Chapter Nine, Section One: Sources of Ancient Religion from Deceit and Divine Religion by Sadeq Khademi

Primary Sources of Ancient Religious History

The principal sources for the history of ancient religion encompass classical texts, namely Greek writings, Babylonian inscriptions, Achaemenid and Sasanian reliefs, coins, the Gathas and authentic religious texts of the Magi, the Old Testament, and works by Islamic historians who had access to primary Iranian sources such as the Khwaday-Namag. Additionally, Roman, Egyptian, and Mesopotamian histories contribute to this corpus.

In the eighteenth century, with the advent of the Renaissance and the revival of scientific and empirical inquiry, marking the end of a period of intellectual stagnation, European scholars designated Babylon, Iran, and India as focal points for extensive investigations into beliefs, religions, and archaeology. These endeavors led to the discovery of numerous inscriptions, stone reliefs, and papyri that reflected the beliefs of ancient civilizations. Subsequently, three disciplines—“history of religions,” “tribal studies,” and “anthropology”—were formalized, proving instrumental in understanding ancient religion.

Religious texts, coins, architectural structures, artistic works, and oral traditions transmitted through generations constitute additional credible sources for research in the science of religions.

Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh

Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, a versified compendium of ancient history derived from the Sasanian Khwaday-Namag, narrates events up to the era of King Gushtasp, the patron of Zoroaster, during the Kayanian (Sage) period, primarily in a narrative style grounded in oral traditions prevalent among the populace during the Parthian and Sasanian eras. The Shahnameh chronicles events from the reign of Darius III of the Achaemenids to Yazdegerd III of the Sasanians. Alongside mythological elements, it commences explicit historical accounts from the Parthian period (Parthians = Warriors) onward, whose rule over Iran began in 247 BCE and persisted until 224 CE.

The Parthians, a martial and valorous people unencumbered by religious strictures, delegated provinces to local governors to prevent the dominance of a single dynasty over the entire realm. With their authoritative and militaristic ethos, they forestalled autonomy and fragmentation of these provinces. For three centuries, the Parthians withstood the foremost global power, Rome. Despite their governance amidst the pervasive Greek culture in Iran, they ultimately lost their sovereignty due to internal discord.

Major Religions of Iran

The history of ancient religions and the identification of official religions of ancient states and nations, particularly Iranshahr, and the chronicles of Achaemenid emperors, are primarily derived from primary Greek sources that attended to the religions, rituals, philosophies, and cultures of ancient peoples in their historiography.

According to Greek sources, within the vast dominion of the Achaemenid state, the official religion and the grand rites of the Magi, including Zoroastrianism and Buddhism, enjoyed widespread adherence.

Later historical sources, to be discussed subsequently, narrate Christianity, recognizing it as a religion with an organized church and numerous followers in Iran during the Sasanian period.

With the fall of the Sasanian Empire, the eternal land of Iran gradually, extensively, and predominantly embraced the cohesive and enduring coexistence with the Islam of Iran’s noble and monotheistic adherents. The natural essence of Iran and its innate religion, when governed by noble sovereignty, form an authentic unity devoid of plurality or alterity, precluding assumptions of domination or hegemony.

Historical accounts portray the vast land of the Iranians and the Iranian Plateau as a cradle for the world’s major religions. Consequently, researching historical religions necessitates examining Iran’s history within the broader context of Iranian ethnicity and culture.

Key Historical Sources of Ancient Religion

The most significant and ancient written historical sources discovered to date, upon which the study of ancient religions relies, belong to the following Greek historians: Herodotus, born circa 484 BCE; Ctesias, active in the late fifth and early fourth centuries BCE; and Xenophon, a Greek philosopher who lived circa 430 to 350 BCE.

Ancient religions are predominantly understood through the perspectives of these historians, meaning we recognize the religions as interpreted by Greek historians rather than the reality of divine religions. It is also imperative to note that Greek cultural engineering and persistent countercultural policies attributed the most negative traits to Iranian religious adherents. In their malice, they not only distorted their narratives but also employed deceit and betrayal in translating certain ancient works or fabricated artifacts from these sites to reflect their cultural and political objectives. Thus, in Greek histories, we encounter Iranians and Greek religious adherents, not the authentic Iranian religious figure. An example is the fifth-century CE Christian priest Theodore of Mopsuestia’s account of the Iranian Magi’s religion, based on Hellenistic texts, which erroneously ascribes a distorted form of Greco-Roman polytheism to the Magi. Photius provides a summary of his narrative. Greek sources lacked an understanding of the depth of the specialized and noble Magi culture and religion, narrating in their texts the social layer and superficial religious figures institutionalized among the general populace or superficial religious men.

