O sister, if I myself do not don a shroud, if my body is not torn apart by the dagger, if my head is not placed atop the point of a lance in malice, how will Ḥusain intercede for the ummah (Muslim community) at the resurrection?
âµ
The Third Imam, Ḥusain b. Ê¿AlÄ« b. AbÄ« ṬÄleb, is a greatly revered figure whose significance within ShiÊ¿i Islam cannot be overstated: his Martyrdom, ShahÄdat-e Ḥażrat-e EmÄm Ḥusain, is the climactic episode of the taÊ¿ziyehâs Muḥarram cycle. The events represented in previous episodes have led inexorably to this point. With even the adolescent boys from amongst his supporters gone, there can be no more delay before Ḥusain himself joins the battle. This is the dramatization of an event of great eschatological importance: not merely the unjust killing of a much loved leader, but the fulfilment of Ḥusainâs covenant with God, to sacrifice his life on the plain of Karbala in order to become an intercessor for the sins of the ShiÊ¿i community on the Day of Judgement. The taÊ¿ziyehâs colourful rendition of Ḥusainâs martyrdom narrative largely follows historical sources, but incorporates jinn (genies), dervishes and foreigners.
1 Script Sources
The ten renditions of this episode shown in Table 3 provide the sources for my analysis.
Script sources for The Martyrdom of Imam Ḥusain
The taÊ¿ziyeh treatment of this momentous event has two central themes. First, Ḥusainâs steadfast commitment to his covenant is underscored by the running theme of his refusal of help: while he prefers a peaceful solution to the conflict, and is deeply troubled by the idea of leaving his womenfolk and children unprotected, he rejects any form of assistance that would equate to evading his fate. The other important theme is the transition of leadership. After Ḥusainâs death, someone must succeed him as Imam, a divinely ordained infallible spiritual leader for the community. Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n will be invested with this role but, as he is incapacitated by illness, practical leadership of the group will be assumed by another â Zainab.
Performer playing Ḥusain b. Ê¿AlÄ«, Ḥusainiyah-ye Ê¿Äáºam, Baraghan, Alborz, 10th Muḥarram 1439/ 2017
I will examine how this transition is portrayed. In my outline of the playâs skeleton I show how in the application of the martyrdom composition-scheme we see Zainab assuming functions normally served by Ḥusain; I will go on to look in detail at how she begins to take on a leadership role. The expression of the theme of refusal of help changed through time and will be analysed together with the episodeâs historical development. Ḥusainâs martyrdom has been the subject of many taÊ¿ziyeh renditions; the dramatists embellished their portrayals year after year, which resulted in considerable fluctuations in the episodeâs content. We will see that by the time its content had settled, around 1318/1900 (corresponding broadly with the end of the reign of NÄá¹£er al-DÄ«n ShÄh QÄjÄr, d. 1313/1896), one of the most interesting developments that had taken place was in the identity of the benevolent outsiders attempting to come to Ḥusainâs aid at Karbala.
2 Imam Ḥusainâs Martyrdom Transposed: From Historiography to the TaÊ¿ziyeh
Ḥusainâs life and deeds are widely documented in historical and hagiographical sources. I begin examination of this episode with brief consideration of the sourcesâ treatment of his martyrdom, particularly elements likely to have given rise to the taÊ¿ziyehâs plot detail. Due to its importance, this event is covered much more intensively in such sources than the martyrdom narratives discussed above. It thus provides a particularly good example from which to make general observations about how their content has been translated into dramatic material.
Indeed, much of this episodeâs narrative corresponds with the account of these events given in al-ṬabarÄ«âs TÄrÄ«kh. This tells of Ḥusainâs honourable and pious nature, and of how, although he had been betrayed by the Kufans (whose letters had summoned him), he sought a peaceful solution. He met at night (alone) with Ebn-e SaÊ¿d to negotiate. Al-ṬabarÄ« records that most sources hold that Ḥusain proposed three solutions during these negotiations: he would return to Medina; he would retreat to one of the border stations of the Muslim lands and live quietly; or he would put his âhand in the hand of YazÄ«d,â for YazÄ«d to make his own judgement about what should happen between them.2 He records that the nature of these offers is debated by one source, yet all of them have made their way into the taÊ¿ziyeh.3 His bid for peace proving unsuccessful, al-ṬabarÄ« records, Ḥusain requested and was granted respite.4 This respite provides the temporal framework both for the ânight of goodbyesâ that we saw in The Martyrdom of Ê¿AbbÄs and a section of the climactic episode in which Ḥusain takes extended leave of his family.
Furthermore, al-ṬabarÄ«âs account contains material relating to the taÊ¿ziyeh episodeâs theme of refusal of help. Refuge in a foreign land is among the offers of help that became fixed elements of the climactic play. Neither this offer nor the others that become permanent features of the play are traceable to historical sources. Nonetheless, al-ṬabarÄ« records that, while on the road near Kufa, having just received news that the Kufans had abandoned his cause and an army was assembled to march against him, Ḥusain was offered refuge in the mountains of AjÄ, and the protection of the tribe of Ṭayyiʾ. He declined, saying that he must continue until the situation reached its final outcome.5
Al-ṬabarÄ« also gives information about members of Ḥusainâs family who are important protagonists in the climactic episode. He tells of the Ḥusainâs young child being shot by an enemy arrow whilst on his knee.6 The child is unnamed but in the taÊ¿ziyeh this becomes a poignant scene â the martyrdom of Ê¿AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar. He also tells of how, when Ḥusain had been wounded and his martyrdom was imminent, his young nephew ran out onto the battlefield to defend him and was killed.7 The boy is again unnamed; however, this is clearly Ê¿AbdullÄh b. Ḥasan, whose martyrdom features shortly before Ḥusainâs in the climactic episode.8
Al-ṬabarÄ« also mentions Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ḥusain, referred to in the taÊ¿ziyeh by his honorifics Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n or SajjÄd, and Zainab bint Ê¿AlÄ«. The mention of Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n is succinct. It is simply recorded that after Ḥusainâs death, when the enemy plundered the camp, he was found lying ill in bed. Shamer b. áºÄ« al-Jawshan (Shemr) and some others wanted to kill him, but he was spared because of his youth and the subsequent arrival of Ebn-e SaÊ¿d, who ordered that no one should enter the womenâs tents or disturb Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n.9
Treatment of Zainab is much more extensive. Giving Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ḥusain as the source for this account, al-ṬabarÄ« records her desperate remonstrations against her brother being killed, and the tender relationship between them.10 This, and the instructions that al-ṬabarÄ« has Ḥusain give her concerning what to do upon his death, are echoed in the taÊ¿ziyeh. Furthermore, al-ṬabarÄ« notes Zainabâs bravery, recalling that when Ḥusain (already injured) was fighting multiple opponents she came out of the camp and chastised Ebn-e SaÊ¿d,11 another detail portrayed in the taÊ¿ziyeh.
Much of the version of events given by al-ṬabarÄ« is echoed in other sources. However, there is a significant area of discrepancy. Whilst all accounts tell of Ḥusain fighting valiantly and being finally brought down by a mass enemy attack, they differ with regards to the identity of his killer, and who takes his head. In the taÊ¿ziyeh retelling of this event it is certainly Shemr who does both deeds. In the climactic episode much is made of Ḥusain acknowledging, and having had foreknowledge of, his killerâs identity. Also, in the scripts of BÄzÄr-e ShÄm (chapter 6) we will see Shemr give YazÄ«d a graphic account of the process of removing Ḥusainâs head, leaving no room for ambiguity.
Shemr features in al-ṬabarÄ«âs account as a ruthless commander who advocates showing no mercy, and indeed orders the final attack in which Ḥusain is brought down, yet al-ṬabarÄ« names SenÄn b. Anas b Ê¿Amr al-NakhaÊ¿Ä« as the one who stabs and kills Ḥusain and takes his head.12 Al-MufÄ«d also cites SenÄn b. Anas as Ḥusainâs killer, but names Shemr as the taker of his head.13 BalÊ¿amÄ«âs Persian version of al-ṬabarÄ«âs TÄrÄ«kh also attributes responsibility for taking the head to Shemr, but only after a soldier named ZurÊ¿ah had caused Ḥusainâs death by stabbing him in the back with a weapon and then pulling it out through his chest.14
By the early Safavid period, historians show some awareness of this discrepancy. MÄ«rkhÄnd cites the accounts of different sources. In one version, that he attributes to DÄ«navarÄ«, SenÄn stabs Ḥusain from behind and kills him, and his head is taken by Shebl b. YazÄ«d (brother of KhawlÄ« b. YazÄ«d al-Aá¹£baḥī, infamous for transporting Ḥusainâs head to Kufa and hiding it in his oven).15 He also gives an account transmitted by al-KhwÄrezmÄ«, in which (encouraged by Shemr) ZurÊ¿ah and SenÄn kill Ḥusain, but adds a brief reference to the fact that some say it was the leprous Naá¹£r b. Khowshah who killed him, and that others say it was Shemr. The names of these same assailants are repeated in the work of MÄ«rkhÄndâs grandson, KhÄndamÄ«r.16 KÄshefÄ«, writing in the early Safavid period but from Timurid Herat, also shows knowledge of the discrepancy. In his Rawżat, he acknowledges two of these versions of Ḥusainâs killing, one in which SenÄn strikes the fatal blow but KhawlÄ«âs brother takes his head, and the other in which Shemr is guilty of both deeds.17
What can be made of these discrepancies and the fact that the taÊ¿ziyeh dramatists settled on the personage of Shemr as unequivocally responsible for Ḥusainâs murder? Indeed, a major difference between the accounts of the aforementioned sources and the taÊ¿ziyeh rendition of these events is that the taÊ¿ziyeh focuses far less on the perspective of the antagonists. Whereas in these sources the names of many Kufan and Damascene soldiers are mentioned (and conversations between them recorded), in the taÊ¿ziyehâs central episodes the number of antagonists who receive individual treatment has been reduced essentially to the personages of Shemr and Ebn-e SaÊ¿d, with a handful of others making very brief interventions. Ḥarmalah, who features consistently in the climactic play as the one who fires the arrow that kills Ê¿AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar, is an example of one of these others, as is Murrah b. MunqeẠal-Ê¿AbdÄ« who often features in Ê¿AlÄ« Akbarâs martyrdom episode as his killer. However, it is not unusual for MunqeẠto be replaced by Shemr.18 In the event of practical constraints, such as the availability of performers or costumes, it seems that in the taÊ¿ziyeh Shemr can always be the killer, a representative of all other killers.
