2018-01-03T03:16:00-08:00
The Iranian thinker and researcher Nasser Porbirar is considered an exception to the rule of Iranian thinkers and researchers, as he deviated from the dominant Persian discourse for more than a century on the contemporary intellectual and cultural scene in Iran with his new theses and theories about the history of Iran. He titled his first book, “12 Centuries of Silence,” which means the rule of the Achaemenids, Ashkans, and Sassanids, which lasted 12 centuries before Islam. He describes these three dynasties as alien to their geographical surroundings and to the indigenous population of the Najd of Iran, where they were 15 people – including Arabs and Elamites – living a peaceful life while they were It had an ancient civilization, until the Al-Yahoud, according to the Torah, came with Cyrus of Achaemenid (7th century BC) and forced him to attack these peoples. He destroyed their civilization, enslaved them, and wiped them out of existence.
This is what Porbir concludes from the Persepolis rock paintings and engravings. Nasser says: Nothing remains of these three dynasties that ruled by force, sword, and Al-Jibt (Egypt) over the peoples living in the Najd of Iran. There is no significant cultural impact left of them compared to the Greeks, Romans, and even the pre-Islamic Arabs. Except that she was proficient in using the Persian spear to erase the peoples that preceded her in the Iranian Najd, open the lands of others, and drown other peoples, including the Greeks, Egyptians, and Indians, with seas of blood.
Porbir criticizes the Persian nationalist historians – who are affiliated with Western historians and archaeologists, most of whom are Al-Yahoud – for starting Iranian history with the Achaemenid dynasty, while he says that this dynasty and its founders Cyrus (Cyrus) and Darius are agents of the Al-Yahoud, according to what is stated in the Torah, and that they came late compared to peoples who lived thousands of years before them. . Jewish archaeologists and orientalists exaggerated their status and reputation, contrary to their reality in history. Nasser Porbirar praises the Mesopotamian civilization and considers it the mother of civilizations in the world. He accuses Cyrus of Achaemenid of destroying this civilization, especially the Babylonian one, as a result of the movement of the Al-Yahoud.
This Persian-Iranian researcher and thinker faced, and despite people’s interest in his two books – 12 Centuries of Silence and A Bridge to the Past – which were printed several times within a few months, he faced a conspiracy of silence on the part of Persian nationalist thinkers in Iran. Rather, it receives various threats from nationalists who cannot respond to it with thought or logic, but rather with force and intimidation. To learn about his bold views and ideas, Al-Zaman conducted the following interview with him:
● About your life?
Born in 1940, I studied primary school in an Islamic school called the Jaafaria School in Tehran, where I learned a lot of the basics of the Arabic and Persian languages in this school. My studies in high school coincided with the Shah’s coup against the national leader, Muhammad Mossadegh, in 1953. For political and family reasons, I was not able to enter the university, as I consider myself fortunate not to have entered the university in Iran due to the modest level of culture and study at that time and now. Also, entering and not entering the university did not change anything. From a human perspective in general.
● It seems that before the revolution you were a member of the Tudeh Communist Party?
I began my political activity in 1961 in various forms, the most important of which was my cooperation with Hoshang Tzabi (one of the leaders of the Tudeh Party who was executed by the Shah), whom I met and the party in 1973. We were secretly publishing a newspaper for the party at that time. The Tudeh Party was the only party that represented leftist thought in Iran at that period. But after the revolution in 1979, and after my interactions with the cadres and leaders of the Tudeh Party, it became clear to me that they were a non-national group trying to implement international duties. Accordingly, I left the party in 1980 and began to criticize them, as you know.
● Why were you arrested after the revolution?
The topic has details, but I will summarize and say that my arrest was carried out by a conspiracy by the Tudeh Party group, as they thought that my matter would end up in prison in the first days of arrest, but I thwarted their plans with my intelligence and my own tactics. I suffered during the period of my detention in prison, which lasted for more than 5 years (1982 – 1987). Among these things I suffered, including the attempt of Al-Qawush’s doctor, whose name is Frebers, to keep me alive. He tried to take my life by using a lethal needle. The subject has a file in Evin Prison in Tehran.
