 I'd like to thank the organisers, and Sarah Stewart in particular, for having invited me to read this paper. I'm going to take you back to Parsi history. In their stay of over a thousand years in the subcontinent of India, the Parsis have by and large had a safe and secure life in their adopted country. However, the Parsis have not been strangers to communal conflict. It is gently assumed by the urban members of the Parsi community today, and by non-zerastrians as well, that the arrival of the Parsis in India and their stay of over a millennium is a remarkable story of adaptation and harmonious existence as a minority group completely free from inter-communal strife. The apocryphal sugar in the milk story adds substance to this belief and is unfailingly mentioned in every exposition about the community to a non-zerastrian audience. This is perhaps part of a carefully cultivated identity, that of a peace-loving people who have added value to the society they live in. It can be argued that this deliberately engineered image is perhaps closer to the truth, and the few stray incidents may seem as aberrations to this success story. It is however essential for a community which is insignificant in numbers to build on such an affirmative image. Earlier events such as the Battle of Variaf in the 11th century, the Kalyan Rai incident in the late 16th century, and the Parsley Muslim riots in the 19th century are indicative that the transition in the centuries following their arrival was not totally skirmish-free. Whether these events constitute a definite landmark in the memory bank of the community or were just occasional happenings or were due to more subtle and complex issues needs to be considered. For the Parsley's, the dousing of their sacred fires in the 19th century struck a deep chord of anguish in their psyche and in turn aroused an ancient memory of why they were forced to leave Iran. This paper will focus on some encounters between the Zoroastrians and the non-Zoroastrians and will highlight the attempts made by the Parsley's to ensure the preservation of a Parsley identity and through that process the survival of our religious institutions. Each year on Rwse Ashishwang Mahefravedin of the Zoroastrian Shanshai calendar, it fell on the 11th of September last month, the Nafsari Malesar Bedin Anjuman commemorates the Battle of Variaf which occurred towards the end of the 11th century. There was a small settlement of Parsley's in Variaf, close to Surat, largely into farming, and they were attacked by an army of Rajput chieftains, specifically the chief of Ratunpur, because the Parsley settlers refused to pay a high tribute demanded by the Rajput chieftain. According to legend, with the men being away, the Parsley women of Variaf donned the men's armour and fought against the attacking Rajput army. As in every epic story there was a mishap and a helmet slipped off the head of one of the women revealing her cascading hair. Realising that they had been tricked, the Rajputs returned with reinforcements and the Parsley women, unable to withstand the ferocity of the second assault, chose to jump into the river Tapti, preferring death to dishonour. Since then this episode in Parsley history is commemorated by a community gathering during which a jushin is celebrated in memory of the women folk, accompanied by what is termed as a val nogambar, when sprouted hyacent beans are cooked, consecrated in the jushin ritual and then served to the attendees. According to the oral tradition, the sprouted hyacent beans symbolically represent the hair of the women whose act of bravery and sacrifice are remembered by the living even today. In fact I attended this jushin in Bombay last month. Much late in the 19th century, Khursajibamanji Framroes, inspired by the event, wrote a song titled Jange Varyav, Varyav Ghamniparsibhanwani Badhuri Vishay Garbo, the battle of Varyav and the song in honour of the bravery of the women from the village of Varyav. The Rhanumai Masthiasni Sabha, an organisation founded by Dadabai Nauruji, also commemorates this event with the jushin and the recital of poems in Mumbai. Poems recited to an audience introduce a sense of belonging and an association with the past. The Parsees use religious rituals, songs and poems as devices to perpetuate a revered memory and to cement the sacrifice made by their ancestors in the minds of the community. Such remembrances serve to maintain the identity by preserving the past and also giving a sense of community being. In contrast to the Varyav episode, an incident in Khambar, Cambay or Khambat many centuries late in the 16th century, highlights a massacre of the Parsees by a wealthy Hindu named Kalyanray. According to Captain Henry Dandas Robertson, who wrote in the Bombay Gazette, quote, not a Parse was left standing after the attack, close quote. Cambay situated at the mouth of the River Mahi was a flourishing port city with extensive trade links to the Red Sea and the Gulf of Hormuz. It is possible that Kalyanray riots may have been caused due to an ongoing trade war between the Hindus and the Parsees. The Parsees having grown in numbers in the 16th century were accused of breaking into houses and robbing the locals of their property, causing general panic and mayhem, forcing the Hindus to abandon their homes and their much-loved temple of Kuarka Keshitar, the ancient name of Cambay. As far as I can say, this is the only incident where there seems to have been Parsee hooliganism. Robertson, in his historical narrative of the city of Cambay, noted how Kalyanray, who had been forced to flee to Surabh, later having acquired wealth, returned to Cambay with an army of coalies and Rajputs and attacked the Parsees, setting their homes on fire and forcing them to flee Cambay. Three things stand out with regard to this episode. The conflicting reports concerning the dating of this massacre, the incontrovertible existence of a powerful overlord Kalyanray and his role in the massacre and the complete amnesia of the Parsee community towards this episode. For the Parsees themselves, it seemed to be an episode they have chosen to forget if at all it happened. Hence, there is no commemorative jushan, poem or song about this unfortunate episode in Parsee history. I would however like to offer here a tenuous proposition connected to Cambay and the Parsees living there at that time. In compiling the genealogy of the Parsees Arastrian priests, a remarkable effort has been made by the Bagarya priests of Nausari to maintain their records and in a lesser form by the priests of Udvada, Baruch and others. The genealogy which is missing from the priestly records is that of the priests of Cambay. Thus, through Dr. Farros Cotwal, who is with us this morning in his article titled The History of the Parsee Priesthood, has confirmed this and I would like to postulate that perhaps the Cambay massacre did happen and the priests were killed and therefore their written genealogy was lost. Hence, the priests of Cambay are unable to trace the names of their ancestors to this day. Thus, this event for reasons not clearly understood remains more as a footnote in history rather than a place in the collective memory of the community. Some periods in the latter part of the 19th century were equally perilous for the community. The Parsee Muslim Raths of 1851 started soon after Beramji Khashigigandhi, editor of the newspaper Chitragyan Darpan, illustrations reflecting knowledge printed on the 23rd of September 1851, showed a sloppily executed photograph of Prophet Muhammad with some historical material taken from a book written by Simon Oakley. On the 17th of October, riots broke out in Bombay after the Friday sermon against this publication. The Muslim rioters beat up the constables through stones at Parsee residences, attacked Sir Jamshajajajibai's Ilhaibag fire temple, desecrated the Bmewawala and NH Karani fire temples, and attempted to attack the Manichee Manchegy said fire temple, all located in the heart of Bombay. Two of the three fire temples attacked during the 1851 riots were moved out and reconsecrated elsewhere, thereby safeguarding the religious institutions from possible future attacks. Several public meetings of the Justices of Peace were held, and handles were distributed by the trustees of the Bombay Parsee Panchay to quell the sentiments of the rioters. Unfortunately, four days later, the rioting started again. The editor, Mr Behramji Khursajigandhi, was forced to seek police protection. There appears to be some element of cultural misunderstanding and insensitivity in the printing of the Prophet's image and a non-realisation of what was or is religiously unacceptable to the psyche of the Muslims. A deputation of leading Parsees met Sir Jamshajajajibai, then the most powerful Parsee, well scons within the establishment, and asked him for help. Jijibai had to set convened a meeting and passed a resolution requesting Parsees and Muslims to maintain peace and not to plunder each other's homes. Interestingly, one of Jamshajajig's main business partners was a Muslim, Mohammad Ali Rogay, but the records are silent on his involvement in the mediation. A deputation of 25 Parsees led by Dadabai Nauruji met Governor Lord Faulkland, who issued a proclamation and had it published in English Persian Urdu Marathi and Gujarati. He warned both communities not to create any further trouble. Chief Justice Sir Erskine Perry, present at the meeting, suggested that the Parsees and Muslims should sit in each other's horse carriages and go around the streets, asking the people to calm down and maintain peace and order. The Parsees responded by publishing in June 1853 a poem in Gujarati title, Fasad Al-Kamfam. Another book in English was published by Seth Pestonji Dadajin Unwala in 1856 about the riots. Again, it would seem that the Parsees dealt with their pain and trauma through the use of poetry, hoping thereby to preserve a historical narrative and a memory of the event. The fire temples which were attacked by the Muslims remained closed for several years as the sacred fires within the fire temples had been doused. Within six years of the riots in Bombay, the port of Bharuch on the Narmada River was convulsed by riots, this time with devastating outcome for the Parsees. The Bharuch was one of the oldest Parsi settlements with a dachma being built as far back as 1309 CE. It is said that the younger brother of Zartoshmobed had settled in Bharuch to serve the flourishing Parsi community around the 13th century. It was a place of learning for the Zarrastrians and as many as 24 manuscripts were said