 Dear colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, the object I'm going to discuss would certainly have been included in the Soas exhibition if its relevance to Zoroastrian heritage had not been fully recognized only a few months ago, too late to obtain it as a loan. This silver plate has been kept since before 1858 in the Cabinet des Medailles of the National Library in Paris. It was acquired from Prince Saltikov and was probably found in the southern Ural, like most Sasanian and Peri-Sasanian plates acquired in this period by museums, especially the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg. This plate has been traditionally known as the Anaitis Plate according to the old and incorrect assumption that most nude or half-nude female figures on Sasanian dishes depict or symbolize Anaita, goddess of the waters. In fact, the central motif shows a lady in transparent dress wearing a pearl necklace and seated and a griffin which combines animal elements from both the earth and the air. To the earth belong the lion's body and the gold horns. To the air belong the beak of a bird of prey and the wing whose base is hardly visible on the right shoulder. The tail ends with a palm leaf and thus refers to the rim of plants. The upper and lower axis of the dish are marked by an identical figure combining a moon crescent and the bare head of a young man. Four dancing couples are evenly distributed around the inner surface of the dish. Among the eight characters, six have long plates covered by a veil or ornamented by floating ribbons. They are certainly women. This is probably also the case of the two other characters who have short, uncovered hair but are also dressed as women. I shall now describe these eight figures. For reasons which will be justified subsequently, I proceed anticlockwise and take as a starting point the couple to the left. The character on the left of this couple holds a lotus flower in one hand and in the other one, a bird, apparently a falcon. The woman who faces him holds an incense burner. Of all characters, she's the only one who is clearly not dancing for her feet are covered with folds at the bottom of her dress. In the space to her right, there is a cup. In the second couple, both women have transparent upper clothes showing their breasts. The one to the left makes a salutation or an auspicious gesture with her palm while the one on her right presents a bowl whose contents are indicated by a series of small punched circles. The astral symbol is set between them at head level. In the third couple, the character on the left with short curly hair holds a staff or a spear in his right hand and a torch in his left hand. The wavy lines of the flames are visible. The woman facing him presents a cup held in her right hand while the left hand holds the base of a goat's skin which rests on her shoulder. The fourth couple at the top of the composition comprises two women. The one on the left makes a salutation or a respectful gesture with her pointed finger and the other one holds a bucket. The astral symbol reappears between them. The first elaborate comments on this plate were presented by Prudence Harper in 1971. She identified the Greco-Roman models of the composition. The woman seated on the griffin recalls a series on a griffin or Dionysos on a panther. In the later case, one can compare, among other examples, the badminton sarcophagus where Dionysos on his panther is surrounded by characters symbolizing the seasons. On some other images, for example, this late Roman mosaic from Ravenna, the seasons are dancing. This is how Prudence Harper proposed to interpret the dancer on our plate, though not going into any detail. In 1996, Boris Marschak offered a more detailed study in a section of his masterly book, Gilbert Shetsudes' Orients. Firstly, he pointed to some North Indian influences in the costumes with their long shoals recalling saris, as well as in the thick plates of the ladies and in the various dance steps. Moreover, he identified one character as symbolizing the festival of the Khurshido d'Archdashn, which, according to Biruni, was particularly popular in Tahriristan, the ancient country of Batria in northern Afghanistan. Consequently, he attributed the plate not to Sasanian Iran, but to Tahriristan, which was exposed to Indian influences in old periods, including the Sasanian one. As for the central figure, he compared a plate found at Thomas in the Ural and now in the Hermitage. Here, the decoration consists of fish and plants symbolizing various steers of the earth. While the lady plates the flute and rides a pacific griffin, which, like the one on our plate, is a combination of a lion, a goat, a bird, and has a plant tail. According to Marschak, this figure should be interpreted as an allegory of the earth, rather than as a particular goddess. It can be noted, however, that on the wooden panels from Kourouk-Tobay, near Otrar, on the Sirdarya, a goddess seated on a griffin throne holds an ushery, and should therefore be identified as Spandarmat, the goddess protectress of the earth, who, according to Middle Persian texts, at the time of the last judgment, hands over to Hormaz the bones which have been entrusted to her. Marschak's main contribution to the explanation of this plate was his recognition of the dancing couples, not merely as general symbols for the seasons, but as personifications of Zoroastrian festivals, carrying specific attributes associated with them. I shall soon present the details of his interpretation, but beforehand, it is necessary to sum up briefly our present knowledge of the Zoroastrian calendar in the east during the period six, seven century to which Harper and Marschak have attributed the plate and stylistic criteria. This knowledge has recently progressed thanks to the study by François de Blois and Nicolas Simps-Williams of dating formulas on bacteria and documents from the Kingdom of Rome in Bactria. Here, as everywhere in the Iranian world, because of the missing quarter of a day in the calendar year, the months had advanced by eight or nine positions from the original seasonal point they had occupied at the time of the creation of the calendar in the Achaemenid period. This implies, for example, that no rules, this is the original situation, and no rules having moved forward by three quarters of a year now fell in June and July instead of March. This is a situation in the sixth, seventh century. We also know that contrary to Sogdiana and Corasmia, Toraristan had officially adopted the calendar reform instituted in about 470 under the Sasanian king Peros. This reform did not change the succession of the month, but pushed back no rules in the main festivals by eight months, thus re-establishing their initial position in the solar year. No rules seems to be missing here. Yes, it was on top. No rules actually is reinstituted in his former position, but in a different month. Unfortunately, the reform failed in two respects. Firstly, as no other correction was attempted in the 11th century, the calendar year started at once to move ahead of the solar year. Secondly, people tended to keep to their former habits, and the new dates of festivals were not generally accepted. Some of them remained in the place they had occupied before the reform. Others were duplicated at an eight month distance, various solutions being adopted in the different regions. This chaotic situation is still reflected in the most detailed account we have of Zoroastrian festivals in the post-Sasanian period that of Albiruni in his chronology, composed in various stages during the first half of the 11th century. It follows that when we try to link the depiction of a festival with a particular time of the year, we have to take into account four possibilities, pre-reformed date, post-reformed date, duplication, or a purely seasonal festival independent from the structure of the calendar. Let us now return to Marshaq's interpretation. He considered that this figurative calendar had to be read anticlockwise, with which I agree, and he took as a starting point the couple at the bottom, which he assumed to represent no rules then in early summer, hence their light clothes. According to him, the astral symbol associated with this couple is not linked to the solstice, not to the equinox, but simply symbolizes no rules. In the same way, the identical symbol in the opposite position would indicate the festival of Miragon, which took place six and a half months later, and here would be symbolized by the bucket containing water mixed with haoma. Between no rules in summer and Miragon in winter, there is the late autumn festival of Khorshid-Odhar-Jashn, which, according to Biruni, was the main fire