Везде
Where Was Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ, The Sasanid Stronghold In North-Eastern Arabia?
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Where Was Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ, The Sasanid Stronghold In North-Eastern Arabia?
Annotation
PII
S086919080008438-8-1
DOI
10.31857/S086919080008438-8
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Dmitry Y. Mishin 
ORCID: 0000-0001-7716-1281
Occupation: Senior Research Fellow, Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences
Affiliation: Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Edition
Issue 1
Pages
8-16
Abstract

This study is an attempt to ascertain the geographical position of Punyāt Ardashir, the Sasanid stronghold in North-Eastern Arabia, identifiable with Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ of al-Ṭabarī’s history. To do that, it is necessary to understand, what the names al-Khaṭṭ and Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ applied to. In mediaeval Islamic literature the name al-Khaṭṭ had different meanings and was used to denote a settlement in the region then called al-Baḥrayn and embracing the territory from Basra to Oman, an island in the Persian Gulf, and the coastal zone of the region of Baḥrayn. The word ‘madīna’ denoted a town when preceding the town’s name, and a capital when followed by the name of the region. Therefore, it should not be assumed that Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ meant ‘the town of al-Khaṭṭ’. The lack of references to Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ in the extant sources, including when such references would be expected, suggests that Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ was the capital of the region of al-Khaṭṭ, which had a distinct name. That regional capital is not necessarily identical with the settlement of al-Khaṭṭ. This means that the only firm basis for any tentative localization of Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ is its status of the regional capital. Madīnal al-Khaṭṭ is to be expected to have been the residence of the Sasanid marzbān, and to have been sharply defended by Persians during the Islamic conquest. The place which best fits to that description appears to be the fortress of al-Zāra situated in the territory of present-day al-Ḳaṭīf. Therefore, Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ is probably identical with al-Zāra.

Keywords
pre-Islamic Arabia, al-Khaṭṭ, Punyāt Ardashir, Sasanids, Dārīn
Received
09.12.2019
Date of publication
28.02.2020
Number of purchasers
41
Views
1729
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf 100 RUB / 1.0 SU