to have been copied over a period of time in Bharuch by eminent copyists such as Adishir Mobed Jiva. Bharuch is the home of five fire temples, a clear indication of how large the Parsi population must have been. Like Cambay, Bharuch was a trading post and it served as a link port for goods transiting to Africa, the Near East and China. Five days after the Indian Mutiny or the War of Independence began in Merut, on 10 May 1857, some Muslims of Bharuch falsely accused a Parsi, Bejanji Sheryarji Bharucha, of desecrating a mosque on the outer periphery of the city. The Muslim rioters rushed in to Dastur Faridunji Khamddin Darbimer, which was consecrated in 1777. The rioters extinguished the fire and killed the elderly head priest, Edward Adishir Hormasji Khamddin. Completely inebriated with passion, they dragged Bejanji Sheryarji Bharucha out of his house, killed him and pulled his corpse with the rope towards the district of Vijalpur. The rioters then proceeded to the Shapurji Nariwala fire temple consecrated in 1738 in the outfought area and extinguished the sacred fire as well as wounded the elderly head priest, Edward Mervanji Mancheji Khamddin. Unfortunately, neither Mr Davis, the Collector and Magistrate of Bharuch nor Captain Bell, who was present in Bharuch, were able to quell the riots until an English contingent led by Lieutenant Richardson arrived and brought peace to the town. You must always bear in mind that the Parsi population has been very, very small and therefore happening such as these clearly had a devastating effect on the community in India in general. Whether this was a planned synchronised riot to coincide with the mutiny in Meerut is not known, but clearly emotions were considerably inflamed and it was an indication that all was not well in some major parts of India controlled then by the East India Company. The Parsis of Bharuch on the 19th of May 1857 petitioned Bettington, the Chief of Police Bombay Presidency, to examine the role of the head constable. They petitioned the trustees of the Bombay Parsi puncha to use their influence with the government in Mumbai in order to obtain justice and they petitioned the Governor's Council to appoint commissioner to investigate and punish the guilty. 39 of the 61 persons arrested were sentenced to imprisonment by the Cessrin's Judge, A.K. Forbes. Two of the rioters were hung on the 16th of November 1857 for the murders of the priests, Edward Adishar Kanjin and Bejan Sheryaji Parucha. These were trying times for India as well. The wounds of the mutiny were still fresh and whether the ongoing riots in Bharuch had any connection with the imminent loss of the Mughal Empire needs to be studied. The Parsis who were well represented in the Municipal Council in Bombay and were known to be close to the British having become wealthy working as agents and brokers of the East India Company may have been under attack due to their perceived closeness to the British. They may have also been targeted due to their small numbers. A book titled Khasumate Bharuch in Gujarati verse gives details of this riot. It was compiled by Erved Kekhashu Pesenji Vakila teacher and was published in August 1858 under the pen name Bande Khuda, Servant of God. It would seem that history repeated itself for the Parsi community because 22 years after the Muslim riots against the Parsis in Bombay in 1851, a book was published in Gujarati in June 1873 by Mr Rastamji Hormazdi-Jalway, titled Prasidha by Gangoro Anekamo, the prophets of the past and their works. This was a Gujarati translation of Washington Irving's book about the life of Prophet Muhammad and others. Again the Muslims thought that this translation was an insult to their prophet and so eight months after its publication hundreds of Muslims came out of the Jammar Masjid after their Friday afternoon prayers and began to attack the Parsis indiscriminately. They destroyed the home of the Parsi police inspector Framji Bhikaji Khumana and entered the Sajamshijijipai fire temple again in Ilhabag in a Muslim enclave and desecrated the sacred fire and looted the valuable items and cash. Of interest is a long memorial, a letter of protest presented by the Parsis of the Marquis of Salisbury, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for India and Council in London. Apart from lamenting about the wrongs inflicted upon the Parsis during the riots, the plundering and desecration of the fire temple and the death of Parsis in the riots, they also protested about the general antagonism of the police commissioner Suta and the indifference of the Governor of Bombay, Sir Philip Woodhouse. Eminent men like Saurabh Jishapuri Bengwally petitioned the Minister for India Affairs in England drawing his attention to the injustice done to the Parsis and their religious institutions during the riots. The Parsis in defending themselves with the government said, quote, an industrious peaceful ordinary people whose sole desire is to live on terms of amity with all men, close quote. They further wrote, quote, no class is so strong in interest in keeping the peace as the Parsis for their few in number prosperous and unaccustomed to any other commercial pursuits. This image is reiterated and is the baseline on what the Parsis have formulated as their brand identity in India, as a peace-loving, prosperous community. It is the judicious construction of this image which has helped the survival within a larger and a more aggressive multi-religious population. Later, the Parsis were also traumatised by another issue that occurred. A book was published basically talking about the notes and reflections of the Bombay riots in 1884. Another book was published, True History and Philosophy of the riots. And Manchurji Kawasi Langdana published an account of this conflict in Gujarati work. And another book in Gujarati, Fesa de February, the February riots was published by Kawasi Dinshaji Kias. The Parsis resorted to the written world not only to explain their version of what happened, but also sought to reiterate that theirs was a community which readily assimilated within the polity of India like sugar in the milk. Sweetening their surroundings without causing any ripples. The last but one case which I would like to touch upon is that of the Babunath Mandir land dispute in Bombay. From a Parsis point of view, some Hindus wanted to take over land on the periphery of the Tars of Silence in Bombay in order to build a Mandir. The dispute lasted on and off for 160 years and was eventually fought in the law courts which resulted in some rioting. It was finally settled in 1940-41 with the Parsis again in retreat being forced to give up a part of their land in the midst of a Parsis housing colony in Bombay. A detailed study of this episode is a matter for a separate paper. A final illustration of the community, continuously on alert to safeguard its identity in religious institutions, is also evident in more recent times. In 2002 when Bombay and parts of India had horrible riots, the Athornan boarding madrissa and dada, fearful of Hindu fundamentalism in the aftermath of the massacres in Gujarat, sought to change the term madrissa of the dada priestly seminary to gurukul, lest anybody confuse the parsley priestly seminary to be a Muslim madrissa. They collectively felt that the term gurukul would make them safer while retaining their primary identity, which is that of a parsley priestly institution. It is reported that the trustees wanted to, quote, carefully secede from the Islamic connotation and ward off potential attacks, close quote. The journalist Fatar Fekar, noting this, quote, in a legible turning point in Mumbai's history, the new sign board reveals a deepening dread felt by the unlikeliest of people, the soft-spoken, the genial Parsi priests. To summarise then, the Parsi's keen to safeguard and preserve their community and religious institutions and properties, responded to the riots, one by petitioning the law officers directly connected with the riots, petitioning the Parsi panchart to intercede on their behalf with the government, approaching well-known Parsi luminaries such as Jijipah, Inauguri and Bengwally to petition and speak to the government on their behalf. They also stretch across communal boundaries to sit with members of the opposing communities to bring peace. This was a crucial survival strategy as their smallness and numbers did not allow them to prolong the conflict. They resorted to literary and religious devices and wrote books, poems and commemorated events with the religious ceremonies to mark the event lest it be forgotten, so as to reinforce and extol the sacrifices made by their forebears. Finally, in the face of fierce opposition, they retreated and by doing so created physical space to those hostile to them. The Parsi's relocated some of their fire temples in other areas outside the fort area in Bombay, ultimately setting the stage for peace on a long-term basis. To conclude, taking the above-listed measures, the Parsi's have been able to preserve their religious identity by adopting strategies of survival that ensure their existence despite their smallness in numbers. Thank you. First of all, I'd like to thank the organizers of this conference for having me here and for allowing me to speak on a somewhat esoteric subject. It's really a pleasure to be able to present some of my research on this to you all. There's a handout going around, but I should like to point out that unfortunately there are not enough copies for the tremendous turnout of audience in this room, so I would like to ask you to please share the handout with your neighbours, and if any of you would like your own copy of the handout, please send me an email after the talk. My email address is simply dancheffield at gmail.com. So I'll go ahead and begin. What truth is there to be found in forgery? In a short story entitled Sosana Panjom, Sosana V, one of contemporary Urdu surrealist literature's brightest stars, an essayist and the translator of Franz Kafka Nair Masoud relates a Bohesian history of an ancient Persian man named Sosana V, the last of five generations to bear the same name, the descendant of the ancient kings of Iran. And Masoud's telling, though no details of his life were known, Sosana V was remembered as a great sage who transmitted a collection of extraordinarily ancient texts and a long expired language, a language which he claimed was the parent of the languages of the world. Yet, with the introduction of European science, Masoud relates that scholars had finally succeeded in deciphering the ancient inscriptions and in recovering the