festival in Toharistan. It is here indicated by the character holding a torch. Following Miragon, the last couple is associated with two spring festivals. One is the Jashni Niloufar, a festival mentioned by Biruni and attached not to a fixed calendar date, but to the seasonal blossoming of the water lilies in June. Still, according to Marshak, the other spring festival would be Sade, the other great fire festival, occurring 50 days and 50 nights before no rules. Hence its name meaning the Andrets. According to medieval descriptions, Sade was celebrated with bonfires, where birds and various animals covered with pitch were released. Marshak recognized an allusion to this practice in attributes distributed between both characters of the couple. To the left, a bird, and to the right, the incense burner, which he interpreted as a fire holder instead. At this point, the calendar circle is complete. While admitting that Marshak's contribution has definitely put the interpretation of his images on the right path and accepting several of his identifications, I have to express some points of disagreement. At first glance, it seems strange that no rules occupy the bottom position with the dancers being seen upside down. Also, some of his interpretations of specific attributes are far from being straightforward. There is no particular reason to associate a bucket of water, either with miragon or with the haoma ritual. For in this ritual, the mixing of haoma and the water takes place in the pestle where the haoma tricks have been crushed. Also, the symbols supposedly representing the festival of Sade, no, excuse me here, are not convincing. The closed object held by the woman on the right is hardly a fire holder. And the bird opposite is probably a falcon which does not at all recall medieval descriptions of Sade nor images. Actually, on these images and descriptions, the fire is lit in the open and the birds released are pigeons or peacocks, not falcons. Therefore, I propose to recognize this couple as the true depiction of the New Year festivals instead of the following couple as Marshaq would have us believe. Indeed, the falcon is mentioned in connection with no rules in medieval descriptions. In the Mahasin al-Nairu's while miragon, nor reattributed to the ninth century author Al-Kisrawi, it is stated that in Sasanian times, a white hawk was let free on each day of the Noru's cycle. In the Noru's Nami conventionally attributed to Omar Khayyam, a hawk is listed among the offerings presented to the kings by the chief of the Magi on the first day of Noru's. As in the period to which Ordish belongs, Noru's fell in June or early July, the water lily flower could actually indicate the Jashni Nilufar which occurred in June as proposed by Marshaq. As for the lady to the right, there are two reasons for associating her with the flower digon, the festival for the dead which was held in the 10 days preceding Noru's. Firstly, she does not dance and she is the most modestly dressed of all characters, with her long veil and her feet covered, which looks appropriate if she's linked with the commemoration of the dead. Secondly, what she holds is in fact an incense burner and according to Biruni during the flower digon, I quote, they fumigate the houses with juniper so that the dead can enjoy the smell. A difficulty could arise from the fact that Biruni associates the flower digon celebrated in Persia, not with the Noru's of the kings, the Noru's celebrated at the dead it occupied before Perot's reform, but with the reformed Noru's of the Magi which occurred eight months later. In the neighbor country of Sokhjana, however, Noru's was consistently celebrated at its ancient date and Zoroastrians of Tocharistan might well have followed this custom. An ordish, this couple is preceded by a cut which Al-Kisrawi and the Noru's Name mentioned as being also presented to the king on the day of Noru's. It is also an attribute of Yima considered as the king who established Noru's. Pursuing anti-clockwise, we find a couple in summer clothes. The major festival which then marked the end of summer was Tiragon, which Biruni describes at its pre-reformed date, which it also occupies here. Biruni mentions that a special dish made of ungrounded wheat and fruits was consumed on this occasion. I propose to recognize it in the bowl presented by the lady on the right. So now the astral symbol can no longer symbolize Noru's. It must be associated with the late summer festival. It could well be the autumn equinox which closes the summer in the same way as the symbol at the other end of the dish would be the spring equinox. This is consistent with the fact that the symbols are identical. If they were meant to depict the solstices, they would be contrasted. They express the equal distribution between the night, figured by the moon present, and the day, figured by the young man. For the following couple, I fully agree with Marchak's identification of the Khorshidadar jashen symbolized by the torch. But contrary to him, I consider it as the only fire festival shown on the dish. Marchak did not commend the attributes of the lady in front, a cup and a goat's skin. They clearly elude to wine. They, and not the bucket in the following scene, indicate the autumn festival of Miragon, the only occasion when, according to the testimony of Ktesias, the king appeared drunk in public. We are now left with the last couple for which the only attribute is a bucket. This is just a water bucket, and it alludes to Aubrey Zaghan, the water-spilling festival which took place on the last day of the Eleventh Month and when people threw water at each other. This festival is mentioned at exactly the same date by Chinese travelers at Samarkand in the early seventh century. And I have proposed elsewhere to recognize it on a wall painting from a temple of Pengekent. People throwing water, half-nude people throwing water to each other. As suggested before, the astral symbol here stands for the spring equinox marking the end of winter. The yearly cycle can now start again with Frauardigan and Norouz. I shall now try to place the distribution of these figures in the calendar as well as in the solar year more precisely. Each couple symbolizes a group of three months, not necessarily corresponding with what we consider the limits of the four seasons. In order to pinpoint the system in the solar year, we have two guiding marks, the seasonal festival of the water lilies which took place in June, independently from the movements of the calendar and is here closely associated with Frauardigan and Norouz. And the summer clothes of the figures representing the following period. As Marschak considered that group corresponded to Norouz, he put this festival in July and accordingly he dated the object to the period when the new year fell in July, that is the second half of the sixth century. If in fact Norouz belongs to the previous block of months, as I have tried to show, we should consider a slightly later stage in the history of the calendar. Supposing Norouz occurred before June, it would lead us to the eighth century which seems too late from the stylistic point of view. Supposing it occurred after June, it would push the following block of months after the summer, which though the corresponding dancing couple clearly were summer clothes. Second altogether Norouz in June seems to be the best option, which leads us to a period between the last quarter of the sixth century and the end of the seventh century. Assuming that the equinoxes depicted in the middle of the second and fourth couples of dancers occurred in the middle of the period they symbolize, I propose the following system. The first group comprises the 12th, first and second months of the Zoroastrian calendar and at that time corresponds roughly to May, June, July. It includes the Frawardigrand, Norouz and the Waterlilies Festival. The second group comprises the third, fourth and fifth months and corresponds roughly to August, September, October. It includes the autumn equinox in the middle and Tiraghan at about the same time. The third group comprises the sixth, seventh and eighth months and corresponds roughly to November, December, January. It includes the Audard-Jashne, Rochille Audard-Jashne at the very beginning and Miraghan in the middle. The fourth group comprises the ninth, tenth and eleventh months and corresponds roughly to February, March, April. It includes the spring equinox in the middle and Abrezaghan at the very end. If the equinoxes actually occurred in the middle of the fourth and tenth Zoroastrian months respectively, then the period when the dish was produced can be narrowed down to the second half of the second century. This is