The Prophet Muhammad’s Revolutionary Rejection of Imperial Power: How He Rejected the Rituals, Clothes & Colors of Rome & Persia

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

"In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful."

In the glittering apse of the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna, a mosaic immortalizes the essence of imperial majesty. Emperor Justinian I stands central, bathed in celestial gold. He is adorned with the sacred regalia of Romano-Persian kingship: a radiant nimbus framing his head like a saint, a jeweled crown asserting divinely ordained rule, a purple chlamys (cloak) dyed with Tyrian purple—a color so exclusive it was legislated for royalty alone—vermilion red shoes marking his elevated station, and in his hands, a golden bowl, perhaps for the Eucharist or tribute, symbolizing his role as mediator between heaven and earth. 👑🟪🥇👞

This image is not merely a portrait; it is a manifesto in mosaic. It synthesizes centuries of imperial ideology forged in the competitive furnace of Roman and Sasanian rivalry. The halo (nimbus), adopted from solar deities and Persian xwarrah (divine royal glory), visualizes the emperor’s sacred luminosity. The purple screamed political and economic monopoly. The ritual offering portrayed him as the cosmocrator—the ruler of the earthly oikoumene mirroring God’s rule in heaven. This was the ultimate "soft power" of antiquity: clothing and ritual as theology, authority made visible.

⬇️ Meanwhile, 2,500 miles away in the sands of Arabia... ⬇️

While emperors in Constantinople and Ctesiphon wrapped themselves in sacred textiles and cosmic symbology, a man in plain, undyed wool or simple Yemeni cloth was shaping a vision of authority that would dismantle the very aesthetics of empire. Prophet Muhammad ibn Abdullah ﷺ not only never wore the purple, the gold, or the crown—he actively fought against this entire system of "imperial frippery."

His rejection was not one of poverty versus wealth, but a theological and social revolution. He stood against the core idea that power must be theatrically adorned, that authority requires visual separation from the common people, and that cloth and color could legitimize rule. In the face of empires that dressed their kings as gods, he offered a model of leadership where the most powerful man was visually indistinguishable from the poorest shepherd—distinguished only by piety, justice, and character.

This blog explores that great visual disconnect: how the imperial uniform of Rome and Persia represented the peak of ancient political theater, and how the Prophet of Islam stripped authority bare, launching a revolution that was felt not just in battle, but in the very fabric of society.

🏛️ SECTION I: The Emperors’ Playbook — Rituals, Robes & The Rules of Power

To understand the revolutionary vision of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, we must first understand the world he was born into — a world dominated by the majestic, unshakeable theatrics of imperial rule.

In the 6th and 7th centuries CE, two superpowers cast long shadows across the known world: the Roman Empire 🦅 and the Sasanian Persian Empire 🦁. Their dominance was not maintained by armies alone, but through an intricate, sacred language of ritual, color, and clothing designed to elevate their rulers to near-divine status. This was the imperial playbook — a system of visual and ceremonial propaganda so powerful that it convinced millions that emperors were not merely men, but the living embodiments of cosmic order, the “Two Eyes of the Earth.” 👁️👁️

From the purple-dyed silks reserved exclusively for Roman emperors to the glittering xwarrah (divine glory) radiating from Persian crowns, every detail was calculated. Court rituals like proskynēsis (full prostration before the ruler) and coronation ceremonies tied to the spring equinox weren’t just traditions — they were theological statements, reinforcing a hierarchy that descended from the heavens. Kings were partners with the sun and moon ☀️🌙, their palaces were microcosms of the universe, and their very attire was a walking temple of authority.

This section decodes that imperial playbook. We will explore:

👑 The Sacred Uniform: Why purple meant power and gold meant divinity.
🏺 Ritual as Reality: How ceremonies turned kings into living icons.
🌍 The Global Language of Majesty: How Rome and Persia mirrored and rivaled each other’s symbols.

Only by seeing the height of this imperial stage can we truly appreciate the profound simplicity of the one who refused to step onto it — and instead, built a new stage altogether. ⬇️🕋

👑 SECTION I.I — The Emperor’s Wardrobe: How Clothes SCREAMED Power from Head to Toe 🥾👗👒

In the imperial courts of Rome and Persia, clothing was not fashion—it was theology, politics, and cosmic identity made visible. From the halo around the emperor’s head to the color of his shoes, every thread was a deliberate statement of divine right, universal rule, and unbreakable hierarchy.

Matthew Canepa’s groundbreaking research reveals just how intentional—and competitive—these sartorial systems were. As he writes in The Two Eyes of the Earth, imperial clothing created a “late antique kosmos of power” where “clothes scream who the ruler is from head to foot.” 👇

🪬 HEAD: Crowns, Halos & Divine Glory

Symbol	Rome 👑	Persia 👑	Meaning
Diadem / Crown	Jeweled diadem with toupha (crest), often combined with halo	Evolving diadem with long fabric ties → later jeweled plaques inspired by Roman designs ⬅️	Divine appointment; symbol of victory and lordship
Nimbus (Halo)	Solar radiance, sanctity, celestial authority	Adapted from Roman/Hel lenistic art; signifies xvarenah (divine royal glory) ☀️	Sacred luminescence; ruler as “partner with the sun and moon”
Winged Victories	Female figures with laurel wreaths on arches/spandrels	Appropriated into Sasanian architecture (e.g., Taq-e Bostan) offering diadems ⬅️	Victory bestowed by gods; celestial endorsement of reign

📘 Canepa notes: Xusro II’s diadem changed after receiving gifts from Emperor Maurice—fusing Roman jeweled segments with traditional Sasanian ties. This was ornament as diplomacy.

👘 BODY: Purple, Silk & Cosmic Robes

Garment	Rome 🟪	Persia 🟨	Meaning
Purple Chlamys / Cloak	Tyrian purple = only for emperor; worn over white tunica	Kings wore vibrant colors; purple/red also restricted	Monopoly on power; visual separation from all other humans
Silk Tablion / Segments	Gold-embroidered panel on cloak (e.g., Justinian in San Vitale)	Caftans with senmurv (mythical creature) in medallions 🦅	Global aristocratic language; control over Eurasian luxury trade
Ornamental Motifs	Duck in pearl roundels, geometric borders from Central Asian silks	Palmettes, pomegranates, winged ovals (symbol of royal xvarenah)	Wealth + cosmic symbolism; motifs shared across empires via silk roads

🧵 Textiles were political: Wearing a certain silk pattern meant you belonged to the imperial inner circle—and recognized the source of that luxury.

👢 FEET: Red Shoes & The Kiss of Submission

Footwear	Rome 👞	Persia 👢	Meaning
Red/Purple Shoes	Campagi with pearls; only emperor could wear red	Red tzaggia (boots) studded with pearls; king only 👑	Exclusive right to rule; wearing them = claiming throne
Knee-High Boots	Adopted later (maybe Heraclius) from Persian style	High boots with pearls over billowy trousers 🐎	Equestrian + nomadic prestige; cross-cultural status symbol
Ritual Significance	Envoys kissed emperor’s shoes during proskynēsis (prostration)	Same ritual in Ctesiphon: footwear = point of contact with divinity	Submission literalized; loyalty physically performed

👣 Canepa writes: “Only the Roman and Persian emperors were permitted to wear red boots… this mutual understanding emerged from diplomatic interaction and investiture of client kings.”

🔄 THE SYSTEM: How It All Worked Together

This was not random luxury—it was a coherent system of power:

Head to Toe Theology 👑→👢
The ruler’s body became a walking cosmos: halo (heaven), purple (earthly dominion), red shoes (sacred contact point).
Cross-Cultural Dialogue ↔️
Rome and Persia watched and copied each other—diadems, motifs, and footwear styles flowed both ways through war, diplomacy, and gift-giving.
Client King Fashion Wars 🧥
Border rulers (Armenians, Laz) were dressed by emperors as political statements. Their robes mixed Roman and Persian elements—a sartorial tug-of-war.
Ornament as Empire 🌀
Geometric patterns (palmettes, winged ovals) became shared aristocratic code. Using them showed you belonged to the transcontinental elite.

⚔️ WHY THIS MATTERS FOR UNDERSTANDING THE PROPHET ﷺ

When Prophet Muhammad ﷺ walked in simple Yemeni cloth and leather sandals, he was making a deliberate, revolutionary statement. He rejected:

👑 The celestial crown → choosing a simple turban
🟪 The purple cloak → wearing undyed wool
👞 The red pearl shoes → wearing plain sandals (na’l)
🏛️ The entire system where clothing = divinity

While emperors dressed as gods, the Prophet dressed as a servant—and in doing so, dismantled the visual theology of imperial power thread by thread.

🎭 SECTION I.II — The Imperial Ritual Playbook: How Emperors “Performed” Godhood on Earth

To understand the court of the 7th century, you must understand its theatre — a theatre where the emperor was not an actor, but a living icon, and every gesture, every silence, every veil was scripted sacred drama.

Matthew Canepa reveals that by the late third century, Rome and Persia had forged a shared ritual language — a “sacral, yet religiously neutral” vocabulary of power — used to communicate, compete, and coexist. This wasn’t just diplomacy; it was high-stakes cosmic theatre, where each court staged reality itself to show the other — and their own people — that their emperor was the axis of the universe.

🔄 The Two Big Ideas Behind the Rituals

1. Brotherhood as a Competitive Concept 👥⚔️

Emperors called each other “brother” — but this was no warm fraternity. It was a tense, mythologically charged parity.

