ҴŌѴ (Gayūmarṯ, Kayūmarṯ; Mid. Pers. Ҳō/d, Av. gaya marətan “mortal life,” Man. Gehmurd; Ar. Jayūmart), the sixth of the heptad in Mazdean myth of creation, the protoplast of man, and the first king in Iranian mythical history. The particulars of Ҳō’s life and death are given somehow differently in Middle Persian books. Our main source of information on this first righteous man is the Bundahišn, of which the essential features are as follows:
Ҳō, like other creations, was fashioned forth to assist Ohrmazd in his fight against the Evil Spirit (Ganāg mēnōg; Bundahišn 1a.4). He was created in Ērān-wēz (q.v.), in the middle of the world, on the left bank of the river Good Dāitī (see ٴĪճĀ), facing the Uniquely-Created Bull (Gāw ī ēwdād, q.v.), on the opposite bank. He measured four medium reeds ( 2.10) in height and in breadth; he was round and shining as the sun (an anthropomorphic representation; Bundahišn 1a.13), with physical features as men born of his seed. His body was created by Ohrmazd from earth, i.e., through Spandārmad, its divinity, thus of the next-of-kin marriage of father and daughter, and his sperm was fashioned from the light and brightness (ōī) of the sky (Bundahišn 1a.13). When creations were placed under the custody of Amahrspands (see AMƎŠA SPƎNTA; ELEMENTS), Ohrmazd took to himself the Holy Man, Ҳō, the pre-eminent element of material beings (az gētiyān bun; Bundahišn 3.12; cf. mardōm gētīg pahlom dahišnān “Man the foremost of material creations”; ŧ첹, ed. Madan, p. 43). Because the frawahr of Ҳō took upon himself to contend with the Ahriman (q.v.), Ohrmazd conceded to grant him perfection and immortality at the Renovation (frašegird; Bundahišn 1.23-24). On the creation of Ҳō, Ahriman laid low in his awe for 3000 years, till the arch-demon Whore (Jeh, q.v.) came and roused Ahriman from his stupor, promising him to destroy Ҳō and the creatures of Ohrmazd. Commencing the second cosmic stage, the Mixture (ܳŧ&Dz;), Ahriman attacked the creations and sent Astwihād (q.v.), the demon of death, to assail Ҳō with Want, Sloth, Lust, and 1000 diseases (Bundahišn 4.19). But his misdeeds were of no avail, since Ohrmazd had brought Sleep in the form of a radiant youth over Ҳō; and Time (i.e., Zurwān) had destined him to live for thirty years (Bundahišn 4.25). In the end, in accordance with the aspect of his horoscope, when the malefic Saturn returned to its exaltation, and Jupiter was in descension, Ҳō succumbed to his injuries and passed away (Bundahišn 6F.7), while his sperm was in two parts purified by the rays of the sun and entrusted for safe-keeping to the deity Nēryōsang and in one part fell upon the earth and was received by Spandārmad, his creator and mother. His seed remained for forty years in the earth, out of which slowly grew the rhubarb plant, the stem of which developed into the first human couple, Mašīa and Mašīānag (Bundahišn 6F.9), the progenitors of all human races, the ten (twenty-five in Bundahišn 14.38) species of mankind (Bundahišn 14.1) that inhabit the Xwanīrah, the central continent of the earth. On Ҳō’s passing away, Ohrmazd took his ideal form (ēwēnag kerb = frawahr) and entrusted it to the sun-station; which ever since shines through the sun. And seven (eight in 3.69) kinds of metal developed from the members of his body. Ҳō the protohuman, with the first human frawahr, is also the first Zoroastrian hero to be raised at the Resurrection to bring about the Renovation (frašegird) in association with Sošyāns, the savior and the last man (Bundahišn 34.6). The cause of Ҳō is safe-guarded by the fire of Warahrān (ŧ첹, ed. Madan, p. 538), because the seed of man is said to have originated from fire, not water.