precisely the date which Prudence Harper had proposed 40 years ago. To conclude, this document provides fundamental evidence for the existence and status of Zoroastrianism in Tokaristan in the period between the fall of the Sasanian Empire and the completion of the Arab conquest of the region. I do not intend to deny the importance of Buddhism in Tokaristan at this time, nor the protection it continued to enjoy from many rulers, but I would like to suggest that this importance has been overestimated due to the overwhelming proportion of texts, monuments, and images issued from this religion. Zoroastrianism being still largely taught orally on producing less images, moreover, often indistinguishable from the Hindu models in the East has left less tangible traces. On the dish discussed in this paper, the choice of some symbols seems to point to a court milieu. The falcon and cup presented to the king at Noru's are the allusion to wine drinking at Miragon. The very high quality of execution, though quite different from dishes previously executed in the Sasanian royal style, also speaks in favor of this assumption. At the same time, we can realize more and more how Biruni is a safe guide to recognize festivals and their symbols in the original diversity. Thank you. Thank you very much, Francois. Thank you. I'd like to thank Sarah Stewart and the other organizers, Alan Williams and Alva Tinser, for inviting me to give a paper at this conference. And I would also like to add that I am both an outsider and an insider, so please have mercy with me. I am an outsider because I'm not Zoroastrian, but I am an insider because I'm Iranian, so. This set of modern glazed tiles that you see on the screen come from Parsi, Mumbai, and they are now in the British Museum. They depict a series of iconographic features that originally date to ancient Persia, but have become symbols of modern Zoroastrianism. And here I'm very grateful to Fyruza Mystery for guiding me through the computer, through the various images, and also Malcolm Dippu. Thank you. These are the image of the Prophet Zarathustra, the winged figure, the Fravashi of Farvahar, the legendary King Lohrasp, the Holy Fire in Otishtan, and also architectural details such as human-headed gateway figures and column capitals with bull protomies. Not all these symbols had Zoroastrian connections in the first place. For example, the human-headed gateway figures were inspired by the Lamassu of Assyrian art, but others such as the Holy Fire and the winged symbol are associated with Zoroastrianism. Let us now look at each of these symbols and tiles and consider their origin and religious significance. The image of Zarathustra, which Professor Russell will also talk about, derives from the fourth-century AD relief of the Sasanian King Shapo of the Second at Tarabustan near Kermanshaw. On the left stands the Zoroastrian Divine Being, or Yazata Mithra, with his radiated crown. This image inspired in the 19th century representations of the Prophet. The winged symbol is often shown in ancient Persian art of 500 to 280 BC. Here, it symbolizes either Ahura Mazda, the wise lord, or the kingly glory, the Khwana, or Farahizadi. On all Achaemenid reliefs, the winged figure appears prominently in the presence of the King of Kings, as seen, for example, on the Beesutun Relief of Darius the Great of circa 520 BC at the top. It has also, as I said, become a symbolic icon of Zoroastrians, but I would like to add also of non-Zoroastrian Iranians of all denominations, particularly the young generation after the revolution of 1979. Then, we have the image of King Lohrasp of the Avestan tradition, and Ferdowsi Shahnameh, who was the father of King Vishtaspa, Kavi Vishtaspa, the patron of Zarathustra. And on the Parsi tile that you see, Lohrasp wears a white priestly outfit but holds a bow like an ancient Persian king in his hand. He resembles Darius the Great and other ancient Persian kings who are always shown in profile, holding a bow, a symbol of kingship, in their hand. At Nakhsha Rostam, above his tomb, Darius is worshiping in front of a fire altar with a winged figure facing him. And you can see in the middle the drawing by Sir Robert Care Porter at the beginning of the 19th century. The holy fire and fire holder derive from a mixture of Achaemenid and Sasanian iconography, as seen on stone reliefs, seals, and also coins. But this modern image of the fire holder seems to be more like Achaemenid-Otterstans. The architectural setting is a mixture of the Achaemenid gate of all nations, as seen at Persepolis with the bullman on either side, and also the Sasanian arch of Khosrow II at Tar-Bustan. Another popular modern Zoroastrian image with no original Zoroastrian iconographic connotation is an audience seen with the legendary King Jamshid described here on the tile as Jamshid-e-Jam. But of course Jamshid has a very special position in the Avesta and also in the Shah-Nameh, the king par excellence, the king who introduces Noruz. And he appears on this Gajar tile very much looking like an ancient Persian king, as seen below on a fourth century, fifth century relief at Persepolis in an audience seen. Now we shall turn our attention to the Zoroastrian iconography in the Sasanian and Parthian period. The Sasanian kings who came to power in 224 AD, 224, were Zoroastrians. And as described by Professor Abdu-Young in an article on regional variations in Zoroastrianism in case of the Parthians, from the beginning of the Sasanian Empire, the Zoroastrian religion was part of a new imperial project. Sasanian imperial art, and I would like to emphasize this, please, please make a distinction between art and also the religion. I mean, there are many, many illustrations in the art of the Sasanian, the Kemenid Sasanian, a Parthian Sasanian period, which may not be seen as religiously correct. But I believe that the Parthians and the Sasanians who were neighbors of the Romans were much influenced by imperial iconography. And the messages that were given on their rock reliefs coins, which were circulated not amongst the ordinary people, but amongst the aristocracy and also rulers outside their empire, had to be strong and had to show them, present them as the holder of the Khvarnah, the phar. The royal art of the Sasanian rulers of Iran show the king as the holder of the Khvarnah. He is the legitimate ruler, the rightful ruler. He is the possessor of the phar. Mithra, various Yazartas like Mithra, Varathragna, who is the same as Bahram, Anahita, and even the royal falcon, the Varagna, have a duty to protect the rightful king and his glory, the Khvarnah. A variety of symbols, such as the radiate crown of Mithra, the wild boar of the victorious warrior god, Varathragna, the wing symbolizing Khvarnah, and all these symbol, they emphasize the status of the Sasanian king of kings as chosen by Ahura Mazda and the Yazartas. The king is described as a Mazda worshiper in monumental inscriptions in texts and on coin legends. The back of Sasanian coins, as you see, depicts from the very first Sasanian king, Adeshir, the first who came to the throne in 224, a Zoroastrian firewater. And in fact, at the time of Adeshir, it's not just the firewater, but it's the firewater and the throne. So the message is very clear that kingship and religion are one and united. It is during the reign of Bahram the first and Bahram the second in the 270s that we encounter the figure of the high priest, Khairdeer. In his inscription at Nakhsharo Stam, he writes, Hormoz, meaning Hormoz the second, king of kings gave me cap and belt and named me Khairdeer the Moabed of Ormazd. And from province to province, place to place, the rights of the gods were much increased and many Bahram fires were established. And after Bahram, king of kings, son of Sharpur went to the place of gods and Bahram, king of kings, son of Bahram, meaning Bahram the second, made me Moabat and judge of the whole empire. He made me the director and authority, Padiq Shah, over the fire of Anahid Adishir and Anahid the lady in Astaghur. And he named me Khairdeer, soul saver of Bahram, Moabed of Ormazd. And from province to province, place to place throughout the empire, the rights of Ormazd and the gods, Yazatan, became more important and the Mazdayasdian religion and Magans were greatly honored in the empire. And great blows befell Ahriman and the demons. Now we may say that actually Khairdeer goes over the top and exaggerates and not everything that is described here was really done by him. But nevertheless, I think he gives a very clear indication of the line and how the state religion was implemented. Until the very end of the Sasanian period, royal Sasanian art and iconography were inseparable