Herodotus’s Histories

The inaugural historian, the Greek Herodotus, pioneered the recording of official historical narratives and descriptions, relying on oral sources, personal observations, and experiences. Employing a narrative historiographical style, he documented only what he deemed accurate, infused with his historical interpretations, Athenian biases, and commitment to Greek values, under the term “history” (from the Greek Historie, meaning inquiry). He established the foundation for historical analysis in his work, The Histories. The Histories transcends mere event chronicling, embodying interpretive reporting and the language of Herodotus’s guiding concerns.

Herodotus, weaving what he found accurate or compelling with sincerity and literary embellishments for aesthetic narration and to evoke the imaginative engagement of appearance-driven readers—typically the general populace—employed exaggeration and hyperbole to align readers with his views, as recorded in The Histories.

Herodotus of Halicarnassus, whose own history remains obscure and enigmatic, passed away circa 425 BCE.

While The Histories marks the inception of historiography, historiography imbued with historical thought and culture differs from history itself. The oldest recorded historical thought, culture, and religion pertain to Iranian culture.

Magi Religion in The Histories

Herodotus discusses the customs, traditions, and culture of Iranian civilization with a religious analytical lens, equating them to Greek traditions. He addresses the Magi, Zoroastrianism, and other religions as the oldest historical religions within the world’s most expansive empire, based on oral accounts without access to authentic documents, royal archives, or translations, relying on contemporary interpretations and assumptions.

Herodotus lacked a true understanding of the Iranian Magi’s sagely religion and system and had no direct contact with the authentic religious Magi or access to religious narratives. His accounts of the Magi are superficial, entangled with a cursory acquaintance. For instance, in The Histories, he writes regarding the Achaemenid religion: “The Persians consider it unlawful to erect temples, statues, altars, or fire temples, deeming those who do so foolish… They call the entire dome of the sky Zeus (Radiant, King of the Gods, God of the Shining Sky, Dios)” (Book I, Section 131).

By Zeus, he refers to Ahura Mazda. He equates the Greek term Zeus with Ahura Mazda (Great Wise Life-Giver, Essence of Manifest Consciousness), a topic to be elaborated in the chapter on the Gathas. Zeus was the supreme god of the Greeks. However, the profound meaning of Ahura Mazda bears no equivalence to the concept a Greek associates with Zeus. “Zeus Pater” or “Zeus Patros” was pronounced as “Dyaus Pitar” among Indo-Aryans and “Jupiter” among ancient Romans. Greeks regarded Zeus as the god of the sky and universal father, residing atop Mount Olympus, surrounded by six male and six female deities protecting him, with other spiritual beings in their vicinity. They believed that after death, a person either ascends to the verdant Elysium or descends to Tartarus for punishment, both within this world.

Herodotus portrays the Achaemenids, from five centuries BCE, as a global superpower, ambitious, endowed with wealth, power, and the vigor of their populace, a tolerant power upholding truth, wisdom, order, compassion, and liberty, aspiring to extend these values to the entire world, particularly to the Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta.

Mythologizing

Herodotus’s history of Cyrus the Great and other Achaemenid emperors, heroes, and Iranian events is tainted with popular legends, fabricated and exaggerated statistics, fictional narratives, literary hyperbole, rumors, sheer idealism, and verbosity, occasionally infused with his deliberate fabrications. Not only Herodotus but also some Greek philosophers conveyed their ideas through myths.

Aristotle, who possessed the most extensive scientific library and texts of the era, supported by the Athenian city-state and influenced by Iranian Magi sciences, deemed Herodotus’s writing stylistically noteworthy but labeled its content as mythical. Imam Ja’far Sadiq, in the Tawhid Mufaddal, references Aristotle (Aristatalis), noting his rejection of chance and coincidence.

Unsubstantiated Bias

Herodotus omitted narratives he deemed false but, in recounting those he considered true, succumbed to political and propagandistic biases, aversion, enmity, and intense hatred from narrators antagonistic to Iranians, Greeks, Spartans, Athenians, or internal political rivals, as well as rumors. Today, the ancient city of Halicarnassus lies in Turkey. During Herodotus’s time, Artaxerxes, the Achaemenid king, and his governor Lygdamis ruled the region. Most inhabitants of Caria, where Halicarnassus was located, aligned with the Persians. However, Herodotus’s uncle, Panyasis, led a rebellion against Lygdamis, with Herodotus by his side. Panyasis was captured and executed by Lygdamis, but Herodotus escaped. This political wound, rebelliousness, aversion to Persia, and Greek patriotism likely drove him to historiography, particularly to explore the roots of enmity between Greece and Persia. In this endeavor, he occasionally includes narratives derogatory to Iranian nationality, falling into the fallacy of conflating motive (the historian’s intent) with outcome (claim and result).

His negative sentiments render his tainted narratives rhetorical rather than propositional, lacking the truth-value and reportorial fidelity to reality. Nevertheless, this rhetoric provides a historical image from which propositional truths can be extracted. Committing such a fallacy does not inherently entail deliberate falsehood in claims or outcomes.