In Persian epic tradition, the world was divided among three brothers: Ēraj (Iran), Salm (Rome), and Tūr (Turks/China). The brothers became enemies — so “brother” meant both equal and rival.
In letters, titles balanced each other competitively:
“Kawad, king of kings, of the rising sun, to Justinian Caesar, of the setting moon.”
— Canepa notes the moon was divine in Persian cosmology, but clearly secondary to the sun.

Why it mattered: Calling each other “brother” acknowledged the other’s legitimacy while setting the stage for symbolic one-upmanship.

2. The “Two Eyes” or “Two Lights” Metaphor 👁️👁️🌟

This was the ultimate co-ruler slogan:

“It is clear to all mankind that the Roman and Persian empires are equal like two lights, and it is necessary that, like eyes, one is continuously made more beautiful by the other…”
— Peter the Patrician, 6th century

This framed their coexistence as cosmically destined, ancient, and necessary for world order.

🏛️ THE DIPLOMATIC RECEPTION RITUAL — Step-by-Step

When a Persian ambassador arrived in Constantinople (or a Roman envoy in Ctesiphon), it wasn’t a meeting — it was a multi-day orchestrated experience designed to overwhelm, subordinate, and impress.

🛣️ Stage 1: The Approach — Controlling the Journey

Step	What Happened	Why It Mattered
Greeting at the Frontier	A high Roman official of equal rank meets the envoy at Dara/Nisibis.	Immediate hierarchy assertion: you are met by your equal, not the emperor.
Lodging & Gifts Along the Way	Local governors host the envoy in major cities (Antioch, Nicaea). Gifts, fine food, and “care” provided.	Demonstration of imperial reach and wealth across the empire.
Final Approach to Capital	In Chalcedon, the Magister Officiorum sends subordinates with more gifts.	Building anticipation; showing that the emperor’s attention is everywhere.

🏙️ Stage 2: The City as a Set — Visual Indoctrination

As the envoy entered Constantinople:

The Regia (Main Street) — Lined with senators in silk robes, forming a gauntlet of imperial hierarchy.
Monuments as Backdrop — The envoy passed:
- Hagia Sophia’s dome (God’s house)
- Justinian’s colossal equestrian statue (emperor as conqueror)
- The Chalke Gate with mosaics of defeated kings (Goths, Vandals) prostrating before Justinian

👁️ The message: You are walking into a city where your emperor is already depicted as a subject.

🚪 Stage 3: The Palace — The Inner Sanctum

Location	Experience	Psychological Impact
Chalke Gate	Mosaics show Belisarius presenting captive kings to Justinian and Theodora.	You are entering as they did — a subordinate.
Magister’s Office	Gifts inspected; envoy questioned about the Persian king’s health, family, journey.	Intelligence gathering under courtesy; establishing control.
Antikonsistorion (Waiting Room)	Envoy waits with translators. Silence. Tension builds.	Sensory deprivation before sensory overload.

👑 Stage 4: The Audience — The Holy Reveal

This was the climax of sacred theatre:

The Summons
A voice booms: “Let Yazd-Gušnasp, envoy of Xusro, emperor of the Persians, be called!”
The Veil Rises
Silence → then spears clash, guards snap to attention. The command “Leva!” (Raise!) is given.
A silk veil lifts — revealing the emperor:
- Enthroned under a baldachin held by winged Victories
- Flanked by golden-armored guards (candidati)
- Dressed in purple, gold, jewels, feet in red pearl boots
- Face impassive, iconic, divine

The Threefold Prostration (Proskynēsis)

The envoy moves across three purple porphyry disks inlaid in the floor:

Prostration	Location	Meaning
First	At the threshold	Acknowledging entry into sacred space
Second	Mid-hall	Recognizing the emperor’s cosmic centrality
Third	At the throne	Kissing the emperor’s feet — ultimate submission

🧎 This was not optional. It was demanded of everyone, from senators to foreign kings.

The Fraternal Shift
Suddenly, tone changes:
Emperor speaks: “How is our brother’s health by the grace of God? We rejoice in his health.”
Gifts are exchanged; letters read.
🔄 Why the shift?
Ritual first establishes hierarchy (you prostrate), then parity (we are brothers). It’s a controlled equilibrium.

⚡ Key Ritual Elements & Their Meanings

Element	Roman Court	Persian Court	Shared Meaning
Veil (Curtain)	Velum lifted to reveal emperor	Parwān (curtain) lifted to reveal king	The sovereign is hidden until the perfect moment — mystery = divinity
Silence	No one speaks until emperor does	Complete silence in throne room	Human noise would profane the sacred presence
Incense & Atmosphere	Burning incense; maybe organ blast	Artificial thunder, rain machines at Ādur Gušnasp	Sensorium of holiness; awe through sound/smell
Prostration	Proskynēsis — full body to floor, kiss feet/carpet	Namāz burdan — prostration + hand-over-mouth gesture	Body made low = soul acknowledging divine authority
Crown & Throne	Jeweled diadem; dome canopy with stars	Suspended crown (too heavy to wear); Takht-e Taqdis throne with rotating celestial dome	Ruler as cosmic axis; heavens move around him
Seating Hierarchy	Senators stand by rank; only emperor sits	Golden chairs for “kings of China, Rome, Khazars” — empty but symbolic	Throne room is a map of world submission

The throne room was a microcosm of the universe:

In Constantinople, the Chrysotriklinos audience hall had Christ enthroned in the apse, directly above the emperor’s throne → emperor as Christ’s living representative.
In Ctesiphon, Xusro I’s Takht-e Taqdis had a rotating dome with stars and planets that moved with the heavens → king as center of cosmic order.
Seasonal thrones, astral decorations, mechanical wonders — all to say:
“The seasons turn, stars move, and kings kneel… around ME.”

⚔️ Why This Matters for Understanding the Prophet ﷺ

While emperors were:

🧎 Making men kiss their feet
👑 Wearing crowns too heavy for humans
🎭 Staging divine reveals with veils and thunder

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was:

🧕 Wearing simple wool
🤲 Welcoming guests with his own hands
🕌 Praying shoulder-to-shoulder with former slaves
🗣️ Speaking plainly, without ceremony

He rejected the entire imperial ritual script — not because he lacked power, but because he redefined it.

Power was not about making yourself look like a god — it was about serving the One God.

🏛️🎉 SECTION I.III — City as Stage, Art as Statecraft: When Emperors Hosted Reality

While millions of peasants tilled the land, emperors turned cities into theatrical sets—scripting reality to show that heaven itself knelt before their throne.

Matthew Canepa reveals that diplomacy wasn't just negotiation—it was competitive theater. From hippodrome spectacles to hunting parties, from chess matches to feasts, every event was carefully staged propaganda aimed at the rival envoy—and through him, at the rival emperor.

🎁 The Gift Exchange: Luxury as Language

Step-by-Step Ritual of Gifting:

Envoy presents gifts: “Your brother sent you gifts, and I pray you to accept them.”
Threefold prostration repeated as gifts are brought forward.
Imperial inspection: Silentiaries record each gift; vestosacrani (wardrobe officials) appraise value and symbolic meaning.
Emperor responds with gifts of equal or greater value—maintaining ritual equilibrium.

🧠 Why it mattered: Gifts weren’t generosity—they were calculated political statements. A silver plate with a hunting king sent a message: “I am the victorious hunter; you are the prey.”

🎨 The Visual Vocabulary of Gifts

Object Type	Roman Example	Sasanian Example	Message
Silver Plates	Theodosius I missorium (emperor enthroned)	King hunting boar/ram (Kawād I plate)	“I am the source of authority” vs. “I am the divine hunter”
Silk Textiles	Purple robes with jeweled tablion	Royal hunter silk (senmurv pattern)	“My body is sacred” vs. “My body is victorious”
Crystal/Gold Cups	Justinian’s banquet ware with victory scenes	“Cup of Solomon” (king enthroned)	“My table displays my conquests”

🏟️ The Hippodrome: Where Empire Became Theater

Constantinople’s Stage:

Justinian’s equestrian statue: Made from melted Persian booty, inscribed: “Slayer of the Medes… may the defenders of the Medes remain forever chained.”
Theodosius’s obelisk base: Shows Persian envoys prostrating alongside barbarians.
Chariot races: Factions dressed as “Huns” and “Persians”—ritually defeated every race.

The Ultimate Spectacle: The Vandal Triumph (534 CE)

Gelimer, Vandal king, stripped of purple, forced to prostrate before Justinian.
Persian envoy watched as Justinian received obedience of a king.
Message: “This could be your king.”

Xusro I’s Counter-Stroke:

At Apamea (540 CE): Xusro sat in the kathisma (emperor’s box), presided over races, forced the blue faction (Justinian’s color) to lose.
Built a hippodrome at Ctesiphon—populated with captive Antiochenes.
Created “Weh-andīōg-husraw” (Better Antioch of Xusro)—a living trophy city.

🎪 The hippodrome wasn’t sport—it was sovereignty performed.

🏹 The Hunt: Where Kings Played God

Sasanian Hunting:

Sacred ritual: Xusro II’s Taq-e Bostān reliefs show enclosed paradise hunts with elephants, nets, music.
Animals = cosmic enemies: Boar (Warahrān), Ram (Xwarrah)—killing them proved divine power.
Envoys participated: Roman envoy Stilicho reportedly killed lions and tigers in Persian hunts.

Roman Response:

Arch of Constantine: Reused Hadrianic hunting tondi, added nimbus to emperor—claiming Sasanian-style divine glory.
Great Palace mosaics: Showed hunts with “Parthian shot”—borrowed Persian imagery.