● In your last two books, you spoke about a great civilization in Iran and Mesopotamia before the Achaemenid dynasty. You consider these people – that is, the Achaemenids – to be an immigrant people who came from Central Asia and the Caucasus to find Iran, where their leader Cyrus became the leader of the Persians due to Jewish support for him. Even more than that, you say that the Achaemenid dynasties The Ashkans and Sassanians are strangers to the Iranians, and it confirms that they did not enjoy culture, art, economics, or politics. It also talked about their purely military nature and their use of the Persian spear to eliminate the indigenous population in Najd Iran and the bloody conquests in other people’s lands. What scientific and historical evidence do you provide for this matter?
What evidence, tools, or what they describe as certainties used by those claiming that Cyrus is the founder of human rights in the world, why did I use them in my new project regarding Iranian history? These are all theories presented on the basis of possible backgrounds. I explained in the book that there are no – neither from a geographical nor historical perspective – a people who were later known as the Achaemenids, as we do not find any historical precedent among them, neither in Iran nor in Mesopotamia. This confusion afflicts all historians because the rise of Cyrus (Kyrus in Persian) was a rise. Surprisingly, it happened overnight. The only ancient source about Cyrus that explicitly mentions his name is the Torah, as we see in this book the first features of Cyrus’ appearance. Other than that, there is no document about this person. Likewise, those who defend the thesis of Cyrus, the defender of human rights, do not have any document, but they rely on the Torah only.
In fact, there are two readings of the Old Testament in this regard. The Old Testament considers Cyrus a prophet and says that he and his people lived in the north (of the Black Sea). On this basis, I arrived at a theory that says that the economic, social, and political conditions of the Al-Yahoud at the time of the appearance of Cyrus were such that the Al-Yahoud needed a savior in Mesopotamia, where the triumph of victory had destroyed the Jewish civilization 20 years before the appearance of Cyrus, and he displaced them to Iran, Afghanistan, and China, and took most of them captive and brought them with them. Their wealth to Babylon. The Al-Yahoud were looking for a savior to destroy Babylon, to free their captives, to destroy the Mesopotamian civilization, which had always been a source of trouble to the Al-Yahoud, and to restore life to the Al-Yahoud in Jerusalem. All of this is mentioned in the Torah, where it explicitly confirms in the book that I chose Cyrus for the sake of our goals to destroy Babylon, and it says that we brought Cyrus from the north of the Black Sea from the Ashkenazi region, where he had neighbors there who were the Mendeans and the Gutians. The Guts are the ancestors of the Germans, and the Mende are a people who live beyond the Caucasus Mountains, where their documents are printed in my books. We do not see either Cyrus or his Achaemenid tribe before he became emperor. We have not even seen a horseshoe of them in Iran, as I refute what is said about his occupation of the regions of the Medes, Shush, and Elam before his appearance in Mesopotamia. It is not possible for an emperor like Cyrus to invade Assyria and Babylon without any physical, mental, or mental record. In Najd, Iran, where we do not see these Achaemenids before Cyrus became king, we do not see any vessel, grave, drink, or cradle for them.
in Iran. Our analysis does not match the prevailing official discourse, so we must know who the Achaemenids are? Where did they come from and who supported them to become powerful enough to destroy Babylon? The Torah says clearly: I plan for you, O Babylon, as I negotiated with people and mobilized them, and they are very barbaric and murderous people who have no mercy for anyone and whose swords and spears do not miss. They will soon attack you and will destroy your walls and your farms and kill your youth, so that Babylon will end as a populous country forever.
These are the correct features for following the command of Cyrus and the Achaemenids in Mesopotamia.
● To prove the absence of civilization during the era of the Achaemenids, Ashkans, and Sassanids (12 centuries before Islam), did you compare them to other civilizations such as the Greek, Yemeni, and Indian?
I compared the prevailing civilization in Mesopotamia and Iran before Cyrus, as they were two well-known centers of thought and art in the world. Everything that humans currently know has its foundations in Mesopotamia and ancient Iran. The Sumerians, Assyrians, Elamites, Medes, and the peoples who lived south of the Caspian Sea, all of these laid the foundations of human civilization. In Mesopotamia, the first irrigation systems and the first alphabets were invented. The people in Mesopotamia also made the first sea vessels and the first chariots and formulated the first laws, where we find the book of the law 5,200 years ago. These countries were powerful and world civilization learned a lot from them.
The situation was like this until the emergence of Cyrus, after which we see silence prevailing between the two rivers and Iran, as we do not see during this period (which extends for 12 centuries) and until the emergence of Islam neither a book nor a wise man on a global level. That is, Cyrus destroys the achievements made by humans over thousands of years in Mesopotamia and Iran, and plants spears and swords in their place. With the coming of Cyrus, darkness took over Iran and Mesopotamia.