Conflating Motive and Outcome

In examining Herodotus’s Histories or any historical text, one must avoid the fallacy of conflating motive with outcome, origin with product, or prior circumstances with present reality. Attacking the author’s character or past to discredit their historical claims, or dismissing their current state due to prior anti-Iranian sentiments or any adverse background, is erroneous.

Linking the truth or falsehood of a claim to the claimant’s character, irrelevant traits, or beliefs is a common fallacy in scientific reporting that must be eschewed. Herodotus’s opposition, negative political stances, overt and covert motives, emotions, or alleged commissioned writings in oppressive environments cannot lead to the conclusion that his reports and historical accounts are entirely false, deceitful, or devoid of historical reason. Criticizing his motives or their influence on his historiographical actions, or critiquing the claimant rather than the claim, its evidence, and his Histories, does not invalidate them. Instead, his outcomes and claims must be evaluated within a rational and philosophical historical analysis, free from extraneous factors, temporal, spatial, or emotional influences, and the author’s personality. This approach enables the separation of accurate reports and pure content in Herodotus’s Histories from impurities and embellishments.

For non-scholars seeking superficial, imitative historical knowledge, the identity of the historical witness matters. Such individuals require the most authoritative and truthful narrators, unable to accept a historical account’s propositional meaning and truth-value solely based on its narration without considering the narrator’s character, integrity, justice, and veracity. In imitation, one cannot accept the words of those antagonistic to the noble Magi or sovereign emperors, as an enemy’s speech is typically biased and adversarial. An imitator, living in a superficial, conventional world driven by prevailing norms, profits, and losses rather than precision, good, and evil, makes decisions based on such tainted knowledge. Thus, rationally within their lived context—not philosophically committed to evidence and inquiry—prudence dictates deeming the outcome and product defective and tainted by enmity, considering the motive or origin. They assume a conventional entailment between motive and outcome, origin and product, to avoid brainwashing, misinformation, harm, and injury from malicious, self-interested claimants. An imitator must heed the virtue or vice of the claimant’s motive and personal gain, accepting its entailment with the truth or falsehood of the claim and its alignment with reality, as they focus not on evidence but on the claimant’s testimony, accepting it superficially based on perceived expertise and integrity, not rational judgment of evidence.

Paraphrasing Historical Events

History is a narrative of external events, and historical analysis is a mental act where the narrator’s character and motives, even if accurately discerned, are irrelevant. Likewise, the wording, form of the report, and narrative style conveying it are secondary, especially since paraphrasing and conveying the substantive content of external events and occurrences is rationally accepted and deemed valid. For the reader of history, the essence of the narrative, the propositional content, meaning, and derived or inferred significance—particularly in major, overarching, and significant events—are of paramount importance.

On The Histories

The book Historiography and Historical Perspective in the Ancient World: Life, Times, and Legacy of Herodotus of Halicarnassus is a noteworthy study on Herodotus’s history.

Tom Holland’s Persian Fire, published in 2005, despite articulating the first and greatest global empire’s struggle to conquer the West, relies on unreliable sources in parts and critiques Herodotus’s Histories. However, like The Histories, it exhibits strong Greek-centric bias and Western nationalism.

Persian Fire deliberately adopts a narrative history to evoke imaginative representations of events, offering readers a heightened sensory pleasure through secure presence in fictional conflicts, entertaining with unrealistic portrayals. The book employs captivating yet occasionally superstitious and propagandistic inaccuracies, reminiscent of early Greek historians and street performers.

The British author’s simple yet evocative prose renders the book popular. Such works are cited by Wikipedia editors, media, historical narrators, and serve as study and research sources for history students. Owing to its dramatic, fictional narrative, it captivates adolescents and youths. Holland portrays historical heroes like Hollywood film protagonists, using populist, emotive expressions, evoking fervor, zeal, or disdain and hatred.

Studying and researching empires and dominant powers with hard power and soft cultural hegemony is compelling for audiences. Holland’s In the Shadow of the Sword chronicles the Sasanian Empire’s collapse following Muslim conquests and the historical roots of the Islamic Caliphal Empire. With an anti-Islamic bias, it attributes numerous vile and malevolent traits to Islamic adherents and Caliphal Muslims, discrediting the divine roots of Islam—a fallacy previously discussed.

Thucydides’s History of the Peloponnesian War

Another Greek historian, Thucydides (born c. 460 BCE, died c. 395–400 BCE), also known as Tucydides or Phocydides, is notable.

The earliest manuscript of Thucydides’s history (c. 480–425 BCE), like Herodotus’s (c. 480–425 BCE), dates to around 900 CE, with some papyri from the early Christian era.

In History of the Peloponnesian War (431 BCE, chronicling the war between Athens and Sparta), Thucydides addresses the Achaemenid state’s intervention in these conflicts, which spanned nearly three decades. He discusses Iranian culture and Achaemenid governance scientifically, adhering to evidential standards and historical philosophy, free from the imaginative exaggerations and myth-making common among Greeks.