♟️ Games of Thrones: Polo, Chess, Backgammon

Game	Origin	Imperial Significance
Polo (tzykanion)	Persia	Theodosius II built a polo field in Great Palace—adopted after Persian education.
Chess (zatrikion)	Persia (via India)	Xusro I’s vizier invented backgammon to outwit Indian king—diplomatic weapon.
Backgammon (nēw-ardaxšēr)	Persia	Played by Emperor Zeno; mentioned in 6th-century Greek poems.

♛ These weren’t games—they were training for rulership. In Persian courts, skill at chess proved strategic genius; at polo, military prowess.

🍷 Feasts: Where the World Was Served on a Plate

Imperial Dining as Cosmic Order:

Seating = hierarchy: Closer to emperor = higher status.
Food from imperial plate = supreme honor.
Vessels told stories: Justinian’s golden plates showed his victories; Xusro’s crystal cups showed his divine glory.

Persian Bazm (Royal Banquet):

Wine, music, poetry praising king as parallel to gods.
Carpet of Spring of Xusro: 30×30 m silk-gold-jewel garden—artificial paradise indoors.
Entertainments: harpists, dancers, acrobats, magic shows, monkey plays.

Diplomatic Dining:

Envoys ate “apportionment from emperor’s table” on holidays.
Theodora tried to make Persian envoys prostrate to her—Xusro I mocked: “A state run by women is nothing to fear.”

🧩 Why All This Theater Mattered

To the millions of peasants, these spectacles screamed:

“Your emperor is not a man—he is a cosmic force. The seasons turn, stars move, kings kneel… all around HIM.”

Every hunt, every race, every gifted silver plate reinforced:

The emperor is divinely victorious.
The rival emperor is subordinate.
The world order is fixed—and they are at the top.

☪️ The Prophet’s ﷺ Revolutionary Simplicity

While emperors staged celestial theater, the Prophet:

🏹 Never built a hippodrome—he prayed in a dusty courtyard.
🎪 Never staged victory spectacles—his greatest victory (Mecca) saw him enter humbly on a camel.
🍞 Never feasted from golden plates—he ate barley bread and dates, often sharing a single dish.
♟️ Never played royal games—he raced children, wrestled playfully, and mended his own sandals.

He rejected the entire imperial script—not because he couldn’t afford it, but because he redefined power itself.

🏁 SECTION I CONCLUSION: THE IMPERIAL PLAYBOOK — The Principles of “World Ruler” According to Rome & Persia

After exploring the rituals, clothing, spectacles, and symbolism of the Romano-Persian imperial system, we can now summarize the core principles that defined a “true world ruler” in the 6th–7th century. These were not just political rules—they were cosmic, theological, and performative.

📜 THE IMPERIAL PLAYBOOK: Principles of a “World Ruler”

Principle	Roman Expression	Persian Expression	Shared Message
1. Divine Embodiment	Emperor as Christ’s vicar; halo; called “divine,” “sacred.”	King as “partner of sun and moon,” “in the form of gods”; nimbus = xwarrah.	Ruler is a living icon of God/gods; his body is sacred.
2. Cosmic Centrality	Throne under dome of heaven; hippodrome as microcosm; calendar control.	Takht-e Taqdis (rotating throne); throne room with empty chairs for subject kings.	Universe revolves around ruler; he is axis mundi.
3. Sacred Clothing	Purple chlamys, red pearl boots, jeweled diadem—only for emperor.	Red pearl boots, jeweled crown suspended from ceiling, silk with senmurv.	Clothing = theology; color & fabric display divine right.
4. Ritual Hierarchy	Proskynēsis (full prostration), kissing feet, veiled entrance, silence.	Namāz burdan (prostration + hand over mouth), veiled king, golden chairs.	Submission is physical; ruler’s presence demands bodily humility.
5. Gift Diplomacy	Silver plates with emperor enthroned; silk robes; assessed by vestosacrani.	Silver plates with royal hunter; silk with astral motifs; crystal “Cup of Solomon.”	Gifts are political statements; luxury is diplomatic language.
6. Spectacle as Sovereignty	Hippodrome games, triumphal processions, Vandal king paraded.	Royal hunt reliefs, polo, Nowrūz feasts, hippodrome in Ctesiphon.	Power is performed; public ritual reinforces world order.
7. Victory as Virtue	Coins: victor omnium gentium; equestrian statues; defeated kings in art.	Rock reliefs of trampled enemies; hunting = defeating chaos; “king of kings of Iran and non-Iran.”	Ruler is eternally victorious; enemies are cosmic chaos.
8. Control of Time & Space	Liturgical calendar; palace as New Jerusalem; churches oriented to throne.	Nowrūz (New Year) coronations; throne room with seasonal thrones; fire temples.	Ruler orders sacred time and geography.
9. Global Aristocratic Culture	Adopted polo, chess, backgammon, Persian silks, hunting iconography.	Adopted hippodrome, Roman marble, winged Victory motifs, diadem styles.	Elite tastes are transnational; appropriation shows supremacy.
10. Body as Political Text	Beardless divine youth → bearded philosopher-king; nimbus; gemmed shoes.	Long sword, royal gaze, mounted archer, heavy crown (too divine to wear).	Royal physique and gaze manifest divine authority.

In both empires, the ruler was understood as:

The mediator between heaven and earth
The source of all law, order, and victory
The living symbol of the empire’s cosmic destiny
The sole possessor of sacred aesthetics (purple, red shoes, pearl diadems)
The center of a global hierarchy—all other kings were his subjects or “brothers” in a tense, mythic fraternity

This system was brilliant, oppressive, and mesmerizing. It convinced millions—from senators to peasants—that the emperor was necessary for cosmic order.

While Rome and Persia were perfecting this imperial theater, a man in Arabia was dismantling it—not with an army, but with a revolution in signs.

🕋 SECTION II: The Unadorned Throne — How Prophet Muhammad ﷺ Redefined Power from the Desert

While the empires of Rome and Persia were perfecting the sacred spectacle of kingship—turning palaces into heavens and rulers into gods—a revolution was being born not in marble halls, but in a land of sand, silence, and scripture.

Here, in the barren expanse of Arabia, a man named Muhammad ibn Abdullah ﷺ was not merely challenging empires; he was dismantling the very language of imperial power. He wore no purple. He demanded no prostration. He built no palaces and performed no coronation under rotating thrones. And yet, within a single generation, he would unite warring tribes, inspire a civilization, and redirect the course of history—not by mimicking imperial grandeur, but by inverting it.

This section is not about conquest. It is about semiotic revolution. We move now from the theatre of imperial divinity to the quiet force of prophetic simplicity—from crowns to cloaks, from proskynēsis to prayer, from the cosmic emperor to the servant-leader. We will trace how the Messenger of Islam systematically rejected the visual, ritual, and performative grammar of Persian and Roman kingship, and in doing so, authored a new vocabulary of authority—one rooted not in looking divine, but in being devout.

In the stillness of the desert, a new world was being whispered into existence—one where the most powerful man dressed like the poorest, where the leader washed his own clothes, and where true sovereignty belonged not to kings, but to the Creator.

Let us walk from the glittering halls of Ctesiphon and Constantinople into the dusty courtyard of Medina—and witness how a man with no crown out-kinged the kings of the earth.

🚫 SECTION II.I — The Prophet’s Prohibitions: How He Stripped Empire from the Body

While Roman and Persian emperors wrapped themselves in silk, gold, and purple to look like gods, the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ systematically forbade every imperial fabric, color, and adornment—turning the body itself into a site of revolution.

From the Hadiths of Sahih al-Bukhari, we see a precise, intentional dismantling of the visual language of imperial power. What’s striking? Most of what he forbade was Persian and Roman royal regalia.

📜 THE PROHIBITIONS — And Their Imperial Origins

Prohibition	Hadith Reference	Imperial Equivalent	Why It Mattered
1. Dragging Garments (Isbal)	“Whoever drags his garment out of pride, Allah will not look at him on the Day of Resurrection.” (Bukhari 5783, 5784)	Persian & Roman royal trains — long robes sweeping ground = majesty, superiority.	Rejects visual hierarchy; clothes must not exaggerate status.
2. Garments Below Ankles	“What is below the ankles of the izār (lower garment) is in the Fire.” (Bukhari 5787)	Persian trousers/robes worn long; Roman toga/paludamentum flowing.	Humility in dress; no excess fabric = no aristocratic “waste.”
3. Silk for Men	“Whoever wears silk in this world shall not wear it in the Hereafter.” (Bukhari 5789, 5792)	Persian & Roman imperial silk — purple, gold-threaded, senmurv patterns = divine right fabric.	Silk = luxury = distance from people. Forbidden to erase class visual markers.
4. Gold Rings & Adornments	“The Prophet forbade gold rings.” (Bukhari 5863, 5865)	Persian royal signet rings (King’s seal); Roman imperial ring (authority symbol).	Rejects royal seals & jewelry as power tokens.
5. Gold & Silver Vessels	“He forbade us from drinking from gold and silver vessels.” (Bukhari 5832)	Persian crystal/gold cups (Cup of Solomon); Roman imperial banquet ware.	Eating/drinking vessels = imperial luxury. Shared clay bowls instead.
6. Red Dye (Saffron/Red Silk)	“He forbade a man from dyeing with saffron.” (Bukhari 5846)	Persian royal red boots & robes; Roman purple/magenta = imperial color.	Red/Purple = exclusive royal color. Ban breaks color monopoly.
7. Fine Brocade (Dībāj)	“He forbade silk, brocade (dībāj), and sitting on it.” (Bukhari 5832)	Persian & Roman brocade — woven gold/silver thread, worn in courts.	Brocade = aristocratic textile. Forbidden to erase visual elite culture.
8. Silk-Cotton Mix (Siyarā’)	“The Prophet gave me a silk garment (siyarā’), but I saw anger on his face, so I cut it and distributed it among my women.” (Bukhari 5839)	Mixed fabric = Persian/Roman hybrid luxury — still carried silk’s prestige.	Even partial silk = slippery slope to elitism.
9. Silk Cushions & Rugs	“He forbade red silk cushions (mayāthir).” (Bukhari 5834)	Persian Bahār-e Kesrī carpet; Roman silk pillows in palaces.	Furniture also marked status — no silk under you either.
10. Imitating the Opposite Gender	“The Prophet cursed men who imitate women and women who imitate men.” (Bukhari 5885)	Persian court eunuchs & Roman gendered fashion — blurring lines as elite spectacle.	Rejects courtly gender fluidity as aristocratic play.