ancient languages of the past. Yet no language deciphered through modern science corresponded to the language of the fifth Sosana. To these scholars it became clear that the language of the fifth Sosana was no language at all, rather it was simply a forgery, a joke. The generations of revered literary figures and respected lexicographers of the past were simply dupes that we too would simply be dupes to go along with them. Nair Masoud's story, therefore, reads as a mournful narrative of the disenchantment of the modern world, one in which older forms of meaning-making are rendered meaningless in the name of science. In today's talk I'll be speaking about the followers of a man who may be familiar to some of you on whom this short story is based, a man who called himself Azar Kevan. Azar Kevan and his followers are so infamous, indeed embarrassing to some scholars of Zoroastrian religious history, that the supposedly neutral editor of the Encyclopedia Ironica thought it necessary to append to the Encyclopedia entry on the School of Kevan, the following quotation, quote, its contents have no relation to Zoroastrianism as embodied in the authentic literature of that religion. It contains gross absurdities and claims, names and events born of fantastic imagination. Who was this man who could inspire such bitterness from the professively impartial editors of the Encyclopedia Ironica? This question has been haunting me since I first delved into the occult world which Kevan occupied in the course of my dissertation research some years ago, and it's finally one I think I can say something constructive about. I'm going to share this with you today. On a recall ban, the author of this Encyclopedia Ironica article on Azar Kevan and one of the very few European scholars to take Azar Kevan seriously over the course of the past two centuries, writes quote, Azar Kevan was a Zoroastrian high priest who emigrated to India and became the founder of the Zoroastrian Eshraqi or Illuminative School. The literature produced by this school is the Zoroastrian response to the great project of Sheikh al Eshraqi, Shahabeddin Yahya Sohravaldi, end quote. In today's talk, I want to re-evaluate, perhaps even add nuance to this seemingly innocuous commonplace evaluation of Kevan and his followers by examining each of the propositions in some depth, namely, A, that Azar Kevan is Zoroastrian, B, that he was a high priest, C, that he founded his school in India, and D, that his thought constitutes a Zoroastrian response to the project of Sheikh al Maktul Sohravaldi. In the process, I hope to shed light on the context which gave rise to such figures as Kevan and his followers and to meditate upon what it means to claim Iranian Zoroastrian identity and the intellectual climate of the 16th and 17th century Persianate world. Brings me to part one of my talk entitled The Mixing of Cultures, a technical term used by the Kevani Order called Amizeshafa Hang. As many of you know, the Safavid dynasty had its origins in a Sufi Order centered on the city of Ardabil in Iran, where the 13-year-old head of the Safavid Order, the man who was to become Esmail I, led the armies of the Turkmen Kizilbosh into battle against the Akkoyunlu dynasty of Iran. His army reportedly ran into battle without armor, believing that they were protected by the divine charisma of their Sheikh of their leader. The early Safavid period, ushered in by Esmail, was characterized by a diverse religious landscape as Imam-i-Shia, Sufi, Horufi, Noctavi, Nurbachi and other gholat or extremist or exaggerator movements competed for legitimacy and political capital in the nascent Safavid empire. And it was into this complex religious landscape that the man who came to call himself Azar Kevan was born. Though a number of works associated with his followers are still extant, very little is known about the historical details of Azar Kevan's life. What we can ascertain comes from two books associated with his school, the Sharristan-i Donesh or Gulistan-i Binesh, better known as the Sharristan-i Chahar-Chamann. That is the region of knowledge and the garden of vision composed sometime around the year 1610 of the Common Era. And the Dabbistan-i Mazawheb, the school of doctrines composed in the year 1658 of the Common Era. These two extant narrative accounts of the teachings of Azar Kevan and of the biographical details of his followers. According to the text of the Dabbistan, Kevan was supposed to have been born in the ancient capital of the early Sasanians, the city of Estahar in the year 1533. This is, of course, problematic because the city of Estahar was in ruins long before the year 1533 and still in 1533. He likely travelled to India sometime before the year 1580 and he died in Patna probably around the age of 85 in the year 1618. He was an ascetic, a vegetarian, a man who began to engage in fasting and staying awake for lengthy periods at the age of five, who was eventually able, reportedly, to reduce the amount of food he ate to a few grams, or as the texts say, one derham, and who reportedly, as a great Sufi figure, lived in an earthen vat for 28 years of his life. Azar Kevan lived in a time made weighty by millennialist expectations. We've heard a little bit about millennialism already from Professor Panayino. Following the rule of Timur, the Sahib Qiran, or the Lord of the Conjunction, millennialism came to play an important role in the charisma of the Timurid royal house and was transmitted to the Timurid successors, the Safavids, and the Mughals. As Professor Panayino alluded to yesterday, the expectation of a renewer, a mojadad, or a messianic, or a Mahdi figure was connected with the great conjunction of the planets Jupiter and Saturn, which recurs every 960 years. Following the book of conjunctions of Abu Mashar, the great conjunction was thought to issue in a new cycle of royal dispensation. As the great Arab polymath Ibn Khaldun tells us, quote, the great conjunction indicates great events such as a change in royal authority or dynasties, or a transfer of royal authority from one people to another. The previous great conjunction in the water sign of Pisces occurred in the year 622 of the common era, linked with the rise of Islam, the fall of the Sasanians, and the beginning of an Arab dispensation. 960 years before that was linked with the rise of Alexander the Great and the end of the Canid dynasty. Thus, what would happen in the year 1583, or 960 years after the rise of Islam, was a subject of great astrological speculation, and messianic movements sprouted up across the Islamic world. According to the interpreters of Abu Mashar, 1583 was to mark the end of the Arab dispensation and the beginning of a new cycle of Persian rule. It is into this context of messianism, and more specifically, Persian messianism that Azar Kevan must be understood. Indeed, his very name, Kevan, or the planet Saturn, is an obvious reference to the great conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn. Kevan espoused what he called variously the porsi, the obodi, the Azari, or the Yazdani religion, claiming that his interpretation of this religion was the ancient religion of the Persians. Yet, unlike what we know from earlier Zoroastrian sources in the Azari cosmology, the world began as a series of emanations from God described as rays of light shining from the light of light, the Shid Shidon, and commencing with the first intellect, the Aklea Val, which in the teachings of the Azaris is the angel Bahman, described as the pen with which God wrote the book of the material universe. In this respect, Kevan is drawing upon the imagery of an earlier messianic movement, the Harufis founded by Fazlullah Astar al-Baudi in the late 14th century, who held that the world is a book composed in a divine meta-language, the decipherment of which allows the annihilation of the illusion of self and the divine ecstasy of union with God. In Kevan's elaborate cosmology, the world has existed for some 600 decillion years and is eternal. This world is governed by cycles of time in which each fixed star on a planet governs the earth for the period of millennium. At the end of the succession of planets, the world is renovated and beings similar in all ways, but not identical to the beings of the previous cycles come again into this world. That is to say that the Kevanis believe in a concept of cyclical time. Unlike normative Zoroastrians who hold a king named Qumars, or Gaomars to be the traditional first king of Iran, Azar Kevan asserts that a pre-Atomite figure called Mahabad, or the Great Abad, is the earliest sage king of the world in each successive cycle. The elaborate Kevanian prophetology, ancient Iranian kings, were also made into prophets of which Zerothustra was one of the most important continuators. I want to read with you a few Kevani texts to see what we can say about this movement and its relationship to Zoroastrianism. I want to draw your attention to the first text on your handout, text 1.1. It's notable that Kevanis apparently kept themselves separate from Zoroastrians who were not initiated into their esoteric school. Non-initiated Zoroastrians in the Kevani texts are always referred to by the terms of gabr or behtin, and instead the Kevanis apparently chose to move Igincognito among Muslims. Thus, in text 1.1 we read, the members of this doctrine are mixed up with the peoples of Islam. They wear their clothing and they keep Muslim names, as well as another name according to their doctrine. They are scattered and resident in the lands of Iran and Tehran, far away from and indeed afflicted by the gabs. Though their associations with Muslims might initially give pause to scholars of Zoroastrianism, like the Harufis and the Noctavis before them, Kevanis held that the world and the divine were fundamentally and essentially one. That is that everything that exists is the delimitation and definition of a fundamentally unlimited and undefinable universal oneness which in its totality is equal to God. This philosophy is known as wahdatul wujud, a philosophy originally ascribed to the great Arab and Ellucian thinker, Mohiddin ibn Arabi, which was commonplace among Sufi movements in the early modern period and in this respect Kevan is no different. As a corollary to wahdatul wujud, Kevanis held perhaps for the first time amongst peoples to call themselves Zoroastrians that all of the religions of the world were valid paths to the divine, something we might think of as a precursor to modern pluralism. Thus, in text 1.2, we read, and now a morsel regarding the mingling of the abadi dervishes