Procopius (
History of the Wars
, 1.3) records that the Hephthalite capital was named “Gorgo,” and that it lay not far beyond the Persian frontier. The likeliest location of the city, and therefore of the Persian invasion, is somewhere in the region of Gonbad-e Kavus, site of the magnificent eleventh-century AD tower so admired by Robert Byron. It is true that later sources have Peroz crossing the Oxus, a river much further to the north, but scholars are generally agreed that Procopius’s account must derive from a contemporary Persian source, and is therefore much to be preferred.
6
Ammianus: 19.1.2.
7
Theophylact Simocatta: 4.4.8.
8
Procopius:
History of the Wars
, 1.4. Based on the evidence of his coins, Peroz also had earrings comprised of three pearls.
9
Ammianus: 26.6.80.
10
Ibid.: 26.6.77
11
Tabari: Vol. 5, p. 112. Scholars have long recognised that some authentic Sasanian material was preserved by Persian historians and poets following the Arab conquest of their country; but how much precisely is a question that has become increasingly controversial. As with the Muslim sources for Arab history, so with those for the Sasanian period: no methodology exists for distinguishing authentic material from that which has been mangled or simply fabricated from scratch. The stern admonition of a leading historian of the period is worth bearing in mind: “none of the information which [Tabari] presents should be accepted unless it receives some corroboration from independent sources of provable worth” (Howard-Johnston (2006), p. 172).
12
This process began under Peroz’s father, Yazdegird II.
13
This is the so-called “Alexander’s Wall.” In fact, as recent archaeological surveys have demonstrated, it had nothing to do with Alexander. Dated as it has been to a period in the fifth century or early sixth century, its association with Peroz appears, if not certain, then highly probable. See Rekavandi
et al
.
14
Agathias: 4.27.3.
15
Letter of Tansar
, p. 64.
16
In point of fact, only three of the “Seven Houses”—including the Karin—are attested to in pre-Sasanian sources, but others are mentioned in inscriptions dating from the early Sasanian period, implying that they must have held prominent positions under the previous regime. It is always possible, of course, that some of the families may have fabricated the antiquity of their lineages. See Christensen (1944), pp. 98–103.
17
Theophylact Simocatta: 3.18.7.
18
Elishe, p. 167.
19
For a detailed explication of the relationship between the Persian monarchy and the dynasts of Parthia, see the ground-breaking work of Parvaneh Pourshariati. Whereas once the Sasanian state was seen as the very model of a centralised autocracy, scholars now increasingly emphasise its character as a confederacy: yet another paradigm shift, to go along with all the others that are currently revolutionising the study of late antiquity.
20
Elishe, p. 242.
21
According to Procopius, this was “Gorgo,” “located just beyond the Persian frontier, and frequently fought over as a result” (1.3.2). No archaeological traces of such a city have been found, and it seems improbable that the region could have supported any major settlement. Presumably, then, “Gorgo” was a tent city, of the kind common on the steppes. I am grateful to Eberhard Sauer, the excavator of the Gurgan Wall, for a discussion on this point.
22
Heliodorus: 9.15.1.
23
Ibid.: 9.15.5.
24
Ibid.: 9.15.3.
25
Procopius:
History of the Wars
, 1.4.
26
Joshua the Stylite, p. 11.
27
It is suggested in the
Cambridge History of Iran
(p. 403) that the details preserved by later Iranian historians of raids on the mythical Kayanid realm were modelled on actual events that took place in the aftermath of Peroz’s defeat: yet another example of how late antiquity can sometimes resemble a hall of mirrors.
28
Strabo: 15.3.15. The description dates from the first century BC, but corresponds to the physical remains of fire temples from the Sasanian period: a reflection of the ancient roots of Zoroastrian practice.
29
Lazar P’arpec’i, p. 213.
30
An alternative theory places this fire temple even further north. See Boyce, “Adur Burzen-Mihr.”
31
Greater Bundahishn
: 18.8.
32
Yasna
: 30.3.
33
Ibid.: 29.8.
34
Agathias: 2.26.3.
35
Ibn Miskawayh, p. 102. The phrase is attributed to the supposed will of Ardashir, a document faked in the fifth or sixth century, and then preserved in Arabic.
36
Letter of Tansar
, pp. 33–4. The realisation that such a statement was an aspiration rather than a statement of fact has been one of the great breakthroughs in contemporary Sasanian studies. As Pourshariati (2008, p. 326) has aptly warned, “In assessing church–state relations, it is prudent to remember that the history of the Zoroastrian church as a monarchy-independent, hierarchically organised church dates only to the 5th C AD.”
37
From the
Denkard
, a Zoroastrian text that dates from a few decades after the reign of Peroz. Quoted in the
Cambridge History of Iran
, p. 894.
38
The exact date is uncertain, but it was some time in the late fifth or early sixth century—precisely the period when the Zoroastrian Church was coming into being. See Kellens, p. 1.
39
Yasht
: 13.100.
40
Lazar P’arpec’i, p. 213.
41
Mihr Yasht
: 102–3.
42
Ibid.: 7.
43
Ibid.: 23.
44
Ibid.: 2.
45
Joshua the Stylite, p. 11.
46
Christensen (1925), p. 93, argues that Kavad was in his thirties when he ascended the throne, but the majority of sources contradict this. The likelihood is that he was either fifteen or twelve when he became king. See Crone (1991), p. 41.
47
Tabari: Vol. 5, p. 117. The stories of Sukhra’s heroism that have been preserved in Arab histories must ultimately derive from traditions propagated by the Karin.
48
See Pourshariati, p. 380.
49
Did this mean that the Parthian traditions of Mihr worship were so unacceptable to the standards of Zoroastrian orthodoxy as to constitute a rival school of religion? The question has provoked intense disagreement among Iranists. The late Mary Boyce, doyenne of Zoroastrian studies, argued that Mihr always ranked as a god subordinate to Ohrmazd, even in Parthia; but more recent scholarship has questioned this. See Pourshariati, pp. 350–68.
50
For the history, and the rewriting of the history, of the three sacred fires, see the respective essays by Boyce. The likelihood that the Median temple, the Fire of the Stallion, was built as late as the fifth century is particularly striking. As Boyce points out, “no clearly datable objects have been found in the ruins earlier than the reign of Peroz.”
51
Tabari: Vol. 5, p. 132.
52
Letter of Tansar
, p. 40.
53
Quoted from a multiplicity of sources by Crone (1991), p. 23.
54
Ibid.
55
For the apocalyptic strain in fifth-century Iran, see Yarshater, p. 996.
56
Tabari: Vol. 5, p.132.
57
The best introduction to Mazdakism is Yarshater’s essay in the
Cambridge History of Iran
. He traces the origin of the movement all the way back to the third century AD. Crone (1991), in a typically bracing article, argues that the dating of Mazdak’s career to the reign of Kavad, which all the sources agree upon, is wrong, and should be placed several decades later. For criticisms of this theory, see Zeev Rubin (1995), p. 230, n. 11. For the argument that Mazdak never so much as existed, see Gaube.