Ҳō as one of the foremost heroes of Zoroastrianism, ranking with Zoroaster and Sōšyans, and being the first to embrace the message of Ohrmazd (ŧ첹, pp. 28, 519; tr. de Menasce, chap. 35, p. 50), was ordained by Ohrmazd the first Mazdean prophet to transmit the divine word to men (fradom aštag ī az dādār Ohrmazd ō mardōm; saxwan abar barišnīh hammōzišn andar axw ī astōmand fradom gayōmart, ŧ첹, ed. Madan, p. 313; tr. de Menasce, chap. 312, pp. 298-99). The Dādestān ī dēnīg, chapter 63 (tr. West, pp. 197-98), in line with the Bundahišn, recounts the creation and life of the first man, and extols him (2.10) as a man of divine prowess in whose keeping is the whole of creation. In the Frawardīn Yašt (87), his fravaši is celebrated as the first righteous man who embraced the will and commandment of Ahura Mazdā (q.v.), and from whom developed the family of Aryan lands; and in Yasna 23.2, his fravaši is exalted together with those of the preeminent heroes of Mazdaism such as Zoroaster, Kay Wištāsp, Sōšyāns, and all ancient teachers of the faith. As he had no flock to preach his revelation, the Word of God and prophetical counsels addressed to his mind (ŧԾ&Dz;) were subsequently revealed to Mašīa, and through their son, Sīāmak, to mankind (ŧ첹, ed. Madan, p. 313). A few philanthropical precepts are also attributed to him: “The praises offered to me would be more favorably received from those who recognize men of noble character (meh) within commonalty (keh), and the low (keh) among the high society (meh), as well as from a brother who would forgive the misconduct of his junior brother” (Pahlavi Yasna 68.22, p. 281). Ṭabarī also ascribes to him the apothegms: “Pay heed to what is said, not to the speaker. Look up to advice and wise words, no matter who says it. Acknowledge the truth, no matter of what provenance” (Balʿamī, ed. Bahār, p. 123).
According to the Čihrdād nask (ŧ첹, ed. Madan, p. 688) the original Avestan text had contained an account of the creation of Ҳō in bodily form, the manner of the birth of Mašīa and Mašīānag, and the establishment of monarchy on earth by Hōšang, wherefore his epithet ŧ&Dz; (Av. 貹-ٲ- “the first to establish [sovereignty]”; Yt. 19.26; Yt. 5.21; ʲվŧ 20.1). Ṭabarī (I, pp. 147 ff.) and Balʿamī, (ed. Bahār, pp. 112-28) with more details, recount at some length the creation of Ҳō who is identified as Adam. He is represented as a peaceable and pious primitive king who renders the world prosperous and habitable.
There are various traditions in regard to the sequence of Ҳō’s descendant. The Middle Persian books generally give his posterity as: Mašīa (Mašīānag), Sīāmak, Frawāk (Ar. Afrāwāk), and Hōšang (ŧ첹, ed. Madan, pp. 231, 613; Bundahišn 14.31, 31.1, 35.4; 7, p. 54), which is followed by Ṭabarī (I, p. 154). But his translator Balʿamī (ed. Bahār, pp. 124-25) passes over Frawāk. Iranian legendary history, however, being based on a secular tradition recorded by the &Dz;-峾, derived from the ݷɲ-峾, refers to Ҳō as the first world king. He is depicted as a prehistoric cave-dweller who brings forth the rite of royalty, founds the Pēšdādīān dynasty and, clad in leopard-skin, rules over men and beasts by natural disposition. In this version his son, the noble Sīāmak, is killed by Ahriman, whereupon his grandson Hōšang, the second Pēšdādīān king, avenges himself on his father’s killers, the demons (&Dz;-峾, ed. Khaleghi, I, pp. 21-25, Moscow, I, pp. 29-31).
The epithet attached to Ҳō is inconsistently reported by Middle and the New Persian materials. The ŧ첹 (ed. Madan, p. 29; tr. de Menasce, p. 50) refers to him as (ճ۱ʾ)&Dz; (lit. clay king), but the Pahlavi Dzəŧč (JamaspAsa, p. 85) knows him as &Dz; (king of the mountain). The Islamic historians call him variously &Dz; or &Dz; (Balʿamī, ed. Bahār, pp. 12, 113). It is with good reason suggested that gil (gl) may be a misreading for gar (gl; Yarshater, p. 420). In contrast with these readings the &Dz;-峾 gives 첹&Dz;, which is an obvious error since kay (Av. kavi) is the title of the kings of the second legendary dynasty, the Kayanids (ed. Khaleghi, I, p. 22, Moscow, I, p. 29).