● What do you say about the rule of Buzurgmihr al-Hakim and the musicians of Barbad and Nakisa during the era of the Sassanian kings?
These are all the legends of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh. When we talk about historical issues, you must provide historical documents about them. We in Iran have a number of inscriptions on rocks from the era of the Achaemenids and Sassanids. These inscriptions do not talk about any culture, civilization, thought, or even religion. There is no talk in these inscriptions about Zoroaster and his book Avesta. These inscriptions did not talk about cultural affairs, as all of them, without exception, either talked about personal issues or military issues.
The most important of these rock inscriptions is Bestun in the city of Kermanshah (west), which resembles a military statement issued by a revolutionary figure named Darius, where he talks about his actions here and there. Therefore, those who claim the existence of Zoroaster and the books Avesta and Zend must provide historical documents to prove this matter.
Those who claim the existence of religions or wisdom in ancient Iran or anything cultural or civilizational before the emergence of Islam have not presented any documents, nor any rock inscriptions, nor even coins. Without these documents, talk in this area turns into myths, as we can accept them as myths. Not only.
● So, you say that the character of Zoroaster and his books Avesta and its gates were created by the minds of the Persians after Islam?
Yes, all of these matters were created after Islam and in order to confront the Arabs and Islam, and I have elaborated in detail in my third book on this subject (the book is in press).
● What do you say about the cast, i.e. the ruling class during the Sassanian rule, especially at its end, where the Zoroaster clergy, i.e. the Mog, fall into this category, as these and the Kasra constituted an excellent ruling class, as official historians remind us?
The only source for this speech is the Shahnameh, which was sung in the fourth century AH. You must provide historical documents in this field.
In fact, the only source that talks about religion during the Sassanian era are many rock inscriptions in the Kaaba of Zoroaster in Fars Governorate (south).
In these inscriptions, a person speaks frankly and introduces himself with the title of lifer, meaning the chief cleric of the region. Neither I nor anyone else wrote that. The chief cleric, who lived about 200 years before the emergence of Islam, talks about a religion based on the worship of cattle and describes it as the religion of Bahram. He does not mention a religion called the religion of Zoroaster or a book called Avesta. If in reality there was a religion in the name of Zoroastrianism, a prophet in the name of Zoroaster, and a book in the name of Avesta, then what place is more important than the Katir rock inscriptions that were written by the greatest clerics at that time?
● What was the religion of the Sassanians? I have never gone back further in history than they did.
Religion in Iran was multi-Allah and multi-species, meaning it was a primitive Bedouin religion. It was a regional, traditional, and specific religion for the local population.
There were cults and religions prevalent at that time, but none of them were general in all countries at all. We did not even see a trace of a single religion in the court of Al-Aksara in Iran. There is a kind of praise and praising, not worship, praising water, fire, and livestock. This is the thing that many refer to.
● Zoroastrians sanctify fire to this day!
There is nothing wrong with the Zoroastrians writing something about the history of their religion, as they have not done such a thing until now. This history should not be based on myths and imagination, but rather it should be based on material, objective and historical evidence that can be referred to. When you do not find (before Islam) in Mesopotamia, Iran, the Middle East, or anywhere, a name from Zoroaster, then where is this religion and where are its extensions? If this religion had prevailed before Islam, it should have been mentioned somewhere.
● Mr. Nasser, you said in your book 12 Centuries of Silence that the Aryan race is a fabricated race. You also expressed doubt about the authenticity of the existence of a people called Pars, meaning the Persians, as you said that its meaning is the wanderer and the invader. What do you tell us in this area?
Before the rise of Cyrus, Iran was divided between peoples and nations whose names and population boundaries we know. As I mentioned in my book, there was no geographical spot called Pars, meaning Persia, in Najd Iran at that time.
Iranian history is written based on research carried out by the Al-Yahoud, and they made an effort to elevate the status of the Achaemenids as their liberators and destroyers of the Mesopotamian civilization. The Al-Yahoud seek to present the Achaemenids as creators of culture, civilization, or anything they desire, because of the service the Achaemenids provided to them. Take, for example, Jewish archaeologists and historians such as Gerishman, Darishtedt, and Eshkuler. Also, 90 percent of historians of Iranian history are Al-Yahoud, meaning that the Al-Yahoud exaggerated the history of the Achaemenids. Over the past hundred years, they tried to portray Cyrus in Iranian history in a way that matches it. His image in the Torah presents him as an image of a prophet, and they succeeded in that.