To download PDF you should pay the subscribtion

Full text is available to subscribers only
Subscribe right now
Only article and additional services
Subscription benefits
100 RUB / 1.0 SU
Whole issue and additional services
Subscription benefits
800 RUB / 16.0 SU
All issues and additional services for 2020
Subscription benefits
4224 RUB / 84.0 SU
1 It is well-known that the name Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ appears in the monumental ‘History of Prophets and Kings’ by al-Ṭabarī (839–922/23). He states that Ardashir I (225–240), the founder of the Sasanid dynasty, built in the Baḥrayn region1 the town of F.sā Ardashīr alias Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ [al-Ṭabarī, 1881-1882, p. 821].
1.  The mediaeval region of Baḥrayn was not identical with present-day Bahrain and was thought to comprise the coastal lands between Basra and Oman [al-Bakrī, 1983, p. 228; Yāḳūt, 1977, 1, p. 347].
2 That statement is reproduced by Ibn al-Athīr (1160–1233), who, so far as the Sasanid history is concerned, heavily depends on al-Ṭabarī. However, Ibn al-Athīr abridges the original text a little and only refers to Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ, without specifying its Persian name [Ibn al-Athīr, 1987, p. 296].
3 A town built by Ardashir in the Baḥrayn region is mentioned by several writers who do not follow al-Ṭabarī, but use information going back to his sources. The name of the town is written as:
4 F.w.rān Ardashīr, by Abū Ḥanīfa al-Dīnawarī (d. between 894 and 902/03) [al-Dīnawarī, 1960, p. 45],
5 B.w.rā Ardashīr, in an unknown writer’s treatise Nihāyat al-arab fī akhbār al-furs wa al-ʻarab [The Utmost of What May Be Desired in Exposition of the History of Persians and Arabs], which, for the Sasanid history, is in many respects an extended version of al-Dīnawarī’s book [Nihāyat ..., 1996/97, p. 200],
6 B.t.n Ardashīr, by Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī (ca. 893/94–between 961/62 and 970/71) [Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī, 1921/22, p. 34],
7 Beh-tan Ardashīr, in the Mudjmal al-tawārīkh wa-l-ḳiṣaṣ [Collection of Histories and Stories] written ca. 1126/27 by an unknown writer who, in his history of the Sasanids, closely follows Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī [Muǧmal ... 2000, p. 51].
8 It is to be observed that all those writers are essentially in line with al-Ṭabarī’s statement, but never identify the town built by Ardashīr with Madīnat al-Ḳhaṭṭ.
9 References to al-Khaṭṭ also occur with writers belonging to Oriens Christianus. Eutychius of Alexandria (877–940), like al-Ṭabarī, devotes a special fragment to towns built by Ardashir I and mentions al-Khaṭṭ, yet without quoting its Persian name. But Eutychius provides a geographical localization of al-Khaṭṭ, stating that it was situated in the west (looking from Iraq which the information obviously comes from), behind the river which is to be identified with Tigris [Eutychius, 1906, p. 108]. The Synodicon orientale contains a reference to a local church synod held on the island of Dārīn in May 677, in which the bishop of of Khaṭṭā (this must be the Syriac equivalent of Arabic al-Khaṭṭ) took part, as well as the bishop of Hagar2 [Synodicon ..., 1902, p. 216, 482]. About a hundred years earlier, in February 576 another synod, of the Nestorian church of the Sasanid empire, was held, and the bishop of Hagar and P.y.ṭ Ardashīr gave a written approval to its decisions [Synodicon ..., 1902, p. 128, 387].
2.  Hagar is the Syriac name of the fortress called in Islamic sources Hadjar. It was situated in present-day Ḳaryat al-Ḳāra, a few kilometres to the north-east from al-Hufūf [al-Djanabī, 2004, p. 238].
10 An interpretation of that evidence is provided by J. Marquart, who suggests that the names of the town quoted by Muslim writers and P.y.ṭ Ardashīr of the Synodicon orientale are connected to, and denote the same as, Panait, the name of a region in the southern quarter (kust-i-nēmrōz) of the Sasanid empire, which occurs in the geography of Ananias of Shirak (ca. 610–ca. 685).3 On the basis of that, Marquart reconstructs the initial name which, in his opinion, was Paniat-Ršīr. According to him, it was the official Sasanid name of the town of al-Khaṭṭ (die Stadt al Xaṭṭ) [Marquart, 1901, p. 42].
3.  The name Panait is quoted after the Russian translation of Ananias’s geography by K. P. Patkanov [Armyanskaya geografiya ... 1877, p. 67]. It is used here as the first choice because it fits best to Marquart’s reconstruction of the name as presented above. A modern English translation by R. H. Hewsen has Anatršir [Hewsen, 1992, p. 72]. As for the Syriac name, it is reconstructed, by means of a slight conjecture, as P.n.y.ṭ Ardashīr.
11 An undoubted merit of Marquart’s work is that it allows to ascertain the common origin of the town’s different names occurring with Muslim writers. Marquart himself believes that it was F.n.yādh. By the time when al-Ṭabarī wrote, that form had long been forgotten. Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī explains his B.t.n Ardashīr as Persian be-tan meaning ‘on the body’, telling that the town was built upon, and partially from, the bodies of those who had fought against Ardashīr I [Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī, 1921/22, p. 34; cf. Muǧmal ... 2000, p. 51]. The fact that the original name was no longer used appears to explain of the variety of forms presented above.