A similar phenomenon is observable with regards to the identities of the slain infants from amongst Ḥusainâs party. The sources discussed above include a number of different accounts of male infants being mercilessly slain at Karbala. Their names and the details of the killings vary, yet in the taÊ¿ziyeh they are all represented by Ê¿AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar.19 While, as I have shown, stories are often embellished as they are retold, this is rather the opposite process. Different stories have been amalgamated and condensed, to create solid recognisable protagonists and antagonists about whose innocence or guilt there can be no doubt. While there is evidence to suggest that Shemr was widely viewed as a villainous figure long before the first taÊ¿ziyeh performances,20 the sources of the early Safavid period show that he must have become the undisputed executioner par-excellence shortly before, or simultaneously with, the taÊ¿ziyeh traditionâs emergence.
We must take into account that the taÊ¿ziyeh genre took shape during the Safavid period, when Twelver ShiÊ¿ism had become Iranâs religion of state. As the faith spread at a popular level, it is likely that it became more important to identify Husainâs killer, a key player in one of the core narratives. In chapter 1 I mentioned the role of dervish storytellers in the propagation of ShiÊ¿ism under the Safavids and the birth of the pardeh-dÄrÄ« tradition. It is likely that the consolidation of Ḥusainâs killer into the personage of Shemr took place during this period, as figures like Shemr and Ê¿AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar became icons on the storytellersâ canvases, representatives of their kind, and in turn influenced the taÊ¿ziyeh treatment of Karbala.
As the taÊ¿ziyeh tradition took root, it too became a widespread part of popular piety and influenced the understanding of these important religious stories among the masses. In its earlier phases, there was some variation in the detail portrayed. For example, the oldest extant taÊ¿ziyeh script (GhÄrat-e khaimeh-hÄ, dated 1136/1724) features a conversation between the antagonists in which they brag of their evil deeds and KhawalÄ« tells of having cut off the head of Sulá¹Än-e Yasreb (Ḥusain).21 As the repertoire became consolidated, a discrepancy over such a key issue was clearly problematic, and responsibility for the heinous deeds of murdering Ḥusain and taking his head was laid definitively with Shemr. However, a nod to the ambiguity over Ḥusainâs murderer does remain in the climactic play, which sometimes features SenÄn b. Anas in the type-scene âThe Unwilling Killerâ (discussed in chapter 2).
Performers playing Ḥusain b. Ê¿AlÄ« and Ê¿AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar, Ḥusainiyah-ye Ê¿Äáºam, Baraghan, Alborz, 10th Muḥarram 1439/2017
3 Skeleton of The Martyrdom of Imam Ḥusain and Function of Its Sections
This episode has an arch plot structure: however, there is almost no falling action and the denouement is extremely brief (a short interjection by a surviving family member, confirming the new status quo). The martyrdoms of Ḥusainâs infant son Aá¹£ghar and his nephew Ê¿AbdullÄh constitute peaks in the action prior to the climax. The episode is composed of three thematic segments: the first concerns Ḥusainâs preparations for the separation from his family; in the second he encounters a series of benevolent strangers while alone on the battlefield and, through his refusal of their help, demonstrates his commitment to fulfilling his destiny. In the third and final segment the family are once again the centre of the action, as we see his separation from them and his martyrdom. Each segment is composed of shorter sections, there are twelve in total.22 The episode includes all the elements of the martyrdom composition-scheme, but with some interesting twists. This is the skeleton of what had come to be the playâs standard form by around 1317/1900.
3.1 Section One â Ḥusain Unprotected, the Enemy Encroaching (Exposition)
The play opens with Ḥusain and Zainab praying and decrying the cruelty of fate (charkh).23 They recount the misfortunes of the martyrs and foretell the suffering to be endured by the survivors. Shemr and Ebn-e SaÊ¿d issue a battle challenge. Knowing that his martyrdom is imminent Ḥusain asks to put his head in Zainabâs lap, and sleeps. Meanwhile, the enemy approach the camp: Shemr arrives and demands that Zainab wake Ḥusain. Complaining at being awoken, Ḥusain describes a pleasant dream in which he saw his grandfather, father, mother and brother Ḥasan (or a least two of them) in paradise and was told that tomorrow he would be their guest. This is the floating scene described in chapter 2 (and also featured in Ê¿AbbÄsâ martyrdom episode). Ḥusain then attempts to negotiate with Ebn-e SaÊ¿d: stressing their lineage he requests water and asks to be allowed to return to Medina or even to retreat to beyond the lands of the Arabs. The answer is no, he must swear allegiance to YazÄ«d or fight and die. He will not swear allegiance and is granted respite to take leave of his family.
The dream scene is thus integrated into an opening scene typical of the martyrdom composition-scheme, of which the opening prayer, enemy challenge and foretelling of fates are all essential elements. However, this time, because Ḥusain himself will be the next martyr, the foretelling also initiates the idea that a monumental transition must take place â that of leadership of the group. The heroâs attempt at negotiating with Ebn-e SaÊ¿d is again an essential part of the composition-scheme, yet is also a floating scene; its position within the chronology of the action varies among renditions.24
3.2 Section Two â Familial Farewells: Acquiescence Equates Permission (Rising Action)
Ḥusain bids farewell to his relatives one by one and expresses his vaá¹£iyyat. Extended farewells between the hero and his family are a standard element of the martyrdom composition-scheme: in this episode they are particularly drawn out, because they serve additional important functions. In the other plays that we have examined, and that conform to the scheme, the episodeâs hero asks Ḥusainâs permission to do battle and is initially refused. This slows the actionâs forward momentum â towards the battlefield â allowing for an emotional build-up. We have seen this initial refusal of permission overruled by the wishes of a senior relative (those of the heroâs father in the cases of both Ê¿AbbÄs and QÄsem). In the climactic episode it is Ḥusain himself who will do battle and there is no one above him in the hierarchy at Karbala from whom he must ask permission. However, such is the extent of the womenfolkâs resistance to his departure that it stalls his progress towards the battlefield, serving a function similar to that of Ḥusain refusing other heroes permission to fight. Zainab, Kuls̱ūm, SakÄ«neh, Umm LailÄ, ShahrbÄnÅ« and others all vehemently protest his leaving.25 They decry being left unprotected and facing humiliation in a foreign land. Zainab is overwhelmed by the idea of separation from Ḥusain; she wishes for her own death and often collapses with grief. As other heroes cited their fatherâs wishes in order to overturn Ḥusainâs denial of permission for battle, Ḥusain too defers to hierarchy in justifying to the women the need for him to fight. He cites his covenant with God, to sacrifice his life in order to become an intercessor, and that his grandfather had taught him of this duty. The womenâs eventual acquiescence is a form of permission. The Chodzko rendition illustrates this particularly clearly when, after a very extended farewell and begging Ḥusain not to go, Zainab finally says âburowâ (Go!).26 He is thus released and heads onto the battlefield.
All of this considered, this section covers three essential elements of the martyrdom composition-scheme: the hero requesting and initially being denied permission to fight; contesting that decision based on the wishes of a senior relative; and taking his leave of his family and expressing his vaá¹£iyyat.
3.3 Section Three â Ḥusain Prepared for Martyrdom and Vaá¹£iyyat Continued (Rising Action)
After their final tacit acceptance of his parting, the women ready Ḥusain for battle, and the farewells and last wishes of the hero continue throughout the preparations. Zainab is the one tasked with dressing her brother in a kafan, a symbolic moment that always marks the irrevocable progress of events towards the characterâs martyrdom. Ḥusain dressing in preparation for this moment is shown in additional ways across renditions of the play. He asks Zainab to bring him an old shirt; she protests that a king should not wear such a rag but he explains that he will wear it beneath his clothes so that when the enemy plunder his body, stripping it of any garment of value, it will be left to protect his modesty.27 Elsewhere, Ḥusain requests that Feżżeh, FÄá¹emeh-ye ZahrÄâs elderly kanÄ«z, bring him a special garment that he wishes to wear for martyrdom.28
Ḥusain also gives practical instructions about what should be done after his death. He gives the women three orders: they should not go out of the camp, nor scratch their faces and pull their hair, nor cry in a way that the enemy will hear.29 He also gives them three signs by which they will know when he has been killed: the ground will tremble when he falls from the saddle; the sun will go dark and blood will rain from the sky; his horse, áºuljanaḥ, will return to camp with his forelock full of blood.30
The women now ready áºuljanaḥ, help Ḥusain into the saddle, and walk with them to the edge of the battlefield. This is an important scene featuring in all renditions of the episode. It shows not only disruption of the usual order of things but also the transition of roles, as the women take on tasks that would normally have been done by men. In some versions, angels hear of what is going on. Seeking to redress the imbalance, they rush to Karbala to help ready the horse and lead Ḥusain into battle.31
3.4 Section Four â Martyrdom of Ê¿AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar (Rising Action-First Peak)
ShahrbÄnÅ« is heard crying because her milk has run dry and her suckling son Ê¿AlÄ« Aá¹£ghar is desperate with thirst.32 Ḥusain takes the child in his arms and goes out to implore the enemy to grant water yet, at Ebn-e SaÊ¿dâs order, Ḥarmalah shoots an arrow that pierces the childâs throat. Ḥusain is devastated. Some renditions include a heart-wrenching scene in which he dresses the baby in a kafan and digs a grave for him.33 This is the only occasion in the Muḥarram cycle when a character is dressed in a kafan after death. The other martyrs don the kafan as a symbol that they are willing to sacrifice their lives. By contrast, Aá¹£ghar cannot consent to being killed. His death is portrayed as a most cruel murder, punctuated by the kafan. It is a highly evocative scene, not least because Aá¹£ghar is often represented by a real baby in performances.