Thucydides, an Athenian military general versed in warfare tactics, recorded his perspectives and certain events of the Greco-Persian wars preserved only in the memories of the elderly, articulated through the voices of his historical protagonists.

Thucydides critiqued Herodotus’s narrative historiography, believing he prioritized audience engagement and entertainment over enduring truth. Thus, he viewed Herodotus as a literary prose writer uninterested in truth.

Emerging Power: Catalyst of War and Conflict

Thucydides posits Athens’s emerging and growing power as a rival, instilling fear in the established Spartan power, precipitating their war.

It is noteworthy that it is not the superior, dominant power that fosters discord, conflict, and war, but weakness and vulnerability that create battlegrounds.

This theory applies to religions, sects, and schools of thought. It is not the unadulterated content of superior, dominant religions or schools that causes conflict, but their custodians, clergy, and zealous followers—elites and leaders in a monolithic, autocratic environment lacking sagely leadership or dominated by deceit—who reject the ascendancy of non-conforming scholars. These figures, foreseeing power, social status, and public favor, threaten the religious position and personal standing of self-interested, authoritarian custodians.

Barriers to the Influence of Dominant Religious Deceit

Neither democracy, populism, nor authoritarian monarchy can prevent the pervasive influence of dominant religious deceit in any society. Rather, the advancement of science, awareness, widespread intelligence, and philosophical and rational thinking, coupled with ethics, acceptance of truth, and moral upbringing, can forestall this through the demand for knowledge, methodical justification of religions, empirical experience of their content, and upholding sincerity, fairness, and the virtue of integrity. This prevents custodians, religious affiliates, powerbrokers, profiteers, and deceivers from becoming self-interested, predatory lords akin to oppressive kings and plundering emperors, wielding superstition and ignorance as guillotines in the name of religion, religiousness, and God to secure worldly gains.

Commitment to science, inquiry, intelligence, rationality, and awareness, alongside ethics, can transform governance and power systems into responsible, law-abiding management rooted in knowledge and ethics, serving truth and camaraderie, and acting as faithful guardians of the law. It can also guide priests, spiritual fathers, and religious authorities toward rational, truthful, justifiable, explicable, and accountable scholarship adhering to justice and ethical standards.

Adherence to scientific law, methodical knowledge, fairness, and chivalrous ethics prevents the rise and penetration of the slaughterhouse of religious deceivers, the hegemony of monolithic religious voices (soft power and established cultural order), the abattoir of false clergy, the guillotine of religious deceit, and the quagmire of tainted claimants. These figures, armed with the poisoned dagger of hollow, deceitful mediation between people and God, and through bribery, coercion, flattery, and deception, reject science, awareness, transparency, truth, and non-commissioned law serving knowledge. They subordinate science and law, like religion, to their interests, systematically ensnaring the masses in swamps of superstition and traps that demand naive, obedient, submissive, or mercenary followers. They lead people willingly into minefields of these predatory successors’ arrogance, sacrificing them for their survival and permanence.

Such priests, fathers, and claimants, if not restrained by science and law serving knowledge and ethics, drag the masses further into their autocratic self-interest, imprisoning them in exploitation and leading them to a dance of death. If religion, science, and law do not serve truth, they become machines of exploitation and crime against the masses, rendering all subservient to dark-hearted, self-interested, world-devouring lords. Mercilessly, they place the yoke of slavery and the collar of servitude on all the disenfranchised ensnared in their clutches, pouring the hemlock of death down the throats of all freemen and freedom-seekers to subtly institutionalize their insatiable profiteering as divine will, knowledge, and justice, under the guise of religion, science, and law.

In the epic verse of Ferdowsi:

My heart is weary of war and evil, seeking the divine path.
Now let us restore knowledge and justice, bringing delight in place of grief and toil.

Critique of Historical Narratives and Their Motives

Historical narratives, when scrutinized through the lens of historical reason, must be evaluated independently of the narrator’s motives or personal character. The truth or falsehood of a historical account does not hinge on the biases, intentions, or moral standing of the historian. Instead, the validity of the narrative rests on its evidential basis and logical coherence, assessed through a rigorous philosophical and analytical framework. This approach ensures that historical claims are judged on their intrinsic merit, free from extraneous influences such as the historian’s political affiliations, emotional predispositions, or cultural context.

For the uninitiated seeking superficial historical knowledge, the credibility of the narrator is paramount. Such individuals rely on the perceived integrity and authority of the historian, accepting narratives based on the narrator’s reputation rather than engaging with the evidence itself. In this context, the accounts of those antagonistic to the noble Magi or the sovereign emperors are deemed suspect, as enmity often taints their reports with bias. For the layperson, living in a world governed by conventional norms and pragmatic concerns, prudence dictates skepticism toward narratives from adversarial sources, presuming a correlation between motive and outcome. This assumption, while rational within their lived experience, does not align with the philosophical rigor required for scholarly inquiry, which demands fidelity to evidence and reason over reliance on the narrator’s character.