🧵 BREAKDOWN: Why These Prohibitions Target Imperial Aesthetics

1. Silk (Ḥarīr) — The Fabric of Kings

Persia: Royal senmurv silks, gold-threaded robes.
Rome: Purple silk chlamys, tablion with jewels.
Prophet’s ban: “Silk is for them in this world, and for you in the Hereafter.” (Bukhari 5832)
→ Rejects the fabric that literally clothed gods-on-earth.

2. Red & Purple Dye — The Color of Thrones

Persia: Red pearl boots, crimson robes.
Rome: Tyrian purple, magenta paludamentum.
Prophet’s ban: No saffron/red dye for men → breaks the color code of royalty.

3. Gold & Silver Vessels — The Table of Power

Persia: Crystal “Cup of Solomon,” gold plates.
Rome: Golden missorium of Theodosius.
Prophet’s ban: Eat/drink from clay, wood, copper → rejects dining as imperial theater.

4. Long/Dragged Garments — The Walk of Majesty

Persia: Flowing robes, train-bearers.
Rome: Toga trains, pallium length.
Prophet’s ban: Ankle-length only → no “sweeping” superiority.

🧠 The Deeper Revolution: From Imperial Body to Muslim Body

Imperial Body	Prophetic Body
Clothed in silk	Clothed in wool/cotton
Adorned with gold	Free of jewelry
Red/Purple only for ruler	No gender/status color codes
Long trains = authority	Short hems = humility
Vessels of gold = sacred meals	Shared clay bowls = community
Silk cushions = elevated seating	Sitting on floor/mats = equality

The Prophet didn’t just forbid luxury—he forbade the visual grammar of empire.

When a Muslim man walked in plain, undyed, ankle-length wool, he was a walking rejection of the Persian king’s pearl-embroidered red boots and the Roman emperor’s purple silk cloak.

⚡ The Theological Rebellion

You are not a god — don’t dress like one.
Your authority comes from piety, not fabric.
Your body is for worship, not display.
The Hereafter’s silk is earned, not worn.

In the desert, a caliph would later dress like a shepherd, while in Constantinople and Ctesiphon, emperors dressed like divinities.

The difference wasn’t wealth—it was worldview.

🧵 SECTION II.II — The Prophet’s Attire: What He ACTUALLY Wore (And What It Meant)

While emperors in Constantinople and Ctesiphon wrapped themselves in imperial theater, Prophet Muhammad ﷺ dressed in clothes that told a completely different story — a story of accessibility, humility, and human equality.

From Sahih al-Bukhari and other authentic narrations, we have a vivid, detailed picture of the Prophet’s ﷺ wardrobe — not as a ruler set apart, but as a man among men. His clothing was functional, simple, often gifted, and never used to elevate himself above others.

👕 A VISUAL CATALOG OF THE PROPHET’S ﷺ WARDROBE

Item	Description & Narration	Meaning & Contrast to Imperial Dress
Ḥulla (حُلَّة)	A two-piece garment (izar + rida’). He once prayed in a ḥulla, his clothes gathered up (mushammiran) so as not to drag. “I saw the Prophet ﷺ come out in a ḥulla with his clothes gathered up…” (Bukhārī 376)	Simple, practical — not heavy silk or purple. No train, no draping finery.
Jubba (جُبَّة)	A long outer garment. He wore a Jubba Shamiya (Syrian jubba) with tight sleeves, and a woolen jubba on travel. “He performed wudu while wearing a Syrian jubba…” (Bukhārī 204)	Local, ordinary material — not imported silk or jeweled regalia.
Burda (بُرْدَة)	A woven cloak, sometimes coarse-edged. A woman wove one for him by hand; he wore it, then gave it away. “A woman brought a burda… she wove it with her own hand to clothe you.” (Bukhārī 5810)	Handmade, gifted, shared — not exclusive or symbolizing rank.
Ḥibara (حِبَرَة)	A striped Yemeni cloth — said to be his favorite garment. “The most beloved garment to the Prophet ﷺ was the ḥibara.” (Bukhārī 3557)	Modest patterned cloth — not solid purple or gold-embroidered.
Qabā’ (قَبَاء)	A lined outer garment. Sometimes given as gifts; he once wore a qabā’ of silk brocade with gold buttons when meeting a guest. “He came out wearing a qabā’ of brocade with gold buttons.” (Bukhārī 3046)	Worn only occasionally, often as a gift — not daily royal attire.
Khamīṣa (خَمِيصَة)	A square garment with woven patterns. He once prayed in one with designs, but it distracted him — so he gave it away. “Take this khamīṣa of mine to Abu Jahm… it distracted me from prayer.” (Bukhārī 373)	Rejected if distracting — unlike emperors who wore dazzling robes to awe.
Mighfar (مِغْفَر)	A helmet/head armor. Wore it entering Makkah at the Conquest. “The Prophet ﷺ entered Makkah in the year of the Conquest with a mighfar on his head.” (Bukhārī 3692)	Functional battle gear — not a jeweled crown or diadem.
Khuff (خُفّ)	Leather socks/shoes. Allowed wiping over them in wudu. “Who does not find sandals, let him wear khuff.” (Bukhārī 5857)	Practical footwear — not red pearl-encrusted boots reserved for kings.
Izar & Ridā’ (إِزَارٌ وَرِدَاء)	Lower wrap and upper shawl — basic dress of the Arabs.	Universal dress — no distinction between ruler and ruled.

🌟 KEY THEMES IN THE PROPHET’S ﷺ DRESS

1. Accessibility Over Awe

An Arab once yanked his burda so hard it left a mark on his shoulder — and the Prophet ﷺ simply smiled and ordered him to be given charity.
Contrast: In imperial courts, touching the emperor’s robe was forbidden; approaching him required prostration.

2. Gifted, Not Hoarded

He received gifts of clothing and often gave them away — even his favorite garments.
Contrast: Emperors accumulated silks and purple dyes as state property, legislating exclusivity.

3. Modesty in Adornment

He once wore a patterned khamīṣa in prayer but found the patterns distracting — so he gave it away and asked for a plain garment instead.
Contrast: Emperors wore intricate patterns (senmurv, eagles, stars) to symbolize cosmic power.

4. No Reserved Colors

He wore green, black, white, red stripes, Yemeni patterns — but never claimed a color as “royal.”
Contrast: Purple and red were legally restricted to emperors; wearing them was treason.

5. Practicality in All Things

His sleeves were sometimes too tight to roll up for wudu — so he washed his arms under the garment.
Contrast: Imperial robes were designed for ceremony, not practicality.

🏠 HIS HOME: THE ULTIMATE CONTRAST

While emperors sat on golden thrones under rotating celestial domes:

“I entered and saw the Prophet ﷺ on a simple palm-fiber mat that had left marks on his side, with a leather pillow stuffed with palm fibers under his head, and some animal skins hanging.”
— Bukhārī 246

His bed was a ḥaṣīr (mat); his pillow was adām (leather) stuffed with līf (palm fiber).

No gold, no silk, no throne — because leadership was not about luxury, but responsibility.

💬 “HE IS NOT A TYRANT” — THE REVELATORY MOMENT

A man once told his son, hesitant to approach the Prophet ﷺ:

“O my son, call the Prophet for me.”
The son said: “Should I call the Messenger of Allah for you?”
The father replied: “O my son, he is not a tyrant (لَيْسَ بِجَبَّارٍ).”

This phrase — “he is not a tyrant” — captures the essence of Prophetic leadership:

No forced prostration
No veiled entries
No exclusive colors
No heavy crowns
No imperial silence

He was approachable, reachable, touchable — because his authority came from truth, not theater.

🔄 THE BOTTOM LINE: REDEFINING POWER THROUGH SIMPLICITY

Imperial Power	Prophetic Power
Wore purple & gold	Wore wool & cotton
Demanded prostration	Accepted a handshake
Sat on golden thrones	Sat on the floor
Crowns too heavy to wear	Wore a simple ‘imāmah (turban)
Reserved red shoes	Wore sandals like anyone else
Clothing as separation	Clothing as connection

The Prophet ﷺ didn’t just reject imperial dress — he rejected the entire philosophy behind it: that power must be visually elevated, that authority requires ceremonial distance, that leadership is about appearing divine.

He showed that true leadership wears the garments of the people, sleeps on their mats, eats their food, and walks in their sandals — because real authority needs no costume.