This scene only features in the later renditions from amongst my script sample.34 However, it was not an innovation of the dramatists. As we have seen, historians record the murder of infants at Karbala, and KÄshefÄ«âs Rawżat includes Aá¹£gharâs story. In the position that it came to occupy in the climactic play, his martyrdom constitutes the climax of the first thematic segment, concerning Ḥusain preparing to leave his family.
3.5 Section Five â Arab Brings a Letter from FÄá¹emeh-ye á¹¢ughrÄ (Rising Action)
A messenger, identified as an Arab, arrives with a letter from Ḥusainâs daughter FÄá¹emeh-ye á¹¢ughrÄ who was left behind in Medina due to illness.35 Upon his approach Ḥusain senses that he comes from the Hijaz, saying that he carries the scent of his own people. Ḥusain asks for news of á¹¢ughrÄ. The Arab recounts coming across her in Medinaâs narrow streets; she is ill with sadness from missing her father.36 Her letter asks for news of her brothers and when Ḥusain will send for her, or return. Different renditions include a range of emotive details such as her asking whether Aá¹£ghar is talking yet, or saying that she has stitched clothes for him.37 The Imam answers that their reunion will be at the Resurrection. This is a familial farewell by proxy, the medium of the letter allowing á¹¢ughrÄâs voice to be heard at Karbala and the presence of the messenger allowing Ḥusain to respond: it belongs thematically to the playâs first segment but is not always played in this position. In the playsâ second thematic segment, which I will now detail, Ḥusain is alone on the battlefield and has a series of encounters with benevolent strangers. The arrival of á¹¢ughrÄâs messenger can feature between these encounters.38
3.6 Section Six â Encounter with the Dervish of Kabul (Rising Action)
A dervish from Kabul arrives. He is on a pilgrimage to the tomb of Ê¿AlÄ« b. AbÄ« ṬÄleb at Najaf and, having heard a child crying with thirst, has filled his kashkÅ«l (beggars bowl) with water and come to help. Ḥusain is grateful but tells him that water is not unobtainable for them, ordering him to pour it onto the ground. A miracle occurs: as the water runs through the Imamâs fingers the parched plain of Karbala is momentarily transformed into an ocean.39 Having learned of Ḥusainâs identity the dervish asks to be martyred for him; the dervish confronts Ebn-e SaÊ¿d and does not speak again. This is an example of the type-scene âThe Arrival of a Strangerâ (outlined in chapter 2).40
3.7 Section Seven â Encounter with ZaÊ¿far, King of the Jinn (Rising Action)
Next, ZaÊ¿far, king of the jinn, arrives. Ḥusain asks who he is and why he has come: he replies that he is of a line of jinn loyal to Ḥusainâs family and that his father was converted to Islam and given the rank of monarch by Ê¿AlÄ« b. AbÄ« ṬÄleb.41 He has heard of Ḥusainâs terrible plight and has come with a vast army of jinn warriors. If Ḥusain grants permission, they will destroy his opponents. Ḥusain is grateful but says that it would be unchivalrous to allow jinn to fight for him as they are invisible to the enemy. ZaÊ¿far suggests that they assume human form to do battle but Ḥusain still refuses, instead telling ZaÊ¿far to go and mourn for him.
3.8 Section Eight â Encounter with Sultan Qais (Rising Action)
With his final battle imminent, true to the martyrdom composition-scheme, many renditions of the play now show Ḥusain making a last attempt to negotiate with Ebn-e SaÊ¿d. He seeks a peaceful solution, asking that they be allowed to retreat abroad, to beyond the lands of the Arabs â a particularly significant request at this point as the next stranger to offer help will indeed offer refuge in a foreign land.
The battle begins but suddenly the playâs action jumps to India where a certain Sultan Qais and his vizier go hunting in the wilderness and are assailed by a lion.42 They call to Ḥusain for help (their initial dialogue having established that they are ShiÊ¿i). Ḥusain arrives just in time and saves them by pacifying the lion, reminding it that by his fatherâs decree the flesh of his followers is forbidden to wild beasts. When Qais enquires about Ḥusainâs bloodied state he is told of the situation at Karbala and offers refuge in India.43 Ḥusain responds that there is no use for him in surviving his beloved Akbar. He instructs Qais to go home and set up a mourning ritual for him. Qaisâ story completes an important trilogy of scenes in which, as Husain repeatedly refuses help, his commitment to his duty to be sacrificed at Karbala is emphasized. This trilogy was a 13th/19th century innovation.
3.9 Section Nine â Covenant Foregrounded: Ḥusain Ready for Martyrdom (Rising Action)
In the playâs third thematic segment there are no more interventions from strangers and, during the escalation towards the climax attention returns to Ḥusainâs interactions with his family, and aggressors. Having digressed considerably in the second segment, the dramatists once again bring the reason for Ḥusainâs martyrdom to the fore. Often Jebraʾīl (Gabriel) appears to Ḥusain and speaks to him of his covenant.44 Or, Ḥusain talks to God about being prepared to die for the absolution of the sins of the ummah.45 The message at the core of the taÊ¿ziyeh that connects the audience to these events is stressed. It is for their sake that Ḥusain makes this sacrifice. Despite his resolve Ḥusainâs internal struggle is shown through a variety of conversations with non-human helpers. He lies down and embraces the earth, asking the sands of Karbala to mother him in the absence of ZahrÄ,46 or to take word of his plight to his father at Najaf.47 Some renditions feature Ḥusain speaking to his sword, áºÅ«-l-feqÄr, remembering its deeds in the hands of his father, or conversing with his horse, ordering him to take news of his death to the camp.48 Such addresses also highlight the absence of human helpers at this point.
3.10 Section Ten â Unwilling Killers (Rising Action)
Ḥusain is overpowered by the vast enemy army and, badly wounded, falls from his horse. Ebn-e SaÊ¿d gives the order that he must be killed yet many renditions delay the climax by inserting a type-scene here, âThe Unwilling Killerâ. Someone is ordered to take Ḥusainâs head and sets out to do so, but cannot. Two varieties of this scene can be played here: in one the unwilling killer is a Christian from amongst the enemy troops; in the other he is SenÄn Ebn-e Anas.49 Whether the scene is played or not, ultimately Shemr presents himself as the one who will be Ḥusainâs killer and sets out to take his head.
3.11 Section Eleven â Martyrdom of Ê¿AbdullÄh (Peak in Action)
Despite Zainab trying to hold him back Ê¿AbdullÄh b. Ḥasan rushes onto the battlefield to defend his uncle (it is sometimes suggested that Shemr is sitting on Ḥusainâs chest at this point).50 He berates Shemr but the arch-antagonist mercilessly dismisses the boy, saying that his mouth still smells of milk. When Ê¿AbdullÄh persists, he kills him. This martyrdom is a last peak in action before the climax. It is stable feature of this episode, underscoring the ruthlessness of Ḥusainâs killer.
3.12 Section Twelve â Martyrdom of Ḥusain (Climax and Denouement)
Ḥusain tells Shemr that he is thirsty but water is denied. In some renditions, he sees a mark on Shemrâs chest that fits his grandfatherâs description of his killer.51 Whilst accepting Shemr as his murderer Ḥusain asks him to hold back as he is waiting for someone. Who? His mother. There follows a short type- scene âAn Apparition from Beyond the Graveâ. FÄá¹emeh-ye ZahrÄ appears, in some renditions accompanied by the Prophet Muḥammad.52 She and Ḥusain mourn those who have fallen and lament the fates of the survivors. Ḥusain asks her to close his eyes and place his feet towards the qeblah (direction of prayer). They comfort each other. He tells her to go, that he is coming right behind her.
The covenant is always recalled here, reminding the audience again that Ḥusainâs sacrifice is for their sake. He often makes a final prayer, praying for forgiveness for the ShiÊ¿a.53 In the martyrdom composition-scheme, as we have seen it applied across other episodes, Ḥusain rushes across the battlefield to the heroâs side at the moment of his death. Now, as he himself is about to die, it is Zainab who comes to his side.54 This is significant to the theme of transition in leadership, with Zainab taking on Ḥusainâs role. Like the other heroes who, taking their last breaths, asked Ḥusain to spare their womenfolk from seeing their injured bodies, Ḥusain tries to send Zainab away so that she will not see his murder. He says the shahÄdah. We hear that the ground is trembling and that the sky has gone dark.55 Shemr declares the deed is done and demands his reward.
4 Transition of Leadership, Spiritual and Physical
The martyrdom of Ḥusain b. Ê¿AlÄ« is not only an event of great eschatological importance within ShiÊ¿ism, it is also a moment of transition. His earthly role must be assumed by another, or indeed others. In Twelver ShiÊ¿ism the gift of being a spiritual guide is transferrable between generations (or brothers in the case of Ḥasan and Ḥusain). After Ḥusainâs death the imamate will pass to Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n; he will become the Fourth Imam. We would thus, perhaps, expect him to become the new leader of the group and, given that the cycleâs main protagonist is about to be martyred, that the dramatists would begin to bring Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n into focus as a major character. However, this is not what happens. Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n is given only very brief treatment and, certainly for the duration of this episode, is tasked solely with surviving in order that the light of the imamate not be extinguished.56 Meanwhile, Zainab effectively takes on leadership of the group. In the following chapter we will hear much about how women â in particular Zainab â become the spokespeople for the cause once the party arrive in Damascus. However, given the strongly hierarchical structure of the group (emphasised throughout previous episodes of the cycle), a transition is required to show Ḥusainâs earthly mantle being passed on, and this must happen before his martyrdom. We will now examine how the dramatists have managed this transition and illustrated the importance of the protagonists involved.
