The Missing Story of Zal’s Death: A Mythological Approach to His Personality and Fate based on Post-Jungian Criticism

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Assistant Professor of Persian Language and Literature, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran

Abstract

Post-Jungian criticism is an approach that has continued and developed Jungian criticism. Due to the ambiguity around Zal’s fate in the existing sources, and his reputation for immortality, the present paper has, for the first time, identified the narrative of the death of Zal in a manuscript of Shahnameh, and, then, analyzed the relationship between this new narrative and the myth of Zal in Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh and its sources. Because Zal’s immortality is important in Jungian criticism of this myth, the discovery of the story of Zal’s death is the most important reason for this paper’s Post-Jungian critical approach. The paper shows that archetypal images associated with the myth of Zal represent the character of an ancient shaman. This figure fulfills such functions as magic, mediumship between the nation and their totemic gods, witch doctor, spiritual healer and intuitive knowledge. From a Jungian perspective, the archetypal image of Zal’s personality gave him a complementary (secondary) role in the initiation of the hero (Rostam). But the post-Jungian approach replaces the old archetype of wisdom with the archetype of death and rebirth, and develops the core meaning of the myth of Zal to his initiation on the way to his unity with his totemic ancestor (Simorgh).
 
Extended Abstract

Introduction

The fate of Zal in Shahnamneh is one of the most ambiguous parts of his story. In his book Ostureh-ye Zal, Mohammad Mokhatari regards Zal as the human manifestation of Zarvan (god of time) and interprets his fate as his immortality, which is one of the most accepted interpretations of this story. Most of the studies so far have come to the same conclusion. The present study challenges this idea and holds that the absence of Zal’s death in the most widely read version of Shahnameh does not necessary mean that this story is missing in other sources of Shahnameh. Regarding his immortality, three different fates can be found for Zal in the sources of Ferdowsi’s era.
 

Theoretical Framework

In the present paper, the story of Zal is studied independently and his fate is examined based on some newly emerged documents that challenge the idea of his immortality held by most scholars. Here, the post-Jungian approach is adopted to examine the story of Zal as it enables us to compare this character with the archetype of the old wise man in Jungian psychology.
 

Methodology

The missing story of Zal’s death in the older versions of Shahnameh is compared with a new text in the version kept in Berlin Library. The post-Jungian theory is utilized here to analyze the structure of the story of Zal and compare it with the Jungian archetype of the old wise man.
 

Discussion and Analysis

In the version of Shahnamen in Berlin Library, after selecting Homay as his successor, Bahman is killed in a fight. In Bahman-nameh, Azarbarzin, Faramarz’s son, accompanies Bahman in this fight but does not help him. But in the new version, he is Zal’s son and kills the dragon and Bahman at the same time in revenge for Farmarz’s murder, and Zal, who is beset by Bahman’s injustice dies in peace as he says prayers after hearing the news. In the archetypal, post-Jungian analysis, Zal is the shaman of a god. His death while saying prayers can be interpreted as the mystical concept of the voluntary death. His death can be related to the archetype of death and rebirth, symbolizing immortality.
 

Conclusion

In the Jungian approach, the old wise man is an element that completes individuality, such as the role Zal plays for Rostam. From a post-Jungian perspective, the archetype is based on the plurality of images, most of which in the story of Zal are connected with his role as a shaman. Zal is a medium that, with the help of the symbolic simorgh, protects justice and peace in the world and curbs natural forces. Zal cannot be regarded as the human manifestation of Zarvan, as Kiyoumars, based on older sources, seems to fit this description better. The most important archetype in the analysis of the story of Zal is the archetype of death and rebirth, which is the counterpart for the Jungian old wise man.
 
