Debate, Dialect, Magic and Discourse in Late Antique Iran

The following panel attempts to discuss the interaction between the different religious communities in late antiquity and the transmission of knowledge from one group to another. The papers question and highlight the modes and way in which the Zoroastrians, Jews, Muslims and others came into contact with each other and interacted in various with each other through the intellectual discourse and popular religion in Iran. What the essays reveal is that in late antiquity there were some common challenges, concerns and discourses that took place not only internally within each community, but also an inter-communal discourse which is rarely noticed and noted. By tackling all more than one religious communities’ view of late antiquity one is able to have a more complete vision of the Iranian world between 500 and 900 CE.
The sources used to highlight these issues range from Zoroastrian and Talmudic texts of the Sasanian and early Islamic period, to magic bowls with Aramaic writings to Arabic texts previewing the Iranian world. Thus, a multitude of texts and material culture are brought together to suggest a vibrant interaction and knowledge between Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Muslim community. (Panel convenor Touraj Daryaee)

Chair
name: 
Touraj Daryaee
Institutional Affiliation : 
University of California, Irvine
Academic Bio: 
Touraj Daryaee is Howard C. Baskerville Professor in the History of Iran and the Persianate World and the Associate Director of the Dr. Sameul M. Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture at the University of California, Irvine. Daryaee specializes in the history of ancient and medieval Iran and the Persianate world. His most recent book is Sasanian Persia: The Rise and Fall of an Empire, IB Tauris, London, 2009.
Discussant
Name: 
Touraj Daryaee
Institutional Affiliation : 
same
Academic Bio : 
same
First Presenter
Name: 
Charles G. Häberl
Institutional Affiliation : 
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Academic Bio : 
Dr. Häberl is a full-time lecturer employed jointly by the Department of African, Middle Eastern, and South Asian Languages and Literatures. He was born and raised in the State of New Jersey, and received his PhD in Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations from Harvard University. In addition to teaching Arabic and Aramaic language courses at AMESALL, he also teaches content courses on the modern Middle East at CMES. His primary academic focus is upon the languages of the Middle East, both ancient and modern, and ethnic, linguistic, and religious minorities from the region He has conducted field work with speakers of several different Semitic and Iranian languages, which has resulted in a monograph on the Neo-Mandaic dialect of Khorramshahr.
Concise Paper Title : 
Aramaic Incantation Bowls & Late Sasanian Mesopotamia
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
The Aramaic incantation bowls are the primary source for magical praxis and the relationship between the mundane and the numinous in Late Antique Mesopotamia, yet their origins and their function(s) remain mysterious. They appear in the archaeological record quite suddenly towards the end of the Sassanian era, and seemingly disappear shortly after the advent of Islam. Furthermore, it is not at all clear who their composers were and for whom they were composed. The majority of the Aramaic bowls are written in the "square script", with smaller corpora written in Mandaic, Estrangela, and Proto-Manichaean scripts, and on this basis generally attributed to the different communities associated with these scripts. The features of the language of the texts themselves are also occasionally addressed in classifying these texts, albeit to a lesser extent. Precedents exist, in both form and function, for the incantation bowls, and similar bowls continue to be used in the same region up to the present date for prophylactic and divinatory purposes, but it is not at all certain that these are related. Furthermore, Iranian influence is found throughout the various corpora, and manifests itself particularly in the demonology of the bowl incantations. Is it possible to discern a continuity of magical traditions between and among these various praxes? To what extent do the bowls instantiate their respective traditions rather than this continuity of magical tradition?
Second Presenter
Name: 
Kevin van Bladel
Institutional Affiliation : 
University of Southern California
Academic Bio : 
Kevin van Bladel conducts research on the cultural and intellectual history of the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East in the first millennium CE. His research focuses on the interaction of different language communities and the translation of learned traditions between Greek, Arabic, Syriac/Aramaic, Latin, Iranian languages and Sanskrit. His work often deals with historicizing texts written anonymously or pseudonymously. His first book studies the figure Hermes Trismegistus in Arabic, showing how the ancient Egyptian sage of legend came to be considered a prophet by medieval Muslims (forthcoming July 2009). Other current projects include studies of the Aramaic cultural background of Elagabalus, Greek and Syriac chronographic sources in Arabic historiography, and an inventory of the Arabic Hermetica, most of which are found in unpublished manuscripts. Lately he has finished articles on the role of Syriac literature in the formation of Qur'anic lore and on the history and culture of early Islamic Bactria (Afghanistan). At USC he has taught ancient Greek, Old Persian cuneiform, and Indo-European historical linguistics with special attention to Greek and Latin, as well as courses on early Arabic literature, Aristotelian philosophy, Classical and Near Eastern mythology, ancient wisdom literature and folklore, and a seminar on alchemy, astrology, and magic. Informally he has given Syriac and Middle Persian tutorials to interested students.
Concise Paper Title : 
Arabic Testimonies Concerning Western Iranian Dialects
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
The studies of G. Lazard, among others, have helped to clarify the complicated changing status of the western Iranian languages during the first centuries of Muslim rule (seventh to ninth century), when Arabic displaced all competition as the medium of official communications and as the lingua franca of non-religious learning in the region. The very names of the Iranian languages shifted along with the status of the populations that spoke them. If modern Farsi is a descendant of the court dialect, Dari, and if Pahlavi is a descendant of Parsi, what was the fate of the Parthian (originally Pahlavi) language, while its name came to be applied entirely to another language, or rather to an idealized people of the past? And when did the meaning of the word pahlavi shift from the proper name of an ethnos and its language--Parthian--to its later meaning? This communication presents anecdotal testimonies, drawn from a variety of Arabic works by Iranian Muslims in the tenth century CE, that shed some light on the answers, and demonstrate that a variety of Northwest Iranian or “Parthian” did survive as a recognized common language in the northern region where it had been spoken for centuries, around Rayy, well into the tenth century. These testimonies also help to describe the sociolinguistic situation of Arabic in the lives of Iranians who converted to Islam, and hint at a pervasive separation of Zoroastrians from Arabic learning and Muslim urban life by this time.
Thid Presenter
Name: 
Yuhan S.-D. Vevaina
Institutional Affiliation : 
Harvard University
Academic Bio : 
After completing his dissertation, Studies in Zoroastrian Exegesis and Hermeneutics with a Critical Edition of the Sudgar Nask of Denkard Book 9 in Iranian and Persian Studies at NELC this June, Professor Vevaina currently serves as a Core Fellow in the Core Curriculum in Harvard College and as a Lecturer in NELC. In the Fall he will be a TF for Images of Alexander the Great and in the Spring semester he will be a TF for Professor Jay Harris' course “If There is No God, All is Permitted”: Theism and Moral Reasoning . In the Spring Vevaina will also be teaching his own course (Iranian Civ. 105) “Crow Eaters” and “Fire Worshippers”: Encountering Contemporary Zoroastrians . His research interests include: critical approaches to the study of Zoroastrianism; the history and development of Zoroastrian interpretation; the interplay between text and liturgy in ritual practice; colonial and post-colonial constructions of religion; and religion in diaspora.
Concise Paper Title : 
The Zoroastrian Communities Response to Islam: Text, Debates and Interaction
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
number of the most important texts in Pahlavi literature were redacted in the 9th century CE, and, therefore, they often reflect the ongoing struggles of Zoroastrian communities of late antiquity in coping with the changing realities of Islamic rule in Iran. This paper will explore the ways in which characteristically Zoroastrian patterns of debate and discourse were mobilized to address the burning theological and social issues of the day. Questions of religious practice, theological efficacy, and priestly power are often found in highly dense and multi-layered narratives in encyclopediac texts such as the Bundahišn, hermeneutic texts such as Dēnkard Books 8 and 9, and debate texts such as the Gizistag Abālīš. By examining the literary, sociological, and religious implications of such cross- generic themes and topics we will be able to better appreciate the often subtle ways in which Zoroastrian communities responded to the sudden loss of political power, religious dominance, and social prestige. It is also hoped that a reexamination of such issues will allow us to write more nuanced narratives of Zoroastrian communities in the Islamic era in Iran.
Fourth Presenter
Name: 
Samuel Secunda
Academic Bio : 
Samuel Secunda is a Mandel post-doctoral fellow at The Scholion Center for Interdisciplinary Jewish research at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Prior to that he was a Postdoctoral Associate in Judaic Studies at Yale University. He took his Ph.D. from the Yeshiva University studying Talmudic and Zoroastrian Middle Persian texts and their interrelation.
Concise Paper Title : 
The Talmudic and Middle Persian Texts in Late Antiquity: Common Challenges and Discourse
Paper Abstract (maximum of 400 words) : 
Jews and Persians lived together in Mesopotamia for over a millennium. The Babylonian Talmud, the central text of medieval and modern rabbinic Judaism, was composed by Babylonian rabbis between the third and the sixth or seventh centuries, and during more or less the same period Zoroastrian literature, at least in its oral form, underwent significant development. The nature of the relationship between Judaism and Zoroastrianism is one of the older and more elusive questions considered by students of comparative religions, and recent years have seen a renewed interest in the links between the Babylonian Talmud and Pahlavi literature. Both literatures were composed by elite, learned, and ritually-minded groups, specifically rabbis and dastwars, and this constitutes both the greatest point of comparison, but also a daunting challenge. Because of the specialized nature of these texts, they often appear to be inwardly focused, self-absorbed literatures that lie worlds apart from one another. Specifically, the Talmud is primarily interested in interpreting the Mishnah – a rabbinic legal work compiled in Roman Palestine around 200 CE – as well as the Bible, Midrash (classical rabbinic biblical exegesis), and other works and statements by Palestinian and Babylonian sages. The majority of Sasanian Zoroastrian literature is closely associated with the Avesta which it translates, glosses, interprets, arranges, discusses, and expands. Some scholars have taken the diverse interests of the two literatures as an indication that historically, rabbis and dastwars had little to do with one another, yet this is unwarranted. Still, the problem remains. How can we bridge the gap between Sasanian rabbinic and Zoroastrian texts so that scholars might responsibly compare them? This paper will attempt to further clarify the nature of the problem and then suggest a number of solutions. In particular, I will show that careful philological analysis of talmudic and Middle Persian texts can allow for a comparison not just of discrete parts, but of legal and philosophical/theological trajectories and larger structures. These comparison will indeed demonstrate that the Babylonian Talmud and Zoroastrian literature shared a common challenges, concerns, and ultimately, a common universe of discourse.

Posted in