4.1 Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ḥusain: Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n
Characterization of Ê¿AlÄ« b. Ḥusain, referred to most commonly as Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n or Imam SajjÄd, represents something of a challenge. He is the Fourth Imam of ShiÊ¿i Islam and a highly revered figure, yet in the plays of the Muḥarram cycle the dramatists cannot make him a hero, as they have done with the other men and adolescent boys of Ḥusainâs family, as they must portray him as being too weak with illness to fight at Karbala. In constructing his character they must portray him both as exceptional and vulnerable. Indeed, in some cases the dramatists appear to have evaded this tricky issue by not treating him at all, omitting him as a character from the climatic play.57 Those renditions that do treat Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n tend to adhere broadly to KashefÄ«âs account of his experience at Karbala, in which he is determined to defend his father despite his illness: struggling and weak, he shakily makes for the battlefield but is ordered back to camp by Ḥusain, who says that he must survive as Imam and beget future generations so that their hereditary line should continue until the resurrection.58 Some taÊ¿ziyeh treatments of Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n offering to be martyred have Ḥusain replying explicitly that he must stay alive in order to take on the imamate.59 Importance is also placed on his surviving as the male protector of the women and girls. Regardless of the justification, in Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«nâs case the refusal of permission to fight will not be repealed.
In some renditions, the dramatists have developed the theme of sickness, showing Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n to be delirious. As Ḥusain enters his tent to say farewell, dazed, he believes his father to be Ê¿AbbÄs, QÄsem, Akbar,60 or even Muḥammad, Ê¿AlÄ«, Ḥasan, or FÄá¹emeh-ye ZahrÄ.61 In the Litten Collection rendition, when Ḥusain visits Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«nâs tent on his return to camp during battle, the composer makes a colourful allusion to FarÄ«d al-DÄ«n Ê¿Aá¹á¹Ärâs famous Sufi poem Maná¹eq al-á¹ayr. He is stuck with so many arrows that due to their feathered quills the feverish one initially sees him as a giant bird, commenting that he looks like the mythical simurgh, and wondering is it the hoopoe? Or Jebraʾīl himself? The dramatists also highlight Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«nâs intense frustration at not having strength to fight, some showing him adamant that he should be martyred, insisting on making for the battlefield, and held back or taken back to camp by Kuls̱ūm or Zainab.62 In this sense, as with Umm LailÄ, Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«nâs refusal to obey Ḥusain is connected with delirium.
The special nature of Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«nâs identity is underscored in the climactic episode by the attention given to his mother, ShahrbÄnÅ«. Although with very little basis in historical accounts, popular tradition holds that she was a daughter of the last Sasanian king Yazdegerd III.63 ShahrbÄnÅ«âs union with Ḥusain infuses the imamate, through Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n and his descendants, with royal Persian blood, creating an inextricable link between Iran and ShiÊ¿ism. With such lineage, the light not only of the imamate but also of the â farrâ, the glorious light of age-old Persian kingship, will live on in Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n.64 ShahrbÄnÅ«âs distinctive identity is brought to the fore in the climactic episode as, while the other survivors will be taken to ShÄm, a significant number of renditions feature Ḥusain arranging her escape. He tells her that upon his death, when áºuljanaḥ returns to camp covered in blood, she should mount and release the reins. The horse will take her where God wants her to go and she will be saved from captivity.65 She will escape to Ray and thus, it is intimated, will carry the news of the events at Karbala to Persia. Her flight itself is dramatized in a separate sub-episode.66 While that episode does not feature her arrival in Iran, the audience are likely to have been familiar with the popular narrative concerning her return, and the existence of her shrine (founded in the 9th/15th century) on Mount Tabarak at Ray on the outskirts of Tehran. Popular tradition holds that on that site, pursued by her enemies, she called to God for help and the mountain opened to offer her refuge.67 ShahrbÄnÅ«âs journey creates for the audience a physical connection between the distant sands of Karbala and their homeland. Ḥusainâs provision for her escape in the climactic episode provides the fulfilment of a tangible local legend; it evokes her royal Persian lineage and with it that of their son, Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n.
Besides tasking the frail Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n with staying alive in order to assume the imamate, Ḥusain invests him with his vaá¹£iyyat. He instructs him to tell the ShiÊ¿a that when they drink cold water they should remember Ḥusainâs thirst at Karbala.68 Ḥusain also tells him that he should look after the family, but it is clear that this will not be possible for some time. The responsibility for practical leadership of the group must, indeed, fall to Zainab.
4.2 Zainab: Readying Ḥusainâs Horse
I have demonstrated above that the very structure of the play works to support the idea of Zainab taking on Ḥusainâs mantle. According to the Muḥarram cycleâs martyrdom composition-scheme, where the hero of the episode would normally seek Ḥusainâs permission to sacrifice his life, Ḥusain himself speaks with his female kin â in particular Zainab. He debates with her at length and invokes (in the form of the covenant) the will of God, and of his grandfather the Prophet, in order to finally win her agreement. Then, as Ḥusain is gasping his last breaths, it is Zainab who comes to his side in the way that in other episodes Ḥusain arrives to accompany the other dying heroes of his house, Ê¿AbbÄs, Akbar and QÄsem. Ḥusain directly states his wish for Zainab to take care of the family as he makes his vaá¹£iyyat; the scene in which the women ready Ḥusainâs horse for battle is important in showing Zainab taking over responsibility for the group.
The preparation of the horse is an integral part of this episode. It highlights the injustice at Karbala by showing a situation so dire that the women must undertake menâs jobs. It seeks a sense of outrage from the audience and always features one or more characters decrying this state of affairs: for example Ḥusain, in the Litten rendition exclaims:
Ḥusain: O AllÄh, look upon the state of Ê¿AlÄ«âs Ḥusain! Except you no backing nor refuge remains for broken-hearted me. Zainab and Kuls̱ūm are helping me, one with a flag in her hand, the other as jelÅ«dÄr (groom who leads the horse). SakÄ«neh has become a saddle-bearer for Ḥusain. All of my kith and kin are weeping and wailing.
While the call for outrage is clear, and the scene incites lament for the lost menfolk, it also elicits pride in the women. Furthermore, this moment marks an important change in their situation. We have seen that in previous plays of the cycle the perspective of the women and girls at Karbala does receive treatment and that, indeed, that treatment increased as the plays developed. We have also seen that to the martyr heroes the womenfolk are precious and must be guarded, but providing this protection is an earthly obligation that must be forgone in order that they fulfil their divinely ordained duty to sacrifice their lives. The women and girls are in many ways synonymous with the camp, a closely guarded territory to which the heroes go between their forays onto the battlefield. This is about to change: the camp will be burned and with their male protectors gone the women will face the enemy directly. Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n will survive but it will be largely the women and girls who remain to represent Ḥusainâs house and, as we will see in chapter 6, to protect Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n.
The scene in which they ready the horse marks the moment at which, with Zainab as their leader, the women begin to take over from their menfolk. In the Zand and Chodzko renditions, before asking her to bring his horse Ḥusain tells Zainab that she now stands in place of his male helpers:
Ḥusain: O light of my two eyes in my sorrow, O unfortunate burdened sister, I have no companion, no helper. I have no son, no brother. Now, you are my brother and also my afflicted QÄsem and my Akbar.
The same sentiments are echoed in later renditions. Ḥusain then asks Zainab to bring him his horse: she will be his jelÅ«dÄr in place of Akbar. In some versions, it is Zainab alone who fulfils all tasks associated with readying the horse for battle, including carrying Ḥusainâs saddle, holding the stirrup for him to mount and raising the flag.71 In others, the women of the family help her: Kuls̱ūm typically acts as flag-bearer in place of Ê¿AbbÄs; SakÄ«neh, Feżżeh, ShahrbÄnÅ« and Ruqaiyeh take on a variety of tasks including passing Ḥusain his sword.72 The women form a veritable army, and some dramatists have Ḥusain refer to them as such in his farewell to the sickly Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n:
Zainab then calls upon the women to come out of the camp and to line up in rank, in order that it not be said that Ḥusain is without an army. That the women take on such roles is portrayed as a grievous disruption to the natural order, but their bravery and loyalty is celebrated here. In Cerulli MS 539, Zainab gives a long and rousing speech as she instructs them individually on the tasks they should undertake; she ends by ordering them to shout in unison âYÄ Ê¿AlÄ«!â. In performance this is no doubt a highpoint in the action and it is likely that the audience (particularly the female contingent) joined them in making this cry.
In the Chodzko rendition Zainab ensures that Ḥusain will have an army in a different way. After readying the horse, rather than rallying the women she calls for a message to be taken to Ê¿AbbÄsâ corpse; she instructs him and the other martyrs to rise and line up on two sides, raising the flag to welcome their king to the battlefield. But whichever way the scene is played, it ends with either Jebraʾīl or Zainab calling upon the ShiÊ¿a to mourn; Ḥusain is going into battle and will be martyred â for them. Such calls are addressed to the audience: they are common in the climactic play (usually made by Jebraʾīl or Zainab as opposed to other characters), serving to pull the audience into the drama through their vocal participation. They should now lament loudly in anticipation of Ḥusainâs death; the new order, that will be established in its aftermath, has been prepared. The women, under Zainabâs leadership, are taking up the banner.
In Persian epic literature, that as we have seen influenced the characterisation of the ahl-e bait and their kin, women are important players and can also be heroic warriors.74 However, despite the allusions of this scene, the women of Ḥusainâs house will not take up arms: rather, as the cycle continues, their voices will be their weapons. Nonetheless, it merits comment that the wider taÊ¿ziyeh repertoire includes at least one story of women doing battle. According to Islamic tradition women acting as warriors is not permitted; the play in question, Durrat al-á¹¢adaf, is likely to have been inspired by the tales of female warriors from Persian literature.75 It is the eponymous story of a girl from Aleppo whose father is one of the city elders and whose family are supporters of Imam Ḥusain. Upon hearing of his martyrdom and the arrival of the cavalcade of captives, she rallies a group of 72 female warriors from amongst her kin and sets out to ambush the party, to help the prisoners and to take revenge on Ebn-e SaÊ¿d and Shemr.76 In some renditions these combatants are martyred, whilst in others the play closes before the conclusion of their battle.