with the various peoples shall be written with the pen of inquiry. This group calls this practice the mixing of cultures, Amizeshafa hang, and perhaps table manners, Mies chawr. When someone foreign to their doctrine is introduced to the assembly of this group, they do not speak coarsely of him. They praise the path of his doctrine and they accept what he says and do not overlook even a morsel of politeness and generosity according to the principle of their doctrine, namely that in their belief one can approach God through every religion. I'll just skip the rest of this text here. Going further than previous Golaad's movements in asserting Persian superiority, which for Kevan is the closest language to the divine meta-language and the closest religion to the fundamental truth, Kevan denies the centrality of Arabic and the Quranic revelation which are the imperfect equivalents of their analogs and other religious traditions. Kevan reportedly writes in his last work called the Aenea Secandari or the Mirror of Alexander that the religious categories of Mubad in Persian are a Mubed and the category of Motakallam in Arabic or a systematic theologian are fundamentally the same. Likewise, the category of Herbed or Herbed in Zoroastrianism in Persian and Sufi in Arabic again are fundamentally the same. He likens the difference between these words to the differences between the Persian word ab, the Arabic word ma, the Turkish word su and the Hindi word pani. That is, these words all signify the same fundamental substance that is water. So, too, the categories of Zoroastrianism and Islam become interchangeable. Thus, Kevan, like the Sufi referred to in text 1.3, enjoins in anti-nomianism a contradiction of the laws of the time like the Sufis who do not act according to the decrees of the jurists of the age and that instead one should spend time with Hindus, Jews, Zoroastrians and Christians for all seek the same fundamental truth of the universe. Text 1.3, we read, just as one spends time with Muslims, one should also befriend Hindus, Jews, Zoroastrians and Christians. Therefore, one cannot act according to the decrees of the jurists of the age for they are perpetrators of jihad and murder and for that reason, they oppose the necessary. Of course, by now, the scholars amongst us must be thinking that apart from using words like mo-bed and her-bed, this does not sound very much like any Zoroastrianism which one finds in a Vestian or Pathavi texts, or for that matter even in New Persia and Sanskrit or Gujarati texts prior to this point. Kevanis were of course aware that what they were doing was fundamentally different from what others Zoroastrians were doing. For the purposes of this paper, let's call these more familiar Zoroastrians, normative Zoroastrians, although I understand that this is a theoretically fraught term. Remember that in text 1.1, it is enjoined that the followers of Azar Kevan keep their distance from the gabs elsewhere, the behtines, the normative Zoroastrians. The differences that the Kevanis have with these, quote, normatives is ascribed to a lack of knowledge about the esoteric understanding of the teachings of Zarathustra, a lack of initiation into the secrets of the pre-eternal religion of Abod. Thus we read in text 1.4, some of the Zoroastrians overcome by the wicked, the Darvandan, have no knowledge of their earlier religion and are without the bounty of the Sharia of Abod. Even the behtines of Iran and India are without this beneficial glory, yet we, the followers of the Azaris, recognize the other prophets and agree with the religion of Abod. This brings me to the second part of my talk. The figure upon whom this crucial distinction hinges is Zarathustra. In order to claim legitimacy as the true Persian religion, the religion of a true Persian dispensation, Kevan and his followers had to explain why what they were doing does not look like the, quote, normative Zoroastrianism. In order to do this, they do something which previous Sufi groups who engaged with Zarathustra never did. That is, they obtained known, quote, normative Zoroastrian texts, that is texts composed by normative Zoroastrian authors and copied in normative Zoroastrian contexts. And the Dasautir, Ozark Kevan refers to the narratives of the Zarathustra nome and the Changrana Ghacha nome, and likewise in the Sharistan and Chaha Chaman and the Dabistan quotations are directly taken from these texts, as well as from the Ardaviroff nome and the Saddarinasm. Those of you who are familiar with Zoroastrian literature and Persian might recognize that these are four of the most common Zoroastrian new Persian texts. And incidentally, the four new Persian Zoroastrian texts that, as far as I can tell, constitute the entirety of Kevani engagement with the normative Zoroastrian literature. That is to say that while the Kevanis, though nominally Zoroastrian, quote, from hundreds of texts with known Muslim authors, only four texts that they engage with directly belong to the normative Zoroastrian corpus. It is perhaps not coincidental that these four texts often occur together in manuscripts, that they are the only Zoroastrian new Persian texts which are known to have been copied in Muslim contexts during this period. For instance, we have St Petersburg Manuscript in the National Library of Russia, PNS 11, which was copied between the years 1653 and 1655, which has in sequence the Zarathustra nome, the Changrana Ghacha nome, the Ardaviroff nome, and the Saddai Nazm, copied by a certain Mohammad Qasem and Mohammad Jalil Qabali in the city of Bukhara. Incidentally copied at exactly the same time that the Dabaston is being composed. Still, even these four texts had to be made to agree with Kevani teaching, and this was done by employing an esoteric reading strategy, an esoteric hermeneutics in other words, which held that the teaching of Zarathustra was fundamentally allegorical and elusive. Text 2.1. I'll just skip over some of the introductory passages here. Since no word with such delicacy, elegance, and eloquence had ever been heard by them, except from the books and pages which had been sent down, the truth of the Quranic passage, produced asura like it, became clear. His eminence said, this divine word, according to the belief of the Abawdids, that is the translation of the known things, the God, in the manner of enigmas and illusions. The previous generations of Zoroastrians had been employing esoteric hermeneutical strategies already in pathivia, if not already in avestian literature, as has been studied extensively by Shaul Shaqed, James Russell, Yuhan Vivayna, Antonio Panaino, and myself. The extent to which the Kevani's read these quote normative texts esoterically is unprecedented. According to the Kevani's, the reason why Zarathustra presented his teachings in this way is as follows. The Abawdids say, text 2.2 in your handout, the substance of Shaat Zarathustra is contained in mystery and illusions, since allegories, though far from reason, are wondrous for the commoners. Also, if we were to try to explain to an ignorant person the existence and lack of assistance of the existent necessary, the Vah Jebel Vajud, he would not understand, and if we were to speak to him the immateriality of the intelligences, the uncompoundedness of the souls, the excellence of the celestial spheres and the stars, he would be confused, as I'm confused when I read about these things. He would not perceive spiritual delights and punishments and could not understand the truth. Figurative expressions of the law can be understood by both the elite and the commoners and all profit from it. Publicizing it is the cause of repute in this world and the next. Though the elite comprehend the nature of the truth, the path and wisdom, most of the commoners object to it, then, thus, one must put the clothes of law, the Bost-e-Shariat, on utterances of wisdom so that everyone can profit from it. Know that the sect of the Azar Hushangis, that is the Yazdanis, agree that even though the religion of Zarathustra prevailed from Goshtasb to Yazdegerd, still the kings interpreted it esoterically Tavilkarde and made a degree with the law of Azar Hushang, that is Mohabod. They never ordained that living beings be killed. Here, hearkening back, I think, to the discussion yesterday about the subject of sacrifice, they understood that the words of Zarathustra were elusive. They never put into action any passage which opposed the sect of Azar Hushang, and they would interpret it esoterically. Thus, for instance, the Azaris interpret the Zoroastrian doctrine of Ormazd and Ahrimann. In this context, they understand Ahrimann as the materialism of the human soul. Ahrimann's assault against the world of God is the domination of the sensual passions over the soul. The creation of the Amesha Spentas is the existence of praiseworthy qualities and pure morality by which the senses can be subjugated by means of asceticism. One is struck, really, at how modern this reading sounds. An attempt, in other words, to read moral philosophy and the posterist etelian and neoplatonic tradition into the teachings of Zoroastrianism. It's not insignificant that the period in which Azar Kevan is writing is a period referred to as early modernism, and this is really when we can start talking about early modern Zoroastrianism, an attempt to understand the Zoroastrian tradition in ways which are not strictly ritual. Though Kevan is often linked with the court of Akbar in India, I have been trying to emphasize his positionality already within the Iranian world, within the Safavid world, and in particular his role in the Safavid court. He was already apparently held in great reverence by contemporary luminaries both in Iran and India, who referred to him by such titles as Zol Olum, The Possessor of the Sciences, The Coltspey Moharrin, The Axis of the Truthseekers, and even the Emome Zaman, the religious leader of the time. The Shoristan and the Dabistan, the two texts which I've been referring to in this lecture, describe encounters between Azar Kevan and his followers with many of the most important intellectuals of 16th and 17th century Iran and India. For instance, the Safavid ideologue, Sheikh Baha'i, Mir Damod, and Mir Fendereski, three of whom are renowned as the founders of the so-called School of Esfahan. And so, to conclude my lecture, I want to examine one instance of one of these intellectual encounters between the Kevanis and these famous luminaries of the Safavid world. An encounter between one of Kevan's students, named Mubar Housh, with Sheikh Baha'i, a man who was to become Shah Abbas, the