Studia Iranica, vol. 48 (2019)
Vol. 48/1 (2019)
• BEGMATOV, Alisher, “Commodity Terms in the Languages of Central Eurasia: New Interpretations from Mugh Document A-1”, p. 7-27.
The document A-1 is one of the least understood documents among the Sogdian manuscripts from Mount Mugh. The authors of previous editions of this document have reached the conclusion that the commodities referred to in this document are precious stones. I propose that this interpretation is potentially mistaken. By comparing textile terms, mainly in Central Asian languages, I conclude that the content of this document relates to textile or leather products rather than precious stones.
• TIMUȘ, Mihaela, “Pōryōtkēšān versus kēšdārān. L’autorité religieuse contre les tenants d’autres doctrines”, p. 29-76.
The article proposes a contrasted analysis of two notions, one designating the religious authorities (pōryōtkēšān), and the other the upholders of the doctrines (kēšdārān) different from the Mazdean religion. It is mainly based on Dēnkard 3, one of the most important theological treatises of the Mazdean exegesis of the 9th c. A.D. The core of the article concerns one category of reasoning patterns here qualified as “binary”, used for purposes both apologetic and polemical. The article attempts also at formulating working hypotheses as answers to the question “who are the kēšdārān?” in the case of certain chapters.
• OVERTOOM, Nikolaus, “Considering the Failures of the Parthians against the Invasions of the Central Asian Tribal Confederations in the 120s BCE”, p. 77-111.
TWhen the Parthians rebelled against the Seleucid Empire in the middle third century BCE, seizing a large section of northeastern Iran, they inherited the challenging responsibility of monitoring the extensive frontier between the Iranian plateau and the Central Asian steppe. Although initially able to maintain working relations with various tribal confederations in the region, with the final collapse of the Bactrian kingdom in the 130s BCE, the ever-widening eastern frontier of the Parthian state became increasingly unstable, and in the 120s BCE nomadic warriors devastated the vulnerable eastern territories of the Parthian state, temporarily eliminating Parthian control of the Iranian plateau. This article is a consideration of the failures of the Parthians to meet and overcome the obstacles they faced along their eastern frontier in the 120s BCE and a reevaluation of the causes and consequences of the events. It concludes that western distractions and the mismanagement of eastern affairs by the Arsacids turned a minor dispute into one of the most costly and difficult struggles in Parthian history.
• LA VAISSIÈRE, Étienne de, “Al-Mu‘taṣim et l’Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg”, p. 113-119.
TThe Zoroastrian treatise Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg includes a list of Iranian grandees. One of them should be identified with the Abbasid caliph al-Mu‘taṣim and not with Khusraw Parvez as previously thought, so that the text is in chronological order.
• DIGARD, Jean-Pierre, “Un pan méconnu de la civilisation iranienne: son «système domesticatoire»”, p. 121-142.
Among the distinctive features of the Iranian cultural area is its “domesticatory system”. It concerns all the animals held for various purposes, their production and use techniques, treatments and representations of which they are the object. This domesticatory system is characterized by the presence of a stable nucleus, consisting mainly of large domestic herbivores (cattle, camelids, equines, ovicaprids, with several cases of hybridization), some birds (poultry, pigeon) and insects (bombyx), not to mention the dog with ambivalent status, and a more unstable margin alternating disappearances (elephant) and introductions (bee). Like the Iranian culture of which it forms an integral part, this system derives its originality from the geographical and historical situation of the Iranian area at the meeting point of the Arab, Indian and Turkish cultures, as well as the Zoroastrian, Shiite and Sunni religions, and its role as a receptacle and a melting pot of cultural contributions from East and West.
COMPTES RENDUS p. 145-153.
Vol. 48/2 (2019)
• MIYAMOTO, Ryoichi, “Étude préliminaire sur la géographie administrative du Tukhāristān”, p. 163-186.
According to the analysis of the Bactrian documents, we notice that there were four administrative divisions in Tukhāristān: shahro, ōdago, lizo and andago. Although the relationship between shahro and ōdago is unclear, it is certain that lizo and andago were inferior administrative divisions to shahro and ōdago and that they were in shahro or in ōdago. Then, concerning the relationship between the local administrative divisions and the local dominant strata, one can suggest the possibility that khar, the local chief, controlled shahro and that kharagan, the local aristocracy, ran lizo. In addition, according to examinations of Chinese sources and Arabic documents, there is the possibility that the Tang Dynasty and the Abbasid Caliphate recognized local administrative divisions and took them into account when they established their own governing structures.
• COURTIEU, Gilles, “La pratique du mazdéisme en Crimée selon l’Histoire Naturelle de Pline”, p. 187-193.
Two conclusions relative to the practice of Zoroastrianism in antiquity can be drawn from a careful examination of a brief passage in Pliny’s monumental Historia Naturalis on odoriferous shrubs. The first one concerns liturgy. King Mithridates needed freshly cut branches in situ for the cult: they could not be but the ritual rods called ‘barsom’, about which we learn that it was imperative that they kept a lively look to be appropriate. The second one is of geographical nature, as it proves that Zoroastrianism was performed not only by this king but also by the inhabitants of Crimea and its surroundings.
• MOREEN, Vera B., “Echoes of the Battle of Čālderān: the Account of the Jewish Chronicler Elijah Capsali (c.1490 – c.1555)”, p. 195-234.
Rabbi Elijah Capsali (d. after 1555) of Candia, Crete, is the author of the Hebrew chronicle Seder Eliyahu Zuta [‘The minor order of Elijah’] which includes an indirect account of the seminal battle of Čāldirān between the Ṣafavid Shāh Esmā‘īl (r. 1501-1524) and the Ottoman Sultan Selim I (r. 1512-1520). The aim of the present study is to provide an English translation of the account highlighting the author’s “biblical” style and rhetoric, and pointing to those details that confirm, differ, or are additional to the Ottoman and Iranian narratives of the battle. The chronicler’s pro-Ottoman sympathies are reinforced by the sources most likely to have been available to him even as some of the details of his account are more than likely wholly imaginative. The account also illustrates the widespread contemporary emotional reactions caused by Chāldirān in the larger Mediterranean area.
• (†) CALMARD, Jean, “Le voyage de Louise de la Marnierre en Iran (1836-1837): introduction, récit, notes”, p. 235-297.
Translation of a Persian manuscript relating the two travels of Madame Louise de la Marnierre in Southern Persia in the 1830s. The first part of this article, retracing the biography of this French woman, who lived in Persia from 1819 to 1840, was published as «Une dame française à la Cour de Perse: Louise de la Marnierre», by Jean Calmard, in Studia Iranica 46/2 (2017), pp. 261-311.
• GIGNOUX, Philippe; Dieter WEBER, “Un papyrus en pehlevi égaré à la Sorbonne (Paris)”, p. 301-304.
COMPTES RENDUS p. 307-314.