and the Avestan concept of the Khwana of Fah was crucial for the legitimacy of the king to present himself as the rightful ruler of Iran Shah. Just as the Sasanians who were Zoroastrians and Persians from the area of Persepolis, the earlier local kings of Persis or Pars also produced an iconography which is clearly in tune with Zoroastrianism. Coins of Persis of about 280 BC to AD 200 show a variety of worshiping scenes. The king standing in front of a sacred building with or without the winged symbol or the king holding consecrated rods or the barsam and standing in front of the sacred fire in the later periods. Also present are astral symbols as well as the royal falcon with or without a diadem and this is very actually important because the falcon or if we would like to see it as the Varagna bird is one of the key elements in the protection of the Khwana as described in the Yashd. From about 140 BC, the kings of Persis came under the yoke of the Arsakit Parthians and you see here at the top two very well-known and important rulers, Mithradates or Mehdat, the first and Mehdat, the second on the right. And they ruled over a vast empire stretching from the river Euphrates in the east, now in modern Iraq and Syria, to northeastern Iran and southeastern Iran and Pakistan. The Arsakits were an Iranian dynasty from the northeast, from Khorasan. So culturally, as also Abdul Young has described in his article, they came from a different background than the Sasanians. So their religious policy was different but one also has to bear in mind, which is very important, that under the Parthians, as under also the earlier Achaemenids, there was no such thing as a state religion. State religion does not really set in until under the Sasanians and under the Achaemenids we have documents of various gods being worshipped and sacrifices made to them. So people were allowed to worship whatever they wanted. And although the kings show their allegiance to Ahura Mazda, like Darius does in his inscription, but it does not mean that Zoroastrianism was the only religion. Now, already in the early part of the Parthian, or our circuit period, we have evidence of Zoroastrianism being a major religion. And we have, for example, the Ostraca from Nisa, the first capital of the Arsakits now in modern Turkmenistan, which give you evidence of the Zoroastrian calendar. We also have, for example, textual evidence from a first century AD classical source Isidor of Karaks, who says that an ever-burning fire was kept at Ashak, which is one of the early Arsakit Parthian capitals. And we also read in the Dengkart, a 10th century compendium of Zoroastrian beliefs and customs, that King Valach, which you see at the bottom of Vologazus, the first who ruled from AD 51 to 78, instructed all the provinces of his empire to preserve versions of the Avestan books and teachings, both in oral and written form, which had been dispersed as a result of Alexander's pillage and looting between 333 to 330 BC. Evidence of fire altars can also be found in Arsakit Parthian art. We see, for example, on a coin of Aravana or Atavanas, the first on the back, a figure standing next to a fire altar and holding his hand over it, and the isolated relief of Vologazus, the third, the second, and the third, in the second century AD shows the king standing again, another king standing in front of the fire altar and sacrificing. In the first century BC, the iconography of Parthian coin becomes very much geared to show that the king received his symbol of kingship from a divine being. And although the iconography is very Hellenistic inspired, which is not a surprise because the Parthians came after the Seleucid and also the Parthians ruled over an area in the western part of their empire, which was heavily Macedonian populated as a result of Alexander's conquest and the Seleucids. But the contents of the messages, I believe, is very Iranian or can be also understood Zoroastrian because the king is always shown receiving a diadem, a symbol of kingship, from a goddess, which could be very easily in the guise of a Hellenistic goddess, but representing a Zoroastrian or Iranian azata. I mean, we know that from the Yash that, as I mentioned before, Anahita, Mithra, Ashi, and Varathrugna all protected the Khvarnah, the glory. So there is no reason why in the Parthian period they presented divine beings and thought of classical goddesses or gods when they had their own Zoroastrian-Iranian divine beings. And to prove that actually there are Zoroastrian divine beings represented on coins, I'm showing you these magnificent gold coins from the collection of the British Museum from ancient bacteria, which is sort of modern Northern Afghanistan and Central Asia, of the Kushan period, that is from around AD 110 to 230 AD, the Kushan kings were originally Iranians and they worshipped a whole mixture of Zoroastrian and also Hindu gods. Irrelevant to us are these with Zoroastrian names and you can see on the top left is Olagno, Olagno is the same as Varathrugna, then on the right is Atesho, that is fire, atash, or atar. Then you have Pharaoh, then you have Mero, which is Mithra, Ma'u, which is the moon, and you have Nanna, and here I see a clear really link between Nanna of bacteria who was probably inspired from Mesopotamian Nanna but also from Iranian Zoroastrian Anahita. And at the bottom right, Firuze, that's for you, that's Zoroaspo on horseback, and there is even a representation inscribed as Ahura Mazda on the far right. So looking to the west of the Parthian Empire, the kingdom of Komargini in southeastern Turkey also produced a distinctive form of religious dualism which had evolved by the first century BC with Mithradat is the first Kalinikos and his son Antiochus the first. They claim divinity and descent from a combined Persian and green ancestry and worshiped a mixture of Iranian and Greek divine beings. At Asamir on Nymphios and at Nimrodda, images of the king in Iranian dress are shown in the presence of Zeus or Mazdes, Apollo, Mithra, Helios, Hermes, and Heracles. Greek inscriptions from Nimrodda, the dynastic shrine of Antiochus, refer to his Persian and Macedonian ancestry and a relief from his mausoleum depicts his Iranian ancestors, Darius and Xerxes on the left Darius and Xerxes while an inscription from Asamir on Nymphios says that he ordered the priest to wear Persian dress on his and his father's birthdays. Here at Comergini, Verathragna, the victorious warrior god or as we read about in the Vahram Yash or Yash 14 is merged with Aris. And there is also the statue, a second century statue of a bronze figure from Selukia on the Tigris in Mesopotamia and our modern Iraq dating to the Parthian period which also gives actually both names of Heracles and Verathragna and Apollo here. So we know that this was quite common in that period. An Iranian or Zoroastrian iconography and I'm saying all because we're not very certain is also found in the art of Elimius in the region of present day Eize or Mala Amir in the Bahtiari region of southwestern Iran. Here local kings who received their crown from their Parthian overlords have left behind a number of rock reliefs where symbols such as the diadem, the royal falcon suggest the importance of the Khwana, the glory of the king received from God. And they are represented also in the presence of divine beings. At the site of Bader Nishande near Masjid-e-Soleiman an architectural relief shows a scene with a male figure in elaborate belted tunic and trousers at the bottom now in the National Museum of Iran standing near by a fire and sacrificing over the altar. His tall tiara or kola suggests it could be the Parthian king of kings himself. This relief may be dating to AD 200. Coins from Elimius, like Parthian coins also show a whole range of divine symbols particularly symbols that are connected with kingship and the diadem plays a very important role sometimes shown on its own but is often also carried in the beak of the royal falcon or the Varagna bird. And we have also representations of figures with radiated crowns which could be the Yazata Mithra. Now the evidence presented to you suggests that the iconography of the Parthian period should also be understood within an Iranian Zoroastrian context. Just because the Arsikid Parthians adopted the Greek language of the iconography and also used Greek for their official documents does not mean that they were not Iranians or not Zoroastrians or that they were lover of the Greeks. This term is definitely introduced for political reasons in order to keep the Macedonian population in the western part of the empire under control. To conclude, it is interesting that modern Zoroastrian symbols all derive from Sasanian and