diffusion in the Achaemenid period was carried out entirely by Zoroastrian
priests.^60 The Zoroastrian character of this calendar is evident from its naming
of the months and days of the month after theyazatas(Zoroastrian divine
beings), to which each of the months and days of month are dedicated;^61 and it
may be assumed that these names were used from the time of the calendar’s
inception. However, documentary and epigraphic evidence indicates that the
uses of this calendar in Antiquity were much broader than Zoroastrian and
cultic. A Persian Zoroastrian date appears to be mentioned in an official,
satrapal account from mid-fourth-centuryBCEBactria—the earliest attestation
of this calendar discovered to date.^62 The next document to be dated by this
calendar is afirst-centuryBCEAramaic economic ostracon from Nisa, the main
city of Parthia (now Turkmenistan, which incidentally provides evidence of
this calendar in the region between Transoxania and Persia).^63 In the late
Parthian period, this calendar is used in the inscription of Artabanus IV at
Susa (c.215CE), and a few decades later, in Iranian inscriptions from Dura-
Europos in Syria, just within the Roman Empire.^64 In the Sasanian period
(third–early seventh centuries), the Persian Zoroastrian calendar appears to
have become widespread as what appears to have been an official, imperial
calendar.^65 Its public use continues in medieval Iran after the Muslim con-
quest, as well as in Armenia, Choresmia, Sogdiana—much the same regions as
earlier in Antiquity. The evidence does not suggest, therefore, that the calendar
I have been calling for convenience‘Persian Zoroastrian’was either essentially
Zoroastrian or intended specifically for religious use.
In this light, it is much more plausible to attribute the institution of the
Persian Zoroastrian calendar to the Achaemenid rulers than to Zoroastrian
priests. The Achaemenid rulers had the administrative and political means of
(^60) Boyce (1975–91: ii. 243–5), conjecturing that it was designed and instituted by a large
convocation of leading Zoroastrian priests.
(^61) Theyazatasafter which the days are named follow their order of appearance inYasna 16
(part of the ancient body of Avestan literature): ibid. 243–50.
(^62) Shaked (2004) 42–5, Naveh and Shaked (forthcoming): this fragmentary document is dated
year 2, 20 Shebat:, which is apparently equated with the Zoroastrian daydainā, i.e. 24th of the
month (the name of the month, if there ever was one, is missing; my alternative suggestion that
DYN might simply be an Aramaic demonstrative, i.e.‘thisday’, has been rejected by Aramaist
colleagues). The calendardainābelongs to must be the Persian Zoroastrian calendar, because if it
was some archaic, Iranian lunar calendar, the equivalent Babylonian date should have been 24
Shebat:or something close to it. It has been suggested, however, that the mention ofdaināin this
document is related to the Zoroastrian cult, which might lend support to the calendar’s
‘Zoroastrian’interpretation: see Ch. 2 n. 76.
(^63) Chaumont (1968), Boyce (1970) 516–17. Boyce assumes that Nisa in this period was a
stronghold of Zoroastrianism, but this need not be the explanation for the use of this calendar in
this document.
(^64) Artabanus IV: ibid. 517. Dura-Europos: Ameling (2004) iii, Syr111–17, Syr120, and Syr122.
(^65) So according to Bickerman (1983) 785–6. Persian Zoroastrian dates occasionally appear,
e.g. in Syriac Christian sources from Sasanian Mesopotamia (e.g. above, n. 30); see further
Ch. 5.4.
TheRise of the Fixed Calendars 185