رقیه شیبانی فر

“Khodaynameh is one of the outstanding works in Persian literature. It is written in Pahlavi language and deals with the mythic- narrative history of the ancient Persia. Unfortunately nothing has survived in the original language. Khodaynameh can be regarded as a literary genre which holds various narratives (dehqani, mobadi and pahlavani) in it. This book in the second century Hijri was translated into Arabic by Abdullah ibn –Muquaffa entitled Syrolmuluk fragments of which remained in some Arabic texts. Recognition and reconstruction of these narratives makes the dream of reaching Syrolmuluk and consequent work Khodaynameh come true to some extent. This essay deals with this approach profiting from Arabic texts particularly Nihayat al-arab fi akhbar al – furs wa-l-Arab which holds a major part of Syrolmuluk in the time span from the reign of Ghoshtasp till the reign of Khosrow Parviz.

This research deals with the investigation of how Shahnameh is used for today’s children based on the theory of “Shahnameh moving from myth to tale”. The essence of Shahnameh containing a period of Iran’s mythological history, is based upon the Persian myths which with passage of time have turned into allegories in Shahnameh and have left their positive and negative characteristics in the mysteries, secrets, symbols and messages of the stories some of which do not correspond with the children’ world. Therefore, for familiarizing children with the stories of Shahnameh it seems appropriate to put aside the negative characteristics of myths as far as child’s culture is concerned and concentrate on the positive aspects and in this way sections of the story in a format of a short story can artistically and literarily be presented to them in a simple language.

Nihāyatu’l- irab fi akhbare’l -fors va’l- arab is the name of a book whose author (s) and the authoring time are uncertain. In compiling this book، authors such as ’Amer Sha’bi، Ayyoub ibn-i Gherriyah، Abdullah ibn-i Moghafa’، Asma’i and Ab ol-bakhtary have contributed. There are three different speculations concerning the time of authorship: 1) 75 A. H. 2) before the year 142 A. H. 3) around 170-193 A. H. However، this book– especially the parts narrated by ibn-i Moghafa’—are the most important sources in our understanding Siyar ol-molouk and subsequently the Khodāy-nāme in the Sassanid period. Since Ferdowsi’s Shāh-nāme is also connected to the Khodāy-nāme through the Abu-Mansouri Shāh-nāme، the story of Dara and Alexander have been chosen from Nihāyatu’l- irab and the Shāh-name in order to determine the main source of the two narratives. The comparative study of the structure of the story of Alexander and Dara in these two books reveals that Ferdowsi’s account is exactly like ibn-i Moghafa’s but Ferdowsi has eliminated some details and has added some more to serve his storytelling purposes.

This article aims at a comparative study of the structure of “Rostam and Esfandîâr" legend, based on Hansen's theory, as narrated by Ibn Moqaffa’, in Nihāyatu’l -irab and Ferdowsi, in Shāh-nāme. Accordingly first the narratives analogous to those of Ibn Moqaffa’, and Ferdowsi have been compiled while probing into the basic dissimilarities between them, like Rostam 's Zoroastrian faith or otherwise. Next, the structures of these stories have been analyzed at a general and specific level, according to Hansen. In conclusion, Ibn Moqaffa's narrative is found to be a historical one with a continual structure, whereas in the case of Shāh-nāme, being an esthetically poetic narrative, it has been subdivided into a few episodes.

This article aims at a narratological study of the “Haftgordan story” of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh and the story of “Afrasyab-ibn Pashang” as narrated by Anushirvan Marzban in Hormozdyar. After a review of the summaries of the two narratives، a comparative structural study of the works coupled with a study of their mythical and ritual origins are presented. These studies show that Ferdowsi’s account of the story is characterized by its bucolic، nationalistic and rationalistic nature as well as the exclusion of some ritual (Rostam as a Zoroastrian hero) and mythical (Afrasyab’s visit to Satan) parts. Although it seems that the exclusion of ritual parts may have occurred some time before Ferdowsi، it is quite probable that the omission of mythical parts was his own decision. Conversely، Anushiravan’s narrative، originating from priestly order with emphasis on the teachings of Mazdisnai، is more original and unified، and it enjoys from an equally mythical and ritual deep structure that is more in harmony with the similar patterns in Persian stories. This story particularly plays an important role in the analysis of the Persian epic in its transmission from priestly to bucolic narration.