Select Bibliography
Bal’ami, A. 1341 [1962]. Tarikh-e Bal’ami. M. Bahar (eds.). Tehran: Vezarat-e Farhang.
Bin Abi-Khayr, I. 1370 [1991]. Bahman-nameh. R. Afifi (ed.). Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi.
Dinawari. A. 1364 [1985]. Akhbar al-Taval. M. Mahdavi Damghani (trans.). Tehran: Ney
Ferdowsi. A. 1042 A.H. Shahnameh. Berlin: Berlin Library. No. 4252
Ibn Athir. 1965. Al-Kamal fi al-Tarikh. Beirut: Dar ul-Sadir.
Ibn Balkhi. 1363 [1984]. Fars-Nameh. G. Le Strage and R. Nicholson (eds.). Tehran: Donya-ye Ketab.
Mokhtari, M. 1379 [2000]. Ostoureh-ye Zal. Tehran: Tous.
Samuels, A. 2005. Jung and the Post-Jungians. New York Press: Routledge.
Tabari, M. 1352 [1973]. Tarikh al-Rusul va al-Muluk. A. Payandeh (trans.). Tehran: Bonyad-e Farhang.
Tha’alibi, A. 1368 [1989]. Ghurar Akhbar Muluk Furs va Seyrahum. M. Fazayeli (trans.). Tehran: Qatreh.
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