🏡 SECTION II.III — The Prophet at Home: The Man Who Mended Shoes While Emperors Sat on Thrones

While Roman and Persian emperors lived in palaces as living icons — their bodies sacred, their bedrooms guarded, their every need attended to by armies of eunuchs and slaves — Prophet Muhammad ﷺ lived a life that shattered the very idea of sacred kingship.

From the authentic narrations of ‘Ā’isha (رضي الله عنها), we glimpse a man who did not just reject imperial ceremony — he lived its opposite in the most intimate space of all: his own home.

🧵 A DAY IN THE LIFE: THE PROPHET’S ﷺ DOMESTIC REALITY

Action	Narration	Imperial Contrast
In the Service of His Family (في مهنة أهله)	“He would be in the service of his family, and when prayer time came, he would leave.”	👑 Emperors were served by their families and court — the emperor never served.
Mending His Own Sandals (يخصف نعله)	“He would mend his sandals and do what a man does in his house.”	👑 Emperors wore pearl-encrusted red boots made by slave artisans — never touched a repair.
Patching His Own Clothes (يرقع الثوب)	“He would patch the garment, and sew.”	👑 Emperors’ clothes were silk, purple, gold-embroidered — worn once, then stored or gifted.
Milking His Own Sheep (يحلب شاته)	“He was a human among humans: he would mend his clothes and milk his sheep.”	👑 Emperors drank from golden goblets served by cupbearers — never touched livestock.

🛋️ THE PROPHET’S HOME VS. THE IMPERIAL PALACE

🏠 The Prophet’s House:

A few simple rooms opening into a courtyard.
Floor of sand or palm fiber.
No guards at the door.
Family and Companions walked in freely.
He slept on a palm-fiber mat that left marks on his side.
He personally mended, cleaned, milked, and served.

🏛️ The Emperor’s Palace:

Vast complexes with throne rooms, hippodromes, private chapels.
Marble floors, golden mosaics, silk curtains.
Guards, eunuchs, chamberlains controlled all access.
The emperor’s bedroom was a sacred space — entered only by select attendants.
He was dressed by eunuchs, fed by servants, guarded while he slept.
His body was considered too sacred for mundane tasks.

👑 THE PHILOSOPHICAL EARTHQUAKE

What the Prophet ﷺ was doing wasn’t just “being humble” — it was a systemic dismantling of sacred kingship.

Imperial Ideology	Prophetic Reality
The ruler’s body is holy — must be protected from mundane contact.	The Prophet’s body was human — he milked goats and mended clothes.
The ruler’s time is divine — too precious for domestic chores.	The Prophet’s time was for his family — he served them before prayer.
The ruler’s home is a palace — a stage for ritual and awe.	The Prophet’s home was a house — a place of work and rest.
The ruler is served — to elevate him above common humanity.	The Prophet served — to embody common humanity.

⚖️ THE POLITICAL MESSAGE IN THE MUNDANE

When ‘Ā’isha was asked: “What did the Messenger of Allah ﷺ do in his house?”

She replied:

“He was a human among humans.”

(كَانَ بَشَرًا مِنَ الْبَشَرِ)

This statement is revolutionary.

In a world where:

Emperors were “partners of the sun and moon”
Kings were “in the form of the gods”
Rulers demanded prostration and veiled entries

…the Prophet ﷺ declared through his actions:

“I am human. I mend. I milk. I serve. I belong to you.”

🔄 THE RITUAL OF THE EVERYDAY

The emperors had:

Morning levée (awakening ceremony)
Sacred vesting (dressing by eunuchs)
Silentium (audience behind veils)
Proskynēsis (subjects kissing feet)

The Prophet had:

Morning service to his family
Self-dressing in simple clothes
Open door — any Companion could enter
Handshakes and smiles — no prostration

💡 WHY THIS MATTERED THEN — AND NOW

In the 7th century, power was theater.

The more distant, sacred, and unapproachable the ruler, the more legitimate he seemed.

The Prophet ﷺ replaced that theater with transparency, accessibility, and shared labor.

He didn’t just tell people “I am your brother” — he lived it:

By mending his sandals like a poor man
By milking his sheep like a shepherd
By patching his clothes like a tailor
By serving his family like a humble husband

🎭 THE ULTIMATE CONTRAST

Emperor	Prophet
Dressed by eunuchs	Dressed himself
Fed by tasters	Ate with his family
Slept in a guarded bedchamber	Slept on a mat
Held audience behind a veil	Held council in his courtyard
Rode in a golden chariot	Rode a camel or walked
Wore purple silk	Wore patched wool
Demanded prostration	Accepted a handshake
Called “brother of the sun and moon”	Called “a human among humans”

🕋 THE LEGACY: REDEFINING LEADERSHIP

While empires built palaces to separate the ruler from the ruled,

the Prophet ﷺ built a community where the leader lived among the people.

While kings wore crowns to show they were above humanity,

the Prophet ﷺ wore patches to show he was part of it.

His home was not a fortress of power — it was a house of mercy.

His life was not a performance of divinity — it was a testimony of humanity.

And in that simple, radical, everyday reality — mending a sandal, milking a sheep, serving his family — he dismantled a thousand years of imperial sacral kingship, and built something entirely new:

Leadership as service. Authority as responsibility. Power as humility.

🏹🚫 SECTION II.IV — The Hunt: From Imperial Spectacle to Prophetic Prohibition

While Persian kings built walled hunting paradises and Roman emperors staged beast hunts in hippodromes, the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ taught a radically different ethic: hunting for food—not for sport, glory, or divine theater.

🏛️ Imperial Hunting: Cosmic Theater of Power

Aspect	Roman Imperial Hunt	Persian Royal Hunt	Prophetic Approach ﷺ
Purpose	Demonstrate virtus (manly excellence); political spectacle	Prove possession of xwarrah (divine glory); cosmic ritual	Sustenance only; lawful food acquisition
Scale	Colosseum beast hunts (venationes); enclosed game preserves	Walled paradises (pairidaēza → paradise); elephants, nets, armies of beaters	Individual or small group; no organized game drives
Method	Professional bestiarii; staged massacres; exotic animals	King as mounted archer; “Parthian shot”; ritualized slaughter	Simple tools: bow, trained dog; no torture instruments
Symbolism	Emperor taming chaos; domination over nature	King defeating demonic forces (boar=Warahrān); enacting cosmic order	No symbolism—just halal food; mention Allah’s name
Aftermath	Bodies displayed; mosaics commissioned; silver plates minted	Rock reliefs carved (Taq-e Bostān); silk patterns woven	Eat what you kill; waste is prohibited

⚔️ The Imperial Hunt: Kings Playing God

Persian Royal Hunt:

Xusro II’s Taq-e Bostān reliefs: Show enclosed hunting park with elephants, boats, nets, musicians.
Animals = cosmic enemies: Killing boar proved victory over evil.
Divine glory manifested: Nimbus appears around king’s head post-hunt.

Roman Imperial Hunt:

Arch of Constantine: Reused Hadrianic hunt scenes, added nimbus to emperor.
Colosseum venationes: Thousands of animals slaughtered in single day.
Silver plates: Emperor hunting lion/boar = “I dominate the natural world.”

👑 Message: “I am not just a king—I am a cosmic force. Even animals bow to my divinity.”

☪️ The Prophetic Hunt: Simplicity, Mercy, Purpose

From Sahih Bukhari: The Prophet’s ﷺ Direct Teachings

Hadith Principle	Meaning	Contrast with Imperial Practice
“What your trained dog catches for you, eat.” (Bukhari 5477)	Dogs as tools for sustenance, not spectacle.	No exotic cheetahs/leopards for show.
“If you hit with the sharp edge [of arrow], eat. If you hit with the flat side, it is carrion.” (Bukhari 5476)	Precision and mercy—quick kill required.	No torturous spearing for entertainment.
“Do not shoot with small pebbles.” (Bukhari 5479)	Prevents painful, non-lethal injury.	Opposite of arena “games” prolonging agony.
“Do not set up animals as targets.” (Bukhari 5513)	No practice shooting at living creatures.	Direct condemnation of Roman/Persian “target practice” on birds/animals.
“Eat what you kill—it is provision from Allah.” (Bukhari 5485)	Hunt = food source, not trophy collection.	No decorative skins, ivory trophies, or boastful monuments.
“If another dog participates without your permission, do not eat.” (Bukhari 5477)	Intentionality and control matter.	No uncontrolled mass hunts with hundreds of dogs/beaters.

🚫 Specific Prohibitions: Breaking the Imperial Model

1. No Torture or “Sport Killing”:

The Prophet ﷺ cursed whoever uses a living creature as a target. (Bukhari 5513)
This directly condemns:
Roman arena beast-baiting
Persian royal “demonstration hunts”
Shooting birds for practice

2. No Waste:

“If you kill, kill well.” (Muslim)
Contrast: Thousands of animal corpses left to rot in hippodromes.

3. No Ostentation:

Hunt with simple bow, trained dog—not with:
⛔ War elephants
⛔ Golden nets
⛔ Armies of beaters
⛔ Orchestras playing

4. No Divine Pretense:

Mention Allah’s name—not your own glory.
No nimbus, no rock reliefs, no “I am the divine hunter” iconography.

🌿 Real-Life Example: The Onager Hunt

From Sahih Bukhari (5484–5485):

Companion Abu Qatadah hunts Onager while others were in ihram (couldn’t hunt).
Uses simple spear, kills quickly.
Some companions refuse to eat—doubting permissibility.
Prophet ﷺ says: “Eat—it is food Allah provided.”

