod, earning him the nickname of Ādel (Per. Dādgar), “the Just,” evidently for exposing the deviantways of his father under Mazdak’s influence. This is an achievement that obviously makes Khusrowwiser than his father and more worthy of the throne, prompting Kavad to abdicate the throne andbecome an ascetic to repent his sins! (Fārsnāme, 87–8).

65As mentioned before, almost all Muslim historians, in some manner or another, refer to aMōbed asthe author or the protector/archivist of the text to which they are referring (e.g. al-Masʿūdī, al-Tanbīh,61). In the introduction to the Shahnameh, Ferdowsi attributes the collection of the stories which he ismaking into verse to a Degγān-zādeh (son/descendant of the Dihgāns, Sasanian gentry, for whom seeZakeri, Sasanid Soldiers, 22–31), the aforementioned ʿAbd al-Razzāq. However, even his sources areMōbeds who have come together to relate the oral and textual stories that they possess.

66For a possibly more nuanced assessment of the state of affairs, and the environment in which thesetexts are being composed, see P. Huyse, “Late Sasanian Society Between Orality and Literacy,” inV. Sarkhosh Curtis and S. Stewart, eds., The Sasanian Era, vol. III, Idea of Iran (London, 2008), 140–57.

12 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

the early Islamic centuries were, therefore, meant to reflect the late Sasanian environ-ment and literary productions, and, indeed, to be based on the texts produced duringthe same period.

Sasanian Zoroastrianism as a Product of the Early Medieval World

The authors of the narratives described above present heresies such as ManichaeismandMazdakism as gross trespasses against the Good Religion and diluters of righteous-ness in the “Land of the Ēr.”67 Of all the evidence which demonstrates the Zoroastriangoals for orthodoxy in the late Sasanian era, the best is the existence of a clerical classthat the Sasanians put in charge of preserving the Good Religion through institutionallife. Based on MP and Syriac sources, historians assume that a clerical establishment,headed by a high priest (mowbedān mowbed), began sometime in the early Sasanianperiod and continued to its collapse.68 Many Islamic sources mention a mowbed asthe major advisor to the king, often in situations where a lesson in morality isneeded.69 We have also seen the thirteenth century evidence for the presence of aTansar as the mowbedān mowbed under Ardashir I, although no contemporary evi-dence for this is available and it might be best treated as a later invention, at bestin the late Sasanian period.70

One of the best pieces of historical evidence which bears out the role of the Zor-oastrian priesthood in the institutionalization of state-sponsored forms ofZoroastrianism is the set of inscriptions left by the high priest Kerdīr, a man whointroduces himself as the mōwbedān mōwbed of the court of Wahram II (275–93CE).71 In his inscriptions, Kerdīr claims to have enjoyed a high position at thecourt from the time of Shapur I (240–71 CE), lasting through the reigns of hissons, Hormizd I (271–73) and Wahram I (273–75). Despite admitting that he wasonly elevated to the highest position under Wahram I and II,72 Kerdīr makes greatclaims to power and presents himself as a high official of the court, includinghaving been given a kamar ud kulaf (“belt and cap,” symbolic attire of a high positionin society) by Wahram. This figure carries the titles of Herbed and Mōwbed from the

67The idea of the Sasanian Empire as matching the ideal domain of the Ēr, as opposed to that of theAn-Ēr, was reflected as early as the third century in the inscription of Kerdīr (KKz). For a discussion ofthis, see G. Gnoli, The Idea of Iran (Rome, 1989).

68W.W. Malandra, “Zoroastrianism i: Historical Review,” EIr, 2005.69Al-Masʿūdī in the story of Wahram II: Murūj al-dhahab (Beirut, 1985), 245–8.70For the letter of Tansar, a long exegesis in the genre of advice-literature or Fürstenspiegel, see Boyce

and Minovi, Letter of Tansar. The letter is most likely a late Sasanian composition, although one com-monly sees it taken as evidence for the existence of a Hirbēd/Mōbed of the same name as the chief priestof Ardashir I (e.g. Malandra in EIr).