first chief advisor for a time, and the man, in many ways, responsible for popularizing Imami or Twelver Shia Juris Prudence in Iran through his composition, The Jamea Abbasi. Text 2.3 on your handout. One day in the School of Sheikh Baha'i din Mohammad Jabal Amwili who belongs to the Mojtahads of the Imamis, a group of students of Quranic Sciences, the Alum, including Mirza Nizam, Abdus Samad, and a group of others were present. This Fagir, meaning Mubar Housh, also had a place among them, since some of them in the Sheikh also were friendly with aesthetics. They inquired about the state of the illuminationists, for they had a singular link and a united bond with the leading illuminationist thinker of the time, Mir Mohamed Bakr Dolmawd. One day the subject of the discussion among the students was to be Jihad, that is the shedding of blood. And then the text quotes an anonymous poem. O you who call a murderer a Ghazi, or someone who fights against infidels, a Ghazi is one who is victorious over the self. In the course of the discussion, the students discuss the niceties of the distinctions between the Ahle Kitab and the Kaafers, that is the peoples of the book and the infidels. But the question arises among the students of Sheikh Abahawi's assembly about what to do with Zoroastrians. According to the students of Sheikh Abahawi, Zoroastrians only possess what they refer to as a Shebhe Kitab, a semblance of a book. After the students leave, the Sheikh asks Mubad Hush about Zoroathustra. And I'll just read a small selection from this text 2.4. Mubad Hush tells the Sheikh what he thinks about Zoroathustra, is in fact a prophet with a book. And the Sheikh says, quote, you speak the truth, but what does the Imam of the Age, Ozark Ewan, say? The Sheikh was familiar with the access of the truth seekers and had on some journeys studied alchemy with his eminence. I said, quote, he believes in the prophethood of Zoroathustra. The Sheikh said, ah, say no more, that settles it. Whatever he says, it's so. Moreover, the Sheikh then goes on to ask about the relationship between Zoroathustra and the prophet Abraham, referring to the notion that Zoroathustra and Abraham are one and the same figure. That is, that Zoroathustra is simply a translation of the name Abraham into Persian. This notion is in fact commonplace both to Islamic as well as to even normative Persianate Zoroastrian thought at this time. For Kevan and his followers, just as Mubad and Muthakallam, Herbad and Sufi are identical, so too are all the prophet kings of Zoroastrian history identical to the writers of the same fundamental essences as figures in Quranic history. The Sheikh in text 2.5 goes on to say, quote, that Zoroathustra is a gloss, a translation, Eborat of Abraham the Friend. Mubad Hush says, so it is. One must know that Zoroathustra is called Abraham the Friend, Khalil, Khalilulaw. The story of Abraham's falling into the fire and the fire becoming a rose garden around Abraham is well known. It occurs also in the books of the Behtin or the normative Persians that a king by the name of Durran Sarun threw Zoroathustra into a fire and no pain came to him from that fire. But one must know too that the law, the Sharia, the theology, the Calom and the heavenly book of this famous prophet are all mysteries and illusions ramso esorat for the benefit of mankind. And since the famous book and the dear law of Al-Baud may it always be flourishing, text seems a bit weird here but it is undisguised and evident and without signs and illusions the Azar Salsonyons belong to the religion of the learned Al-Baud and the good people went about even before the religion of Zoroathustra in that religion later too the Khosros of Iran explained the religion of Zoroathustra and made a degree with the religion of Al-Baud. So I'd like now to conclude my talk. I'd like to return to the four propositions of Henri Corban which I put forward at the beginning which I'll take up in reverse order. First, that Azar Kevan's thought is a response to Sheikh Shahabuddin Sohravaldi. Well, when Sohravaldi and Azar Kevan are read side by side to one another they bear little resemblance to one another. The term Eshraak in the Kevani text is therefore something of a red herring which has led certain scholars such as Corban and Syed Hossein Nass among others to go back to Sohravaldi. And while Azar Kevan does in fact meet Sheikh Maqtul Sohravaldi in a dream all that occurs in this dream is that Azar Kevan repudiates Sohravaldi for writing his major philosophical works in the Arabic language and not in Persian. It is essential therefore to take into account the later developments of Eshraak'i thought most contemporaneously as had been transmitted by Baha Dola Nurbachsi who is cited extensively by the Kevanis and more importantly a school which harmonizes the teachings of Sohravaldi and Ibad Arabi who is really of central importance to Azar Kevan. The second proposition I want to take up is that Azar Kevan founded his school in India and while it is true that Kevan migrated to Patna towards the end of his life and that his most prolific followers spent most of their careers there as I hoped to have shown the Safavid context for Kevan's thought is just as important as the Indic context. Indeed even Akbar's Dine Elahi which is also happening at this time was just another reflex of the Timurid Millenial Charisma as Asfar Mawin has recently demonstrated in his book The Millenial Sovereign. Third, the point that Azar Kevan is a high priest. This notion is referred to nowhere in the extant Kevani literature. It seems to have originated with Givenchy Jamsha Jimodi's article which calls Kevan a quote parcy high priest. Yet as we have seen Kevan's followers cleverly shift the behtin mwbed or the laity priest distinction from a laity cleric distinction into a non-initiate distinction. Thus the titles of hirbed and mwbed taken by Kevan's followers should be understood not as priestly titles. There is no zoroastrian ritual practice that we can recognize as normative anywhere in these texts. But rather that they refer to their status as members essentially of Kevan's Sufi order a point further corroborated by Kevan's own title of Qolp Axis the Perfect Man the leader of the saintly hierarchy. Finally I come to the last perhaps the most important point is Azar Kevan at the end a zoroastrian. And to answer this question one needs a criterion to establish what a zoroastrian is. We have no way of ascertaining whether Kevan's parents belong to a quote normative zoroastrian community. Kevan's followers probably only knew for normative zoroastrian texts but any standard of ritual practice or vestan recitation becomes a criterion of zoroastrian identity then clearly Azarys don't fit this mold. But is this really what is important among these mystics? It is not for nothing that the texts of the Kevanis became popular among even normative zoroastrians themselves at the dawn of the colonial encounter. The Bombay priest Mulla Fyrus for instance who publishes Azar Kevan's Dassolatir in the year 1818 for the first time holds the texts of his esteem as the Avesta. Likewise the great Manechi Limji Hatarya re-exports Azarys' thought to Iran during the middle of the 19th century where it takes on a life of its own among Ghajar intellectuals. To this day, Azar Kevan is revered as a zoroastrian saint by the followers of the Il Mek Shnum school who see themselves as latter-day spiritual descendants of the same forms of esoteric thought that Kevan first espoused. Thus I leave you on a note of ambiguity which is perhaps exactly what the Kevanis had intended. To end, I will just read one line of poetry from the divan of the Kevani poet Mubad possibly the author of the Dabestani mazaheb which is now held in the Khudabahsh library in Patna probably not too far from where it was originally composed in the 17th century. The poem goes, Naz de tu rhanion ze iranem Naz de iranion na ishanem Sonion shi eim gomon darend Shion mas na mosalmonem With two Iranians, I'm from Iran but with Iranians, I'm not them. The Sunnis think I'm Shia the Shia is only that I'm not Muslim. Thank you very much for your attention. Thank you. I'd like to just begin by saying how delighted I am to be here. So as is my alma mater so it's a bit like coming home and also I have many friends and colleagues and even some family in the audience. So thank you for inviting me to be here today. Much has been written about the British in India and the British extensive connection with the Parises but there have only been a few studies that have focused on the interaction between the early American Republic and India let alone personal encounters between Yankees and Parises. This submission is partly due to a lack of Parisee sources for the early period but I have managed to locate three previously unexamined documents that provide some intriguing examples of cross-cultural dialogue between the two groups and I'd like to share those documents and some pieces of some sources that you will be familiar with from a slightly different perspective. So the sources that I have found include the business letters of a Parisee broker to a Yankee merchant at the turn of the 18th century an American review of a published discussion between a Parisee editor and an Anglican missionary that took place in Bombay in 1844 and a Parisee's log describing an overland expedition with a Yankee ships captain from Bombay to Pwna in 1848 and I'm using the name for the city Bombay because that's what it was called then and that's so I'm using the historical reference. By the time the British East India Company had established its factory at Surat in 1613 the Parisee's own story of transition from Iran and settlement in India had been redacted in the form of the narrative poem The Story of Sanjan This text provides a prototype for all subsequent Parisee transitions from the old world to the new. On the one hand it revisits the wondrous rescue of the good religion emphasising the refugee's adherence to the faith particularly to the preservation of the fire in the face of incursion by Muslims. On the other hand it justifies Parisee social assimilation in adopting the language, the dress and some local customs of the Hindu majority population. The imperative to observe local law and custom while maintaining what are deemed to be the most important elements of the religion continues I think to inform Parisee identity in minority situations today not just Parisee identity but Zoroarani Zoroastian identity as well. Communications from the Parisees of Gujarat from the mid 15th century onwards