Achaemenid iconography but for once this is not because the Sasanians destroyed much of Parthian evidence which they did but not in this case but this is because in the 19th century when Zoroastrian iconographic images were chosen, Sasanian rock reliefs and the Achaemenid ruins of Persepolis, Naxarostam and Bissutun were well known but Parthian art was less visible and less well known. And if you're interested in my talk and generally the sort of understanding of religious royal iconography I would like to invite you to a small exhibition that I'm creating at the British Museum. It opens on the 24th of October to the public and it's called, Why is Men from the East Zoroastrian Traditions in Persia and Beyond? Why this title? Because I wanted to make it a bit jazzy. It runs over Christmas. Persia is always very appealing to the public. Iran is a bit frightening. And just to show you how far I'm going I'm actually showing this Christian reliquary chess which dates to 1250 and presenting it as a Zoroastrian iconography because if you look very, very carefully the first magus, the first priest has his hand covered in the Iranian Zoroastrian tradition and please stop this quarrel about insiders and outsiders because I think our subject is suffering enough and this will only put us steps and steps back. Thank you. Dear colleagues, although the records of Iranian and classical antiquity abound, there's no actual labeled image of the prophet that we know before the Italian Renaissance. This isn't because as you've seen that we lack for visual imagery or iconography in the Zoroastrian tradition and the recent discoveries of Sogdian and other Central Asian religious art have enriched the iconographic record. Even before that we knew that the Armenians and Comagenians had image shrines containing images like this of the Yazatas that were influenced in style to some degree by Greco-Roman art. This is the Hierothec and the sacred funerary enclosure of Nemrut Dakh from the first century BC in southeastern Anatolia. There are also bar reliefs. This is at Nemrut Dakh, too, and Arsimea on the Nimfeis. Where a king or ancestor is shown shaking hands with various gods, in this case Mithra, or receiving a large ring which sometimes is adorned with trailing ribbons. The statues in the round that face the fire altars of Nemrut Dakh are cyclopean in scale, but as you saw just now with truly the reliefs that flank the processional ways are on a human scale. It will be seen presently that Zoroastrians have used this standard image of Mithra in particular to represent the prophet Zarathustra. I'd like to say a few things about these particular symbols. The ring that the god offers kings is thought to be the sun-like divine glory Khorna that's bestowed on just and rightful rulers and taken away from wicked ones. Sometimes it's envisioned as a bird or a ram and thus described in texts. And if indeed this ring is Khorna then it's a representation of realities that belong to the spiritual, the Manog world. But the ring might also, perhaps simultaneously, be viewed as an object on a mundane, invisible level. That is the diadem. Middle Persian has two words for this. Didem or Pusag, Sogdian of Se and the Armenian long word Pesach. This was very much part of the gaitig world. It was part of the coronation. So it could be a simple depiction from life. The diadem was tied around the crown at the time of coronation. At the ceremony of investiture an Iranian king was not fully enthroned until this act had been completed. And in the Arsacid era, a noble house held in hereditary perpetuity the office of coronant. In Parthian Iran it seems that the Suren clan were the Taj-Bakhsh, the crown bestowers. In Armenia only a Bagratuni nacharar could be the Togadir, the coronant. And on the reliefs it's a divinity who hands the ring to the king, not a nobleman. And he does not slip it over his crowned head. He merely hands it to him. So if indeed we're looking at investiture scenes, they're symbolic. In which a Hurra Mazda, a spirit even among spirits as our Oastrian text stress is made visible. So we deal either with a metaphor or the Manog world parallel to our own or perhaps with a funerary image and this is a possibility I'd like to explore in greater depth. The scenes and objects that I've shown so far have a funerary connotation. The king meets and greets the divinities and is seated with them in the next world. This is reasonable. All Zoroastrians encounter Mithra, Roshnu and Srausha after death at the time of judgment according to the texts and the blessed then sup with them as well. Sasanian coins name the monarch as one who is Chitra as Yazdan. His seed is from the gods. So perhaps the kings might have thought that the gods to whose number they belong might be visible to them even while they were alive. In Rome this was a device that was employed somewhat ironically to ridicule a hubristic emperor at the full moon in accordance with his claim to be on an equal footing with the gods Caligula used to invite Luna, the moon goddess, to his bed. Did you not see her? He demanded once of Julius Vitellius who was himself later to become emperor to survive Caligula. No replied the latter tactfully. Only you gods can see one another. So perhaps these reliefs show us what otherwise we might not see. A Sasanian relief at Tachibostan near Kermanshah to be considered presently like a similar earlier one of Ardeshir at Nachshe-Rostam is always called an investiture and 10 out of the 28 odd Sasanian rock reliefs are. Now the ancient Iranians were sticklers for protocol and the scene of a god handing the ring of glory or diadem of legitimacy or whatever it was or symbolic representation of what was going on in the material world or it could be funerary. The one thing we know is that it is not an accurate depiction of what actually transpired at an investiture. In these scenes the monarch meets the god Ahura Mazda on foot or on horseback. Ardeshir's steed at Nachshe-Rostam tramples the fallen Ardevan and Ormaz is a humanoid with gorgon locks generally taken to be Ahriman who the Bundahitian tells us is in a basement in hell a basement is one word but that's still very far down let's get there there he is now this again is not something one would have seen at a court investiture usually the deposed king was not displayed for a reason than corpses were ritually impure and Ahriman is fortunately invisible Armenian incidentally preserves an ecfrastic epithet a word crystallized in amber as it were from Parthian days for the particular humiliation to which these defeated enemies were subjected Sombagakoch meaning trampled under foot by the hooves of horses so could this perhaps have been intended as much as a scene of the just kings welcome into the next world as a rite of investiture I'd like you consider this point so so far we have portrayals in Iranian art of men and gods one of the latter Mithra looks much the same wherever we find him in the Iranian world from Comagene all the way to Bactria suggesting that the viewer was expected to recognize him without the help of an inscribed caption such as the multi-lingual one identifying Ormazd at Nakshe Rustam the Sasanians destroyed statues in the round of Yazatas but they apparently felt no hesitation in portraying divine and supernatural beings Ormazd, Nahita, the Dina but Zarathustra is not portrayed anywhere indeed no official inscription of any Zoroastrian dynasty ever mentions the prophet by name the most we can surmise from this silence is that the context did not call for it since religious texts mention him abundantly though the reciter of the Fravarane identifies himself as Zarathustrish and the prophet's name is attested in widely varying local forms that may attest to local zans I'll discuss this presently the only name given to the good religion itself in inscriptions is Mazda worship so Zarathustra brought the good religion but he was not a divine being nor an immortal one although he was considered the greatest of men but there is one ancient portrait painting more precisely one of a pair which in the opinion of some scholars was intended to depict Zarathustra although again there's no inscription and the suggestion remains purely hypothetical the fresco was found in the Mithraeum of Duriauropus to the early third century AD that is to a time shortly before the destruction of the city Dura was a walled fortress city on the Euphrates frontier of the Roman Empire with the Parthians and later the Sasanians the population was heterogeneous the Mithraeum there where this painting comes from was dedicated obviously to an Iranian deity in a region steeped in Iranian Austrian culture and tradition so it makes sense that there was