ابن‌اثیر، ع. 1349.  اخبار ایران از الکامل ابن‌اثیر، ترجمه م. باستانی‌پاریزی. ج1. تهران: دانشگاه.
ابن‌بلخی. 1363. فارس‌نامه، تصحیح گ. لسترنج و ر.ا. نیکلسن. تهران: دنیای کتاب.
اسماعیلی، ح. 1374. «داستان قوم شناسی زال». تن پهلوان و روان خردمند، به‌کوشش ش. مسکوب. تهران: طرح نو. 177-224.
ایرانشان‌بن‌ابی‌الخیر. ۱۳70. بهمن‌نامه، تصحیح ر. عفیفی، تهران: علمی و فرهنگی.
بلعمی، ا. 1341. تاریخ بلعمی، تصحیح م. بهار. به کوشش: م. گنابادی. ج1و2. تهران: وزارت فرهنگ.
 بیرونی، ا. 1352. آثارالباقیه من القرون الخالیه، ترجمه ا. داناسرشت. تهران: امیرکبیر.
پورداوود، ا. 2536. یشت‌ها، ج1. تهران: دانشگاه.
تاریخ سیستان، 1314، ‌تصحیح م. بهار. تهران: کلاله خاور.
ثعالبی، ا. 1368. غرر اخبار ملوک فرس و سیرهم، ترجمه م. فضایلی. تهران: قطره.
چ‍ای‍چ‍ی‌‌ام‍ی‍رخ‍ی‍ز، ا. و س‍ع‍ی‍دی‌‌ه‍رس‍ی‍ن‍ی، م. ۱۳۸۱. ن‍گ‍اه‍ی‌ ب‍ه‌ ت‍دف‍ی‍ن‌ ت‍اب‍وت‍ی‌ در ایران‌ ب‍اس‍ت‍ان‌، ت‍هران:‌ نشر س‍م‍ی‍را و موزه ملی ایران.
خواندمیر، غ. 1362. تاریخ حبیب‌السیر، تصحیح م. دبیرسیاقی. ج1. تهران: خیام.
دادگی، ف. 1369. بندهشن، ترجمه م. بهار. تهران: توس.
دینوری، ا. ۱۳۶۴. اَخبارُالطّوال، ترجمه م. مهدوی‌دامغانی. تهران: نی.
رایس، ت. 1388. سکاها، ترجمه ر.‌ بهزادی. تهران: طهوری.
روایت پهلوی، 1367. ترجمه م. میرفخرایی. تهران: مطالعات و تحقیقات فرهنگی.
شهرستانی، ا. 1975. الملل و النحل، تحقیق: م. سیّدگیلانی. ج‌1. بیروت: دار‌المعرفت.
صدیقی، م. 1391. «سام/ سهراب و زال/ رستم: نبرد پدر و پسر». شعر پژوهی (بوستان ادب)، 4 (1): 123-148.
رحمدل، غ. 1385: «نگاهی دیگر به قصه زال و رودابه»، کاوش‌نامه، 7(13): 11-24.
طاهری، م. و آقاجانی، ح. و رضایی، ف. 1393. «بررسی کهن الگوی پیر فرزانه در داستان زال». ادب­پژوهی، 8(23): 155-179.
طبری، م. 1352. تاریخ الرسل والملوک، ترجمه ا. پاینده. ج2. تهران: بنیاد فرهنگ.
طغیانی، ا. و هاشمی، س. و مختاری، خ. 1393. «نشانه شناسی تعلیم و تربیت در داستان زال و رودابه». ادبیات تعلیمی، 6(22): 33-63.  
کردنوقابی، ر. و کرمی، ن. و نظری، ن. و دلفان‌بیرانوند، آ. 1391. «بررسی تطبیقی ویژگیهای رفتار خردمندانه در شخصیت زال بر اساس مدل سه بعدی خرد آردلت». پژوهش‌های ادبیات تطبیقی، 1 (2): 1-30.
فردوسی، ا. 1386. شاهنامه، تصحیح ج. خالقی‌مطلق. تهران: دایره‌المعارف بزرگ اسلامی.
فردوسی، ا. 1042. شاهنامه، نسخه کتابخانه برلین آلمان. شماره 4252.
قائمی، ف. 1391. «تحلیل اسطوره کیومرث در شاهنامه فردوسی و اساطیر ایران بر مبنای رویکرد نقد اسطوره‌شناختی». جستارهای ادبی، 176 (45):  ‌37-64.
قبادی، ح. و هوشنگی، م. 1388. «نقد و بررسی روانکاوانه شخصیت زال از نگاه آلفرد آدلر». نقد ادبی، 2(7): 91-119.
مجمل‌التواریخ والقصص، 1318. تصحیح م. بهار. تهران: کلاله خاور.
محمدی، ا. 1384. «زروان؛ زال و شخصیت های میانه در حماسه فردوسی». زبان و ادب پارسی، (23): 108-122.
مختاری، م. 1369. اسطوه‌ زال، تهران: توس.
مسعودی، ا. ۱۳۴۹. التنبیه و الاشراف، ترجمه ا. پاینده. تهران: بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب.
مقدسی، م. 1374. آفرینش و تاریخ، ترجمه م. شفیعی‌کدکنی. تهران: آگه.
نسفی، ع. 1379. کتاب‌الانسان‌الکامل، تصحیح و ترجمه م. موله. تهران: طهوری.
یاحقّی، م. و براتی، م. 1386. «فرجام زال». پیک نور، 5 (3): 3-11.
Baumlin, J.S. & Baumlin, T.F. &  Jensen, G.H. 2004. Post Jungian Criticism: Theory and Practice, State University of New York Press.
DĒNKARD. 1911. Ed. DM. Madan, Bombay: Ganpatrao Ramajirao Sindhe.
Eliade, M. 1964. Shamanism, Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy, Routledge & K. Paul.
Haule, J.R. 2010. Jung in the 21st Century Volume Two: Synchronicity and Science, London: Routledge.
Hillman, J. 1975. Loose Ends: primary papers in archetypal psychology, Dallas: Spring.
Hillman, J. 1999. Emotion: A Comprehensive Phenomenology of Theories and Their Meanings for Therapy, Psychology Press.
Hillman, J. 2007. Mythical Figures: Uniform Edition of the Writings of James Hillman, Vol. 1-6. spring.
Hoppál, M. 2007. "Is Shamanism a Folk Religion?”. Shamans and Traditions,Bibliotheca Shamanistica, Vol.13. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó: 11–16.
Hutton, R. 2011. Shamans: Siberian Spirituality and the Western Imagination, London, England ; New York, New York : Hambledon Continuum.
Jacobi, J.S. 1999. Psychology of C G Jung, Psychology Press. Jung, C.G. 1939. The Integration of the Personality, Trans. S.M. Dell. New York: Farrar & Rinehart.
Norton, J. 2000. Narcissus sous rature: male subjectivity in contemporary American poetry, Bucknell University Press.
The Hymns of the Rig Veda. 1976. Trans. by R.T. Griffith, Orient Book Distributors.
Sandner, D.F. & Won, S.H. 2002. "The Sacred Heritage: The Influence of Shamanism on Analytical Psychology". The San Francisco Jung Institute Library Journal, 21(2): 23-42.
Samuels, A. 2005. Jung and Post-Jungian, State University of New York Press: Routledge.
Singh, M. 2017. "The cultural evolution of shamanism". Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (194): 1-61.
Rowland, S. 2005. Jung as a Writer, New York: Routledge.
 
Literary Theory and Criticism
Volume 6, Issue 2 - Serial Number 12
Serial 12
February 2022
Pages 239-262

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics