It would be neither suitable nor possible to attempt in this chapter to give a detailed history of the Sásánians, though on the other hand a period of such great interest and importance could not fittingly be omitted altogether. For this is a period which marks the transition from the old to the new, intimately connected with both, embodying still much of the ancient glory of the Achæmenians, yet standing in a far clearer historical light—a light to which, besides contemporary inscriptions, coins, and seals, and the native records preserved by Arabic and Persian historians and romance-writers, Byzantine, Syriac, Armenian, and Jewish records each add their contribution. It was these kings, called by the Greeks Chosroes and by the Arabs Kisrá (pl. Akásira), who were the restorers of the ancient Persian Empire and the “Good Religion” of Zoroaster, and of whom Mas'údí (writing in A.D. 956) thus speaks in the preface to his Kitábu't-tanbíh wa'l-ishráf (p. 6): “And we have restricted ourselves in this our book to the mention of these empires because of the mighty dominion of the kings of Persia, the antiquity of their rule, the continuity of their sovereignty, the excellence of their administration, their well-ordered policy, the prosperity of their domains, their care for their subjects, and the subju­gation to their allegiance of many of the kings of the world who brought unto them taxes and tribute. And they held sway, withal, over the fourth Clime, which is the Clime of Babel, the middle part of the earth, and the noblest of the [seven] Climes.” In the same spirit sings a poet cited in the same work (p. 37), who, though he wrote in Arabic, boasted descent from the Royal House of Persia:—

“And we portioned out our empire in our time
As you portion out the meat upon a plate.
Greece and Syria we gave to knightly Salm,
To the lands wherein the sunset lingers late.
And to Túj the Turkish marches were assigned,
Where our cousin still doth rule in royal state.
And to Írán we subdued the land of Párs,
Whence we still inherit blessings rare and great.”

We have seen that the Sásánian kings called themselves “gods” or “divine beings” (Pahlawí bagh, Chaldæan alâhâ, The Sásánian kings regarded as divine beings. Greek <text in Greek script omitted>), regarded themselves as the de­scendants and legitimate successors of the ancient legendary Kayání dynasty and the inheritors of the Farri-Kayání or “Royal Splendour”—a kind of Shekina or symbolised Divine Right by virtue of which they alone could rightly wear the Persian crown—and did everything in their power to impress their subjects with a sense of their supreme majesty. Of the accession of “the Royal Splendour” to the House of Sásán we shall shortly cite a curious legend, and of the majesty maintained by them the following extract from Ibn Hishám's Biography of the Prophet (ed. Wüstenfeld, p. 42) furnishes an instance:—

“Now Kisrá [Chosroes, here Khusraw Anúshírwán] used to sit in his audience-hall where was his crown, like unto a mighty cask, The splendour which they maintained. according to what they say, set with rubies, emeralds, and pearls, with gold and silver, suspended by a chain of gold from the top of an arch in this his audience-hall; and his neck could not support the crown, but he was veiled by draperies till he had taken his seat in this his audience-hall, and had introduced his head within his crown, and had settled himself in his place, whereupon the draperies were withdrawn. And no one who had not previously seen him looked upon him without kneeling in reverence before him.”

In no country, probably, has the doctrine of the Divine Right of kings been more generally and more strongly held The doctrine of the “Divine Right” in Persia. than it was in Persia in Sásánian times. That any one not belonging to the Royal House should dare to assume the royal title was, as Nöldeke has pointed out* in reference to the rebellious noble Bahrám Chúbín and the usurper Shahrbaráz, regarded as an almost incredible act of wickedness and presumption. The prevailing sentiment of the people is, no doubt, truly reflected in the following anecdote told by Dínawarí (p. 98) of the flight of Bahrám Chúbín after his defeat by Khusraw Parwíz and his Byzantine allies—

“And Bahrám fled headlong, and on his way he passed by a hamlet, where he halted, and he and Mardán-Sína and Yazdán- Anecdote of Bahrám Chúbín. Gushnasp alighted at the dwelling of an old woman. Then they produced some food which they had with them, and supped, and gave what was left over to the old woman. Then they produced wine; and Bahrám said to the old woman, ‘Hast thou nothing wherewith we can drink?’ ‘I have a little gourd,’ replied she; and she brought it to them, and they cut off the top and began to drink from it. Then they produced dessert; and they said to the old woman, ‘Hast thou nothing wherein we can put the dessert?’ So she brought them a winnowing-shovel, into which they poured the dessert. So Bahrám ordered that wine should be given to the old woman, and then he said to her, ‘What news hast thou, old lady?’ ‘The news with us,’ answered she, ‘is that Kisrá hath advanced with an army of Greeks, and fought Bahrám, and overcome him, and recovered from him his kingdom.’ ‘And what say'st thou,’ asked Bahrám, ‘concerning Bahrám?’ ‘A silly fool,’ replied she, ‘who claims the kingdom, not being a member of the Royal House.’ Said Bahrám, ‘Therefore it is that he drinks out of gourds and eats his dessert out of winnowing-fans.’ And this became a saying amongst the Persians, which they are wont to cite as a proverb.”

For myself, I believe that Gobineau is right in asserting that this doctrine of the Divine Right of the House of Sásán has Influence of this doctrine in later times. had an immense influence on all subsequent Persian history, more especially on the tenacity with which the Persians have clung to the doctrine of the Shí'a or sect of 'Alí. To them the idea of electing a Caliph, or spiritual successor to the Prophet, natural enough to the democratic Arabs, could not appear otherwise than revolting and unnatural, and in the case of 'Umar, the second orthodox Caliph, there was also an element of personal hatred against the destroyer of the Persian Empire, which, though disguised under a religious garb, is nevertheless unmistakable. Ḥusayn, on the other hand, the younger son of the Prophet's daughter Fáṭima, and of his cousin 'Alí, was believed by them Yazdigird's daughter “Bíbí Shahr-bánú.” to have married Shahr-bánú, the daughter of Yazdigird III, the last Sásánian king; and hence the remaining Imáms of both great Shí'ite factions (the “Sect of the Twelve” now prevalent in Persia, and the “Sect of the Seven,” or Isma'ílís) represent not only the Prophetic but the Kingly right and virtue, being at the same time descended from the Prophet Muḥammad and from the House of Sásán. Hence the political doctrine to which Gobineau (Rel. et philos. dans l'Asie Centrale, p. 275) alludes in the following passage:—

“C'est un point de doctrine politique incontesté en Perse que les Alides seuls ont le droit à porter légitimement la couronne, et cela Basis of Shí'ite politics. en leur double qualité d'héritiers des Sassanides, par leur mère, Bibi-Sheher-banou, fille du dernier roi Yezdedjerd, et d'Imams, chefs de la religion vraie. Tous les princes non Alides sont des souverains de fait; aux yeux des gens sévères, ce sont même des tyrans; dans aucun cas, personne ne les considère comme détenteurs de l'empire à titre régulier. Je ne m'étendrai pas ici sur cette opinion absolue, tranchante, qui n'a jamais admis la prescription; j'en ai assez longuement parlé dans un autre ouvrage. Ce fut sur cette base que les politiques bâbys élevèrent tout leur édifice.”

Now whether this marriage really took place or not, it has been accepted by the Shí'ites as a historical fact for many centuries. Amongst early authors who allude to it we may cite al-Ya'qúbí (ed. Houtsma, vol. ii, p. 293), an Arabic historian who flourished in the latter part of the ninth century of our era, and who concludes his account of Ḥusayn's tragic death as follows:—