Contrast with imperial hunt:

✅ One animal, one hunter
✅ Simple weapon
✅ Immediate consumption
✅ No monument, no ceremony, no glory

🔄 The Ethical Revolution

Imperial Ethos	Prophetic Ethos ﷺ
Hunting = demonstration of power	Hunting = permitted necessity
Animals = symbolic enemies	Animals = Allah’s creation
Kill = spectacle	Kill = quick, merciful
Aftermath = boasting, art, monuments	Aftermath = thanksgiving, sharing food
Hunter = divine figure	Hunter = servant of Allah

⚡ Why This Matters

The imperial hunt was theater of divinity—where kings “proved” they were gods by dominating nature.

The Prophet ﷺ shattered that theater:

🏹 No divine glory in killing
🐗 No cosmic symbolism in prey
🎪 No spectatorship
📿 No self-deification

He reduced hunting from a cosmic ritual to a humble, regulated act of sustenance—stripping emperors of one of their most potent tools of self-divinization.

🍞 SECTION II.V — The Prophetic Banquet: When Bread and Meat Outfeasted Kings

While Persian kings reclined on jeweled carpets in halls of silk, and Roman emperors dined from golden plates depicting their victories, the Messenger of God ﷺ fed his community with a simplicity that shattered imperial vanity.

His feasts were not about power—they were about people. His table was not a stage for hierarchy—it was a circle of community. His food was not a symbol of luxury—it was an act of provision.

Here, we explore the prophetic ethos of feasting—a complete inversion of the imperial banquet—through the narrations of his companions.

📜 The Prophetic Feast: Narrations & Meaning

1. The “Grandest” Wedding Feast: One Sheep

Anas ibn Mālik said:
“I never saw the Prophet ﷺ give a wedding feast for any of his wives like the one he gave for Zaynab—for he slaughtered a single sheep.”
— Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī

Compare with imperial banquets:

Xusro II’s “Spring Carpet” feast: 30×30 m silk carpet, jeweled vessels, exotic dishes.
Justinian’s victory banquet: golden plates with his image, wine from imperial estates.

Prophetic message:

Celebration is in gratitude, not extravagance.

2. The Invitation Ethic: Even if Only a Trotters’ Feast

Ibn ‘Umar narrated that the Prophet ﷺ said:
“If you are invited to a wedding feast—or something similar—respond. Even if only to a trotters’ (modest meat) feast.”
— Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim

Compare with imperial protocol:

Persian bazm: only nobles invited; seating by rank; musicians praising the king as divine.
Roman silentium feasts: senators only; food apportioned by status.

Prophetic message:

Community over class. Presence over prestige.

3. The Simplicity of the Meal: Bread and Meat Until They Were Full

Anas added:
“He fed them bread and meat until they had their fill, then left.”
— Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī

Compare with imperial cuisine:

Multi-course feasts with imported wines, exotic meats, rare spices.
Silver plates, crystal cups, tables laden to display wealth.

Prophetic message:

Food is for nourishment, not ostentation. Enough is a blessing.

4. The Warning: The Worst Feast is One That Excludes the Poor

Abū Hurayrah said:
“The worst food is the food of a wedding feast to which the rich are invited and the poor are left out. Whoever does not accept an invitation has disobeyed God and His Messenger.”
— Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim

Compare with imperial exclusivity:

Feasts as displays of social hierarchy; the poor were invisible.
Gifts distributed by rank; dining as political theater.

Prophetic message:

A feast that excludes the needy is no feast at all—it is arrogance.

5. The Incident of Hamza: When Celebration Becomes Excess

‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib narrated:
Hamza, in a state of drink at a feast with music, slaughtered ‘Alī’s two camels prepared for his wedding to Fāṭimah. When the Prophet ﷺ came and saw Hamza intoxicated, he simply turned and left, knowing reasoning was futile. — Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim

Compare with imperial revelry:

Persian bazm with heavy drinking, music, dancing, and royal approval.
Roman feasts with pantomimes, clowns, and often drunken excess.

Prophetic message:

Celebration should not lead to waste, harm, or loss of dignity.

📊 Imperial vs. Prophetic Feasting: A Side-by-Side Table

Aspect	Imperial Feast (Rome/Persia)	Prophetic Feast
Purpose	Display power, hierarchy, divine kingship	Celebrate community, gratitude, simplicity
Food	Exotic dishes, rare spices, multi-course	Bread, meat, dates—simple, local, filling
Vessels	Gold plates, crystal cups, silk tablecloths	Simple pottery, shared plates, often on ground
Music	Harpists, flutes, choirs praising the emperor	Sometimes none; if present, simple poetry or remembrance of God
Guests	Ranked by status; poor excluded	Open to all—rich, poor, neighbor, stranger
Seating	By proximity to emperor = honor	Circle on floor; leader sits among them
Duration	Hours of revelry, often drunken	Until satisfied, then leave with thanks
Symbolism	Empire’s bounty; ruler as provider of plenty	God’s bounty; gratitude for provision

💎 The Deeper Revolution: Feasting as Social Justice

The Prophet ﷺ didn’t just change what was eaten—he changed why people feasted.

Imperial feast: Reinforced social stratification.
Prophetic feast: Reinforced social integration.
Imperial feast: Food as spectacle.
Prophetic feast: Food as sustenance.
Imperial feast: Exclusivity as prestige.
Prophetic feast: Inclusivity as piety.

🕌 The Ultimate Banquet: The ‘Īd Feast

Even the greatest Islamic feast—‘Īd al-Fiṭr—reflects this ethos:

Pray before eating.
Give charity before prayer so the poor can feast too.
Eat something simple (dates) before going out.
Feast together in open prayer grounds—no palace, no invitations, no hierarchy.

Compare to Nowrūz or imperial victory celebrations held in palaces with tributes and ranked seating.

⚖️ Why This Matters in the Story of Power

While emperors were using feasts to say:

“Look how much I own. Look who is invited. Look who is not.”

The Prophet ﷺ was using feasts to say:

“What God has given, let us share. Come, eat. There is enough for all.”

He transformed the feast from a tool of imperial theater into an act of communal worship.

🏛️⚖️ SECTION II.VI — The Ban on Imperial Titles: When the Prophet ﷺ Declared, “There is No King of Kings but Allah”

In an age where emperors wrapped themselves in divine titulature, the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ issued a theological edict that struck at the very heart of imperial self-deification: the prohibition of titles that claimed universal sovereignty.

While Roman and Persian rulers competed to bear ever-more-grandiose titles—each a verbal crown proclaiming cosmic dominion—the Prophet ﷺ taught that the most despised name before Allah is “King of Kings.” This was not merely a rejection of arrogance—it was a systematic dismantling of the imperial claim to godlike authority.

👑 The Imperial Titles & Their Meanings

Roman Titles & Ideology:

Title	Meaning	Theological Claim
Autokrator (Αὐτοκράτωρ)	“Self-ruler,” “Absolute sovereign”	Authority from self, not people or senate; implies self-sufficient power (a divine attribute).
Basileus (Βασιλεύς)	“King” (adopted officially by Heraclius)	Universal monarch, heir to Alexander; God’s vicegerent on earth.
Dominus et Deus	“Lord and God” (used by Domitian)	Direct claim to divinity; emperor as object of worship.
Pontifex Maximus	“Greatest Priest”	Head of state religion; mediator between gods and men.
Kosmokratōr (Κοσμοκράτωρ)	“Ruler of the Cosmos”	Master of universe; heavens and earth under his command.
Victorious, Perpetual, August	Eternal, sacred, triumphant	Transcendent, timeless, divinely favored.

Persian Titles & Ideology:

Title	Meaning	Theological Claim
Shāhanshāh	“King of Kings”	Sovereign over all rulers; only one true emperor on earth.
Padishah	“Master King”	Absolute monarch; shadow of God on earth.
Khudawand	“Lord,” “Possessor”	Divine lordship; parallel to divine attributes.
Partner of Sun & Moon	Cosmic sibling to celestial bodies	Co-regent with heavenly powers; astral divinity.
Divānag, Mazdā-yasn	“Image of the Gods,” “Mazdā-worshipper”	Incarnation of divine form; Ahura Mazdā’s representative.
Kay (کی)	“Kayanid” (mythical dynasty)	Heir to legendary god-kings; semi-divine lineage.

🕌 The Prophetic Ban & Its Reasoning

The ḥadīth collections are explicit and severe:

“The most despicable name in the sight of Allah is a man who calls himself ‘King of Kings’ (Malik al-Amlāk).”
— Saḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, Saḥīḥ Muslim

Sufyān, the narrator, clarifies: “That is like Shāhanshāh.”

Why These Titles Were Forbidden:

Reason	Explanation
1. Claiming Divine Sovereignty (Rubūbiyyah)	“King of Kings” implies ultimate ownership—a quality belonging only to Allah (مَالِكِ الْمُلْكِ).
2. Associating Partners with Allah (Shirk)	When a ruler takes titles like “Lord,” “God,” or “Cosmic Ruler,” he rivals Allah’s names (Al-Malik, Al-Qahhār).
3. Undermining Tawḥīd	Imperial titles create multiple centers of cosmic authority—Islam declares only One.
4. Arrogance (Kibr)	Such titles embody the ultimate arrogance—claiming godhood—which Allah hates most.
5. Deifying the Temporal	They turn a mortal man into an object of worship—the very essence of pre-Islamic jāhiliyyah.

The Prophet ﷺ didn’t just criticize—he replaced the imperial cosmology with a radical alternative:

“Lā Malik illā Allāh.”
“There is no King but Allah.”