12 Another important piece of evidence is signalled by E. Herzfeld, who points out to a seal kept in the British Museum. He transliterates the legend of the seal as darînîk u puny(â)t artaxšatr dar hamârk(â)re (the accountant of the Government of Darînîk and Punyât-Ardashîr) [Herzfeld, 1930, p. 32].4 Marquart’s reconstruction is, thus, supported by an original Sasanid artefact. Perhaps, the punyāt of the seal has developed into modern Persian bunyād in the sense of ‘foundation, basis’ or ‘wall’.
4.  The title is now read as āmārgar. Literally it means ‘a reckoner’, [MacKenzie, 1971, p. 7], but here the sense would be better rendered as ‘a financial officer’.
13 As to the geographical position of Punyāt Ardashir, Marquart places it, in his words, in der Landschaft Qaṭīf in Bahrain, or in the region of al-Ḳaṭīf in Baḥrayn [Marquart, 1901, p. 42]. He does not specify any grounds of that localization, but his view, supported by his undoubtedly correct and wise reconstruction of the name, has long been commonly accepted and not disputed by anyone. However, his theory has recently been challenged by Chr.-J. Robin, who suggests to identify al-Khaṭṭ with al-ʻUḳayr. Robin’s argument runs as follows:
14 - The Kitāb futūḥ al-buldān [Book on the Conquests of the Lands] by al-Balādhurī (d. c. 892) contains a fragment (discussed below under number 5) showing that al-Khaṭṭ is not identical with al-Ḳaṭīf, as Marquart allegedly suggests.5
5.  La plupart des auteurs ne se prononcent pas sur la localisation précise d’al-Khaṭṭ. Marquart ... a suggéré al-Qaṭīf. As shown above, Marquart places Punyāt Ardashir in the region of al-Ḳaṭīf, but, strictly speaking, does not identify the two toponyms.
15 - al-ʻUḳayr is situated near al-Hufūf of which it is a natural port.
16 - The name al-ʻUḳayr does not occur in ancient sources where al-Khaṭṭ is mentioned, whereas the name of al-Khaṭṭ ceases to be used when al-ʻUḳayr appears. More concretely, al-ʻUḳayr is referred to neither in the accounts of the Muslim conquest, nor in pre-Islamic poetry, where the name of al-Khaṭṭ is occasionally used.
17 - al-ʻUḳayr is a centre of important archaeological excavations which show traces of pre-Islamic settlement [Robin, Prioletta, 2013, p. 140–141; cf. Robin, Tayran, 2012, p. 544–545].
18 It does not appear that there are enough grounds to unconditionally support Robin’s view. Ibn Khurradādhbih (ca. 820/21 or 826/27–ca. 912/13) quotes al-Khaṭṭ among the settlements of the region of Baḥrayn [Kitâb ..., 1889, p. 152], but includes al-ʻUḳayr into his itinerary from Basra to Oman [Kitâb ..., 1889, p. 60]. In the last fragment the coast of Hadjar (sāḥil Hadjar) is mentioned alongside al-ʻUḳayr. There are, thus, no reasons to state that al-ʻUḳayr appears to the exclusion of al-Khaṭṭ as the name of the same settlement, or that al-ʻUḳayr was a port of Hadjar. The possible existence of a pre-Islamic settlement at al-ʻUḳayr is not, of itself, an unbeatable proof of the latter’s alleged identity with Punyāt Ardashir. Al-ʻUḳayr might well have been a distinct settlement. Yāḳūt (1179–1229) states that Sasanid king Shapur I (240–271) settled Arabs from the valley of Euphrates at al-ʻUḳayr [Yāḳūt, 1977, 4, p. 283].
19 To ascertain the geographical position of Punyāt Ardashir, it is necessary to review the cases where the name al-Khaṭṭ is used in the sources. It does not appear quite often and, unexpectedly, does not occur in Islamic geographical treatises of the 10th century, the golden age of Islamic geography. References to al-Khaṭṭ in other sources are not numerous either. They can be grouped as follows:
20 1. As stated above, al-Khaṭṭ is mentioned among settlements (ḳurā) of the Baḥrayn region. It occurs first with Ibn Khurradādhbih who quotes al-Khaṭṭ as first and al-Ḳaṭīf, as second, of those settlements [Kitâb ..., 1889, p. 152]. Later on, other writers also refer to al-Khaṭṭ as a Baḥrayni settlement [Ḥamd Allāh Ḳazwīnī, 1915, p. 137; al-Ḥimyarī, 1984, p. 82; Ibn al-Faḳīh, 1996, p. 89; al-Idrīsī, 1974, p. 386; Kitâb ..., 1889, p. 249; Yāḳūt, 1977, 1, p. 347]. However, no other significant information is supplied.
21 2. Pre-Islamic poets often mention khaṭṭī spears (rimāḥ khaṭṭiyya). Mediaeval commentators are almost unanimous in asserting that the spears were called so because al-Khaṭṭ was the place to which spears were brought on ships from India. This explanation, although in an incomplete form, occurs as early as in the Arabic vocabulary by al-Khalīl al-Farāhidī (d. 776/77, 786/87, or 791/92) [al-Khalīl, 1980, 4, p. 136]. Another relatively early writer, Abū-l-ʻAbbās Thaʻlab (c. 815/16–904), twice states that al-Khaṭṭ is an island [Dīwān ..., 1979, p. 27; Thaʻlab, 2008, p. 95] and once calls it Khaṭṭ ʻAbd al-Ḳays, i.e., al-Khaṭṭ belonging to the tribal confederation of Banū ʻAbd al-Ḳays [Gedichte …, 1928, p. 125], which, strictly speaking, does not rule out an identification with an island. It is noteworthy that in the Dīwān Thaʻlab quotes an earlier writer, al-Aṣmaʻī (d. 828/29) as stating that there are no spears on it, but once a ship on which they were transported, landed there. This ‘on it’ (bi-hā in Arabic) seems to be related to the island (djazīra). Therefore, the idea that al-Khaṭṭ was an island may come from al-Aṣmaʻī, let alone people from whom he takes his information.
22 Some other renowned commentators describe al-Khaṭṭ as an island, too. Aḥmad al-Naḥḥās (Copperman, d. 949 or 950) states that al-Khaṭṭ is an island in the Baḥrayn region, which ships land to [al-Naḥḥās, 1973, p. 637]. Similar statements are then found in the famous Kitāb al-aghānī [Book of Songs] by Abū-l-Faradj al-Iṣfahānī (897/98–967), and with Ibn Rashīḳ (999/1000–1064) [Abū-l-Faradj al-Iṣfahānī, 1905, 9, p. 146; Ibn Rashīḳ, 1981, p. 233].