The Role of Historical Reason in Evaluating Sources

Historical reason, as a methodological tool, facilitates the discernment of authentic historical accounts by prioritizing evidence and logical analysis over subjective influences. It requires historians to engage with primary sources—such as inscriptions, coins, reliefs, and texts—while critically assessing their context, provenance, and reliability. By applying historical reason, scholars can distinguish between narratives grounded in verifiable evidence and those tainted by exaggeration, fabrication, or ideological agendas. This approach is particularly crucial when evaluating Greek sources, which, despite their significance, often reflect cultural biases and political motives that distort the portrayal of Iranian religious traditions.

The Greek historians—Herodotus, Ctesias, and Xenophon—provide invaluable insights into ancient religions but are limited by their reliance on oral traditions and lack of direct access to primary Iranian documents. Their narratives, shaped by Hellenistic cultural lenses, frequently misrepresent the depth and complexity of the Magi’s religion, reducing it to superficial or erroneous depictions. For instance, Herodotus’s equation of Ahura Mazda with Zeus reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of Zoroastrian theology, conflating a monotheistic divine essence with a polytheistic deity. Such distortions underscore the necessity of cross-referencing Greek accounts with indigenous sources, such as the Gathas or Achaemenid inscriptions, to reconstruct a more accurate historical narrative.

The Influence of Cultural and Political Agendas

The historiographical tradition of ancient Greece was not immune to cultural and political agendas, which significantly shaped its portrayal of foreign religions, particularly those of Iran. Greek historians, operating within a context of rivalry with the Achaemenid Empire, often employed their narratives to reinforce Greek cultural superiority and justify political opposition to Persian hegemony. This agenda is evident in the deliberate attribution of negative traits to Iranian religious adherents, a practice that served to dehumanize and marginalize them in the Greek imagination.

Theodore of Mopsuestia’s fifth-century CE account, based on Hellenistic texts, exemplifies this trend by ascribing Greco-Roman polytheistic elements to the Magi’s religion, thereby distorting its monotheistic core. Such misrepresentations were not merely errors but part of a broader strategy of cultural engineering, where Greek historians fabricated or manipulated evidence to align with their political objectives. This practice extended to the translation of ancient texts and the presentation of archaeological artifacts, where forgeries were introduced to bolster Greek cultural narratives. Consequently, the Greek historiographical tradition presents a filtered view of Iranian religiosity, necessitating a critical approach that prioritizes primary sources and indigenous perspectives.

The Shahnameh as a Historical Source

Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, while primarily a poetic epic, serves as a significant historical source for understanding ancient Iranian religion and culture. Derived from the Sasanian Khwaday-Namag, it preserves oral traditions and historical memories that complement the archaeological and textual evidence from the Achaemenid and Sasanian periods. The Shahnameh’s narrative, spanning from the mythical Kayanian era to the historical Sasanian dynasty, blends mythology with historical fact, offering a window into the cultural and religious ethos of ancient Iran.

The epic’s portrayal of the Parthians as a martial, irreligious people reflects the historical reality of their decentralized governance and military prowess, which enabled them to resist Roman domination for three centuries. However, its reliance on oral traditions and lack of direct access to primary documents limits its historiographical precision. Scholars must therefore approach the Shahnameh with caution, cross-referencing its accounts with material evidence, such as coins and inscriptions, to verify its historical claims. Despite these limitations, the Shahnameh remains an indispensable source for reconstructing the religious and cultural history of Iran, particularly when analyzed through the lens of historical reason.

The Impact of Archaeological Discoveries

The eighteenth-century Renaissance and the subsequent rise of empirical inquiry marked a turning point in the study of ancient religions. European scholars, driven by a renewed interest in antiquity, conducted extensive archaeological investigations in Babylon, Iran, and India, uncovering inscriptions, stone reliefs, and papyri that illuminated the beliefs and practices of ancient civilizations. These discoveries laid the foundation for the disciplines of history of religions, tribal studies, and anthropology, which have since become essential tools for understanding ancient religious traditions.

Archaeological evidence, including Achaemenid and Sasanian reliefs, coins, and inscriptions, provides a direct link to the religious practices of ancient Iran. Unlike Greek narratives, which are mediated by cultural biases, these material sources offer unfiltered insights into the rituals, iconography, and theology of the Magi’s religion. For example, Achaemenid inscriptions, such as those at Persepolis, affirm the centrality of Ahura Mazda in the imperial ideology, corroborating the monotheistic orientation of Zoroastrianism. By integrating archaeological evidence with textual sources, scholars can construct a more nuanced and accurate picture of ancient Iranian religion, mitigating the distortions inherent in foreign accounts.