⚔️ Imperial Titles in Light of the Ban

Every major Romano-Persian title fell under this prohibition:

Imperial Title	Why It’s Forbidden in Islam
Shāhanshāh	Claims supremacy over all kings—sovereignty belongs to Allah.
Autokrator	Implies self-derived power—power comes only from Allah.
Dominus et Deus	Direct shirk—claiming lordship and divinity.
Kosmokratōr	Assumes command of creation—only Allah is Rabb al-‘Ālamīn.
Partner of Sun & Moon	Associates creation with creator; astral polytheism.
Image of the Gods	Anthropomorphic divinity; representing God in human form.

📉 The Practical Impact: From Caliph to Servant

While emperors styled themselves “King of Kings,” the Prophet’s successors took titles of service:

Khalīfat Rasūl Allāh → “Successor of the Messenger of Allah”
Amīr al-Mu’minīn → “Commander of the Faithful”
‘Abdullāh → “Servant of Allah”

The Caliph was not Malik (King), but Khalīfa (Steward).

He did not own the kingdom—he managed it in trust.

🕋 The Theological Earthquake

This ban wasn’t just about semantics—it was a revolution in political theology:

Roman/Persian model: Emperor as cosmic sovereign → power radiates from him.
Islamic model: Caliph as servant of God → power flows through him from Allah.

The emperor’s body was sacred.

The Prophet’s body was mortal—he prayed: “O Allah, make me live poor, die poor, and be resurrected among the poor.”

✨ Conclusion: The Unmaking of Divine Kingship

By banning “King of Kings,” the Prophet ﷺ did not just forbid a phrase—he dethroned the imperial god-king. He replaced:

👑 Divine right with divine consent
🏛️ Sacred monarchy with servant leadership
🌌 Cosmic emperors with accountable caliphs

In the ashes of imperial titulature, he planted the seed of Tawḥīd in governance:

No crown but the Crown of Allah.

No sovereignty but the Sovereignty of the Divine.

No King of Kings—except the King of all worlds.

👑 SECTION II.VII — The Bedouin's Slip: When a Compliment Became Blasphemy

📜 THE HADITH: When "God and You" Became "God ALONE"

Arabic Text

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ، قَالَ‏:‏ حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، عَنِ الأَجْلَحِ، عَنْ يَزِيدَ، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ‏:‏ قَالَ رَجُلٌ لِلنَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم‏:‏ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ وَشِئْتَ، قَالَ‏:‏ جَعَلْتَ لِلَّهِ نِدًّا، مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ وَحْدَهُ‏.

Reference: Al-Adab Al-Mufrad 783

Book: 33, Hadith 30

English Translation

A man said to the Prophet ﷺ: "Whatever Allah wills and you will."

The Prophet ﷺ replied: "Have you made me an equal (niddan) to Allah? Rather, whatever Allah wills alone."

💥 THE IMPERIAL BACKGROUND: What the Bedouin Meant

To understand why this Bedouin said what he said—and why the Prophet ﷺ reacted with such sharp correction—we must understand what the man thought he was doing.

The Imperial Mentality of "Divine Approval"

In the courts of:

Empire	The Concept	What It Meant
Persia	Xwarrah (Divine Glory)	The king's will was the gods' will; his decisions carried cosmic approval
Rome	Divus Imperator (Divine Emperor)	The emperor's word was law because he was God's vicegerent on earth
Sasanian Protocol	"King of Kings, partner of the sun and moon"	The king's desires were aligned with celestial order
Roman Ceremony	Proskynesis + "Lord and God"	The emperor's will was treated as divine decree

What the Bedouin Was Really Saying

When this Arab man said "Whatever Allah wills and you will," he was not being rude. He was being complimentary—in the worst possible way.

In his mind:

The Prophet was the leader of the community
Leaders in the ancient world were semi-divine figures
Their will was an extension of divine will
So linking Allah's will with the Prophet's was honoring the Prophet

He was essentially treating Muhammad ﷺ the way a Persian subject would treat the Shah—as a divinely approved ruler whose wishes carry cosmic weight.

⚡ THE PROPHET'S RESPONSE: "JAA'ALTA LILLAHI NIDDAN"

The Word: نِدًّا (Niddan)

Ibn Manẓūr in Lisān al-‘Arab defines نِدّ as:

"الشِّرْكُ، النَّظِيرُ، المِثْلُ، العَدِيلُ"
"Polytheism, the counterpart, the likeness, the equal."

Al-Nidd means:

A rival, an equal
Someone set up alongside another as a partner
Someone treated as equivalent in status or authority

Why This Word Is Nuclear

In the Qur'an, Allah says:

"فَلَا تَجْعَلُوا لِلَّهِ أَنْدَادًا وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ"
"So do not make rivals (andād) to Allah while you know." (Q2:22)

The Prophet ﷺ took this Bedouin's innocent compliment and exposed its theological rot:

"You just did what the polytheists do. You set up a rival to Allah. You made my will equal to His."

🔥 THE PROPHET'S CORRECTION: "مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ وَحْدَهُ"

The Precise Phrasing

"مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ وَحْدَهُ"
"Whatever Allah wills ALONE."

The word وَحْدَهُ (alone, by Himself) is the surgical removal of the Bedouin's implicit shirk.

The Prophet ﷺ didn't just correct the wording—he corrected the entire worldview behind it.

🏛️ THE THEOLOGICAL REVOLUTION IN ONE SENTENCE

What Every Emperor Believed

Empire	Belief	Implication
Persia	The Shah's will reflects divine will	"What Ahura Mazda wills and the Shah wills"
Rome	The Emperor is God's vicegerent	"What God wills and Caesar wills"

What the Prophet ﷺ Declared

"No. My will is NOT Allah's will. My desires are NOT divine decrees. I am NOT a partner in sovereignty. I am a servant—and servants do not share the Master's throne."

📊 THE CONTRAST TABLE: Emperor vs. Prophet

Aspect	Emperor	Prophet ﷺ
When praised	Accepted titles like "Lord and God," "King of Kings"	Rejected "Whatever Allah wills and you will"
Will of ruler	Seen as extension of divine will	His will is human, fallible, subordinate
Relationship to God	Vicegerent, partner, divinely approved	Servant, messenger, slave
Response to compliment	Expected it; it reinforced power	Corrected it; it threatened Tawhid
Theological boundary	Blurred between human and divine	Sharp, absolute, unbridgeable
Title claimed	"Partner of sun and moon"	"Abdullah" (Slave of Allah)
What they'd say	"What the gods will and I will"	"Whatever Allah wills alone"

🧠 THE DEEPER MEANING: Why This Matters for Understanding Imperial Rejection

This incident is not about grammar—it's about cosmology.

The Bedouin's Mistake Was Innocent... and Deadly

He thought he was being polite.

He thought he was honoring the Prophet.

He thought he was following the pattern of every other culture he knew:

"Honor the leader by linking him to the divine."

The Prophet's Correction Was Radical... and Essential

He knew that this seemingly small slip was the gateway to idolatry.

If Muslims started saying "Allah and Muhammad will,"

Soon they'd start thinking "Muhammad's will is Allah's will,"

Then "Muhammad's decisions are infallible like Allah's,"

Then "Muhammad is divine like Allah."

The slope from compliment to shirk is slippery.

The Prophet ﷺ salted the slope.

🕌 THE LEGACY: How This Shaped Islamic Leadership

Because of this hadith and others like it:

Aspect	Islamic Model	Imperial Model
Ruler's will	Subordinate to God's will	Extension of divine will
Ruler's words	Subject to critique	Above critique
Ruler's status	Servant-leader	Divine-king
Theological boundary	Absolute	Blurred
Phrasing of intentions	"Insha'Allah" (If Allah wills)	"By our divine right"

No Caliph could ever claim: "What I will and God wills."

Because the Prophet ﷺ himself—the most beloved of creation—refused that phrasing.

If he wouldn't take it, no one could.

💎 THE ULTIMATE IRONY

The Bedouin thought he was giving the Prophet ﷺ a compliment.

He was actually offering him a crown—the crown of divine association.

And the Prophet ﷺ threw it back in his face.

"I am not your emperor. I am not your god. I am not your king of kings. I am a slave. And the only will that matters is the will of the One I serve."

In one sentence, he dismantled:

The Persian concept of xwarrah
The Roman concept of divus imperator
The Byzantine concept of Caesaropapism
Every system where human will is elevated to divine status

The Bedouin came with the language of empires.

The Prophet ﷺ sent him back with the language of Tawhid.

🔚 CONCLUSION: The Sentence That Broke a Thousand Crowns

"Whatever Allah wills ALONE."

These five words are the death certificate of every divine king, every sacred emperor, every ruler who claimed to share God's throne.

The Prophet ﷺ didn't just refuse the compliment.

He refused the entire worldview that made the compliment possible.

He said: "I am not a partner in divinity. I am not a co-sovereign. I am not your emperor. I am your brother—and we both bow to the same Master."

In the courts of Ctesiphon, they said: "What the King of Kings wills, the gods approve."

In the courts of Constantinople, they said: "What the Emperor wills, Christ blesses."

In the courtyard of Medina, the Prophet ﷺ said:

"مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ وَحْدَهُ"
"Whatever Allah wills ALONE."

And with that, the revolution was complete.

🌅 CONCLUSION: When Two Eyes Blinked — And a New Vision Emerged

For centuries, the world was illumined by Two Eyes — Rome and Persia — each believing itself to be the pupil of divinity, the axis of cosmos, the sole font of sovereignty. They dressed their emperors in purple and gold, crowned them with halos of stolen sunlight, and staged celestial theater in marble halls and rock-hewn thrones. Their power was not merely political; it was theological, visual, performative. To be emperor was to play God on earth — and the script was written in silk, carved in stone, and performed in prostrations.