23 Commentators of poetry are not the only ones to deliver such descriptions of al-Khaṭṭ. Ibn al-Balkhī, who wrote in the first decade of the 11th century, in Persian, a ‘Book on Persia’ (Fārs-nāmeh), narrates, in his account of the campaign which Sasanid King Shapur II (309/10–379/80) undertook against the Arabs in the mid-320-es, that the king crossed the sea and disembarked at al-Khaṭṭ, an island from which spears were exported (to Arabia) [The Fársnáma ..., 1921, p. 68]. Later geographer Ḥamd Allāh Ḳazwīnī (1281/82–after 1339/40) states that al-Khaṭṭ is an island on which Ardashir I built a town [Ḥamd Allāh Ḳazwīnī, 1915, p. 253–254].
24 3. The name al-Khaṭṭ was used to denote the coastal zone of Baḥrayn and Oman. Such use of that word is attested in such early a work as the vocabulary of Arabic by Ibn Durayd (837/38–933) [Ibn Durayd, 1987, p. 106]. Geographer Abū ʻUbayd al-Bakrī (ca. 1010–1094/95) quotes Muḥammad al-Anbārī (d. 939/40), a contemporary of Ibn Durayd, as stating that the Baḥrayn’s coastline is called Khaṭṭ (without the alif-lām definite article) [al-Bakrī, 1983, p. 503]. Muḥammad al-Anbārī is mainly known as the author of the final version of the famous al-Mufaḍḍaliyyāt collection of poetry and comments to it, initially written by his father al-Ḳāsim (d. 916/17). It is said in one of those comments, whether made by al-Ḳāsim or Muḥammad, that al-Khaṭṭ is a part of the region of Baḥrayn, which is above the sea [The Mufaḍḍalīyāt ... 1921, p. 245]. For al-Bakrī himself, al-Khaṭṭ is the coastline stretching from Oman to Basra and from Kāẓima to al-Shiḥr [al-Bakrī, 1983, p. 503]. The last statement is then reproduced by ʻAbd al-Munʻim al-Ḥimyarī, whose geographical treatise probably goes back to the late 13th century [al-Ḥimyarī, 1984, p. 220].
25 4. Al-Khaṭṭ is several times mentioned in accounts of the Muslim conquest of Baḥrayn. Ibn Saʻd (ca. 784–845) narrates that Muslim general al-ʻAlāʼ Ibn al-Ḥaḍramī6 defeated Persians and their allies from the Arabic tribal confederation of Banū Bakr Ibn Wāʼil, then pitched his camp at al-Khaṭṭ, on the coast, and beleaguered his enemies, who had fortified themselves in al-Zāra. He compelled them to surrender and afterwards crossed the sea and conquered the island of Dārīn [Ibn Saʻd, 2001, 5, p. 278–279]. A similar account is supplied by Ibn Ḥubaysh (1110/11–1188/89), who depicts al-Khaṭṭ as being situated on the coast, and al-Ḥimyarī. Both writers tell that a Christian arrived to al-ʻAlāʼ and offered to show him a ford to Dārīn in exchange for delivery of his relatives, who at that time were on the island, to him. Al-ʻAlāʼ agreed, crossed to Dārīn and conquered it [al-Ḥimyarī, 1984, p. 230–231; Ibn Ḥubaysh, 1983, p. 186]. Al-Balādhurī quotes an account according to which the surviving Banū Bakr found their refuge in al-Khaṭṭ, but al-ʻAlāʼ conquered it [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 115–116].
6.  Ibn Saʻd omits some of al-ʻAlāʼs ancestors. In most sources al-ʻAlāʼ is referred to as Ibn ʻAbd Allāh [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 107; Ibn ʻAbd al-Barr, 2002, p. 580; Ibn Ḥadjar, 2008, p. 236]. However, al-Wāḳidī (747/48–822) calls the general al-ʻAlāʼ Ibn ʻĀʼidh [al-Wāḳidī, 1990, p. 154]. In yet another version the latter was called al-ʻAlāʼ Ibn Ṣadaḳa [Abū Nuʻaym al-Iṣfahānī, 1998, p. 2198].
26 Al-Balādhurī also speaks of the conquest of Dārīn. His description of the campaign against it is very similar to what has been presented above. A certain Karrāz al-Nukrī showed al-ʻAlāʼ a ford to the island. Al-ʻAlāʼ rushed into the sea (taḳaḥḥama al-baḥr) with a troop of Muslims [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 117–118]. Likewise, aṭ-Ṭabarī narrates that ‘all of them, with a permission from God, crossed to Dārīn, walking like on soft sand above which was water which washed the hooves of their camels’ [al-Tabarī, 1890, p. 1972].
27 Dārīn is present-day island of Tārūt, the south-eastern part of which is now called Dārīn. It is separated from the mainland by a strait which is at present about one hundred metres large. In the sources Dārīn is invariably described as a big and populated island. There were numerous people on it [al-Wāḳidī, 1990, p. 162], and al-Mundhir, son of al-Djārūd, chieftain of Banū ʻAbd al-Ḳays, who remained loyal to the Muslims during the Ridda, asked al-ʻAlāʼ to attack the island where there were strong enemies [al-Kūfī, 1991, p. 43]. Shapur II, upon defeating the Arabs in 320-es, settled some of them, who belonged to the tribal confederation of Banū Taghlib, on Dārīn and at al-Khaṭṭ [al-Ṭabarī, 1881-1882, p. 839; al-Thaʻālibī, 1900, p. 529]. Yet the existence of two separate bishoprics, those of Dārīn and Khaṭṭā, in 677 rules out a possible identification of Dārīn with al-Khaṭṭ.
28 Strictly speaking, the evidence presented under this number 4 does not allow to determine whether al-Khaṭṭ was a town or a region. Yet they show that al-Khaṭṭ was regarded as situated on the coast, probably opposite the island of Tārūt, and included thus the territory of present-day al-Ḳaṭīf. Staying there, al-ʻAlāʼ was able to both beleaguer al-Zāra situated east of al-ʻAwwāmiyya in the present-day Saudi district of al-Ḳaṭīf, and cross to Dārīn. Al-ʻAlāʼ might have had one more reason to stay there. Shapur II, going to his campaign in Arabia, crossed the sea and landed at al-Khaṭṭ [al-Ṭabarī, 1881-1882, p. 838–839]. Staying on the coast, al-ʻAlāʼ was able to prevent an eventual disembarkation of Sasanid reinforcements.