a considerably stronger Iranian flavor to the art of Dura than that which one finds in Mithraeum such as the one here in the city of London or Hadrian's wall for instance there's a fresco decoration on the arch over the portraits in Kultnich and contemporary with the portraits that come from the third and latest repair and enlargement of the temple of alternating fire altars and cypresses we do not find this elsewhere in the Thraegart and nor certainly is prominently but the fire particularly sacred to the Parthians that of Odor-Burzinmer, Mithra the lofty was enthroned in Horasan not far from the great cypress of Kishmar so the repetition of these juxtaposed images seems more than a mere decoration or mere coincidence at Dura the founder of the temple was not an Iranian but a local Syrian legionary that is a soldier of Rome, Ethpani the stratigos son of Zabde are the chief of the archers of Dura the frescoes however were not painted by soldiers but by professional artists and the style is much the same as that which one finds in other temples from the synagogue to Wazanothkanos temple and so on so portraits of two men in white flank the Kultnich with the Turokhtani scene, they stare straight ahead, hold slender ebony staffs and are seated on carbon chairs, Franz Cumont wrote confidently in the excavation report co-authored with Mikhail Rastovtsev here they are there is no doubt that the persons represented in the paintings must be regarded as major prophets, who are the authors or interpreters of the several books and they accordingly identify these two with Zarathustra and with a legendary figure known abundantly in classical sources but not at all in Zoroastrian ones named Ostanes who was supposed to have been a great magus of antiquity and their traditions have been advanced against this identification first of all that this is the dress not of Zarathustrian priests but of Palmyrene ones this doesn't stand up to our careful argument because in fact the Palmyrene priests and others in Syria modeled their sacerdotal attire on that there is no strong cultural difference between Hatra, Palmyra, Edessa the daughter of the Parthians as it was called and erinized Armenia to the north and Parthian Iran immediately to the east in fact even the trousers worn by the Kohanim of the Temple of Jerusalem were an innovation introduced from Iran moreover and so it is suggested that these depict donors now they could have been in fancy dress for Lodz night but donors to Mithraic temples are usually named together with their epithets like Nama Renatus nothing said one is supposed to know who they are this is a portrait as close as we'll ever get to a portrait from life of a prominent Moped of Sasanian Iran this is a painting of the visitation of the Magi from the Echmiads in Gospel it's Armenian it was painted in the Sasanian period and sewn in with the 10th century Gospel and as you can see the attire of this priest is almost identical to that of the priest at Duryuropus the only difference is that it's colorful but then again he wasn't at the time so I think that perhaps what we have here is indeed a depiction intended to be that of Zarathustra there's one other interesting aspect of this painting from Dura which is that not only do these figures hold they also hold little scrolls you know where are they you see them holding a scroll this is very interesting because in addition to being regarded as a great astrologer and so on Zarathustra was considered an antiquity to have been a nomathetes, a law giver he had received the laws from the Agathos Daimon or a pithichesnoema the fortunate mind or vohumanach in ancient texts and in the iconography of Dura it's quite possible that he is holding a scroll of the laws you know it would be very unusual for a mythraic official to be holding a scroll the mythraists didn't have books and they preferred to memorize their teachings you know there's another problem why should be depicted with anybody else if indeed that's him who's the other fellow well it could be Ustanas but as we've seen already very often Zarathustra is portrayed together with someone else on either side of a fire altar you know it could be Lothrasp it could be another person the legendary Ustanas perhaps and as the priest par excellence Zarathustra could very easily be shown as the Zautar together with a raspy you know on either side of a fire altar or for the mythraists on either side of the taroctomy seen so the paintings at the temple to Mithra may or may not include a portrayal of the Iranian prophet in antiquity what in the meantime did contemporaries think of him about about about two centuries after the destruction of Dura by Shapur I the Armenians had become Christian and went to war against the Sasanians in an effort to preserve their religion against reconversion I don't want to go into the question of conversion here but Yerisha Vardabad mentions Zarathustra he calls him Metsen and speaks of the Orenas Zardashtakan Zoroastrian laws in his eyewitness chronicle of the events this chronicle the history of Vartan Mamikonyan is rich in contemporary information about Persian Zoroastrian beliefs and practices the letters and rescripts are paraphrases true to the style of Sasanian originals maybe translations and very often vocabulary doesn't require a translation into Armenian which shares a large body of religious vocabulary with the Iranians several manuscripts of the 16th and 17th centuries of Yerisha's text offer interesting marginal glosses of the name of the Iranian prophet which is given as I said Zarathustra and they call him either Karev or Ucht which means a mighty or significant covenant or Bunbank which means fundamental words it's impossible to tell how all of these glosses are but three of the four terms used in them are Iranian loans Ucht covenant literally something spoken probably either interprets the element dashen as dashen an Iranian long word meaning covenant those echoes the middle Iranian forms are duksht whose intrusive khow would suggest such an interpretation to a hearer the first element of the word Zera could have been understood as deriving from Zor power also an Iranian loan in Armenian so in other words Armenians of the Sasanian era might have understood the name of the prophet to mean not golden light not old camel but fundamental words or mighty covenant that is to say that they understood him more than anything else as the bringer of a spiritual, intellectual and verbal message yes the Avesta after all is one entire mantra spenta he's a monthran the kalakwis with a huramazda were so central and significant that the mountain where they took place is called the spento fra shna and the fravaranea referred to earlier bases its authority on all the questionings, all the meetings at which Zara Thustra and a huramazda conferred together so as a monthran as a law giver Zara Thustra could very easily be seen as somebody holding a scroll and representing a covenant it's just possible this Armenian gloss finds a parallel at the other end of the Zoroastrian world I don't want to go into this in detail I don't have that much time but as yeah as we move to Tachibostan notice this this lotus it's rather unusual Carter suggests that it's related to Sasanian policies in the Kushan Empire it's indeed possible it's certainly not Mithra's flower the 16th chapter of the Bunda Hish says rather vaguely that all flowers are associated with him and Abon is associated specifically with the lotus but in her article on this relief she also mentions interestingly that when the Sasanians were engaged in their expansionist policies in the east they encountered Zoroastrians living there who called the prophet Jarashabda Jarashabda is not the only way we can pronounce Zarathustra's name, of course, in Indic everybody who speaks Gujarati here knows that Jaradosh is the usual way one says this why Jarashabda? it seems a kind of forced pronunciation but if you note that Shabda means word and that the Armenian gloss suggests that Zarathustra is identified preeminently by the power of his words and by the verbal covenant which he made with God perhaps we have evidence of an interesting folk etymology locals and in any case what's significant for us is that this is the source of most present-day Zoroastrian portrayals of the prophet it belongs to a complex of reliefs on the cliff face near Karamansha there are all kinds of problems associated with its dating with who the king is Shapur the second is not the only candidate we know for certain that the prostrate figure is Julian the Apostate though whom Shapur defeated and Ahura Mazda is handing a ring whatever it is to the king yeah but Mithra stands with a barsam as a witness to a