Historiography
Most of Iran’s current religious and historical understanding stems from a butchered line of oral traditions, making it difficult to conceive what may have happened prior to written records. Early Persian historiography comes from Mesopotamian-created “Quasi-history” in which “narratives embellished with theocentric conceptions, ideological preachings, and romantic lore” (CAIS, p. 1-2). Prior to written records, Persians passed down history from generation to generation through oral traditions (p. 1). These stories would be altered and added to, so in determining what was true, Iranian rulers picked what sounded best (p. 4); Herodotus, an ancient ruler, heard several different accounts of Cyrus’s death, but chose to believe the one most worthy of credit (p. 4). Abdoh observes that Americans lack individual identity, but if Iranians have a false history, doesn’t this put them in the same boat as Americans? Iranians are equally like Americans when it comes to the embellishment of their history; “The course of history exhibited a series of conflicts between the forces of good, usually Iranians, and the destructive powers, usually...non-Iranians” (CAIS paragraph 14). Written Iranian history, mostly thought to be falsified, claims “Persians were divinely appointed saviors whose mission was to bring justice, order, and tranquility to the people of the world” (paragraph 3). However, European culture is based on mythology, fables, and lore from the ancient Greeks and Romans as well as the teachings of the bible since written records lacked for an amount of time in the pre-historic era as well. These myths are still taught in schools today, although taught as not necessarily true. Iranian history is described as having “No distinction was made between the factual, the legendary, and the mythical. All three blended into a unified whole, presented as a continuous narrative” (CAIS, paragraph 14). This is perhaps the reason for rejecting American ideas during the Iranian Revolution when Persians had not rejected the ideas of the Muslims centuries before; with a continuous piece of Iranian-dominant lore serving as the Iranian backdrop, Iranians could very well think they are invincible to foreigners. America is similar in this way to when it was just a colony under Britain, and America became an independent nation. Americans too have ideas of where the American people originated from; fabulous tails of Americans as the hero and foreigners as the malice. The difference Iran holds now is awareness of the country’s injustice, whereas America feels mostly good about its nationality because the problems remain subtle and unnoticed by those who do not have cause to worry.
Read more about this topic: Salar Abdoh