29 5. Al-Balādhurī quotes an account according to which in Muḥammad’s time al-ʻAlāʼ was governor over the tribes of a part of the region of Baḥrayn, where al-Ḳaṭīf was situated, whereas another part comprising al-Khaṭṭ was entrusted to Umayyad Abān Ibn Saʻīd. Al-Balādhurī further states that he considers this account to be false and that Muḥammad dismissed al-ʻAlāʼ and appointed Abān in his stead [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 111]. As shown above, Robin quotes this fragment to prove that al-Khaṭṭ is not identical with al-Ḳaṭīf. Indeed, although al-Balādhurī does not hold the account for true, it may be held that for its author al-Khaṭṭ is distinct from al-Ḳaṭīf.
30 The evidence above shows that al-Khaṭṭ denoted at least three objects, namely, a settlement in the region of Baḥrayn, the coastline of the latter, and the island of Dārīn (Tārūt). The interpretation of Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ is even more complicated. The Arabic word madīna(t) could, depending on the context, denote a city, a town, or a capital of a region (as a city in relation to anything else, smaller towns, countryside etc.). To illustrate this, the following words of Ibn Khurradādhbih would be useful:
31 ‘The way from Iṣṭakhr to Sīrdjān (Arabic al-Sīradjān), the capital of Kerman (madīnat Karmān) ...’.
32 ‘... then to Sīrdjān, the capital of Kerman (madīnat Karmān), 11 farsakhs’ [Kitâb ..., 1889, p. 53].
33 But one page later, with respect to the same city:
34 ‘... then to the city of Sīrdjān (madīnat al-Sīradjān) 4 farsakhs’ [Kitâb ..., 1889, p. 54].
35 The word madīna(t), thus, denotes a town when preceding the town’s name, and a capital when followed by the name of the region. Consequently, Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ may have the meaning of either ‘the town of al-Khaṭṭ’ and ‘the capital of the region of al-Khaṭṭ’. Th. Nöldeke, who edited a translation of al-Ṭabarī’s history of the Sasanids, elects the first solution and puts die Stadt Chaṭṭ, ‘the town of al-Khaṭṭ’ [Nöldeke, 1879, p. 20]. Both Marquart and Robin, although disagreeing on the identification of Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ, believe that it was a settlement (die Stadt al Xaṭṭ, la bourgade d’al-Khaṭṭ) [Marquart, 1901, p. 42; Robin, Prioletta, 2013, p. 140]. It appears that the same interpretation is adopted in the modern English translation of al-Ṭabarī’s history by C. E. Bosworth where one reads ‘the city of al-Khaṭṭ’ [Bosworth, 1999, p. 16].
36 In addition to the existence of al-Khaṭṭ in the mid-9th century (as mentioned by Ibn Khurradādhbih, see above), the ‘town’ solution may be supported by some evidence supplied by antique writers. Pliny the Elder (22-24–79) refers to a town of Attana which he, basing on accounts of merchants, depicts as one of the two most famous towns in the Persian Gulf region [C. Plinius Secundus d.Ä., 1996, p. 106–107]. Claudius Ptolemy, who wrote around 150 A.D., refers to a village (kōmē) of Atta [Klaudios Ptolemaios, 2017, p. 626–627]. It would, of course, be interesting to establish a connection between Attana / Atta and Ibn Khurradādhbih’s al-Khaṭṭ. However, it should not be taken for granted that the latter is a continuation of the former. By the time Ibn Khurradādhbih wrote, the Baḥrayn region had undergone a series of dramatic changes caused by migrations of the Tanūkh Arabs (second half of the 2nd century A.D.), submission to the Sasanids (first half of the 3rd century A.D.), invasions of Banū ʻAbd al-Ḳays and Shapur II’s sharp counter-offensive against them (320-es), and, of course, the Islamic conquest. Those probably brought about important shifts both in ethnic structure of the population and the way of life. It might well be that Banū ʻAbd al-Ḳays founded a new al-Khaṭṭ, not identical with the old settlement. Besides, Claudius Ptolemy’s reference to Atta appears in his list of the possessions of aigaioi or etaioi (probably, an incorrect writing of attaioi, those of Atta), alongside two other settlements, Sarkoē (al-Zāra?) and Karada each of which is depicted as a town (polis). If the identification of Attana with Atta is correct, then in about a century a famous town became merely a village not worth being described as a polis. This would suggest a gradual decline of antique Atta, which, in its turn, is an argument against, rather than for, continuity.
37 Above that, Polybius (ca. 208–ca. 125 B.C.) describes Chattēnia as a region (chōra) [Polybius, 1925, p. 424–425] and Pliny the Elder refers to regio (kingdom or region) Attene [C. Plinius Secundus d.Ä., 1996, p. 104–105]. This shows that in Antiquity al-Khaṭṭ was also known as a region.
38 Reverting to Sasanid times, it is noteworthy that the writers speaking of the most important time of the Baḥrayn region, that of its conquest by Muslims, do not mention Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ. This is all the stranger given that Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ built by Ardashir I as a Sasanid stronghold was likely to have been at least one of the principal aims for al-ʻAlāʼ and his fellows. This silence suggests that Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ was a common noun rather than the proper name of a town and denoted the Sasanid Baḥrayn capital which must appear in the accounts of the Muslim conquest under another name. It is not necessarily identical with the settlement of al-Khaṭṭ mentioned above under number 1.
