Macedonian and the Parthian supremacy.  With the Sasanides the national reminiscences became clearer.  Round the founder of the dynasty were accreted, on the one hand, legends wholly fabulous and on the other, such as embodied excellent historical data.  But the latter seem to be inadequately represented in the main work, the Khodayname.  Again very few particulars were known of the reigns of the succeeding sovereigns down to Yezdegerd I. In the chapters which correspond to those of the old Book of Kings just this want of actual information, it seems, the compilers strove to veil behind rhetorical accounts of scenes of homage done to the rulers, imperial speeches from the throne, etc.  For the following ages on there was, in general, good, partly very authentic information.  But this entire presentment did not concern itself solely with veracity.  The Iranians who from very remote antiquity extravagantly lauded truth, had in reality never any great sense of it.  The Khoday Nameh and kindred productions were unfairly biassed and rhetorical.  The ornamental and figurative ingredients are indicated even by the Arabic reproductions, though the latter are greatly condensed.  A classic testimony to it has been kindly communicated to me by Baron Von Rosen which is a passage from a Petersberg manuscript of Albayan Wattabyin of Jahiz in which the Shuubiya or the Persians, who, though Muslims placed their nation above the Arabs say:  “And he who is interested in reason, fine culture, knowledge of ranks, examples and penalties, in elegant expressions and superlative thoughts, let him cast a glance at the History (more properly the Vitae) of Kings." History of the Kings, Siyar-ul Muluk, is the title of the Arabic rendering of the Book of Kings in Pahlavi.  Compare likewise Hamza’s remarks on the works on Persian history.  I have laboured to show the partiality of the Persian tradition in the footnotes.  The narrative is conceived in a monarchical and legitimistic spirit, but equally all along from the view point of the superior nobility and the clergy.  Add to this the exertions to cry up as much as possible the glory of Persia which sometimes produces a strange effect.  Moreover, there must have been no lack of contradictions as to facts as well as respecting estimates of personal character which was inevitable owing to the employment of varying sources.  Nevertheless a work like this written under the Sasanides and familiar with the state of things obtaining in the empire and more or less of an official nature, must have been an admirable fount of history.  There was hardly ever a better presentment of the story of this house than the Khoday-Nameh.

[I have translated the entire passage from the since printed text.  See p. 170.—­G.K.N.]