The Role of Islamic Historians

Islamic historians, who had access to primary Iranian sources such as the Khwaday-Namag, play a crucial role in the historiography of ancient Iranian religion. Their works, which draw on Sasanian royal chronicles and oral traditions, provide a counterpoint to Greek narratives, offering an indigenous perspective on the religious landscape of pre-Islamic Iran. These historians, operating within an Islamic intellectual framework, sought to reconcile the legacy of ancient Iran with the monotheistic ethos of Islam, emphasizing the continuity of divine guidance across religious traditions.

The accounts of Islamic historians, such as those preserved in the works of Tabari and Bal’ami, document the prevalence of Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and other religions in Sasanian Iran, highlighting their institutional structures and societal impact. While these narratives are not immune to theological biases, their reliance on Iranian sources enhances their credibility, making them valuable for reconstructing the religious history of the region. By comparing Islamic historiographical accounts with Greek and archaeological evidence, scholars can achieve a more comprehensive understanding of ancient Iranian religion, bridging the gap between foreign and indigenous perspectives.

The Necessity of Interdisciplinary Approaches

The study of ancient Iranian religion demands an interdisciplinary approach that integrates historiography, archaeology, anthropology, and textual analysis. Each discipline offers unique insights into the religious practices and beliefs of ancient Iran, compensating for the limitations of individual sources. For instance, while Greek histories provide detailed narratives, their biases necessitate corroboration with archaeological evidence. Similarly, the Shahnameh’s poetic narratives require validation through material culture, such as coins and reliefs, to distinguish historical fact from myth.

Anthropological perspectives further enrich this analysis by exploring the cultural and social contexts of ancient religious practices. By examining the interplay between religion, governance, and society, anthropologists can elucidate the role of the Magi’s religion in shaping Achaemenid and Sasanian imperial ideologies. This interdisciplinary approach, grounded in historical reason, enables scholars to construct a holistic and nuanced understanding of ancient Iranian religion, transcending the limitations of any single source or methodology.

Conclusion

The historiography of ancient Iranian religion, as explored in this section, underscores the complexity and richness of its sources, ranging from Greek narratives and archaeological artifacts to Islamic chronicles and poetic epics. Each source, while invaluable, carries inherent limitations—be it cultural bias, reliance on oral traditions, or theological agendas—that necessitate a critical and interdisciplinary approach. Historical reason serves as the cornerstone of this endeavor, enabling scholars to sift through diverse narratives and evidence to uncover the authentic history of the Magi’s religion and its broader cultural significance.

By prioritizing evidence, logical analysis, and cross-disciplinary insights, researchers can mitigate the distortions embedded in historical accounts, offering a more accurate and comprehensive portrayal of ancient Iranian religious traditions. This approach not only enriches our understanding of the past but also illuminates the enduring legacy of Iran’s religious heritage, which continues to shape its cultural identity in the present.

Gaius Pliny’s Natural History

Gaius Plinius Secundus, commonly known as Pliny the Elder, a Roman author of the first century CE (23–79), penned the encyclopedic work Natural History. In this text, he discusses ancient Iran, the East, and certain religious practices thereof. Like other early works composed according to the scientific standards of their time, Pliny’s Natural History is not devoid of errors, inaccuracies, or superstitious elements. However, it distinguishes itself from contemporaneous texts through its meticulous inclusion of a bibliography in its first book, referencing over two thousand sources, a testament to its scholarly rigor.

The works of Pliny the Elder were compiled and preserved by his nephew, Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, known as Pliny the Younger. Remarkably, Pliny the Elder, who was ten years old at the time of Jesus’s crucifixion, lived contemporaneously with the apostles and the authors of the Gospels, yet makes no mention of Jesus or his disciples in Natural History. In contrast, Pliny the Younger, as a senior Roman military commander, reported to Emperor Trajan (Traianus, 53–117 CE) around 110 CE on Christian gatherings, noting that, in the eyes of the imperial court and intellectuals of the era, Christianity was little more than a superstition. Nevertheless, he observed that Christianity had grown to such an extent that pagan temples were emptying, and sacrificial rites were becoming obsolete.

Pliny the Elder refers to the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Persia as Persico Mari and Persici Sinus. He also situates the tomb of Cyrus in the east of Persepolis, whereas, if Pasargadae is indeed Cyrus the Great’s tomb, it lies to the northeast of Persepolis. This discrepancy likely indicates an error in geographical orientation.