Despite it being of great interest that the taÊ¿ziyeh repertoire includes such material, notably, those women are not from among Ḥusainâs house. When treating Zainab and the other women of the family the dramatists were under certain constraints: not only the need to adhere (at least minimally) to records of their deeds in historical sources, but also the need to show them exemplifying the behaviour expected of pious women. Indeed, the heroism of Zainab and her female kin is not that of warriors but of fortitude in suffering and in raising their voices against injustice. This portrayal may also have its roots in Persian literature. In her study of the morphology of Persian âfairy talesâ, by applying Vladimir Proppâs theory of functions Pegah Khadish argues that women are subject to different types of trial to men.77 Theirs are usually trials of patience and endurance, rather than problem-solving (like their male counterparts).78 Indeed, although Zainab takes over an active role as leader of the group and does raise her voice, the taÊ¿ziyeh remains true to this principle in that her strength is shown through her dignified endurance. Thus, while a woman takes on a leadership role, the social status quo is not challenged but reinforced.
4.3 âIf Not You, Then Who â¦?â Salvific Importance of Zainabâs Role
Characterised in the taÊ¿ziyeh as the ideal ShiÊ¿i woman â generous and self-sacrificing, with impeccable qualities of mother and sisterhood, submissive to Godâs will yet fearless in speaking out against injustice â Zainab is also shown to have transcendental qualities. In GhÄrat-e khaimeh-hÄ, the episode in which the enemy plunders the camp after Ḥusainâs death, she curses and briefly paralyses Shemr. She is also shown, like Ḥusain (and their father before them), to have dominion over the natural world; in the same episode, at her command a wild lion comes to protect the bodies of the martyrs from being trampled.79 Moreover, the taÊ¿ziyeh firmly asserts the importance of Zainabâs role in the predestined events that must unfold in order for the ShiÊ¿i community to achieve salvation. Not only must she carry out specific acts, but the suffering that she must endure is more than incidental.
The taÊ¿ziyeh highlights her role as a preserver of the âamÄnÄtâ, key relics that represent the tribulations endured by the Prophetâs family in the righteous path, and which it is believed will be important in the intercession that FÄá¹emeh-ye ZahrÄ will make on the Day of Judgement.80 At Karbala, like the male martyrs who are offspring of the ahl-e bait, Zainab is shown to have been invested with special instructions and to be acting in accordance with wishes of a late and senior relative. Immediately prior to Ḥusain going into battle she kisses his throat, which Shemrâs knife will cut. She explains that it was their motherâs wish that she should do this (in her place) at Karbala.81 This kiss is an important symbolic element of their heart-wrenching farewell. It sees her release Ḥusain and, freed from the constraints of his earthly duties, he heads onto the battlefield to fulfil his divinely ordained duty.
Special attention is given to the predestined nature of Zainabâs role in the scripts. For example, in the Chodzko and Litten renditions of the climactic episode, when she laments her great pain at having lost so many family members, seeming to doubt that she will be able to carry on, Ḥusain encourages her on the basis of the importance of her predestined role:
Ḥusain: Tell me, if not you, who will become a captive, taken prisoner at the hands of the army of hatred? If not you, then who will go to ShÄm? Who will set foot bareheaded in the public court?
According to this understanding, just as Ḥusain does not wish to evade his martyrdom, the event enshrined in his covenant, she should not evade what she must endure. Framing her captivity and humiliation in this way implies that it is not merely a consequence of Ḥusainâs death. Rather, it is an essential part of the sacrifice made by the descendants of the Prophet for the ShiÊ¿i community. Whilst showing that Zainab lived to return to Medina, her treatment in the taÊ¿ziyeh affirms that the sacrifice she made was of an importance equal to that of the Karbala martyrs. Zainab is undoubtedly a figure of great importance in ShiÊ¿i traditions relating to Karbala and in the rawżeh-khÄnÄ«/maqtal telling of these events, yet the degree to which the taÊ¿ziyeh plays highlight her role is in keeping with the trend that we have seen across other episodes. The female perspective and contribution is given special attention.
5 Historical Development
5.1 A Trilogy of Trials, and the Angel Who Became a Dervish
The theme of Ḥusainâs uncompromising submission to Godâs will, demonstrated by his refusal of any form of help, had existed in popular narratives concerning the battle of Karbala for centuries prior to our earliest taÊ¿ziyeh script. In such narratives, Ḥusain rejects offers of assistance (water or military might) made by supernatural beings, jinn and angels â demonstrating his forbearance. In the interest of making the same point, the taÊ¿ziyeh composers built such offers into the climactic episode, where Ḥusainâs steadfast commitment to his covenant is a prominent theme.83
Performer playing the Dervish of Kabul, Ḥusainiyah-ye Ê¿Äáºam, Baraghan, Alborz, 10th Muḥarram 1439/2017
Here, I will examine how during the reigns of Fatḥ-Ê¿AlÄ« ShÄh, Muḥammad ShÄh and NÄá¹£er al-DÄ«n ShÄh QÄjÄr (coinciding broadly with the 19th century CE), the heyday of the genreâs popularity, the dramatists explored the idea of refusal of help through a variety of different gÅ«sheh-hÄ. These are short, self-contained stories, in each of which a benevolent outsider attempts to come to Ḥusainâs aid. As they refined their craft, the dramatists created of these encounters a trilogy of trials for the Imam that showed him resisting three diverse opportunities to evade his fate. Furthermore, they replaced certain offers of help made by supernatural beings with offers made by humans, representatives of living social groups. I will begin by discussing the trilogy of trials and will go on to break down its elements, asking where they came from and what the motivation was for including these particular characters in this, the most important taÊ¿ziyeh episode.
By the end of NÄá¹£er al-DÄ«n ShÄhâs reign (1313/1896) the content of The Martyrdom of Imam Ḥusain had settled; renditions from across Iran had become relatively consistant both in the scenes that they included, and in their structure. We have seen in my outline of the playâs skeleton that its central segment, after Ḥusain taking leave of his family and before the crescendo towards his martyrdom, had come to be composed of a series of three encounters with benevolent strangers. The Dervish of Kabul arrives offering water, ZaÊ¿far, king of the jinn appears offering military might, and, after rescuing Sultan Qais from a lion, Ḥusain is offered refuge in India. He is thus offered, but refuses, solutions to the three essential problems that he and his party face at Karbala: deprival of water; being militarily outnumbered; and lack of refuge or the opportunity to escape. Given his desperate situation and his anguish at witnessing the suffering of his family, refusing these offers constitutes a trilogy of trials for Ḥusain. His fortitude shows his commitment to fulfilling his duty and underscores his infallibility. Importantly, the trilogy transmits the message that he was not vanquished at Karbala. Rather, he understood the higher purpose of his and his familyâs sacrifice.
This trilogy is not only interesting in that it shows the work of the taÊ¿ziyeh dramatists becoming more sophisticated over time; its elements are testament to the evolutionary path of the genre. Whereas ZaÊ¿farâs story is present in relatively early taÊ¿ziyeh episodes, the other two characters were new, their addition a mid-19th century innovation.84 The story of ZaÊ¿far is an example of the taÊ¿ziyehâs potential to preserve and popularise old and otherwise little-known stories. Meanwhile, the stories of the Dervish of Kabul and Sultan Qais are indicative of the taÊ¿ziyeh composersâ societal connections, their influences and sources, and the potential of the genre to broaden the popular understanding of the Karbala narrative by absorbing new protagonists.
How had the theme of Ḥusainâs refusal of any form of help been explored in the taÊ¿ziyeh during the decades, or perhaps even centuries, before the creation of this trilogy? Indeed, the earliest evidence of a gÅ«sheh relevant to this theme featuring in the climactic play is the apparition of ZaÊ¿far and his powerful jinn army in a rendition by the composer NÄá¹eq, dated 1217/1802â3.85 Ḥusainâs encounter with ZaÊ¿far is likely to have been known to the taÊ¿ziyeh composers from KÄshefÄ«âs Rawżat, but it draws on much older sources. The maqtal genre features many stories of the jinn appearing at Karbala; Ebn ṬÄwÅ«sâ 7th/13th century Arabic work LuhÅ«f (Sighs of Sorrow) is an early example.86 Furthermore, in ZaÊ¿farâs dialogue with Ḥusain he mentions his father being converted to Islam by Ê¿AlÄ« b. AbÄ« ṬÄleb; al-Shaikh al-MufÄ«dâs 4th/10th century KetÄb al-ErshÄd includes an account of Ê¿AlÄ« securing the conversion of jinn.87 The narrative of ZaÊ¿far and his army coming to Ḥusainâs aid was indeed rooted in old folklore relating to Karbala. In this case, the taÊ¿ziyeh dramatists would not change or replace ZaÊ¿farâs story: this early exploration of the theme of refusal of help was played by the end of NÄá¹£er al-DÄ«n ShÄhâs reign much as it had been a hundred years earlier. The dramatists devised a prologue, only played in certain renditions, showing ZaÊ¿far abandoning his own wedding to go to Karbala upon hearing of Ḥusainâs plight. Otherwise, they stuck closely to his story as told by KÄshefÄ«.88
There is much greater variation in the other gÅ«sheh-hÄ that express this theme. By the 1830s the dramatists had begun to include further examples of refusal of help, in addition to ZaÊ¿farâs. In the Chodzko rendition Fuá¹rus, a once fallen angel, indebted to Ḥusain because pardoned on his birth, arrives offering the aid of a powerful angelic battalion. The Litten rendition also features such an offer but from an army of unnamed angels, as does Berezinâs 1259/1843 spectator account. Thus, a scene involving an offer of military help from angels appears to have been a stable element of the climactic play as performed in the 1830s and 1840s (at least in Tehran). Fuá¹rusâ story is told in KÄshefÄ«âs Rawżat, and the idea of angels coming to Ḥusainâs aid is not, in itself, surprising.89 However, what happened next is indeed curious.