tell us a bit about relations with their Hindu and Muslim neighbours. But these rivayats or communications don't mention the Christian Europeans who were steadily arriving in India. At this point in time there are no Americans to speak of so the dialogue begins with reports by those Europeans living on the Gujarati coast. These accounts reflect their authors theological and cultural biases but they also reveal the Parisee's own perspectives on their religion. I guess this is an example of Johann's hybridised intellectual collaboration that he was talking about yesterday. One example of that is Henry Lord's account of the religion of the Parisees. Lord was chaplain to the East India Company in Surat from 1624 to 1629 and he states that he was instructed by one of their churchmen through a Parisee interpreter. This is what he says. This Parisee interpreter had a long employment in the company's service that had brought him to a mediocrity in the English tongue so they're communicating in rather poor English on the part of the Parisee interpreter. So the Parisee priest had evidently told Lord through this interpreter that renewed contact through with their Iranian co-religionists had not only reminded the Parisees of their origins in ancient Persia but had also provided instruction in religious matters. This looking back to Iran for both ancestry and authority is also noted by Lord's contemporary a factor of senior merchant in Baruch named Haleinsan do Yong. Do Yong writes of the Parisees collectively as exiled Persians whose beliefs and practices he learnt from their teachers apparently in Portuguese which was still a dominant language of commerce. Do Yong Riley comments that while these Persians regard all Christians as impure with no hope of salvation they do have social and commercial relations with Christians but only they say because of the need to earn their livelihood. This rationale for interaction with those of another religion echoes the pragmatism of the Qesei and foreshadows the time when Parisees would cross the sea to predominantly Christian lands to engage in study and business. As Do Yong was reporting on the prominent role of Parisees in the seaborne trade of Gujarat so the first English pilgrims were settling on the north-eastern shores of America. The parallels between the two immigrant communities are of interest not only in terms of their rhetoric of relocation from an original homeland in order to preserve their religious identity albeit a millennium apart but also because they brought similar portable trades with them. European accounts tell of the centrality of the textile trade for the Parisees in Gujarat particularly the weaving of fine cotton and silk. Likewise many of the non-conformist English immigrants to Massachusetts were cloth makers including Abraham Lincoln's great great great great grandfather Samuel who was an apprentice weaver when he landed in Salem a port above Boston in 1637. These early American settlers would have learned about the Parisees through local newspapers and periodicals as well as European reports but the most significant account just before the American Revolutionary War and also just before the French Revolution was Anka Tildu Peron's French translation of Zoroastian manuscripts. This publication made primary Zoroastian texts accessible to a general audience. It also tells of further Parisee collaboration in their own narrative since both Anka Tildu's translations and his observations were informed by his personal encounters with Parisees in Surat between 1757 and 1760. On reading part of Anka Tildu's Zenda Vesta shortly after it was printed Benjamin Franklin who was then in London remarked Franklin sent a copy of these volumes from London to a public lending library in Newport, Rhode Island in 1772. So as New Englanders were reading about the Parisees and their texts so the Parisees were expanding their own global perspective looking beyond British and other European trading contacts towards America. Once the newly independent America began to trade directly with India from 1784 onwards the merchant mariners of New England particularly Salem, Massachusetts became middlemen in moving goods between ports in India and Britain and obviously other ports in Europe and Southeast Asia. By now the British had encouraged Parisees to bring their weaving skills and their training in carpentry and shipbuilding to the developing port city of Bombay. The resulting rise in wealth brought increased urbanisation for the Parisees along with structural changes to their social and religious systems. Back in Salem in 1799 an American East India Marine Society was founded. Mariners belonging to the society were expected to keep journals of their voyagers taking note of the peoples and cultures they encountered and personally to collect artefacts for the museum. One prominent Salem merchant named Jacob Crowninshield who was a friend of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison he was recommended by an English agent in Bombay to use a Parsi broker there named Nusawanji Manekjiwadia. This set the trend for other Yankees to work directly through Parsi merchants whose fees were competitive with those of English merchants. One of Crowninshield's fellow society members named Iqabod Nichols also used Nusawanji as his broker and towards the end of 1799 Iqabod sent his son George in charge of the cargo on his ship the active. George's mission was to sail to Bombay and to return with the cargo of cotton which Iqabod had already requested by letter from Nusawanji. George arrived in Bombay in early 1800 and returned home with this reply it's one of four unpublished letters from Nusawanjiwadia. We don't know who initiated contact between the two but Nusawanji does refer in the letter to a communication that he'd had with Iqabod of nearly two years earlier. In this letter Nusawanji states that he's acted on the directions he received in supplying George and his captain with the items required. He continues down here I hope you will remember me continually by recommending me to your friends coming out to this port to transact in their business as you indulged me therewith. And he concludes On the envelope of this letter Iqabod notes his response to the receipt of this gift of a shawl. It reads it's upside down I'm sorry I couldn't flip it but it reads Mrs Nicholls presents you her particular thanks for the shawl you was so polite as to send by her son George. In his late life autobiography George relates that in return for the first shawl he had presented Nusawanjiwadia with a set of recently published volumes about historic sea voyages from Christopher Columbus to contemporary times and we know that in the autobiography George Nicholls notes that Nusawanjiwadia later sent a larger camel's hair or cashmere shawl which we think is this one that was donated by the family to the it's not the people of the Essex Museum collection but it's the East India Marine Society originally. This gift exchange points to the synergistic and personal nature of the business relationship between Parsies and Americans and this is a significant contrast to the later rather constrained reception of both groups when they go to China to trade. This oil painting of Nusawanjiwadia was one of the earliest donations to the East India Marine Society's Museum in 1803. It was a gift to Captain John Delling the master of a ship that regularly sailed between Salem and Bombay. The portrait was painted by a Chinese artist in the style popular in New England at the time. But we don't know whether it was commissioned by Captain Delling or by Nusawanji himself. Nusawanji obviously sat for it and he chose the manner in which he was depicted. He's wearing the traditional Parsi dress of the time the Jama Picuri, the long white robe with the belt a shawl, a turban and he's sitting next to a table on which there's a piece of paper and an ink stand with a quill and I meant to point out earlier his signature at the bottom of the letter which is in a kind of neat cursive English. He probably didn't write the letter himself but he would have written the signature. We know that in the same year that the painting arrives Nusawanji himself sends a set of clothes similar to those he's wearing in the painting to the East India Marine Society to donate it. Such items as those were displayed in Salem's annual summertime street parade of all the new curiosities that have been brought from far away and members of the society would model the clothes so it's very likely that someone wore Nusawanji's outfit down the streets of Salem and we know that once it was installed in the museum a life size wooden likeness of Nusawanji was made to wear the clothes and we still have just as a footnote we still have the likeness it's in the attic above the marine hall it's inaccessible at the moment but there is a wadiah ancestor living in San Diego who has volunteered to pay for a new set of clothes if they will get the image down from the attic. Not long after this promising forging of relations American trade with India particularly Bombay was badly affected by President Jefferson's implementation of an embargo against both Britain and France at the end of 1807 this was during the Napoleonic wars when both sides were commandeering American ships and press-ganging American sailors but it the embargo backfired and it had a dire impact on this policy commerce and that's reflected in this letter from Nusawanji to Iqabod Nichols dating January the 15th 1809 Nusawanji in this letter hopes that the difficulties between the United States and the British will soon be adjusted and all the obstacles to a return of harmony and free intercourse will be removed so the vessels from Salem will again be dispatched to Bombay. In anticipation of this renewed traffic Nusawanji encloses a current price list of goods in demand particularly the staple things as iron lead, steel, copper cochinil and saffron. Although the embargo was lifted in March of 1809 trade remained uneven and in a letter of November the 25th 1810 Nusawanji writes that only one ship from New York had visited during the entire season. It was in 1810 that the American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions was founded. This was a non-denominational organisation supported mainly by New England Congregationalists and Presbyterians. The English East India Company had prohibited Christian missionaries in India but in July 1813 it was compelled by the British House of Commons to permit entry. The eagerness of the American Board of Missions to gain access to British India can