kind of a covenant yeah and this is the basis of the very familiar portrayals of Zarathustra sometimes even with the lotus that we know in Imago Klipeata there that's Naksha Rustam you've seen these earlier yeah and there are questions that are raised here that I can't answer Mithra is obviously the embodiment of the covenant yes he is the most human of all of the Azatas and the one who is most easily identifiable of all of the Azatas portrayed the same way wherever we find him the variants in Parsi iconography are slight sometimes the prophet holds a Gorzegov sar just like a priest does before initiation then sleeps with it under his pillow sometimes he holds a staff somewhat like that of the priest from Duryuropus sometimes he holds something that looks a bit like a torch but all of these are just variations on a theme did Parsi's know that in portraying Zarathustra as Mithra they were portraying the bringer of a covenant as the god who embodies the covenant as that portraying the most godlike of men with the most manlike of gods yes I don't know what we do know however is that Zoroastrians in the early modern period before any encounter with western archeological or philological research have an image of sorry of Mithra that seems very much like the standard iconographical type that was to be borrowed as that of the prophet Zarathustra in the 17th century Dastur Anushirvon Marzbon of Kermon be held in a dream the Yazata Mirher with a luminous face and it's described in a Persian verse in a response a Revayat which I translate here and Mithra Marzbon told me this is a secret hidden among the good and bad alike one night as I was deep in slumber I beheld one whose face was like the sun from whom wafted the fragrance of musk and rose water Langerus was that ambergris perfume I opened my mouth and spoke to him who are you tell me your name he said know that I am Mithri Zed who by the gracious command of the knower of the hidden and the keeper of all covenants I am the guide in the material and spiritual world I shatter the works of Ahreiman I work enmity against the demons and Satan so perhaps between the Mithra of Sasanian and earlier ages whose appearance seems to have been remembered in indigenous tradition and the appropriation in modern Zoroastrian art of that image for the portrayal of the prophet lies the entire era of the growth of the western tradition in which Zarathustra was first but dimly remembered Gemisto's plethon revived the classical image of the Persian astrologer mage for the Italian Renaissance and Raphael oh sorry and Raphael portrays Zarathustra in his famous painting The School of Athens where he's shown with Ptolemy and Euclid but opinion seems to be divided about which figure actually represents him and I'm sorry in his lives of the artists calls him Zoroastrian king of the Bactrians so he may be the figure facing away from us in a radiated royal crown and not the figure in white holding a celestial globe actually and if we look more closely see the one facing away from us these strange looking oriental symbols like pseudoestrangula or something on the hem of his robe an oriental sage in other words yes and this is interesting because we have a precursor to Raphael's painting there not nearly as nice it's it's but then it's not the Renaissance yet is it it's Giusto de Padua who painted a fresco on the right will of the capella de Santa Agostino of the Eremitani of the philosophers of antiquity seated beneath the figures embodying their particular arts and sciences and this is from a manuscript copy of the fresco and Zarathustra is seated below a figure representing dialectic he's called Cereaste and he's writing unintelligible characters on a page and that seems to have been that for Raphael perhaps at anyway Donnenfeld who studied the fresco describes these as undoubtedly intended for oriental script the problem is other philosophers are also scribbling away in the fresco but I think it's possible at least that the crown figure in the school of Athens represents Zarathustra and as another serendipitous coincidence and I can't vouch for anything more the crown looks very much like the radiate nimbus of Mithra that we've seen before somewhat mysterious how much longer do I have professor that's about it good I had an appendix which was going to this I'll just say I wanted to make a pitch for for a subject I teach in Armenian this is a this is a funerary relief here from Artsakh Nagorno-Karabakh you can tell that from the weapons of the nobleman buried it's not that ancient unless we have a prehistoric foot lock here but you see the prince entering the next world he holds aloft this mysterious circle which shows a prince again standing on the prostrate body of defeated enemy very much like Naksharustan and he's coming into the that's Armenian for the grave which is an exact rendering of Garodemana the house of song and here is a Busan singing for him and he's going to have his drasm and the point is and it's a point with which I almost close that what's useful about looking at the Armenian reliefs is that they have epitaphs that identify what's going on and this prince is receiving something called in the inscription the the unperishable diadem and it uses a lone word from Middle Iranian for diadem in other words it names for the first time anywhere what this thing is we no longer have to worry about whether it's quarn it could be quarn but it's a diadem it's named as a diadem that's very useful and to come back to the image of Zarathustra well the prophet represented to us what Mithra does too friendship love covenants truth light so I think that if every good Zoroastrian Parsi, Irani simply looks in the mirror he or she will see the image of Zarathustra thank you very much yes thank you for another very interesting paper we have lots to discuss and lots to ask about I wonder if I could exploit my position Chair to ask a question to France first of all you showed us this silver bowl with the four pairs of figures and unless I was sleeping you didn't tell us who the figure in the middle is you told us it's not Anna who is it then? for this figure I sided with Marchak's interpretation an allegory of the earth she clearly represents the earth the model comes from Ceres the the Griffin is composite the question is whether she is the earth in general or Spandarmat the rest of the earth well the fact that she is semi-newd I don't think here she can be labelled as Spandarmat she is the earth and it's consistent with the Greco-Roman models where we have in one model I showed you have Dionysus on a panther surrounded by the seasons seasons and well in one instance the wooden panel I showed from Quiroux-Tobay it seems that the person on the Griffin is really the goddess Spandarmat because she holds the nursery I say yes she is supposed to do at Fresh Gear but I would I'm not so sure but I would say in certain cases the person on the Griffin can be the earth in general I would call her Zama in some other instances she might be more precise this Spandarmat so that's something we still need to think about you know of course there's similar things in Christian iconography there is a famous Floor Fresco I can't remember any of the site it's in Palestine somewhere where Jesus is in the middle surrounded by the 12 months who are labelled as a straight man there's certainly a pair of us yes other questions many please Antonio which is vertical with the one looks at right and one looks toward left yes and this is very interesting it's something which puzzled me and I have no explanation well it can have a very simple one one is looking at the sun rising I mean rising and with the duration of the daylight and the other one the opposite phenomenon in we have six months later so it's in your in your line I think you could use this remark it's convincing thank you others please from Frans Connet the ring in the Persian dictionary produced in India they have a name for it it's called Yare which means support and it does not always have is not presented by gods only in Bishapur too it's also in the hands of some kings and some of the army men on Frans Connet the Chimera in the middle of the bowl that you showed has a wheat tail like the bull interoctony a wheat tail a wheat tail palm leaf tail yeah so can you explain that I did I followed Marsha in this respect it shows the it symbolizes the the plant element so that the the beast she is sitting on could be properly in Greek called a panthera the beast of universe she has elements from a bird from a lion from a goat and also from the plants so she embodies everything on earth yeah other questions then I'll ask another one James this figure that you thought may or may not be