The gÅ«sheh featuring the Dervish of Kabul became part of the climactic episode between 1256/1840 and 1290/1873. That of Sultan Qais was beginning to be played by 1259/1843 and by 1318/1900 (at latest) it had been fully integrated.90 Of the seven renditions of the climactic play amongst my sample that are later than the 1840s, only one (CP: MS 938) features angels offering help, and not in a separate gÅ«sheh but as Ḥusain is leading his horse into battle. This strongly suggests that by the end of the genreâs heyday, the angelsâ offers had largely been written out in favour of the scenes involving the Dervish of Kabul and Sultan Qais.
So, where did these new characters come from? And why were they integrated into the most important taÊ¿ziyeh episode in place of celestial beings? Unlike ZaÊ¿far and Fuá¹rus, the Dervish of Kabul and Sultan Qais did not come from KÄshefÄ«âs Rawżat: rather, they made their way into the taÊ¿ziyeh from the pardeh-dÄrÄ« tradition and are indeed testament to the tight web of influences between the traditions of pardeh-dÄrÄ«, taÊ¿ziyeh-khÄnÄ« and the lithographs of the rawżeh-khÄnÄ«/maqtal genre. The stories of both characters appear in such lithographs at around the same time as they first appear in the taÊ¿ziyeh: that of Sultan Qais in JawharÄ« s ṬūfÄn al-BukÄʾ (1250/1834), and that of the dervish in Muḥammad Ḥusain Ebn-Ê¿AbdullÄh ShahrÄbÄ«âs ṬarÄ«q al-bukÄʾ (first published in 1273/1856â57).91 With regards to the story of Sultan Qais, I have argued elsewhere that the taÊ¿ziyeh composers initially worked directly from the ṬūfÄn version of this narrative, adapting its details through time as they integrated it into the fabric of the climactic episode.92 However, before the 1830s advent of print in Iran the stories of both of these new characters were told in the narrations of the pardeh-dÄrÄn: both are depicted on an extant pardeh dated to the Zand period.93 Interestingly, the same canvas also shows Ḥusain being offered water by an angel, which brings us to an intriguing matter concerning the story of the dervish.
Despite not featuring in KÄshefÄ«âs Rawżat, the dervishâs story, albeit with a narrative twist, had circulated in the rawżeh-khÄnÄ« recitals during the Safavid period. Jean Chardin recalls a recital on the 10th of Muḥarram of 1085/1674 in Isfahan that featured the story of an angel who appeared to Ḥusain at Karbala in the guise of a hermit, offering him a bowl of water. Ḥusain rejected the offer and, saying that if he wanted water he would receive it, touched the ground with one finger â and a great fountain spurted forth.94 This is unmistakably the same story as is told about the Dervish of Kabul in the taÊ¿ziyeh. There are other reports of witnesses hearing versions of this story more than a century before the taÊ¿ziyeh rendition. Salmons and Van Goch report a rawżeh-khÄnÄ« recital in Muḥarram of 1150/1737 in which the same story is told, only the angel does not disguise himself as a hermit.95 The appearance of both the water-bearing dervish and angel on the Zand period pardeh indicates that both of these narratives were in circulation by then. However, as this story found its way into the climactic episode the identity of this water-bearing, miracle-witnessing stranger would become fixed as the Dervish of Kabul.
Another dervish character had long been a feature of the climactic play. Indeed, the earliest extant version (the Zand rendition dated 1204/1789â90) features the gÅ«sheh of MÅ«sÄ va DarvÄ«sh-e BiyÄbÄnÄ« (Moses and the Desert- Dwelling Dervish). This is often described as a prologue but can act more as a frame, its characters not only opening the play but (despite remaining external to the action) interjecting a number of times during its course to comment on what is happening.96 In this gÅ«sheh a dervish, unable to reconcile the idea of a merciful creator with the existence of hell, experiences a crisis of faith and reproaches God. Jebraʾīl hears him and sends MÅ«sÄ to remedy the situation. To justify the necessity of a hell MÅ«sÄ holds up two fingers, telling the dervish to look between them, and shows him a vision of the atrocities committed at Karbala. The play begins. In this case, the dervish acts as a witness and in his conversation with MÅ«sÄ, almost as a narrator. This gÅ«sheh continued to be played but became marginal, largely superseded by the Dervish of Kabul.97
So, as the content of the climactic episode was honed during its great enjoyment of popularity, not only did the angel become a dervish, but the dervish as an external witness became a helper who conversed directly with Ḥusain shortly before his martyrdom, and in most renditions is even martyred for him.98 Furthermore, the dervish in the climactic play was no longer an anonymous desert-dweller, but had become a figure associated with a particular order. As I have discussed above, the KhÄksÄr trace their spiritual lineage to a dervish from Kabul who had met Ḥusain at Karbala.99 The gÅ«sheh that entered the climactic taÊ¿ziyeh episode is a clear adaptation of that story, the founding myth of the KhÄksÄr dervishes. This was the order with whom Selseleh-ye Ê¿Ajam â major participants in the pardeh-dÄrÄ« tradition â were closely associated (if not synonymous). In chapter 1 I showed a connection between the taÊ¿ziyeh-khÄnÄn of the Qajar period and Selseleh-ye Ê¿Ajam. This connection and the strong influence of pardeh-dÄrÄ« on the taÊ¿ziyeh explain the insertion of the founding myth of the KhÄksÄr into the taÊ¿ziyehâs most important episode.100
The story of Sultan Qais does not appear to be traceable to a particular figure. However, taking into account that upon rejecting Qaisâ offer of help Ḥusain orders the sultan to return home and set up a mourning ritual for him, this can be considered a type of founding myth â explaining the existence of a culture of lament for Ḥusain in India. One reading of the Qais gÅ«sheh sees him as a (fictional) Mughal ruler, to save whom Ḥusain transcended not only space but also time, appearing in India on the day of Ê¿ÄshÅ«rÄʾ around a millennium after Karbala. However, in the scripts among my sample this is not the intended reading: they explicitly locate Ḥusainâs apparition in India on the day of the battle, some renditions including, in the introductory conversation between Qais and his vizier, an explicit statement that it is the 10th of Muḥarram and that 61 years have passed since the hijra (migration of the Muslim community from Mecca to Medina and beginning of the Islamic calendar).101 These characters are shown in that same conversation to be believers, calling for Ḥusain when in peril. Some versions attempt even to explain how this can be so: in CP: MS 539 the vizier asks Qais why he and everyone around him are in a state of agitation; Qais answers that a dervish came from the Kaâba with a picture of Ḥusain, with which they have fallen in love; they are being driven crazy by separation from him.102 This proselytising dervish gives the impression of being a pardeh-dÄr, and, since Qaisâ story made its way from the pardeh-dÄrÄ« tradition into the taÊ¿ziyeh, such a character explaining how knowledge of Ḥusain reached India could even represent the author inserting himself into the play.103
In sum, whilst the offers of help from angels and jinn allowed the demonstration of Ḥusainâs commitment to his covenant, the addition of benevolent outsiders who were representatives of living social groups â the KhÄksÄr dervishes and the ShiÊ¿a of India â broadened the narrative scope. It tied these groups to a crucial moment in sacred history. Like the story of ShahrbÄnÅ«, these narratives weave believers of different stripes firmly into the tapestry of the ShiÊ¿i community. The absorption of such narratives into the climactic episode not only allowed a demonstration of Ḥusainâs fortitude but also asserted the breadth of his following.
5.2 Feżżeh and the Garment: Expansion of the Humble Female Role
We have already seen the special attention given to Zainab in this episode: in addition, the episode came to include a plot element foregrounding senior female characters, a similar phenomenon to that discussed in The Martyrdom of QÄsem. In the case of the climactic episode this is a scene involving FÄá¹emeh-ye ZahrÄâs kanÄ«z, Feżżeh, interacting with Zainab, and includes substantial sections of inter-female dialogue. Not as elaborate and rounded as a gÅ«sheh, this is a faqareh (a short and relatively self-contained section of action including a few scenic movements and/or a dialogue). It demonstrates Zainabâs suffering at the impending loss of her brother and reminds the audience of his prophetic lineage, but more interestingly, it honours Feżżeh greatly.104
The scene in question belongs to the section of the composition-scheme where Ḥusain is prepared for martyrdom. He converses discreetly with Feżżeh and gives her with a secret instruction â to bring him a special garment from the bundles of the caravan. Distressed, she struggles to find the garment, and is interrupted by Zainab, who demands to know what she is doing. Through loyalty to Ḥusain, Feżżeh tries to conceal her mission, but Zainab catches sight of the garment and becomes inconsolable, knowing that it signifies Ḥusainâs imminent death. She collapses with grief. In one rendition the others think that she is dead and she is only revived after her recently martyred relatives come one by one from the battlefield to rouse her.105
The garment in question is described as a jÄmeh (robe) but also as a pÄ«rhan-e kuhan (an old shirt); either way, this will be his kafan. It is used as a symbol of Ḥusainâs prophetic ancestry: in one rendition, Zainab calls it the silk shirt of KhalÄ«l (EbrÄhÄ«m);106 in another, it is said to have come from paradise and to have been passed down a line of ancient prophets â Ädam, Nūḥ, MÅ«sÄ, YaḥyÄ â to Muḥammad, who entrusted it to ZahrÄ (for Ḥusain). In this same version Zainab stores this garment in a yakhdÄn (chest) amongst the amÄnÄt, the key relics representing the tribulations endured by the Prophetâs family, of which she is the guardian: once stained with Ḥusainâs blood this garment will become one of them.107 As always with the appearance of a kafan, when it is brought at Husainâs request it signals that his martyrdom is nigh. Feżżeh is charged with bringing it to him where it is suggested that Zainab will struggle to do so.
Whilst some earlier renditions of this episode did feature Feżżeh as a marginal character and saw her praised affectionately by Ḥusain in the familial farewells,108 my script sample does not show her tasked with bringing the garment as a regular feature until around 1317/1900. However there is an intriguing discrepancy in the dating of one version that could indicate it being played earlier. The collector has recorded that Cerulli MS 726 dates to the beginning of the 20th century, yet the script is in tak-nuskheh form and the acting side for Feżżeh bears the date 1256 (1840â41). Both the hand and paper are different to the other acting sides; it looks older. This appears to be a copy of her script inserted from a different (and earlier) rendition. If the date is reliable, then it shows that this faqareh existed in some form by the early 1840s.