I mentioned in the second part of my book – The Dawn of Islam – that no one in Iran, even 100 years ago, knew Cyrus, meaning that the most prominent intellectuals in this country did not know him before this period.
● It seems that some archaeological discoveries were carried out late?
– That’s true. After reading the inscriptions and paintings of the city of Shush (south), Persepolis (south), and Beston (west), and finding the clay tablet of Cyrus, the world realized that a powerful dynasty was ruling here in Iran. These matters took place a century and a half ago, but half a century should have passed for the system and its relations to be formulated, since 100 years ago the issue of the Achaemenid dynasty began to be raised seriously. Then the Al-Yahoud revealed Cyrus, Darius, and Xerxes mentioned in the Torah, as they knew who they were and where they lived.
It is natural for them to portray Cyrus, Darius, and Xerxes in history in a way that matches their Biblical image, because historians are Al-Yahoud, as they were interested in the Biblical texts supporting history and not the other way around.
● You spoke in your books about the role of Israel in promoting the shining Iranian civilization before Islam, to deepen the gap between the Iranians and the Arabs. You also spoke about the hidden arrogance of Mesopotamia, which conquered the world in a short period of time and not the untrained barefoot Arabs during the emergence of Islam. I wrote that the hatred and violence shown by the people of Mesopotamia – unconsciously – towards the Iranians is a reaction to the Achaemenids’ destruction of the Mesopotamian civilization, and that the burning of Persepolis by Alexander the Great is a response to the burning of Athens by the Achaemenids, and the defeat of (the Iranians in) Al-Qadisiyah is a response to The defeat of Babylon, for the first time I hear such a historical analysis.
Yes, I said these things, I defend them, and I have sufficient documents to prove them. In fact, the Al-Yahoud carried out two historical movements that later became the basis for the division and gap between the peoples of the Mesopotamian region and the Islamic world, especially between the east and west of the Islamic world, that is, between the Arabs and the Persians.
The Al-Yahoud are carrying out two historical conspiracies in the region: First, they are trying to confirm to the world, culture, and history that the emergence of Cyrus of Achaemenid in the Mesopotamian region was the reason for the emergence of the first empire in the world, as it had very sacred characteristics in the cultural, artistic, political, etc. fields. The second is to present Cyrus as the founder of human rights in the world. They seek to hide the civilization that preceded Cyrus in Mesopotamia and to indoctrinate the Iranians that they are indebted to the emergence of Cyrus (25 centuries ago), and this matter continues to this day, while we Iranians know that we have a bright history that is 70 centuries old, as we share Mesopotamia in this civilization.
It seems that archaeologists, in accordance with their fanatical nationalist discourse, have little interest in the Elamite civilization. Where I visited the west of the city of Shush and the Karkheh River, up to the Iraqi border in Amara, and I saw many hills filled with archaeological treasures as if they were screaming, “Come and dig me,” and there is no Nasser and no helper!
– They do not approach these hills, because they are only occupied with the ruins of Shush, Persepolis, Pasargad, and Hamedan, which confirms what I mentioned previously.
None of the three dynasties that ruled Iran for 12 centuries, namely the Achaemenids, Ashkans, and Sassanids, were among the original inhabitants of the region (we find Iran and Mesopotamia), as we were unable to find a geographical spot in this region to which these dynasties belong, so we must begin extensive research on The origin and birthplace of these breeds.
One of the strong evidence that proves that they did not belong to this region and its original inhabitants is that there was no trace of them left in this land after their final defeats. There was no trace of the Achaemenids after their defeat by Alexander the Great, and the same was true of the Ashkans and Sassanids. If these breeds were authentic in this land, they would return to their birthplace. Take, for example, the Carmen, Medes, Elamites, and Khozites, after all the terrible attacks and defeats, still inhabit their original lands, and their names are the same old names that have been in place for thousands of years.
● You openly criticize the anti-Arab Persian nationalist discourse in contemporary Iranian literature and history. In your opinion, to what extent have Persian nationalist thinkers such as Zarin Koob, Parviz Natal Khanleri, Mojtaba Minvi and their likes contributed to deepening the gap and hostility between the two neighboring Iranian and Arab peoples and suppressing the Arabs inside Iran?
The origin of these intellectuals goes back to the era of Shah Reza Pahlavi, when he used them for his nationalist tendencies. They did not work according to an intellectual system, but rather according to a specific program whose political goal was to stir up disputes and hostility between Muslims and between the east and west of the Islamic world, as their discourse was based on the Arab assault on language and culture. And the Iranian land and myths. It is certain that there are no historical documents for this discourse. Therefore, this discourse is not based on research cultural foundations aimed at enriching our national information. This propaganda begins from a specific era – the era of Shah Reza Pahlavi – (1925 = 1941) aimed at creating a gap between Arabs and Persians and reviving Jewish documents related to the initial centuries of Islam, which were fabricated by the Al-Yahoud in Iran at that time to divide the Islamic world.
In my third book (in press), I fully explained the extent of the falsification of these documents, which claim that the Arabs neglected our culture, our nationalism, our knowledge, and our national rights, and that Islam became a reason for our backwardness, or that the conquering Muslims committed aggression and bloodshed.
I say forged because you cannot prove a single page of it historically, as it was drafted by the Al-Yahoud without exception.
● Do you think that the populist movement in Iran is also a creation of the Al-Yahoud?
The entire populist movement was created by the Al-Yahoud and was created by the remnants of the Sassanians who fled to Khorasan after their defeat in front of the Muslim armies. Shu’ubism did not emerge from all parts of Iran, but rather from one region, Khorasan, which is the place where the Abbasids appeared to fight the Umayyads. I wonder what the Abbasid armies were doing in Khorasan? Why are all these soldiers who were supposed to eliminate the Umayyads in Khorasan gathered? We know that there is a distance of more than two thousand kilometers separating Khorasan from the Levant?!
Did the Al-Yahoud live in Khorasan at that time?
Yes, we possess documents indicating that the region currently known as Afghanistan and the Greater Khorasan region were affected by Jewish influence centered in the Jewish colonies there. I also presented new documents in my third book (in press) that were not presented by any researcher in the history of Islam. In them, I revealed the conspiracies hatched by the Al-Yahoud to divide the Islamic world. They are documents presented for the first time and will raise the astonishment of the Islamic world when it sees what force rose against the Umayyads. To be replaced by Bani Abbas.
● Some people here believe that the populist movement was struggling against the Umayyad and Abbasid rulers. How true is this matter?
Can these people present a well-known name from the populist movement? I mean, present to history the centrality of this movement?!
● They are based on books from that historical period.
All of these books are fabricated, meaning that they are all forged, without exception. In my third book, I examined these matters, where I confirm that there is no person named Abu Mukhannath, nor Al-Baladhuri, nor Al-Waqidi, for these are all historically artificial figures created by the Al-Yahoud.
It has been proven through my reading of Arabic language issues that until the end of the third century AH there were no books from which, for example, Al-Madani could print 240 books, according to Ibn al-Nadim’s nonsense in the Index.
● You spoke about Ibn al-Nadim. Do you doubt his personality and the personality of Ibn al-Muqaffa as well?
– I do not doubt, but I am certain that it is fabricated because during the era of Ibn Muqaffa, that is, in the early era of the second century AH, there was nothing written in the Persian language, or even in Arabic.
The effort in the Islamic world – which was not Arab before the conquest – was focused on writing the Qur’an. That is, Arabic writing begins with the writing of the Qur’an and not the writing of history. It is not possible to read the Qur’an written during the era of Ibn al-Muqaffa because it is not readable as it did not have syntax and morphology and grammar had not matured to the extent that the Qur’an could be identified in that period. Only a small number of copies of the Qur’an have reached us from the second century AH, meaning that there was no writing of the Qur’an in the second century, or it was very primitive, such that if you now obtain a copy of this Qur’an, you will not be able to read even one verse of it. The question is: How did Ibn al-Muqaffa write these books in Arabic, according to what linguistic style, and on the basis of what morphology and grammar? The first examples of the new Persian language appeared in the fourth century AH.
● What do you say about the Pahlavi language prevalent during the Sassanid era, that is, before Islam in Iran?
Are there any existing examples of this language? All there are inscriptions on some rocks and walls show that the Pahlavi language is a very incomplete language. Not all of these rock inscriptions contain 200 Pahlavi words, two of which we can use to express serious cultural, artistic, and religious issues. All of these words are simple, everyday words, in which there is neither wisdom nor literature. Therefore, we must engage in a historical approach and not make history on the basis of historical claims.
● It seems from your words that there is a need for objective tools for such matters?
There was no Arabic script (alphabet) to turn into a book, and the status of morphology and grammar was not determined, so how did they write books? I mentioned in my third book, with irrefutable evidence, that Arabic books did not appear in the Islamic world until after morphology and grammar were formulated.
● It seems that you are the second Persian – after the poet Ahmed Shamloo – to criticize the Shahnameh of the poet Ferdowsi (who died in the 4th century AH), as you said that he recited the Shahnameh under the orders of a political movement, which is the populist movement, and the Shahnameh cannot be considered as a basis for the history of Iran before Islam. Persian nationalists may see this as a kind of nationalist disbelief.
What do you tell us in this area?
– I do not care about the nationalists’ disbelief or their faith. I wrote these books, so if they can, let them respond to me. There is very clear evidence that there was a Shahnameh writing group that was busy with this matter for 40 years.
They began during the Sassanid era and continued until the era of Sultan Mahmoud Ghaznawi (from the 3rd century to the 4th century AH). The poet Daqiqi sang part of the Shahnameh. We know that 6 people were busy singing the Shahnameh in the same period and in a specific area of Khorasan. These are the people of the Shahnameh, not the poet Ferdowsi, who was receiving his salary from the Shu’ubis to sing poetry that met their inclinations, tendencies, stories, hopes, and goals. Ferdowsi is nothing but a chanter of the Shahnameh, and its idea relates to a political group called Shu’ubism. I mentioned all of these documents, quoting Ferdowsi himself. He confirms in the introduction to all of his stories that they do not represent his opinion, and that so-and-so mentioned the story to me so that I could recite it, in poetry, where he sometimes regrets some texts, expresses his disgust for them, and disavows them.
● If so, why did he do this?
Because Ferdowsi made a living by reciting poetry, and when he finished reciting the Shahnameh, this coincided with the crushing and suppression of the populist movement, as no one would pay him the fee for writing the Shahnameh. He expressed his remorse for the work he had done and directed insults and insults at those who assigned him to recite the Shahnameh because he began to suffer from distress. Al-Aish, and he speaks frankly about the money that was not paid to him for writing the Shahnameh.
● It seems that you have not been spared from the attacks of Persian nationalists, even though you are Persian and Tehrani as well, that is, neither Turkish nor Arab, so that they might accuse you of other things? (Borbirar sent me several faxes from fanatical nationalists threatening him with death)?
These attacks and threats do not frighten me, as these people are not at a level where their attacks or approval can affect anything. These gentlemen have empty hands, and when they are asked to sit down for a serious, documentary dialogue, they all run away. The problems they raise are all simple things, such as why so-and-so was printed in a publishing house or published incorrectly, and based on this. All of these things are justifications. When we called on them for a national dialogue to determine the waste from the precious, they did not dare to engage in this matter, and now, even though it has only been in print for a few months and has reached the third edition, they have not said a word.
● I wanted to point out this point. With particular boldness and frankness – rarely seen among Iranian and Persian historians – you challenged the historical and intellectual discourse of the Persian extremist nationalists! How did they react? I know that despite the conspiracy of silence they have pursued in the newspapers and media regarding your books, we see that they occupy their place among Turkish-Azerbaijani and Arab nationalism, and even among the Persians as well? What do you tell us in this area?
The words of these (nationalists) are not even worth a hollow cardamom, as the ancient Iranians say. The two books have begun to spread like water throughout the country, and their texts attract the attention of anyone who loves Iran and its history. I regret the dominance of a group or a private forum over the press and cultural centers in Iran. This forum maintains previous vendettas against me and knows that if these matters expand into a dialogue on a national level, its members must return to sitting in the first grade of primary school. That is, their information turns into nothing. It is natural that these people do not want the issue to turn into a national dialogue because they know better than others that their hands are empty to prove their theories.
All the historical theories that are currently taught in universities and high schools and kept in libraries are derived from others (Westerners) and they are not theories or national knowledge, because we have not written anything about the history of our country. The historical theories were either written by the Russians, Germans, French, or British and sent to us so that we could translate them here incorrectly. Or is it true, we memorized it by heart and considered it the history of Iran. My books are the first national research on the history of Iran. These nationalists do not have the right to take a position against it. Rather, the original writers of Iranian history have the right to respond to it, and I mean the Western writers, including the Russians, British, and French, as they must defend their previous theories in front of my modern theories.