be seen in this painting of a ship leaving Salem for India early in 1812 and that's the year before the ban was lifted. It's got a handful of missionaries on board but the first Protestant mission was not however established in Bombay until December of 1813 under the leadership of the Reverend Gordon Hall. Hall's memoir was one of several missionary accounts that helped to broaden American awareness of Indian religions and culture albeit from a Christian perspective. Back in Salem however the Reverend William Bentley a Congregationalist minister with Unitarian leanings disparaged his compatriot missionaries in Asia as fanatics without common talents who were mostly very ignorant of the language and the culture of the place they were to visit. The Reverend Bentley felt that these zealous folks would be much better served addressing problems at home and this was a criticism that was also later voiced by the Parsi targets of those missionaries. One of Bentley's fellow Salem residents William Rogers a young Harvard educated lawyer who sailed to Bombay in 1817 made similar criticisms of the American missionaries that he encountered there. In particular a husband and wife who were translating the New Testament into Gujarati. The hope of converting Gujarati speakers was William Felt unlikely to be fulfilled. William's insight was partly informed through his dealings with Parsi's in Bombay. His brokers were Naroji and Jahangirgi Nusa Wangiwadia's clever and honest but William notes very serious sons who had continued their father's monopoly on American business in the city. This page of William's journal describes another Wadia family member Jamseci Bamanjiwadia who was master ship builder at the Bombay dockyard. Jamseci was said to be according to William very shrewd, a capital draftsman and a man of great impartiality who arbitrated in Parsi disputes. Of course it was Jamseci who built the first man of war for the British Royal Navy in Bombay and you can just see it behind him in his portrait here. The man of war was called the HMS Minden. It was launched to great fanfare in 1810 and during the war between the Britain and the United States between 1812 and 1814 the Minden at some point became a flag of truth ship and it's thought that it was on the decks of the Minden one night in September 1814 that a local lawyer named Francis Scott Key watched the rockets red glare over Fort McHenry and composed the poem that became the Star Spangled Banner which is now the national anthem of the United States. William our young Harvard trained lawyer from Salem learned first hand about Parsi religion, history and customs from a Bombay Parsi named Shapoji Saurabji but he writes that what he was told matched other verbal accounts given by the Dasturis. William referred to Mulla Faroes whom Dan mentioned earlier he was the Cadmai Dastur of the Dadi Seth Atash Behram William speaks of Mulla Faroes as the most learned of the Parsi's and their high priest but we don't know if the two ever met in person. William's detailed journal written as a part of his membership of the East India Marine Society offers an invaluable account of what Parsi's thought were the most important aspects of their religion to share with others. His narrative of the Zoroastrian settlement in India follows that of the Kese but it also includes a translation of the 16th Sanskrit Shlokas the short explanations of Parsi religion and custom couched in the sacred language of the Hindus and attributed to the initial arrivals. These passages describe Parsi hospitality and civic philanthropy and also define areas of Parsi separateness in matters of religious praxis and domestic ritual particularly in relation to women. The last sloka comprising the Hindu rulers putative and positive response to the newcomers in Gujarat must still have resonated with Parsi's as they position themselves in the Bombay hierarchy of the early 19th century. In this last passage the Hindu Raja wishes joy to those who walk faithfully in the way of Hormuz, Hormasta increase of their generations efficacy of their prayers in remitting sins, abundance of wealth and that the beauties of person and mind which now adorn should continue to distinguish them among nations to the end of time. You can see where that was preserved for so long, can't you? In the decades following William's visit Parsi letters to newspapers and Pontiac records indicate that Anglicisation and Christian missionary activity had become way more pervasive. During the 1830s and 1840s missionaries in Bombay encouraged interreligious debate assuming of course that Christianity would be shown to be superior. These discussions often played out in the Indian press. There's a lengthy public correspondence between the editor of Jame Jamsud Pestongi Monoggi and the Reverend James Mitchell the editor of a Christian periodical in Bombay entitled The Native's Friend. This discussion was published in full in 1845 by a Parsi-owned imprint that someone referred to yesterday Dufta Ashkara. It's a very rare book as I found when I tried to borrow it from an American institution but I did discover a review of the book in notes on a voyage to Brazil and China in 1848 by a US naval physician named William Rushenberger. Rushenberger assessed the debate's outcome so this is an American view on a Parsi-Anglican debate. It seems to me almost certain that all parodies who read this production will be satisfied not only that the Rev J. M. Mitchell has been routed in argument but that the doctrines of Christianity are absurd and fabulous. Consequently, a blow has been struck which must retard the progress of Christianity in Hindustan. I'd like to thank Dan for alerting me to a telling discussion in the book itself on the merits of Thomas Paine's deist views. Of course, Thomas Paine's political theories had been crucial in informing some of the insights of the American revolutionaries and it was obvious that Christian missionaries at the time were concerned about the spread of Thomas Paine's deism in Europe and America and of course now in India. The Rev. Mitchell had goaded Monarchy to name one single American who follows Paine and in response Monarchy had noted that many leading Americans at the turn of the 18th century had espoused Paine's ideals including Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Monarchy then considers Paine's religious and political views in relation to his own beliefs. Though I might not be able to harmonise certain doctrines of the Zendavester with the age of reason yet that is no reason why I should reject all the documents all the doctrines and arguments advanced by Paine. This Parsi contribution to a discussion of the impact of deism in both America and India takes place as the transcendentalist movement was emerging in New England. While Pestongi Monarchy and Bombay claimed to have studied and minutely investigated the evidences of Christianity and the authority of the Bible so in Concord, Massachusetts Ralph Waldo Emerson had read both Ancateel Zendavester and Ancateel's early appraisee of the Zoroastrian religion. Emerson cited the good sentences of both the Zendavester and the Desatyr and we've just heard Dan talking about the Desatyr as a popular New Persian text that was prevalent amongst Parsi's in Bombay and Emerson had a copy of Muller for Rosa's edition of the Desatyr that had been brought across to him in 1818 version that had been brought across to him and there's an English translation at the end that Emerson used. Although Europeans question the authenticity of the Desatyr Emerson claims that he didn't care whether either of these texts the Zendavester or the Desatyr were genuine antiques or modern counterfeits since for him all truth was timeless and eternally relevant. Both Emerson and his neighbour Henry David Thoreau promoted Zoroasta as the originator of an ancient model of enlightenment which belongs to all humanity and therefore is always new. Of course in this universalist scheme there's no need for conversion from one faith to another nor of course was there any impetus to meet actual adherence of other faiths. Sorry, I'm a bit slow with my thing. By the time that Thoreau wrote his famous passage about the pure water of Walden pond mingling with the sacred water of the Ganges ice from the frozen lakes of New England had become one of the most lucrative exports from the US to Bombay, Madras and Calcutta Who would have thought and this is the ice house next to the Bombay dockyard in 1843 so beginning in the 1830s. And it was some time around then Thoreau's writing in 1846 47 and it's sometimes around then that my paternal grandma's ancestor built an ice house to serve in Ralpindi to serve the British in the Murray Hill station. Parsies were not only involved in the American ice industry but also acted on behalf of American companies in exporting opium. Although American sentiment led by Protestant missionaries was strongly opposed to the opium trade American companies such as that of Augustine, Herd and Canton liaised closely with party houses in receiving, storing and marketing the drug in China. Some of these liaisons led to further cross-cultural ventures. In 1848 the captain of a Herd company opium clipper named the frolic accompanied his Parsi broker Khosechi Mawanjiwadiya I'm sorry they were all full of wadias today on an overland trip from Bombay over the western Gat mountains to the Buddhist rock caves of Kali. In a handwritten account Khosechi gives a brief description of his journey with captain Fokon during the week of December the 7th to the 15th 1848 I'm okay I've got one and a half pages Captain Fokon left all the organisational details of the journey to Khosechi who relied on his network of Parsi acquaintances and contacts along the route to provide suitable transport and accommodation. During the trip, Fokon and Khosechi often take tea and refreshments together and departure from Parsi strictures on eating or drinking with non-Parsis that both Lord and De Jong had noted earlier but had said of course was not observed by all. Having travelled by Palenquing to Kandala at the top of the mountain the two then descended to Kali where they minutely examined the interior of the caves before proceeding to Puna. There, a local businessman Adulji Hormuzgi put them up in a house near the count on one of troops in the Bazaar. Over the next couple of days Khosechi and Fokon toured the sites of Puna with their host including the Bazaar, palaces, temples and even the jail. On their last morning they take a carriage to have a view of the Parsi's burial place on a hill adjacent to the