71The inscriptions have been published by P. Gignoux, Les quatre inscriptions du mage Kirdīr (Leuven,1991).

72Kerdīr Ka’aba Zardusht (KKZ), paragraph 9, when he mentions that Wahram I gave him the rankof “Grandee”: D. Neil MacKenzie, “Kerdir’s inscription,” Iranische Denkmäler, fasc. 13 (1989): 35–72.

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

time of Shapur I73 and describes his persecution of the members of other faiths such asChristians, Jews, and Manicheans,74 as well as his founding many fires. If the inscrip-tions are to be believed, Kerdīr was a powerful government official in the early Sasa-nian period. While the placement of these inscriptions, above that of Shapur I himselfin Ka’ba-ī Zardūsht and next to that of Ardashir and Shapur in Naqsh-ī Rajab, showsKerdīr’s high position, the historical situation may not accord exactly to how this manportrays himself in his writings. Kerdīr, no doubt, was a powerful figure at the court ofWahram II. He is depicted individually as part of the relief programs of Naqš-ī Rajaband has copies of his inscriptions at other localities such as Sar Mašhad.75 As theinternal evidence confirms, all the inscriptions were carved during the reign ofWahram II (274–93 CE). One could argue that, considering this fact, the placementof the inscriptions say little about Kerdīr’s position at the earlier courts of Shapur,Hormizd, or Wahram I. In fact, the only mention of Kerdīr available to us outsidehis own words is the reference to a Muγ Kerdīr in the aforementioned inscriptionof Shapur (ŠKZ), among the names of many other officials, sandwiched between“Abdagash, the son of the fortress master” and “Rastak, the Satrap of Weh Arda-shir.”76 Otherwise, even confirming his existence independently of his own wordswould have been an impossible task. More importantly, we see that Kerdīr is nevermentioned again, effectively leaving no legacy as the original founder of a SasanianZoroastrian church, as his own words might lead us to believe.77 Thus, historiansshould not rely on Kerdīr’s lone presentation of his resume as substantiating evidencefor the existence of an organized clerical establishment in the early Sasanian period.

Interestingly, based on what we know, Kavad’s deposition, which is tied to his here-tical beliefs in Mazdakism, appears to have been performed by nobles and not theclergy.78 Except for Dīnawarī, no other Arabic historian suggests that Kavad wasforced to formally denounce his Mazdakite beliefs or take any oath of protectingZoroastrian orthodoxy in order to retake the throne.79 Even after Khusrow I’s mas-sacre of the Mazdakites,80 we do not see a close association of the king with this sup-posed church. Even forgetting the fact that no synod, no authoritative body or person

73T.Daryaee, “Katībe-yeKertīr darNaqše Rajab,”Nāme-ye Īrān-e Bāstān (NIB) I, no. 1 (1380/2001): 8.74KKZ 11.75MacKenzie, “Kerdir’s Inscription,” 45ff.76ŠKZ 47.77Like his later “successor,” Adurbad-ī Mahrspandān, Kerdīr has to prove his righteousness and the

orthodoxy of his beliefs, even at the height of his power—an effort that seems to foreshadow literaryelements of the later journey of the Arda Wiraf: Skjærvø, “Kirdir’s Vision.”

78It seems that the nobility were unhappy with Kavad forcing them to share their wives with others,and thus lose track of their noble lineage, and they therefore removed the king (Fārsnāme, 84–5). Balʿamīsuggests that the Mōbeds sided with the nobility to advise Kavad not to follow Mazdak (Balʿamī,Mazhdak), but does not specify a religious instrumental in his removal, rather a general rebellion ofthe nobility who were fed-up: Balʿamī, 846.