39 This essentially means that the search for Punyāt Ardashir begins again. The lack of a concrete identification only leaves one basis for such search, namely, the status of Punyāt Ardashir as the capital of the region. It should be expected that Punyāt Ardashir was the residence of the Sasanid marzbān, the military commandant of the region, was protected by the strongest garrison and, finally, was the Sasanid troops’ stronghold in their struggle against the Muslims.
40 Should the extant evidence be put to that test, the results would be rather unclear. Al-Balādhurī states that in 8 A.H. (1 May 629–19 April 630) Muḥammad wrote to Sībukht (in Middle Persian Sībokht), the marzbān of Hadjar, and called upon him to embrace Islam [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 107; cf. Yāḳūt, 1, p. 348]. Ibn Saʻd provides a similar account, although he distorts the Sasanid official’s name, writing Usaykhit Ibn ʻAbd Allāh instead of Sībukht, and describes him as ‘the lord of Hadjar’ (ṣāḥib Hadjar) [Ibn Saʻd, 2001, 1, p. 238]. Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī supplies a list of Sasanid governors of Arabic lands and points out, among them, to Dād Fīrūz Kh.sh.n.sh.fān,7 of whom he states that he ruled over the region of Baḥrayn [Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī, 1921/22, p. 91]. In addition to that, Ḥamd Allāh Ḳazwīnī states, in his description of the region of Baḥrayn, that Hadjar, its capital, was built by Ardashir Bābagān, i.e., Ardashir I [Ḥamd Allāh Ḳazwīnī, 1915, p. 137]. It can be inferred therefrom that Hadjar is Madīnat al-Khaṭṭ which, in al-Ṭabarī’s words, was built by Ardashir I.
7.  Reference is made to the Sasanid governor of the Baḥrayn region, probably named Azād Pērōz Gushnāspān (son of Gushnāsp) (cf. Fīrūz Ibn Djushaysh in al-Balādhurī [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 117], Azād Fīrūz Ibn Djushnas in al-Ṭabarī [al-Ṭabarī,1881-1882, p. 985]. In Islamic sources he has the reputation of a harsh and cruel governor, who mutilated Arabs guilty of crossing the border without authorization and committed the ill-famed massacre of Banū Tamīm at al-Mushaḳḳar. He is said to have been at al-Zāra at the time of the Muslim conquest and to have either embraced Islam following al-ʻAlāʼs capture of Dārīn [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 118] or perished during the siege [Yāḳūt, 1977, 1, p. 349].
41 The alternative data are as follows. Yāḳūt mentions in his geographical encyclopaedia the marzbān of al-Zāra, who in pre-Islamic times collected tributes from Medina and Tihāma [Yāḳūt, 1977, 1, p. 83]. Elsewhere in that treatise Yāḳūt states that the marzbān of al-Zāra is referred to in accounts of the Muslim conquest [Yāḳūt, 1977, 3, p. 126]. Indeed, al-Balādhurī narrates that al-ʻAlāʼ beleaguered al-Zāra and took it after a siege, and the marzbān of Zāra called for a single combat and was killed by one of the Muslims. In the previous fragment he states that al-Zāra was the residence of Fīrūz Ibn Djushaysh (i.e., Pērōz Gushnaspān, see above) and al-ʻAlāʼ took it during ʻUmar Ibn al-Khaṭṭāb’s rule [al-Balādhurī, 1987, p. 117]. The strategic role of al-Zāra can be seen in other sources too. Al-Wāḳidī states that the Persians, after their defeat at the fortress of Djuwāthā, retreated to al-Zāra and al-Ḳaṭīf [al-Wāḳidī, 1990, p. 175]. Abū Muḥammad al-Kūfī (d. c. 926) writes essentially the same [al-Kūfī, 1991, p. 44]. Ibn Saʻd tells, in his account partly discussed above, that al-ʻAlāʼ, upon defeating the Persians at Djuwāthā, marched to al-Ḳaṭīf. There were many Persians there, but he defeated them. The rest of them retreated to al-Zāra, and al-ʻAlāʼ beleaguered them there [Ibn Saʻd, 2001, 5, p. 278].
42 Since no other data are available, the only available solution is the choice between Hadjar and al-Zāra. The second solution appears more plausible. The sources do not show Sasanid forces defending Hadjar as a centre of their possessions against Muslims. But Persians were unlikely to simply abandon the capital of Baḥrayn and the marzbān’s residence. Likewise, in the long run they are unlikely to have held their capital of the region of Baḥrayn at Hadjar situated far from the coast and advanced towards the desert. Should they have done so, they would have had to work a lot to provide the big garrison with all necessary supplies, and the Arab tribes, i.e., potential enemies, could easily pass by the fortress, cut the Persian communications, and isolate and block the marzbān and his troops. Therefore, a different reconstruction is needed, and most probably it would be as follows. The Sasanid capital of the Baḥrayn region was al-Zāra situated near the coast. Its position allowed to bring reinforcements or to evacuate the place and retreat to Persia, whichever the situation might require. Hadjar, together with other strongholds, such as Djuwāthā, protected al-Zāra from south-west, against possible raids of Arab tribes. In case of defeat Sasanid troops were to retreat to north-east, to al-Zāra, which, following the extant sources, they did. Therefore, at the actual stage of the research there are grounds to believe that al-Zāra was the Sasanid capital of the region of Baḥrayn and appears in sources under the names of madīnat al-Khaṭṭ and Punyāt Ardashir.