Cannibalism in the Context of Scarcity-Driven Warfare

Pliny’s reference to the custom of cannibalism pertains to the practice of feeding the corpses of the deceased to animals due to food scarcity, a phenomenon associated with a “scarcity model” of warfare where resources are insufficient to meet needs. This does not involve the consumption of living humans but rather the use of deceased bodies, a practice that, while disrespectful to human dignity and universally condemned by the living, causes no pain to the dead. Once death is certain, the body is merely a remnant, devoid of the soul, which has transitioned to its appropriate realm. In the context of warfare, the bodies of fallen enemies lack sanctity, rendering their use as sustenance less reprehensible. While war and warmongering are inherently criminal, self-defense in the face of aggression knows no prohibited boundaries or red lines. To weaken the enemy and instill terror, any method, however repugnant, may be employed. This is a rational tactic in wars against savage, brutal, merciless, and ambitious adversaries whose sole aim is victory, avoiding defeat, preserving pride and dominance, and expanding territorial control. Such enemies, when dominant, create crises of scarcity, devastating famine, or crippling poverty through sieges, resource destruction, or monopolization.

The Power of Noble Communication and the Prohibition of Warmongering

In warfare, the paramount objective is ensuring security, peace, tranquility, and the well-being of society, encompassing the safety of all humanity. War must never pursue irreligious, hegemonic, or expansionist goals, and warmongering is strictly forbidden.

In contemporary metrics, a nation’s strength is gauged not only by its hard power—military hardware and weaponry—but also by its soft power: the ability to foster connections, disseminate knowledge, and manage media effectively. These elements enhance authority and deter conflict.

Noble individuals, endowed with divine favor, affection, grace, and blessings, are inherently trustworthy and beloved in ordinary, non-crisis situations, possessing a high capacity for connection. However, their ability to guide, lead, and pursue innovative, transformative justice, often through unconventional means, becomes most evident in crises.

In divine wisdom, initiating war or conflict is prohibited. Engaging adversaries through communication, enlightenment, constructive strategies, and divine admonition is the prescribed approach. However, if a recalcitrant enemy persists in malice and hostility, igniting conflict or war, the wise, in defense and deterrence, employ unprecedented deceptions to outmaneuver and incapacitate the foe. In the destructive nature of war, no red lines restrict the use of unconventional deceptions or surprise attacks against a stubborn, hostile enemy to swiftly quell their peace-disrupting, security-threatening sedition. If a threat’s origin is identified and their actions verified, a preemptive strike to neutralize them and safeguard the populace, rooted in truth and wisdom, is justified. Such actions elevate even adversaries and are not mere vengeance. These noble defenders act with magnanimity, honor, and generosity, targeting the enemy’s strongest points and leaders of sedition, not the weak or defenseless populace.

Warmongering Communication from a Position of Weakness

While communication can foster peace and harmony, when conducted from a position of weakness or incapacity, it becomes a tool for colonialism, enmity, and savagery, enabling domination and proving more destructive than war itself. Simultaneously, instigating violence or imposing unnatural, unbearable pressure on all people, including non-believers, is prohibited.

Diogenes Laertius’s Lives of Eminent Philosophers

Diogenes Laertius, a Greek historian and biographer of the second century CE, authored Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, a seminal work in the history of Greek philosophy. This text chronicles the lives of influential Greek philosophers, divided into two sections: the Ionian school (located in the western Achaemenid Empire) and the Italian school. The latter discusses the philosophical doctrines from Pythagoras to Epicurus, with significant emphasis on Socrates and Plato.

Other philosophers covered include Thales, Xenophon, Euclid, Aristotle, Zeno, Pythagoras, and Democritus. Diogenes accessed sources now lost, enriching his accounts.

Diogenes the Cynic, a contemporary of Plato and Aristotle, adhered to a philosophy prioritizing human freedom, often disregarding social norms, laws, and conventions. In Cynic philosophy, freedom is so paramount that theoretical reflections and scholarly writing conventions are overlooked, and anecdotes, maxims, sermons, and satirical jests are freely cited.

Diogenes viewed freedom and self-sufficiency as the ultimate sources of human salvation and happiness. The greatest obstacle to these was adherence to customs contrary to human nature, necessitating asceticism and spiritual discipline to overcome them.

It is said that while Diogenes rested in the sunlight, Alexander the Great stood over him, offering any wish. Diogenes replied, “Take your shadow off me.” Another famous anecdote recounts him wandering the city by day with a lantern, searching for a true human.

Iranian Magi: The Origin of Wisdom and Philosophy

Diogenes’s free spirit led him to uphold fairness in Lives of Eminent Philosophers. He justly attributes the origin of philosophy, and indeed wisdom, to the Iranian Magi, whom he considers older and more accomplished in knowledge than Egyptian priests. He identifies Zoroaster, an Abrahamic Magi leader, as meaning “sacrifice to the stars,” living six thousand years before Xerxes’s crossing of the Hellespont (486–465 BCE).

According to Diogenes, renowned Greek philosophers interacted with the Iranian Magi, drawing from their philosophy, worldview, and knowledge. The earliest scientific treatises and works originated with the Magi. For instance, the text reports a Magi predicting Socrates’s death, and Pythagoras and Democritus’s engagements with the Magi. The writings of Plato and Aristotle, among the earliest enduring works, adopt a critical style toward earlier scholars and opponents, influenced by the Magi’s scientific texts.

