themes, so decisive for Persian art, appeared during the Parthian period under the influence of the art of the north-eastern provinces (Central Asia and Afghanistan).
Towards the end of the existence of the Parthian state, Christianity arose and spread across its western boundaries. In the state of Kushan, on the eastern borders of Parthia, at approximately the same time, one of the most important Buddhist movements was taking shape – the doctrine of the Mahayana. In Parsa, in the south of Iran, Zoroastrianism was developing into a state religion. Syncretism and the common religious language that had arisen in the Hellenistic period were giving way to the search for a dogmatic religion.
Some knowledge of the Iranian religion, Zoroastrianism, is necessary as it formed the ideological basis of Iran’s art for at least two millennia. Its name comes from that of its prophet – Zarathustra (subsequently transmitted to Europe in its Greek form as Zoroaster). Zarathustra was evidently a real figure, as is corroborated in particular by his “peasant” name meaning “owner of an old camel”; he was a member of the Spitama tribe and probably lived in the 7th century BCE. He was expelled from his community for having preached doctrines to which its priests objected and went away into the east of Iran, to Bactria or Drangiana, where he was received by a king belonging to the ancient dynasty of the Kayanids, Wishtaspa (Hystaspes), who was the first to be converted to his faith. Zoroastrianism is known primarily in its later, Sassanian version. At its heart lies a dualism: this asserts that there are two principles in the world – Good and Evil – and the essence of existence is the struggle between them. At the same time Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion, for Ahura Mazda (Iater Ormazd) is the one god, a god of goodness and light, whilst his antithesis, “the lord of darkness” Angra Mainyu (literally “evil intent”, later Ahriman) and his forces, are fiends (daevas).
According to this doctrine, space and time are infinite. Space is dual – “the kingdom of good” and “the kingdom of evil”. Within infinite time (zrvan akarana) Ahura Mazda creates a finite, closed period which lasts 12,000 years. The concept of cyclical development is fundamental to Zoroastrian philosophy. Thus, according to sacred texts, the first 3,000 years of this period were devoted to an “ideal creation” of the world, the world of ideas; in the second 3,000 years the material world was created. Here the struggle between Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu takes place (everything good is created by Ahura Mazda, everything evil by Angra Mainyu). The following 3,000 years is the history of the struggle between the two forces before the appearance of Zarathustra. Finally, the last 3,000 years is “our time” in which Zarathustra appears and three “saviours” (Saoshyants) are awaited, who will announce the decisive moment in the struggle between the forces of light and darkness. The forces of darkness will suffer a final defeat and the world will be purified by fire.
A distinctive feature of Zoroastrianism is its assertion of man’s active role in confessing the good faith of a worshipper of Mazda and thus contributing towards the final victory of good.
Zarathustra’s doctrine and his preaching, as well as numerous pre-Zoroastrian religious hymns and liturgies and a plethora of ancient Iranian myths, were brought together in the Avesta, the sacred texts, which were, however, written no earlier than the 5th century CE, in a very complicated alphabet created especially for that purpose by the Zoroastrian priesthood. For more than 1,000 years before this the priests had learned the texts by heart.
Apparently no more than a quarter of what once made up the Avesta has survived. Its foundation is the Gathas, the preaching of Zarathustra himself, and the Yasna, hymns to the gods. After its codification in the 5th century, parts of the Avesta were translated into Middle Persian and the Zend, an extensive commentary on it, was written. The liturgical texts (Yasna) have, of course, survived longer than anything else, and although they as well as their supplement (Vispered) and the priestly codex (Videvdat) are in the main monotonous incantations to the gods, they contain a number of myths and legends of great antiquity. The gods of the Avesta are not as a rule given human form in the sacred texts.
The single exception is the goddess Anahita, who, in one of the Yashts, is described as a beautiful woman dressed in a silver beaverskin cloak and wearing various ornaments. But many of the Zoroastrian deities are personified mainly as various animals or birds which serve as complete representations of these deities. The evil daevas have a single personification.
These are such evil deities as Azhi Dahaka, a three-headed snake, or the daeva of plague and death, Nasu, represented as a fly coming from the North, or the demon of laziness, the long-armed Bushyasta.
During the Achaemenid period there also existed the Mazdaism of the Magi (an ethical and religious doctrine) and the religion of the Achaemenid kings, which in many ways differed both from the doctrine of the Magi and from ancient Iranian beliefs (thus, for example, in the official texts of the Achaemenid kings the name of Zarathustra does not occur and Ahura Mazda is not the only god but simply the supreme one).
Consequently one can say that in the late sixth and early 5th centuries BCE, Zoroastrianism was only just beginning to assert itself in Iran and the Achaemenid kings, whilst valuing the superiority of Zarathustra’s doctrine as their new official religion, nevertheless did not cast aside the cults of the ancient tribal gods. At the same time Zoroastrianism had not yet become a dogmatic religion with firmly established norms and there were slight modifications as the doctrine developed. Zoroastrianism was widespread in the Parthian empire: for example, shards from the wine store of Mithradatkirt (discovered during excavations at Nisa in Turkmenistan) bear more than 400 proper names of various people, of which a third, the so-called theophoric ones, are given in honour of Zoroastrian deities. However, symbols and religious formulae are lacking on Parthian coins, whilst at Mithradatkirt works of art used in the funerary cult of kings display an abundance of typical Hellenistic imagery.
Only in one province of Iran, in Parsa, are the old Achaemenid traditions preserved. Here a local dynasty was in power, and although very few works from this province have survived (its capital, Istakhr, situated not far from Persepolis, has still not been excavated), from about the 2nd century BCE its rulers issued coins bearing their Zoroastrian (even Achaemenid) names, the symbol of the royal Khwarnah and the symbols of Zoroastrianism – an altar with a blazing fire and a Zoroastrian temple (possibly a temple of the goddess Anahita).
The Sassanian state, formed in the 3rd century CE, began with the creation of a strong centralised power which fairly soon united the whole of Iran under the control of the Sassanid monarchs.
The province of Parsa was the centre of the development of this state and its historical and cultural nucleus for the entire duration of its 400-year existence, and the Sassanids themselves were hereditary priests of the Temple of Anahita, one of the Zoroastrian holy places of Parsa.
Consequently, the keyword in the unification of the country was the “renaissance” of Iran’s ancient grandeur and the ancient grandeur of the Iranian religion. Before long, the Sassanid monarchs were starting to trace their lineage back to the Achaemenids. It is natural, therefore, to regard the history and culture of this period as a nationalist Iranian reaction to Hellenism. The first works of the Sassanian period seem in fact to be totally unlike works from the age of Hellenism or the few that have reached us from the Parthian age.
Above all, the thematic restrictiveness of Sassanian works of art is striking. Monumental reliefs depict nothing but scenes of the king’s investiture by a deity, military triumphs, single combat or the king of kings and his courtiers. In the main, carved gem-seals reproduce official portraits of civil servants and priests, whilst metalwork items show scenes of kings and courtiers hunting or again display official portraits. Such was the art of Iran during the course of the 3rd century CE, and although new themes can be distinguished here in comparison with Achaemenid art – military triumph, tournaments, hunting scenes – it seems as if we are, in fact, faced with a rebirth of ancient Persian art, evident in the symbolism of the scenes, in a particular sort of extended narrative quality, in the emphasis on the divine essence of royal power, even in the choice of location for the largest reliefs which