Zoroasta from Dura is he wearing a hat or does he have flames coming out of his head no he has what often called a Phrygian cat it does look rather like flames no it's a Phrygian it's just a Phrygian cat but there's no question which I once came across identifies them as the high priests well that would be possible yes indeed if they are high priests then how many high priests would the Mithraeists have why two we can portray Zarathustra together with someone else or a Zoroastrian priest together with someone else on either side of an altar but there was only one Paterpatru there was only one Mithraeic high priest we don't know how he dressed one is smaller than the other it might indicate a hierarchy it's possible then again Zarathustra is greater than Ostanes I'm not married to any particular theory what I wanted to suggest is that we should not dismiss Kuman and Rostovcev out of hands I think that they had that their hypothesis was far more plausible than is generally accepted now that's all and that this could indeed be a portrayal of Zarathustra but it may well not be there are many problems of Mithraeic art yeah we also know that there was a Zoroastrian who was of a high priestly grade could be called Zarathustra other than one most likes Zoroaster yeah it's quite possible I don't think for example that this represents somebody of the percess grade of Mithraeism again why have two of them my only suggestion was that we have to consider first of all that this particular Mithraeum was built on the Parthian border yes that when we consider the art of Dura as a whole we're looking at an iconography for any given religious painting there which is suffused in Iranian symbolism this is even true of the synagogue yeah the there is a painting in the synagogue of the resurrection of the dead from the book of Ezekiel and it reproduces carefully the stages of resurrection that the Zoroastrian texts speak about at the end of time the scene of Mordechai in Haman is an Iranian court scene yeah it may even be that the same firm who built the Mithraeum were engaged to paint other temples and that they were they were the people who gave Rostov-Tsev the title for his Dura and the problem of Parthian art Parthians may I just add something I think we shouldn't forget that Dura was part of the Parthian empire for 100 years from the time of Mithradatas the 2nd from 100 to AD 10 or whatever so the Parthian influence is absolutely there well we have Parthian graffiti in the synagogue absolutely, definitely we support James argument about the paintings at the synagogue we have the Pahlavi graffiti directed on 2 scenes the vision of Ezekiel and the book of Esther and according to the more recent decipherings the graffiti say so and so Scribe Vizy was shown that by the servant of the Jews and approved they were the Sasanian officials were specifically directed by the Jews of Dura which could have an appeal in their own culture and this has an exact parallel in the Sasanian conquest of the Holy Land when of the many churches that were destroyed by the Sasanians one with a depiction of the visitation of the magi was kept I forget which Byzantine historian says the Mobadans saw their priests and spared the picture and the building so yes indeed are there any other questions yes please in your paper France you said I've noted down you said that one reason for disagreeing with Marshax interpretation you said why is no ruse at the bottom you remember considering that it is as you say a silver plate and considering you've also called it a bowl we're really looking at it vertically aren't we whereas in life it would be looked at horizontally and so I don't think that's a phrase that really applies in the sense that looking at a bowl you're seeing it in the lateral round do you see what I mean I don't see unless you're looking it as a kind of clock with the hours on it or the months on it that's fixed that turning it round I mean I entirely agree with your argument that it should be looked at that no ruse should be moved around but I can't see that looking at it vertically as having a top and a bottom is helpful yes but in this case anyway they are upside down they are not only in the bottom they are upside down it's not the most convenient position for the most for the holiest of festivals you're standing away standing no because we're looking at the picture from the central figure the central figure is right so she tells us up and down and in this case no ruse would be at the bottom and upside down less distinguished position so the point of reference is the central figure yeah another question way in the back before lunch we heard about how in the Sasanian period they tried to look to the Zoroastrian religion as a sort of legitimizing ancestry and so on and you've tried to show the depiction of Zaratushra in one or two instances you haven't really explained why given all this concern to identify with the Zoroastrian tradition Zaratushra himself was not really either carved or painted extensively apart from saying that he was only a man well the Sasanian reliefs depict very few holy religious scenes mostly they're state reliefs there are some exceptions it's possible for example that we see the Chinvat Poole and the Dina but then again it's the king advancing with Cartier across the bridge so the portrayal even of the afterlife an explicit portrayal with the bridge of the separator and so on still has a political message the inscriptions of the Sasanian kings speak about the Zoroastrian religion but the Zoroastrian religion was called at the time Danny Mazdasen which means the religion of Mazda worship the reason for this is that that's the focus of the religion Zaratushra was a human being one doesn't worship him one worships God it was common place until not very long ago to refer to a certain religion now practice very widely in Iran is Mohammedanism and as you're aware no doubt this was a misnomer based upon Christianity Mohammed died according to tradition I think it was his uncle who said for those of you who worship Mohammed Mohammed is dead for those of you who worship God God is the living and the eternal yes sorry was it Omar? yeah I'm not too up on that particular faith I think you get my point is Zoroastrian is Zaratushri but the name Zoroastrian that you use nowadays should not obscure entirely the fact that it's not Zaratushra whom Zoroastrians worship Zaratushra was a human being who was privileged in the sense that he got to see and speak to a Hurra Mazda and to bring a clear and articulate revelation that Zoroastrian is enjoined to emulate him but not to worship him question to James about the Raphael painting yes I side with the identification of Zoroastria as the one who holds the Armilor Sphere and his future is actually those of Cardinal Bembo who had an amici amoureuse with Cretia Borgia and finished as a Cardinal who was a friend of Raphael the one who is sometimes considered as Zoroaster and whom you considered as Zoroaster should rather be Ptolemy he holds not the Armilor Sphere but a celestial globe earthly globe why does he as a crown at the time of the Renaissance was often confused with the Ptolemy kings it's all true except that Vasari didn't think so maybe Vasari was wrong Vasari who says that Zoroaster is portrayed king of the Bactrians and thus with the crown that's what Vasari says we don't really know but I thought until fairly recently that it was the figure in white who was holding a celestial globe but Ptolemy has various functions in fact so maybe Vasari himself was confused I don't really know but it seems to be the common opinion at the moment and this could shift again yes who's facing away frustratingly from us this was Donnenfeld's opinion in his study in this case who would be the burdened man with the celestial sphere that would be Ptolemy that's his that's Donnenfeld's suggestion again I wasn't there and I don't know the only thing I meant to suggest actually in this paper is that there are a number of trading possibilities rather than certainties we have a portrayal of Zarathustra based on that of Mithra I don't know why I suggested that they're very similar in their ways that they seem to converge asymptotically as it were yes one is the god like a man the other is a man like a god that such a resemblance suggests itself but we don't actually know again with Dura somebody this morning mentioned that it's useful to bring up the suggestions of the ancients of the earlier people in our field who made suggestions which we either repeat or reject and I thought that Kuman and Rastovts have deserved a fair hearing once more so I think that's the end of the time for this very interesting session I'd like to thank you