Diogenes also cites a letter from Darius to Heraclitus of Ionia (535–475 BCE), which reads in part: “You have written a treatise On Nature, difficult to understand and interpret. In some parts, if interpreted literally, it seems to contain profound reflection on the entire cosmos and its events, reliant on a deeply divine force; but in many parts, its judgments are ambiguous, such that even those skilled in literature struggle to grasp its true interpretation. Thus, Darius, son of Hystaspes, hopes to benefit from your Greek teachings and culture. Come swiftly to my court, for the Greeks typically neglect their sages and disregard their exceptional precepts that foster better listening and learning. At my court, you will enjoy all privileges, daily valuable discourse, and a life aligned with your views.”

This historical account underscores the connection between the Iranian court and Greek scholars, aligning with Heraclitus’s deliberately obscure, enigmatic style, earning him the moniker “the Obscure” or “Dark Philosopher.”

Greek sages like Socrates and Aristotle were aware of the Khosravani wisdom of the Magi. The historian Xenophon, a disciple of Socrates, interacted with Cyrus the Younger. Socrates engaged with a Magi named Gobryas, and the Greeks executed him in 399 BCE with hemlock for promoting foreign religions.

Heraclitus, the earliest Greek philosopher to mention the Magi, deemed their rituals blasphemous, a judgment rooted in his detachment from the spiritual essence of these rites, having not immersed himself in a meaningful religious context.

For Heraclitus, moral nobility transcended religion, requiring neither textual dependence nor heartfelt devotion, finding meaning in any context. He viewed the material world as in constant flux, famously stating one cannot step into the same river twice, rejected Greek mythological gods, and embraced a form of monism.

Diogenes draws on Successions of Philosophers by Sotion of Alexandria, a third-century BCE historiographer of philosophy, whom he considers the first philosophical historian.

Additional Greek and Roman Historians

Other Greek historians include Athena, a chronicler from the era of Alexander the Great and ancient Greece’s queen, for whom Xerxes offered abundant sacrifices and tributes after conquering the region; Dinon, a Greek chronicler contemporary with Philip of Macedon (359–336 BCE); Diodorus Siculus (90–21 BCE), author of Iran and the Ancient East in the Historical Library; Nicolaus of Damascus (c. 64 BCE), a Greek historian, philosopher, and Jewish scholar; Quintus Curtius Rufus, a first-century CE Roman historian and biographer of Alexander; and Plutarch (46–73 or 74 CE), a philosopher and priest who authored Lives of Noble Men and the treatise Isis and Osiris, discussing Iranian religion with direct reference to Magi sources.

Suidas, in his Lexicon, notes that Trajan appointed Plutarch as consul and, respecting his vast knowledge, ordered all matters to align with his counsel. Plutarch’s accounts are marked by precision and subtlety regarding Iranian religious principles, rituals, ceremonies, and resurrection, reflecting the strongly Magian character of his sources. Astonishingly, despite being contemporary with Gospel authors, he makes no mention of Jesus, Christianity, the apostles, or the Gospels.

Post-Islamic Sources

In the second century AH (eighth century CE), the translation of Greek philosophical texts, as well as Buddhist, Hindu, and Christian works, into Arabic, coupled with the expansion of Islamic conquests and interactions with adherents of other faiths, invigorated religious discourse.

Following the Holy Qur’an, a primary historical and narrative source for significant past events, several key works on the history of religions, when analyzed through historical reason, include:

• Al-Fihrist by Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn al-Nadim al-Warraq (932–995 CE), which discusses beliefs, sects, and scientific movements up to 377 AH (987 CE), the year of its compilation.
• Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq by Abdul Qahir al-Baghdadi (980–1037 CE), translated by Dr. Mohammad Javad Mashkur (1918–1995 CE) as Seventy-Three Nations or the History of Islamic Sects.
• Al-Baqiya ‘an al-Qurun al-Khaliya by Abu Rayhan Biruni (973–1048 CE).
• Fasl fi al-Milal wa al-Ahwa’ wa al-Nihal by Abu Muhammad Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Sa’id, known as Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi (994–1064 CE).
• Bayan al-Adyan, composed in 1092 CE by Abu al-Ma’ali Muhammad ibn Nimat al-Husayni.
• Al-Milal wa al-Nihal by Abdul Karim al-Shahrastani (1086–1158 CE).

The term milal (plural of milla) denotes a true religion or belief led by a divinely appointed prophet, in contrast to nihal (plural of nihla), which refers to false, non-divine beliefs. A madhhab (religious school) signifies a specific method or approach led by a religious leader or imam within a broader milla. Differences among madhhabs give rise to sects.

Books authored between the fifth and fifteenth centuries CE (corresponding to two centuries before Islam to the eighth century AH), a period known as the Middle Ages dominated by the Church’s ignorance and superstition, often lack impartiality in the study of religions, suffering from bias and commissioned writing.