This scene not only allows long sections of inter-female dialogue, but also honours Feżżeh from multiple angles. She is Ḥusainâs confidante, able to carry out his command where the groupâs soon-to-be leader Zainab would struggle, and carrying Ḥusainâs martyrdom robe â one of the amÄnÄt â in her hands. Thus, we see considerable attention being focused on an elderly woman of servant class who is given an exceedingly sympathetic portrayal. Like Umm LailÄ and QÄsemâs mother, Feżżeh is the type of figure to whom the female audience (the majority of whom were women of the lower classes) could relate. Her expanded treatment in the climactic episode is likely to have been for their benefit.
6 Conclusion
The climactic episode pivots around two themes: Ḥusainâs tested and unwavering commitment to fulfilling his duty to be martyred; and, with Ḥusainâs death imminent, the transmission of leadership of the group, and indeed the community, to another. It is clear that Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n will become the next spiritual leader of the ShiÊ¿a and that his survival is of paramount importance. Due to his illness his treatment remains marginal yet his royal Persian heritage is remembered through the prominence given to his mother ShahrbÄnÅ«, which in turn creates a direct connection between the Iranian audience and the protagonists at Karbala.
Whilst Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n will become the spiritual leader, Zainab will take on the immediate leadership of the group. She fulfils functions in the martyrdom- composition scheme usually performed by Ḥusain and the scene in which she (and the other women) ready his horse sets up what will be the new status quo, with women at the forefront of the defence of the Prophetâs house. We have seen in the analysis of the playâs development the addition of a scene that also celebrated the contribution of a woman â moreover, one with a profile to which a large contingent of the audience could relate. Yet while this episode exalts the bravery of the women, the scene involving them readying the horse allowing a fleeting vision of them as warriors, it does not elicit any transgression of the cultural mores of the traditional society in which the women of the audience lived. We see female heroism demonstrated through forbearance, strength of endurance and adherence to duty.
The theme of refusal of help also celebrates forbearance â that of Ḥusain. I have shown that the idea of him refusing help at Karbala had been important to the composers from early in the Qajar period. However, as the genre flourished and the climactic play was subject to more renditions and embellishments, the identity of those who offered help (and to some extent the nature of the offers) changed. Benevolent jinn and angels were joined, or replaced, by representatives of living social groups. These new stories were forms of founding myth that connected these groups to Karbala. They also reinforced Ḥusainâs legitimacy as rightful leader by affirming the diverse nature of his following.
Ḥusain in conversation with Zainab in the Litten Collection rendition of this play. EsmÄÊ¿Ä«lÄ«, Teshneh, 470.
ṬabarÄ«, History, XIX, 108â09.
AbÅ« Mekhnaf gives one transmitter as emphatically claiming that the aforementioned offers were never made and that instead Ḥusain asked to be left to wonder the land until seeing âhow the peopleâs affair developsâ. Ibid., 109.
Ibid., 113â14.
Ibid., 99â100.
Ibid., 154.
Ibid., 158.
In a different section of his account al-ṬabarÄ« does include Ê¿AbdullÄh b. Ḥasanâs name on list of the BanÅ« HÄshem killed at Karbala. Ibid., 180.
Ibid., 161â62. BalÊ¿amÄ« tells the same story but takes it further, having Ebn-e SaÊ¿d arrive in response to the womenâs cries to find Shemr with sword drawn, ready to kill Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n. BalÊ¿amÄ«, TÄrÄ«kh-nÄmeh, 4, 711.
ṬabarÄ«, History, XIX, 117â18.
Ibid., 160.
Ibid., 160â61. For futher comment on the difference between al-ṬabarÄ«âs and the taÊ¿ziyeh telling of Ḥusainâs murder also see Nematollahi Mahani, Holy Drama, 101.
MufÄ«d, IrshÄd, 336.
BalÊ¿amÄ«, TÄrÄ«kh-nÄmeh, 4, 710â11.
For a taÊ¿ziyeh rendition of this story about KhawlÄ« from the Litten collection see EsmÄÊ¿Ä«lÄ«, Teshneh, 511â34.
MÄ«rkhÄnd, Rawżat al-á¹£afÄ, 3, 2258â61; KhÄndamÄ«r, ḤabÄ«b al-siyÄr, 2, 56.
KÄshefÄ« SabzevÄrÄ«, Rawżat, 468â70.
For example, Shemr is Akbarâs killer in the Darbandsar rendition of his martyrdom episode.
The taÊ¿ziyeh story of Aá¹£gharâs murder corresponds relatively closely to that given by KÄshefÄ« (Rawżat, 457â58). For varying renditions, including different details of the childâs identity and circumstances of death see MufÄ«d, IrshÄd, 333; BalÊ¿amÄ«, TÄrÄ«kh-nÄmeh, 4, 710; MÄ«rkhÄnd, Rawżat al-á¹£afÄ, 3, 2254â57; KhÄndamÄ«r, ḤabÄ«b al-siyÄr, 2, 55.
JalÄl al-DÄ«n RÅ«mÄ«âs Mas̱navÄ«, composed in the 7th/13th century includes a specific reference to Shemr as responsible, together with YazÄ«d, for the suffering of the ahl-e bait and their kin. JalÄl al-DÄ«n RÅ«mÄ«, Mas̱navÄ«-ye maÊ¿navÄ« (Tehran: ChÄp-e ShaqÄyeq, [13th Cent. CE] 1371 SH), 1063.
Fatḥ-Ê¿AlÄ« BaigÄ« and DaryÄÄ«, Daftar 13, 23.
This is a very long episode, the playing of which can last over five hours. For its performance at the tekiyeh of Baraghan (Alborz) on Ê¿ÄshÅ«rÄʾ of 1439/2017 see: Deacon, âTaÊ¿ziyeh-khani in Iranian Communities,â 161â68.
Some renditions include a prologue featuring MÅ«sÄ showing a desert dwelling dervish a vision of the events at Karbala. This will be discussed below.
CP: MS 539 (Rasht, 1353/ 1934); MS 576 and the Darbandsar rendition play the scene here. Whilst MS 938; MS 583; MS 726; and the Zand rendition play it later, as part of Ḥusainâs final battle. The Chodzko and Litten renditions feature it twice, both here and in the later position (Pellyâs version omits it).
Zainab and Sakīneh feature consistently; the other women to feature vary according to the rendition.
EqbaÌl and MaḥjÅ«b, Jung-e shahaÌdat, 197.
Zand and Pelly renditions. CP: MS 726, has Ḥusain speak, on the battlefield, of wearing such a garment. This has some grounding in literary sources; al-MufÄ«d tells that, in preparation for martyrdom, Ḥusain ripped his Yemeni trousers in the hope that they would not be plundered, but to no avail. His body was left naked. MufÄ«d, IrshÄd, 335.
CP: MS 539; MS 583; MS 726; and MS 938.
CP: MS 539; MS 583; and the Darbandsar rendition. For al-ṬabarÄ«âs mention of these instructions see History, XIX, 117â18.
CP: MS 583; and the Darbandsar rendition. In MS 539 he mentions the first two signs, and also áºuljanaḥ returning riderless to camp.
CP: MS 576; MS 583; MS 938; and the Chodzko and Litten renditions.
In the renditions amongst my sample Aá¹£gharâs mother is named as SharbÄnÅ« but in some versions she is RabÄb. See KÄáºemÄ«, MÄ«r-e Ê¿AzÄ, 194.
CP: MS 539; MS 583; and the Darbandsar rendition.
CP: MS 726; MS 583; MS 539; MS 576; and the Darbandsar rendition. In the Zand rendition of the episode Aá¹£gharâs murder is discussed but not performed.
This appears to be a later addition featuring in CP: MS 726; MS 583; MS 539; and the Darbandsar rendition. As previously discussed, it contradicts the idea that she married QÄsem at Karbala.
In most renditions á¹¢ughrÄâs meeting with the messenger in Medina is simply recounted. But it is sometimes performed. See CP: MS 726, and MÄ«r-e AzÄâs rendition of the play from HÄshem FayyÄżâs collection. KÄáºemÄ«, MÄ«r-e Ê¿AzÄ, 191.
The Darbandsar rendition and CP: MS 539 respectively.
CP: MS 583 and MS 539 play it after Ḥusainâs encounter with the Dervish of Kabul. In MS 726 it comes after his encounter with ZaÊ¿far, king of the jinn.
This miracle is reminiscent of a story in RÅ«mÄ«âs Mas̱navÄ«, when pilgrims are amazed by a desert-dwelling ascetic from whose hands and face water pours forth and who summons rain to quench their thirst. RÅ«mÄ«, Mas̱navÄ«, 399â400. The Pelly rendition differs here. It alludes to a miracle that may, or may not have been played: Ḥusain makes a hole in the ground with his spear stating that he could cause water to gush from it should he wish, but that he chooses to die parched to fulfill his covenant.
This scene features in CP: MS 726; MS 583; MS 539; MS 576; and the Pelly and Darbandsar renditions.
KÄshefÄ«âs Rawżat tells of ZaÊ¿farâs apparition at Karbala, and of his fatherâs conversion having taken place after a skirmish inside a well named Beʾr-e Ê¿alam. He features in all renditions amongst my sample except the Zand version, and CP: MS 576.
This scene is included in CP: MS 726; MS 938; MS 583; MS 539; MS 576; the Darbandsar rendition; and, as a separate sub-episode, in Pellyâs collection.
In the Pelly sub-episode and CP: MS 576 instead of offering refuge, Qais offers military help.
CP: MS 539; MS 583; MS 576; and the Darbandsar and Zand renditions. There is even the suggestion that Jebraʾīl brings the written Ê¿ahd-nÄmeh (covenant) with him but Ḥusain tells him to take it away, he knows what must be done.