The Ҳō’s creation myth is also cursorily reported by Šahrestānī, the heresiographer, under the sect of Kayūmarṯīya (pp. 182-83), characterized as a syncretic doctrine, combining what seems to be popular dualistic beliefs blended with Mazdean account of the first man. Its novel features are creation of Ahriman (Darkness) from an inappropriate speculation of an eternal god (cf. the conception of Ahriman from Zurwān’s doubt), and the puerile statement that the ensuing combat between the forces of Light and Darkness comes to a head by the arbitration of the angels, providing that god wholly surrenders the world of mixture to Ahriman for 7000 years, a senseless modification of the 6000. It is evident that the absurd tale lacks the makings of a serious sectarian doctrine. Schaeder (Reizenstein and Schader, p. 238) is justified in disputing the existence of the sect. The parallel Vedic Mārtāṇḍa is taken to suggest a common Indo-Iranian myth attempting to explain the origin of man (Hoffmann, p. 100; Boyce, p. 140). In classical Islamic historio graphy, Gayōmard is often associated with Adam. “There is a tradition that Adam chose from among his numerous offspring two sons, Šīṯ (i.e., Seth, Gen. 4.25) and Kayūmard, and he conferred on them forty cannonical scriptures (ṣaḥīf) to act upon. Šīṯ was entrusted with the maintenance of the religion, and Kayūmard with the kingdom and worldly affairs” (Ḡazālī, pp. 81-85). The author of Borhān-e qāṭeʿ also knows Kayōmart as a son of Adam and the first king (ed. Moʿīn, III, p. 1760).
Bibliography:
Dzə岹ŧč, ed. and tr. K. M. JamaspAsa as Dzə岹ŧč. A Zoroastrian Liturgy, Vienna, 1982.
Boyce, Zoroastrianism I, index, s.v. Gayō.marətan. Bundahišn, tr. Anklesaria. A. Christensen, Le premier homme et le premier roi dans l’histoire légendaire des Iraniens I, Stockholm, 1917; II, Leiden, 1934.
Dādestān ī dēnīg, tr. E. W. West as Dādistān-ī Dīnīk, SBE 18, Oxford, 1882.
ŧ첹, tr. J. de Menasce as Le troisième livre du Dēnkart, Paris, 1973.
Moḥammad Ḡazālī, Naṣīḥat al-molūk, ed. J. Homāʾī, Tehran, 1351 Š./1972.
Ḥamza, pp. 10, 12-13, 24-25.
S. Hartman, Ҳō, Uppsala, 1953.
K. Hoffmann, “Mārtāṇḍa and Ҳō,” Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 11, 1957, pp. 85-103.
Abū ʿAbd-Allāh Moḥammad Ḵᵛārazmī, Mafātīḥ al-ʿolūm, ed. G. van Vloten, Lyden, 1895, pp. 38-39.
Ѳī, ʾ III, pp. 138-39.
Ѳʿūī, Ѵǰū, ed. Pellat, I, pp. 260-63, 281-82, 323.
Idem, ղԲī, pp. 85, 93, 197.
Mēnōg ī xrad, tr. A. Tafażżµµolī as Mīnū-ye ḵerad, Tehran, 1354 Š./1975.
M. Molé, Culte, mythe et cosmologie dans l’Iran ancien, Paris, 1963.
H. S. Nyberg, A Manual of Pahlavi I. Texts, Wiesbaden, 1964.
Pahlavi Rivāyat, ed. B. N. Dhabhar. Pahlavi yasna and Visparad (Wisprad), ed. B. N. Dhabhar, Bombay, 1949.
R. Reizenstein and H. H. Schaeder, Studien zum antiken Synkretismus aus Iran und Griechenland, Studien der Bibliothek Warburg 7, Leipzig, 1926, repr. Darmstadt, 1965.
Ṳʿī, Ḡo, pp. 1-5.
Ḏ. Ṣafā, Ḥamāsa-sarāʾī dar Īrān, Tehran, 1363 Š./1984, pp. 399-411.
A. Tafażżolī, Awwalīn ensān wa awwalīn Pādešāh, Tehran, 1373 Š./1994.
“ʿUlemā ī Islām” in Pahlavi Rivāyat, ed. Dhabhar, pp. 449-57.
G. Widengren, “The Death of Ҳō,” in J. M. Kitagawa and C. H. Long, eds., Myth and Symbols: Studies in Honor of Mircea Eliade, Chicago, 1969, pp. 179-93.
Idem, “Primordial Man and Prostitute: A Zervanite Motif in the Sasanian Avesta,” in R. J. Zwi Werblowsky, ed., Studies in Mysticism and Religion, Presented to Gerschom G. Scholem, Jerusalem, 1967, pp. 337-52.
E. Yarshater, “Iranian National History,” in Camb. Hist. Iran III/1, London, 1983, pp. 416-25.
R. C. Zaehner, Zurvān: A Zoroastrian Dilemma, Oxford, 1955, index, s.v. Ҳō.
(Mansour Shaki)
Originally Published: December 15, 2000
Last Updated: February 3, 2012
This article is available in print.
Vol. X, Fasc. 3, pp. 345-347
Mansour Shaki, “ҴŌѴ,” Encyclopædia Iranica, Vol. X, Fasc. 3, pp. 345-47; online edition, 2000, available at http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/gayomart- (accessed on 23 November 2015).