79Dīnawarī, Akhbār al-tiwāl, trans. M.M. Dāghānī (Tehran, 1992), 95.80Ibn Balkhi makes the whole thing sound like a conspiracy, pre-mediated by Khusrow to prevent the

followers of Mazdak, who were evidently in power at the time, from diverting the plans: Fārsnāme,89–91.

14 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

representing the official position of the orthodoxy in question, are ever mentioned,one cannot but notice the heterodoxy of the kings themselves. For example, the pres-ence of different deities on the Sasanian reliefs demonstrates the fact that there ishardly a single form of Zoroastrian belief, as does the existence of Zurvanism,which may or may not be fairly characterized as a sect.81

Conclusion

I have tried to demonstrate that, despite its representation in the literature, Mazdak-ism was historically not a deviation from some official or orthodox Zoroastrianismbut, ironically, ended up helping to establish one. Modern scholarly discourse aboutMazdakism and other Sasanian religious trends as heterodoxies, which are oftenbased on the anachronistic and ideologically motivated literary portrayals in theArabic and Middle Persian corpora, is problematic. Rather, Christianity and Islam,among other religious groups, were undergoing internal transformations and soughtto establish orthodoxies on their own. This phenomenon has been well-documentedin the case of the Christian world, such as the centuries-old debate between Miaphy-sites and Chalcedonian Christians in Byzantium. In Persian territories, including inNisibis, synods and church councils also express similar trends towards orthodoxy.Moreover, centuries later, conflicts among Islamic sects provoked an inclination tocodified orthodoxy. Under pressure from the Abrahamic religions, the followers ofthe Good Religion in this period similarly felt the need to be accepted by others, todemarcate and clarify their beliefs, and to make their own beliefs understandableand comprehensible to their neighbors and rulers. The study of late antique Zoroas-trianism itself is worthy of many books, though scholarly output is minimal comparedto that on Christianity or Judaism during the same period. As a non-universal religion,it is considered too limited in scope to be worth studying, as its life depends on thesurvival of its protective state-system (namely the Sasanians) whose demise in factmade their belief system irrelevant. A consequence of this assumption is the superficialunderstanding of the other religious strands within the same society which bore closeaffinities with that supposed state religion. As an example of this, Mazdakism, howeverdefined, is not considered within its full social, religious, and political contexts, but

81For example, Ardashir I is invested with a diadem by the god Ahura Mazda, similarly mounted on ahorse, and at the same height as Ardashir himself; see Dalia Levit-Tawil, “The Sasanian Rock Relief atDarabgird—A Re-Evaluation,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 51 (1992): 161–80. In contrast, otherdeities appear: e.g. Anahita, the goddess of purity, is stands opposite Narsē (293–302 CE), andMithras is present in the relief of Shapur II and Ardashir II; on this, see D.N. MacKenzie, The SasanianRock Reliefs at Naqsh-i Rustam, Iranische Denkmäler (Berlin, 1989), and Katsumi Tanabe, “Date andSignificance of the So-called Investiture of Ardashir II and the Images of Shahpur II and III at Taq-iBustan,” Orient 21 (1985): 102–21. For 200 years after these monarchs, there is no other Sasanianrelief until the beginning of the seventh century when Khusrow II is flanked by two gods at his reliefin Taq-ī Bostān reliefs (next to Shapur II and Ardashir II’s reliefs). Here, Khusrow is standing on a plat-form, above the level of the two gods who are flanking him, Ahura Mazda and Anahita, on which seeDaryaee, Sasanian Persia, 34.

Mazdakism, Manichaeism and Zoroastrianism 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14

rather from a limited scope of its effect on its often polemical surroundings. The samewould stand true for other religious and social movements of the same period. It isonly with a wider scope for the study of the orthodoxies and heterodoxies and thegreater religious scene of the Sasanian realm that we might hope to understandbetter the situation of these belief systems in late antiquity and beyond.

16 Rezakhani

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UL

PGC

. Bib

liote

ca]

at 0

9:21

05

Nov

embe

r 20

14