In their courts, clothing was cosmology. A purple cloak was not a garment — it was a theological claim. Red shoes were not footwear — they were divine exclusivity. A jeweled diadem was not an accessory — it was a piece of the heavens placed on a mortal brow.

In their rituals, submission was sacrament. Prostration was not respect — it was ritualized cosmology. The veiled entrance, the sudden reveal, the kiss on the imperial foot — these were not courtesies. They were enactments of a world order where one man was the sun, and all others were orbiting planets.

In their cities, architecture was authority. Hippodromes were not stadiums — they were microcosms of empire. Palaces were not residences — they were heavens on earth. Thrones did not just seat kings — they anchored the universe.

And in their feasts, food was power. Golden plates displayed not cuisine, but conquest. Guest lists were not invitations — they were hierarchical maps. Music did not entertain — it praised the divine king.

Then, from the silence of the desert, a man emerged who did not play the game — he changed the rules.

Muhammad ibn Abdullah ﷺ did not just reject empire — he redefined power itself.

What Empire Said	What the Prophet ﷺ Showed
Power is divine right.	Power is divine trust.
Authority is spectacle.	Authority is service.
Leadership is hierarchy.	Leadership is responsibility.
Sanctity is in clothing.	Sanctity is in character.
Celebration is exclusion.	Celebration is inclusion.
Victory is humiliation of enemies.	Victory is elevation of justice.

He wore wool, not purple.

He ate dates and bread, not peacock tongues on gold plates.

He sat on the floor, not on a jeweled throne.

He welcomed the poor to his feast, not just princes.

He forbade prostration to himself, reserving it for God alone.

He entered Mecca on a humble camel, not in a gem-studded chariot.

He mended his own sandals, while emperors wore pearls on theirs.

The Prophet ﷺ did not just oppose imperial aesthetics — he built a counter-aesthetics of meaning:

Where emperors built palaces, he built mosques — open to all, facing one direction: toward the Divine, not the throne.
Where emperors wore crowns, he wore a simple turban — a sign of dignity, not divinity.
Where emperors demanded prostration, he taught sujūd — to God alone.
Where empires staged hippodrome triumphs, he walked in humility — and taught that true victory is self-conquest.

He did not lack power. He re-imagined it.

He did not refuse influence. He purified its source.

The empires of Rome and Persia are dust. Their thrones are museum pieces. Their crowns are artifacts.

But the Prophetic paradigm remains — not as a relic, but as a living challenge to every generation that confuses luxury with legitimacy, spectacle with substance, and pageantry with piety.

He showed that you do not need a crown to lead.

You do not need a palace to govern.

You do not need silk to be sacred.

You do not need prostration to be respected.

All you need is truth in the heart, justice on the tongue, and compassion in action.

The Two Eyes of the Earth have long closed.

But the Light of Prophecy still shines —

Not from a throne,

Not from a crown,

Not from a palace,

But from a simple grave in Medina,

Where a man who owned nothing

Left behind everything:

A revelation,

A community,

A legacy for all of time.

THE END

📚 Works Cited

al-Balādhurī. The Origins of the Islamic State. Translated by P. Hitti, Columbia UP, 1916.

al-Bīrūnī. The Chronology of Ancient Nations. Edited and translated by E. Sachau, Unveränd, 1879. Reprint, Minerva, 1969.

al-Bukhārī, Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl. Al-Adab al-Mufrad. Edited by Muḥammad Fu’ād ‘Abd al-Bāqī, Maktabat al-Maʿārif, 1998.

———. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Edited by Muṣṭafā Dīb al-Bughā, Dār Ibn Kathīr, 1993.

al-Jāḥiẓ, (pseudo-). Le livre de la couronne. Translated by C. Pellat, Les Belles Lettres, 1954.

al-Masʿūdī. Murūj al-dhahab. Translated by C. Barbier de Meynard, vol. 4, L’Imprimerie Impériale, 1865.

al-Muqaddasī. The Best Divisions for Knowledge of the Regions: A Translation of Ahsan al-Taqasim fi Maʿrifat al-Aqalim. Translated by B. Anthony Collins, Centre for Muslim Contribution to Civilisation, 1994.

al-Ṭabarī. Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden. Translated by T. Nöldeke, Brill, 1879. Reprint, 1973.

———. The History of al-Ṭabarī. Vol. 5, The Sāsānids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen, translated by C. E. Bosworth, SUNY P, 1999.

———. The History of al-Ṭabarī. Vol. 13, The Conquest of Iraq, Southwestern Persia, and Egypt, translated by G. H. A. Juynboll, SUNY P, 1989.

Agapetus. Byzantinische Fürstenspiegel. Bibliothek der Griechischen Literatur, vol. 14, Hiersemann, 1981.

Agathius. The Histories. Translated by J. D. Frendo, de Gruyter, 1975.

Agat‘angelos. History of the Armenians. Translated by R. W. Thomson, SUNY P, 1976.

Ammianus Marcellinus. The Later Roman Empire, a.d. 354–378. Translated and compiled by W. Hamilton, Penguin Books, 1986.

Anonymous Guidi. Translated by T. Nöldeke. “Die von Guidi herausgegebene syrische Chronik.” Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Classe, vol. 128, 1893, pp. 1–48.

al-Bayhaqī, Abū Bakr Aḥmad ibn al-Ḥusayn. Al-Sunan al-Kubrā. Edited by Muḥammad ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Aṭā, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyah.

Buzandaran = The Epic Histories Attributed to P’awstos Buzand (Buzandaran Patmut’iwnk’). Translated by N. G. Garsoïan, Harvard UP, 1989.

Canepa, Matthew P. The Two Eyes of the Earth: Art and Ritual of Kingship between Rome and Sasanian Iran. U of California P, 2009.

Cassius Dio. Dio’s Roman History. Translated by E. Cary, 9 vols., Heinemann; Macmillan, 1914–27.

Chronicle of Arbela = Die Chronik von Arbela. Edited and translated by P. Kawerau, vol. 468, Peeters, 1985.

Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus. De administrando imperio. Edited by G. Moravcsik, translated by R. J. H. Jenkins, Dumbarton Oaks, 1967.

al-Dhahabī, Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad. Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ. Edited by Shuʿayb al-Arnaʾūṭ, Muʾassasat al-Risālah, 2001.

Eutropius. Breviarium ab urbe condita. Edited by C. Santini, Teubner, 1979.

Eutychios. Das Annalenwerk des Eutychios von Alexandrien. Edited and translated by M. Breydy, vol. 471–472, Peeters, 1985.

al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad. Iḥyāʾ ʿUlūm al-Dīn. Dār al-Maʿrifah.

Gottwaldt, J. M. E., editor and translator. Hamzae Ispahanensis annalium libri X. 2 vols., Vogel, 1848.

Ḥamza al-Iṣfahānī. “The Annals of Ḥamzah al-Iṣfahānī.” Translated by U. M. Daupota, Journal of the K. R. Cama Oriental Institute, vol. 21, 1932, pp. 58–120.

Ibn Mājah, Muḥammad ibn Yazīd. Sunan Ibn Mājah. Edited by Muḥammad Fu’ād ‘Abd al-Bāqī, Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Kutub al-ʿArabīyah.

Ibn Qutayba. The Natural History Section from a 9th Century ‘Book of Useful Knowledge,’ ‘Uyūn al-Akhbār of Ibn Qutayba. Translated by L. Kopf, edited by F. S. Bodenheimer, Academie International d’Histoire des Sciences, 1949.

al-Khwārizmī, Muḥammad ibn Mūsā. “The Translation of an Extract from Mafātīḥ al-ʿUlūm of al-Khwārizmī.” Translated by J. M. Unvala, Journal of the K. R. Cama Oriental Institute, vol. 11, 1928, pp. 76–110.

Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj. Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Edited by Muḥammad Fu’ād ‘Abd al-Bāqī, Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Kutub al-ʿArabīyah.

al-Nasāʾī, Aḥmad ibn Shuʿayb. Al-Sunan al-Kubrā. Edited by ʿAbd al-Ghaffār Sulaymān al-Bandārī and Sayyid Kisrawī Ḥasan, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyah.

al-Ṭabarī, Muḥammad ibn Jarīr. Tārīkh al-Ṭabarī. Edited by Muḥammad Abū al-Faḍl Ibrāhīm, Dār al-Maʿārif.

al-Tirmidhī, Muḥammad ibn ʿĪsā. Al-Shamāʾil al-Muḥammadiyyah. Edited by ʿIṣām al-Ḥāḍīn, al-Maktabah al-Tijārīyah, 1993.

“The Testament of Ardašīr” and the “Book of Deeds of Anōširvān” = Grignaschi, M., editor and translator. “Quelques spécimens de la littérature sassanide conservés dans les bibliothèques d’Istanbul.” Journal Asiatique, vol. 254, 1966, pp. 1–142.

Thaʿālibī. Histoire des rois des Perses. Edited and translated by H. Zotenberg, Imprimerie Nationale, 1900.

al-Zamakhsharī, Maḥmūd ibn ʿUmar. Al-Kashshāf ʿan Ḥaqāʾiq al-Tanzīl. Edited by ʿĀdil Aḥmad ʿAbd al-Mawjūd and ʿAlī Muḥammad Muʿawwaḍ, Maktabat al-ʿUbaykān.