References

1. Abū-l-Faradj al-Iṣfahānī. Kitāb al-aghānī [Book of Songs]. Ed. A. al-Shinḳīṭī. Cairo, 1905.

2. Abū Nuʻaym al-Iṣfahānī. Maʻrifat al-ṣaḥāba [Knowledge of [Prophet Muḥammad’s] Companions]. Ed. ʻĀ. Al-ʻAzāzī. Riyadh: Dār al-waṭan li-l-nashr, 1998. Part 1.

3. Armyanskaya geografiya VII v. po R.H. [Armenian Geography of the 7th Century A.D.]. Ed. K. P. Patkanov. Saint-Petersburg, 1877.

4. al-Bakrī. Muʻdjam mā istaʻdjam min asmāʼ al-bilād wa al-mawāḍiʻ [A Reference-Book on Unclear Names of Regions and Places]. Ed. M. al-Saḳḳā. Beirut: ʻĀlam al-kutub, 1983.

5. al-Balādhurī. Futūḥ al-buldān [Conquests of the Lands]. Ed. ʻA. A. Al-Ṭabbāʻ. Beirut: Muʼassasat al-maʻārif li-l-ṭibāʻa wa-l-nashr, 1987.

6. Bosworth C. E. The History of al-Ṭabarī. Vol. V. The Sāsānids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999.

7. C. Plinius Secundus d.Ä. Naturkunde. Buch VI. Geographie: Asien. Hrsg. K. Brodersen. Zürich, Düsseldorf: Artemis & Winkler Verlag, 1996.

8. al-Dīnawarī. al-Akhbār al-ṭiwāl [Long Stories]. Ed. ʻA. ʻĀmir. Cairo: Wizārat al-thaḳāfa wa al-irshād al-ḳawmī, 1960.

9. Dīwān ʻĀmir Bin al-Ṭufayl. Riwāyat Abī Bakr Muḥammad Bin al-Ḳāsim al-Anbārī ʻan Abī-l-ʻAbbās Aḥmad Bin Yaḥyā Thaʻlab [Collection of ʻĀmir Bin al-Ṭufayl’s Poetry as Related by Abū Bakr Muḥammad Bin al-Ḳāsim al-Anbārī on the Authority of Abū-l-ʻAbbās Aḥmad Bin Yaḥyā Thaʻlab]. Ed. K. Al-Bustānī. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir, 1979.

10. al-Djanabī ʻA. ʻA. Hadjar wa ḳaṣabātu-hā al-thalāth (al-Mushaḳḳar–al-Ṣafā–al-Shabʻān) wa nahru-hā Muḥallim [Hadjar, Its Three Fortresses (al-Mushaḳḳar–al-Ṣafā–al-Shabʻān) and Its River Muḥallim]. Beirut: Dār al-maḥadjdja al-bayḍāʼ, 2004.

11. Eutychius Patriarcha Alexandrinus. Annales. Pars I (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium. Scriptores Arabici. Series III, t. VI). Ed. L. Cheikho. Beryti, Parisiis, 1906.

12. The Fársnáma of Ibnu’l-Balkhí. Ed. G. Le Strange, R. A. Nicholson. London: Luzac & Co., 1921.

13. Gedichte von ʼAbû Baṩīr Maimûn Ibn Qays al-ʼAšâ. Hrsg. R. Geyer. London: Luzac & Co, 1928.

14. Ḥamd Allāh Ḳazwīnī. The Geographical Part of the Nuzhat al-Qulub. Ed. G. Le Strange. Leiden, London, 1915.

15. Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī. Kitāb tārīkh sunī mulūk al-arḍ wa-l-anbiyāʼ [History of the Years of the Kings of the Earth and of the Prophets]. Berlin: Kaviani G.m.b.H., 1921/22.

16. Herzfeld E. Kushano-Sasanian Coins (Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India, No. 38). Calcutta: Government of India Central Publication Branch, 1930.

17. Hewsen R. H. The Geography of Ananias of Širak (Ašxarhacʽoycʽ). Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 1992.

18. al-Ḥimyarī. al-Rawḍ al-miʻṭār fī khabar al-aqṭār [[A Book Like] A Fragrant Garden With Information on Regions]. Ed. I. ʻAbbās. Beirut: Maktabat Lubnān, 1984.

19. Ibn ʻAbd al-Barr. al-Istīʻāb fī maʻrifat al-aṣḥāb [Perfect Knowledge of [Prophet Muḥammad’s] Companions]. Ed. ʻĀ. Murshid. Amman: Dār al-a-aʻlām, 2002.

20. Ibn al-Athīr. al-Kāmil fī-l-tārīkh [The Perfect History]. Ed. A. ʻA. al-Ḳāḍī. Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-ʻilmiyya, 1987. Vol. 1.

21. Ibn Durayd. Kitāb Djamharat al-lugha [Collected Vocabulary]. Ed. R. M. al-Baʻalbakkī. Beirut: Dār al-ʻilm li-l-malāyīn, 1987.