CP: MS 938.
CP: MS 938; MS 539; MS 583; MS 576; and the Litten and Pelly renditions.
Darbandsar rendition.
CP: MS 539 includes all three of these addresses; MS 726 only the sword and horse; and the Darbandsar rendition only the sword and earth.
For discussion see chapter 2 âTaÊ¿ziyeh Type-Scenes.â
Zand and Litten renditions.
CP: MS 539; and the Chodzko and Darbandsar renditions. In the Chodzko rendition the Prophet had predicted that his killer would have baraá¹£-e bÄ« shumÄr (innumerable marks of leprosy) on his chest. Shemr invites him to look and Ḥusain confirms seeing this sign. MS 539 features an interesting variation. After seeing the sign Ḥusain reminds Shemr of the Battle of Siffin where he was taken prisoner and brought before Ê¿AlÄ«. Ḥusain took pity on him, intervened on Shemrâs behalf and secured his release. MS 583 features a brief version of the same story.
In CP: MS 576; the Zand, Chodzko, Litten, Pelly and Darbandsar renditions FÄá¹emeh appears alone. In, CP: MS 938 and the Pelly rendition she is accompanied by Muḥammad (in MS 576 she does not speak).
CP: MS 539; MS 726; MS 576; and the Chodzko rendition.
Whilst this is clear in most renditions CP: MS 726 and MS 938 omit this detail.
In CP: MS 539 and the Darbandsar rendition Zainab describes these phenomena in the final scene. In MS 938 she and Ê¿AbdullÄh feel the ground trembling when Ḥusain is wounded and speaking to the earth.
For the special nature of the Imams according to ShiÊ¿i tradition, their being imbued with divine light, and the survival of a living Imam as imperative for the continuation of all life, see Ayoub, Redemptive Suffering, 54â57.
The Zand and Pelly renditions and CP: MS 583.
KÄshefÄ« SabzevÄrÄ«, Rawżat, 458â59.
The Chodzko rendition; CP: MS 539; MS 726; and MS 938.
Darbandsar rendition and CP: MS 539.
Litten rendition.
In the Chodzko rendition and CP: MS 938 by Kuls̱ūm, in the Litten rendition and CP: MS 726, Zainab.
ShahrbÄnÅ« is recorded as Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«nâs mother by al-MufÄ«d and KhÄndamÄ«r, including reference to her Persian royal lineage. MufÄ«d, IrshÄd, 353; KhÄndamÄ«r, ḤabÄ«b al-siyÄr, 2, 61.
Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, âÅ ahrbÄnu,â Encyclopædia Iranica, online version (2005). Available at https://iranicaonline.org/articles/sahrbanu (accessed June 18th, 2024).
The Chodzko and Litten renditions and CP: MS 938. In the Litten and Pelly renditions ShahrbÄnÅ« has been amalgamated with Umm LailÄ and is also portrayed as Akbarâs mother.
See Pelly, Miracle Play, 2, 136â50.
This shrine, BÄ«bÄ« ShahrbÄnÅ«, is only open to female pilgrims (and male descendants of the Prophet). Ali Amir-Moezzi, âÅ ahrbÄnuâ; Mary Boyce, âBÄ«bÄ« Å ahrbÄnÅ«,â ibid. IV/2 (1989). Availableâonlineâatâhttps://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bibi-sahrbanuâ(accessed June 18th, 2024).
CP: MS 938; MS 539. Indeed, this is a hadith attributed to Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n. The Litten rendition features a similar instruction but it is the thirst of Ḥusainâs children that should be remembered when drinking, the suffering of QÄsemâs bride at a wedding, and Zain al-Ê¿ÄbedÄ«n when seeing someone in chains.
EsmÄÊ¿Ä«lÄ«, Teshneh, 475.
The Zand rendition, Fatḥ-Ê¿AlÄ« BaigÄ« and DaryÄÄ«, Daftar 11, 179. The Chodzko rendition features the same three baits with a slight variation, the words
CP: MS 583; MS 726; the Zand, Chodzko and Darbandsar renditions.
CP: MS 938; MS 539; MS 576; the Litten and Pelly renditions.
The Darbandsar rendition á¹¢Äleḥī RÄd, MajÄles, 1, 375. A variation also features in CP: MS 539 (Rasht, 1353/ 1934).
The aforementioned BÄnÅ«-Gushasp, a formidable warrior and daughter of Rustam, is an example of such a figure. For further discussion of female characters of the epics see Djalal Khaleghi Motlagh, Women in the ShÄhnÄmeh: Their History and Social Status Within the Framework of Ancient and Medieval Sources, trans. Brigitte Neuenschwander (Costa Mesa California: Mazda, 2012); Dick Davis, âWomen in the Shahnameh: Exotics and Natives, Rebellious Legends, and Dutiful Histories,â in Women and Medieval Epic, ed. Sara S. Poor and Jana K. Schulman (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).
EsmÄÊ¿Ä«lÄ«, Teshneh, 658.
For the Litten collection rendition of this play dated 1255 (1839) see ibid., 663â712. HumÄyunÄ« cites a variation of the play in which Durrat and á¹¢adaf are two cousins as opposed to one person. TaÊ¿ziyeh-khÄnÄ«, 57.
Pegah Khadish, âThe Morphology of Persian Fairy Tales,â Fabula 50, no. 3/4 (2009): 284. For Proppâs theory of functions see Vladimir Propp, Morphology of the Folktale, trans. Laurence Scott and Louis A. Wagner, 2nd ed. (Austin: University of Texas Press, [1928] 1968), 25â65.
Khadish, âMorphology,â 291.
This request is taken to the lion in Zainabâs name by Feżżeh, FÄá¹emeh-ye ZahrÄâs maid servant. Darbandsar rendition, á¹¢Äleḥī RÄd, MajÄles, 2, 53â55. Nematollahi Mahani, Holy Drama, 38. For further valuable analysis of Zainabâs characterisation see ibid., 73â96.
Ibid., 38, 84.
The Litten and Darbandsar renditions, CP: MS 938; MS 726; and MS 583. In MS 539 she touches rather than kisses his throat.
The Chodzko rendition EqbaÌl and MaḥjÅ«b, Jung-e shahaÌdat, 182. The Litten rendition features the same couplets with a very minor variation,
For further discussion of this theme see Ansary Pettys, âMartyrdom of Hussein,â 28; âThe Taâzieh,â 244â49; and Beeman, Iranian Performance, 128â29.
For the integration of these characters into the climactic episode see Deacon, âCurious Addition.â
For NÄá¹eqâs rendition see DaryÄÄ«, Daftar 14, 15â85.
EsmÄÊ¿Ä«lÄ«, Teshneh, 435.
MufÄ«d, IrshÄd, 240â42.
This prologue features in the MÄ«r-e Ê¿AzÄ and Tehran renditions from amongst HÄshem FayyÄżâs collection.
KÄshefÄ« SabzevÄrÄ«, Rawżat, 268.
Deacon, âCurious Addition.â MaḥjÅ«b, BulÅ«kbÄshÄ«, and Fatḥ-Ê¿AlÄ« BaigÄ« have commented that these characters were likely to have been incorporated into the episode after the 1840s EqbaÌl and MaḥjÅ«b, Jung-e shahaÌdat, 23; BulÅ«kbÄshÄ«, TaÊ¿ziyeh, 168â69; Fatḥ-Ê¿AlÄ« BaigÄ« and DaryÄÄ«, Daftar 11, 155.
See JawhariÌ, TÌ£uÌfaÌn, 239â41; and Fatḥ-Ê¿AlÄ« BaigÄ«, MabÄnÄ«-ye shabÄ«h-khÄnÄ«, 83.
Deacon, âCurious Addition,â 214â15.
Ê¿AnÄá¹£erÄ«, Sulá¹Än-e KarbalÄ, 38â39. For the canvas in question see Figure 13, Marzolph, âVisual Culture,â 147.
Jean Chardin, Voyages du chevalier Chardin en Perse, et autres lieux de lâOrient, 10 vols., vol. 9 (Paris: Le Normant, 1811), 52â5.
Salmons and Van Goch, Die heutige Historie, 81â82.
For further discussion see Fatḥ-Ê¿AlÄ« BaigÄ« and DaryÄÄ«, Daftar 11, 155.
In my sample, the gÅ«sheh of MÅ«sÄ and the dervish only features in the Zand rendition and CP: MS 938.
It is always intimated that the Dervish of Kabul is martyred, but in CP: MS 726 his script is especially elaborate and he is even dressed in a kafan by Ḥusain, an honour reserved for family members and the most prominent supporters.
MudarresÄ« ChahÄrdehÄ«, KhÄksÄr, 7; Partuv BeyżÄʾī KÄshÄnÄ«, TÄrÄ«kh-e varzesh, 43.
Deacon, âCurious Addition,â 216.
The Darbandsar rendition and CP: MS 726.
This story exists as a separate sub-episode (with a slight variation in that the image is of the Prophet) CP: MS 900 Qais-e HendÄ«; Ävardan-e darvÄ«sh shamÄyel-e Ḥażrat-e RusÅ«l az barÄye Sulá¹Än Qais va Ê¿Äsheq shudan-e Qais beh shamÄyel-e Ḥażrat-e RusÅ«l (MÄ«r-e Ê¿AzÄ, Khurasan, Beg. 20th Cent).
For the pardeh-dÄrÄn and proselytization see chapter 1 âConnection to the Storytelling Traditions of NaqqÄlÄ« and Pardeh-dÄrÄ«â. For their visual props see Floor, Theater, 121â22.
The scene features in CP: MS 539; MS 583; MS 726; and MS 938.
CP: MS 938.
CP: MS 539.
Said rendition, CP: MS 938, is also an exception amongst my sample in that Ḥusain orders Feżżeh to get the garment from Zainab (who says that Feżżeh can have anything that she wants, until she finds out what it is).
The Litten and Pelly collection renditions (and also NÄá¹eqâs 1217/1802â3 rendition).