English burying ground and presumably this was one of the two Parsi duckmas in Puna the first was built in 1825 and the second larger one in 1835. What's interesting is that Khosechi makes no other comment on this particular visit but he does become really animated when he's describing the auction of an English army captain's furniture which he says was performed exactly as it is done by this class of people in England and he also gets very animated by the elegant appearance and demeanor of their young host who wears English clothes patent leather shoes and who speaks in fluent English. Khosechi's first-hand account of his adventures with a Yankee mariner which went directly to the East India Museum in Salem stands in stark contrast to the portrayal of the fictitious Parsi for dollar in Herman Melville's Moby Dick which appeared three years after Khosechi's account. Here the enigmatic Parsi with a made-up name reminds us that although American narrative from the Mayflower Compact onward promoted a fundamental commitment to the principles of equality in practice a cultural superiority retained. Melville's own ambivalence with regards to the religious praxis of the culturally other is evident in a passage in Moby Dick when he writes that as the blacksmith forges a harpoon the Parsi bowing his head over towards the fire seemed invoking some curse or some blessing on the toil. Well readers I'm there. Well readers in both London and New York in the autumn of 1851 were being introduced to the Parsi on the Piquad an actual Parsi named Ardeshire Khosechi Wadia another Wadia a relative of Nusawanji was visiting the east coast of America on business probably the first recorded Parsi to set foot in America. Not long afterwards a Salem resident named Caroline King described the visit of a real live Parsi with a tall Calico headdress to her home. Although the visitor wore traditional Parsi headwear he had no qualms in sitting down to tea with non-Parsi's. Caroline writes It was a revelation to me that a fire worshipper could take tea like ordinary mortals. She also noted that her visitor spoke much better English than she and her friend. Okay we have the old chestnut of the fire worshipper so she asks and she says that when she asks about it her visitor explains that the worship of the fire was only symbolic he told his hostess when we look upon the sun as the source of all good light, heat and life so when we pray we turn our faces to the sun as the visible type of the invisible spirit which rules the earth this Parsi adaptability to the surrounding culture in terms of learning both its social custom and its language while retaining the essence the fire as it were of the religion. A test to the pragmatism that European writers such as Lord and De Jong had remarked upon over two centuries earlier. Thank you. I would like to address Mr Dan Sheffield on a trip to Moscow in 1968 my late husband and I had the opportunity of meeting the late Ahmad Mirfender who was one of Iran's most distinguished diplomats and came to respect his independent thinking in world replete with psycho fancy so when he died in exile in the United States about ten years ago I wanted to pay homage to him through his illustrious answers that theosophist Mirfender gave the school of Isfahan and that inevitably brought me to the Corban article on Azar Kevan that you mentioned now it's ten years back and it wasn't a scholarly article but my impression then was that one of the main formative influences on Azar Kevan's development of esoteric taught was through his correspondence with Mirfender Eski Can I go ahead and respond? The sources list Mirfender Eski as being one of the students of Azar Kevan and that Mirfender Eski according to the the Dabaston had studied with Azar Kevan and one I think yes that's correct and I think that one can put Fender Eski's translation of the Ogavashista into sort of the Kevani context of seeking out religious knowledge contact with members of all religious schools I mean if Mirfender Eski says that the Ogavashista is a commentary in the Quran which is very similar to what Kevan is doing with Zoroastrian texts as well so yeah I mean I think that they are very much informed one another's thinking and Fender Eski I think continues Kevan's teaching into slightly further down to the 17th century but yeah it's very important to recognize this connection Dan with reference to the Bahadur Dal Wujud which you mentioned and that one tends to be in a fix every Sunayan often which is only but natural because in Indian Sufi literature of this period there is consistent conflation between that and Bahadur Dal the unicity of contemplation and also it's interesting when you mentioned in one of the parlays after the chap leaves he tactfully mentions well it's a pseudo scripture that definitely comes down from classical Abbasid heresiography where the consistent referendum was for the pseudo scripture and and briefly before the 2002 such as the tyranny of labels I don't think in Karachi they call it any more in the in the in the back row welcome sorry my question is initially to is this that recently in the UK there was a sale of of a house in Harrogate of the call an aristocrat policy called more popular you know now in the narration of your talk my question is what during the episode of the Prince of Wales was it when also the riots took place against the parties this particular episode was that Bamanjig armed the parties with you know with ammunitions and revolvers was there a similar case of the other riots whereby the parties were arming themselves to protect themselves or were they just because of the small minority they just could not take on the majority in that sense the best of my knowledge parties in India have never sort of had armed conflict so therefore the riots that I've been reading about and that I've talked about in my paper this afternoon talks about riots minus any kind of war machinery as it were so the 1851 riots that happened it was pure skirmish with the parties always being at the receiving end you see I think because we are such a small community we can't afford the luxury of arms and therefore I would say to you that armed conflict certainly hasn't crossed my horizon and any of the riots that I've actually read about and this is a quick question to Dan I mean there was a recent term well some years ago there was a monograph there was a monograph comparing Azarkaywan to another sort of very modern day party mystic by the name of Mayor Baba and there was a direct connection with the family link between the two streams yeah this is the book by Kevin Shepard and his sort of who himself has sort of mystical leanings in associations with the Mayor Baba School and I think that this has to do with the attempt of many modern Indian mystics especially those with Parsi ties to attempt a genealogical or a spiritual connection to Azarkaywan we know that Azarkaywan appoints a sort of spiritual successor he dies and sort of leaves the sort of Sufi order who may or may not be his son but as for any sort of further progeny of Azarkaywan it's pure speculation and since we know that he practiced extreme asceticism and chastity it's very unlikely that he actually had physical offspring if we were to believe his own narrative. Do we have any more questions? Just here. I have a question for Dan Shepard You briefly mentioned Dine Elahi the architect of this Dine Elahi was Abul-Fazlal Al-Lami who was a Muslim deeply affected by Hekma Tuleshaw and a friend of Akbar who was pushing him towards universal peace and Dine Elahi is a divine religion but by drawing a lot on Zoroastrian teaching to the extent that he was sometimes accused of being in my juice now Azarkaywan seems to be the opposite he seems to be a Zoroastrian trying to create a new universal religion and both use a very distinct vocabulary Abul-Fazl has a completely new style of Persian with new vocabulary and Azarkaywan seems to have created a new vocabulary so and I have it I cannot believe that Azarkaywan had all these ideas from Safavid Iran I think it seems that he developed it in India and so my question is do you think that they interacted together and him and did he come to his religion after the death of Abul-Fazl or were they doing it together at the same time This is a fantastic question I focused on the Iranian connections in this talk simply to sort of try to diffuse some of the ideas of Korban which focuses exclusively on India but of course we have correspondence between Azarkaywan and Abul-Fazl within the corpus of Kevani literature we have letters written from Abul-Fazl to Azarkaywan and the texts say that Azarkaywan responded to Abul-Fazl in letters that if you read them if you read them right to left they read in Persian if you change the noktas they read in Arabic if you flip them upside down they read in Hindi if you change the noktas they read in Arabic which is quite fantastic but I think that as Mawin I think rightfully points out that of course Akbar is developing his Din-e-alahi within the context of the Indian subcontinent but still the intellectual framework with which he does so very much draws upon the earlier sort of timurid charisma of the astrological sort of dispensations of the great conjunction I mean is a direct millennial reference by the court of Akbar and I think again the sort of unique vocabularies developed by both schools again have to do with sort of the relationship between Harufi ideas of millennialism and messianism and in the relationship between language and messianism entails that one sort of develop a the true meta language of the divine which comes out in different ways in both schools but obviously influences one another Well I think it's time to draw this session to a close but as one of the co-curators of the exhibition I hope you'll forgive me you'll indulge me to plug the exhibition and also the catalogue I mean for instance one of the items in the exhibition is this tabistan that Dunshaffield has quoted for where you will see images of Jupiter and Saturn which have never been shown before and several people have said to me how difficult it is to read the captions and I just like to point out that in the catalogue every item is described in the catalogue and the numbers on the captions relate to the numbers in the catalogue so if you were confused about what was on display and you have a catalogue if you look under the number you will find some text to hopefully illuminate you though I must admit we did in fact describe Azar Kevan as a Zoroastrian high priest but I'm sure you'll forgive that thank you very much