22. Ibn al-Faḳīh. Kitāb al-buldān [Book on Countries and Settlements]. Ed. Y. Al-Hādī. Beirut: ʻAlam al-kutub, 1996.

23. Ibn Ḥadjar. al-Iṣāba fī tamyīz al-ṣaḥāba [Right Distinction Between [Prophet Muḥammad’s] Companions]. Ed. ʻA. al-Turkī. Cairo: Markaz Hadjar li-l-buḥūth wa-l-dirāsāt al-ʻarabiyya wa-l-islāmiyya, 2008. Part 7.

24. Ibn Ḥubaysh. Kitāb al-ghazawāt [Book on the Raids]. Cairo: Maṭbaʻat Ḥassān, 1983.

25. Ibn Rashīḳ. al-ʻUmda fī maḥāsin al-shiʻr wa ādābi-hi wa naḳdi-hi [A Pillar-[like Book] on Good Qualities of Poetry, Its Art Canons and the Discernment of Good and Bad within It]. Ed. M. M. ʻAbd al-Ḥamīd. Beirut: Dār al-djīl, 1981.

26. Ibn Saʻd. Kitāb al-ṭabaḳāt al-kabīr [Big Book of Classes]. Ed. ʻA. M. ʻUmar. Cairo : Maktabat al-Khāndjī, 2001.

27. al-Idrīsī. Opus geographicum. Ed. A. Bombaci, U. Rizzitano, R. Rubinacci, L. Vecia Vaglieri. Fasc. IV. Neapoli, Romae: Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, 1974.

28. al-Khalīl. Kitāb al-ʻayn [Book of [Letter] ʻAyn]. Ed. M. al-Makhzūmī, I. al-Sāmarraʼī. Baghdad: Dār wa Maktabat al-Hilāl, 1980.

29. Kitâb al-Masâlik wa’l-Mamâlik (Liber viarum et regionum) auctore Abuʼl-Kâsim Obaidallah ibn Abdallah Ibn Khordâdhbeh et Excerpta e Kitâb al-Kharâdj auctore Kodâma ibn Dja‘far. Ed. M. J. De Goeje. Lugduni-Batavorum, 1889. Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum, pars VI.

30. Klaudios Ptolemaios. Handbuch der Geographie. Hrsg. A. Stückelberger, G. Graßhoff. 2. Teil. Basel: Schwabe Verlag, 2017.

31. al-Kūfī. Kitāb al-futūḥ [Book on the Conquests]. Ed. ʻA. Shīrī. Beirut: Dār al-aḍwāʼ, 1991. Part 1.

32. MacKenzie D. N. A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary. London, New York, Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1971.

33. Marquart J. Ērānšahr nach der Geographie des Ps. Moses Xorenacʿi. Berlin, 1901.

34. Muǧmal at-tawārīḫ wa-ʼl-qiṣaṣ: eine persische Weltgeschichte aus dem 12. Jahrhundert. Hrsg. S. Najmabadi, S. Weber. Edingen-Neckarhausen: Deux mondes, 2000.

35. The Mufaḍḍalīyāt. Ed. Ch. J. Lyall. Vol. I. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1921.

36. al-Naḥḥās. Sharḥ al-ḳaṣāʼid al-tisʻa al-mashhūra. [Commentary on the Nine Famous Poems]. Ed. A. Khaṭṭāb. Baghdad : Dār al-ḥurriyya li-l-ṭibāʻa, 1973.

37. Nihāyat al-arab fī akhbār al-furs wa al-ʻarab [The Utmost of What May Be Desired in Exposition of the History of Persians and Arabs]. Ed. M.T. Dāneshpezhūkh. Tehrān: Andjoman-i-āthār wa mafākhir-i-farhangī, 1996/97.

38. Nöldeke Th. Geschichte der Araber und Perser zur Zeit der Sasaniden. Leiden, 1879.

39. Polybius. The Histories. IV. London: William Heinemann, New York: G.P. Puntam’s Sons, 1925.

40. Robin Chr.-J., Prioletta A. Nouveaux arguments en faveur d’une identification de la cité de Gerrha avec le royaume de Hagar (Arabie orientale). Semitica et Classica. No. 6, 2013. Pp. 131–185.

41. Robin Chr.-R., Tayran S. Soixante-dix ans avant l’Islam : l’Arabie toute entière dominée par un roi chrétien. Comptes rendus des séances de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 156e année, N. 1, 2012. Pp. 525–553.

42. Synodicon orientale. Pub. J. B. Chabot. Paris, 1902.

43. al-Ṭabarī. Annales. Ed. M. J. De Goeje et al. Prima series. II. Rec. J. Barth, Th. Nöldeke. Lugduni Batavorum, 1881-1882. IV. Rec. P. De Jong, E. Prym. Lugduni Batavorum, 1890.

44. al-Thaʻālibī. Histoire des rois des Perses. Pub. H. Zotenberg. Paris, 1900.

45. Thaʻlab. Sharḥ shiʻr Zuhayr Bin Abī Sulmā. [Commentary on Zuhayr Ibn Abī Sulmā’s Poetry]. Ed. F. Ḳabāwa. Damascus: Maktabat Hārūn al-Rashīd li-l-tawzīʻ, 2008.

46. al-Wāḳidī. Kitāb al-ridda [The Book on the Ridda]. Beirut: Dār al-Gharb al-islāmī, 1990.

47. Yāḳūt. Muʻdjam al-buldān [A Reference-Book on Countries and Settlements]. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir, 1977.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate