Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.
Persian (Farsi - فارسی) not Parsi (پارسی) because Ferdowsi would have had a very hard time writing his Shahnameh in cuneiform (خط میخی).
Persian not Parsi because Sa’adi would have not had enough words to write the Bustan and Golestan (or in cuneiform).
Persian not Parsi because all languages evolve.
Like any other Persian-speaker I am only too aware of the difficulty in memorizing the spelling of Arabic loan-words in Persian (dictation) but I have learned that the exact same thing can be said about many other modern languages. English for instance is still filled with (old German) hard-to-spell words brought over to the British Isles under less than friendly circumstances.
English “is a West Germanic language that originated from the Anglo-Frisian dialects brought to Britain by Germanic invaders” then forcefully latinized by invading Romans.
William Shakespeare would have not been able to write his masterpieces in futhorc (the pre-Latin alphabet used to write old English). And as much as people enjoy reading and appreciating Shakespearean English there aren’t, at least as far as I am aware, any zealous campaigns calling for English script to be reverted back to futhorc or to its Shakespearean form.
We live on this tiny planet—much of our histories begins between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in modern day Iraq. They are filled with brutal invasions, some gorier than others. We borrow and learn from one another. This is how we can move on and communicate.
Before dismissing the Arabic alphabet and numbers, one should try doing a simple math equation with roman numerals:
Consider the tragic effects of Attürk’s engineering of Turkish language:
Try writing a single verse of the Shahnameh using old Persian cuneiform:
New article published on Ajam Media Collective by shimahoush
"In contemporary Iran, remnants of Zoroastrianism, including temples, royal monuments, and even religious symbols such as the Faravahar (symbol ofAhura Mazda, the Zoroastrian God) have become important sites of identification of a “true” Persian past for many Iranians both within Iran and in the Diaspora. For example, many Iranians – regardless of their religious affiliation – don shirts, necklaces or wristbands with the Faravahar symbol as a sign of displaying their ties to their cultural background, largely devoid of any religious import. Sometimes this performance of identity not only exoticizes and fetishizes Zoroastrianism, but also eliminates any association with Iran’s post-Islamic traditions.
Furthermore, this glorification of Iran’s pre-Islamic past and the focus on these holy sites and symbols have often worked to obscure the myriad ways in which Islamic relics, traditions, and stories are so intimately intertwined with their Zoroastrian predecessors, creating a unique Iranian modernity. One is often confronted with two seemingly contradictory narratives of Iranian authenticity: one with roots in Persian Zoroastrianism and the other in Arab Islam. This false binary erases sites of cultural and historical convergence such as popular religious narratives, which are often shrouded in myth and uncertainty. One of the most famous figures that occupies this site of convergence is Shahrbanu – the matriarch of Iranian Islam – and the similarity of her story to that of the emergence of Chak Chak, a Zoroastrian holy shrine.
Like the story of Hayatbanu and Chak Chak, there are multiple theories as to the identity of Shahrbanu and her place in Iranian national history. In the Twelver Shi’a tradition (but also in the belief of some Sunnis), Shahrbanu is identified as one of the wives of the Third Imam, Hussein ibn Ali, and the mother of the Fourth Imam, thus inserting an Iranian heritage to the progeny of the line of Shi’a Imams. The figure of Shahrbanu is therefore utilized in nationalist-religious discourse in modern Iran to emphasize the Iranian nature of Shi’ism and the indigenization of Islam as an intrinsically Persian religion. Often referred to as Shah-e zanan (“the King of Women”), Shahrbanu is remembered by Iranian Shi’as most tellingly in ta’ziyeh passion plays during Ashura (day of mourning commemorating Imam Hussein’s martyrdom), where her tumultuous life story is recited, including her loss and mourning for her martyred husband, Imam Hussein.”
Page 1 of 90