Recognizing Two Narrative Patterns in Zoroastrian Sources through a Verse in Shahnameh

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 PhD Candidate in Persian Language and Literature, Epic Literature Sub-‎discipline, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad‎, Mashhad, Iran‎.

2 Professor at the Department of Persian Language and Literature, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad‎, Mashhad, Iran‎. ‎

Abstract

This study aims to offer a new interpretation of the verse “In envy, the malevolent Ahriman / held counsel until he rise in might” from the story of Gayōmart in the Shahnameh. It begins with a critical review of previous interpretations of the verse. Then, focusing on two key concepts—counseling (rāy-zanī) and empowerment (biyāgend yāl)—it turns to Zoroastrian texts and, through examining some relevant evidences, extracts two distinct narrative patterns. The first pattern consists of three stages: 1. Assembly (gathering), 2.Counsel, 3.Action. The second pattern comprises five stages: 1. Foreknowledge of a predetermined destiny, 2. The Paralysis or unconsciousness, 3.Incitement, 4. Reawakening /mobilization, 5. Action.
A descriptive-analytical and comparative analysis of the verse based on those two models indicates that the verse presents an evolved synthesis of both narrative models. In this narrative, Ahriman, in an effort to disrupt the order of the world of Gayōmart, his son, Siyamak, and humankind, holds counsel with the demons. The outcome of these deliberations is the acquisition of power, culminating in a plan to annihilate, carried out by sending his son, Khazurān, and an army of demons. In the final analysis, a four-stage structure emerges that appears to synthesize the two original patterns: 1. Awareness, 2. Assembly, 3. Deliberation, 4.Action. This structure likely results from the convergence of shared elements in the two primary patterns and finds expression in the verse under discussion.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Authors retain the copyright and full publishing rights. This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

  1. آیدنلو، س. (1388). از اسطوره تا حماسه: هفت گفتار در شاهنامه‌پژوهی. سخن.
  2. بهار، م. (1376). جستاری چند در فرهنگ ایران. فکر روز.
  3. حسن‌دوست، م. (1395). فرهنگ ریشه‌شناختی زبان فارسی. فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی.
  4. خالقی مطلق، ج. (1393). یادداشت‌های شاهنامه. مرکز دائرۀ المعارف بزرگ اسلامی.
  5. سرکاراتی، ب. (1393). سایه‌های شکارشده. طهوری.
  6. فردوسی، ا. (1391). شاهنامه. تصحیح مهری بهفر. نشر نو.
  7. فردوسی، ا. (1393). شاهنامه. تصحیح ج، خالقی مطلق.مرکز دائرة‌المعارف بزرگ اسلامی.
  8. کریستن‌سن. آ. (1393). نمونههای نخستین انسان و نخستین شهریار در تاریخ افسانهای ایرانیان. ترجمۀ ژ، آموزگار.، و ا، تفضّلی. چشمه.
  9. کزازی، م. ج. (1392). نامۀ باستان. سمت.
  10. مکنزی، د. ن. (1373). فرهنگ کوچک زبان پهلوی. ترجمۀ مهشید میرفخرایی.پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی.
  11. مولایی، چ. (1395). دو یادداشت دربارۀ دو بیت از شاهنامه فردوسی. پاژ.12(2)، 196-185.
  12. Ahmadi, A. (2015).The Daēva cult in the Gāthās. Routledge.
  13. Baily, H. W. (1934). Iranian studies III. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 7(2) 275 – 298. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X00085219
  14. Bartholomae, Ch. (1904). Altiranisches wörterbuch. Von Karl J. Trübner
  15. Cheung, J. (2007). Etymological dictionary of the Iranian verb. Brill.
  16. Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1948). Zoroastre: Étude critique avec une transduction commentée des Gāthā. Paris.
  17. Herrenschmidt, C., &Kellens, J. (1993). Daiva. Iranica, VI, 599-602. Available online: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/daiva-old-iranian-noun
  18. Humbach, H. (1991). The Gāthās of Zarathushtra and the other Old Avestan texts. In collaboration with J. Elfenbein & P. O. Skjaervø. Carl Winter.
  19. Humbach, H., & Faiss, K. (2010). Zarathushtra and his antagonists. Dr. Ludwig Reichert.
  20. Insler, S. (1975). The Gāthās of Zarathustra. E.J. Brill.
  21. Kellens, J., & E. (1988). Les textes vieil-avestiques. Dr. Ludwig Reichert.
  22. Lincoln, B. (2014). Further on envy and greed. History of Religions, 53(4), 323-340.https://doi.org/10.1086/675367
CAPTCHA Image