Article on Achaemenid Cylinders published in Text Honoring Professor Jalal Khaleghi-Motlagh

An article on Achaemenid Cylinders and Stelae has been published in the special edition academic text book dedicated to prominent Iranologist scholar and literary specialist, Professor Jalal Khaleghi Motlagh:

Farrokh, K., & Farhid, T. (1396/2018). “Other” Cylinders and Records before and after Cyrus the Great: Kelar, Babylon, Egypt and Xanthus. Studies in Honor of Professor Jalal Khaleghi Motlagh (ed. F. Aslani & M. Pourtaghi), Tehran: Morvarid Publications, pp.379-394.

Professor Jalal Khaleghi-Motlagh was born in 1937 in Tehran. Upon completion of his education in Iran, he enrolled in the University of Cologne in Germany where he obtained a degree in Eastern Studies, Anthropology and History. He then studied Persian language and literature at the University of Hamburg. Professor Khaleghi-Motlagh has conducted extensive research on the epic literature of Iran and the Shahnameh. His research papers have been published in the most prestigious international academic journals. Among his extensive works are his editing of Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, which has been published in eight volumes under the late editor and founder of the Encyclopedia Iranica, Ehsan Yarshater. Too numerous to summarize here, professor Khaleghi-Motlagh’s numerous appointments include his teaching posts in Germany, faculty membership in the International Millennium Congress of the Shahnameh of Ferdowsi as well as being a board member of the Trustees of the Ferdowsi Foundation.

Select scholars were invited to write articles for the above textbook dedicated to the exemplary scholarship of Professor Khaleghi-Motlagh. These include prominent Iranologists such as Richard Davis, Dariush Akbarzadeh, Gholamreza Karamian, Kamyar Abedi, Touraj Daryaee and Shaul Shaked.

The article by Kaveh Farrokh and Tara Farhid re-examines the views of a select set of European scholars (based mainly in Holland, France and England) who since 1979 have worked extensively to place forward a certain perspective with respect to the Cyrus Cylinder and the historical role of Cyrus the Great in general. These views were first advertised in a public fashion by Spiegel Magazine and the Daily Telegraph newspaper in July 2008. Readers are encouraged to refer to Kaveh Farrokh’s responses to Spiegel Magazine and the Daily Telegraph shortly after their articles appeared in July 2008:

President Thomas Jefferson’s (1743-1826; US president in 1801-1809) copy of the Cyropaedia (Picture Source:  Angelina Perri Birney). Like many of the founding fathers and those who wrote the US Constitution, President Jefferson regularly consulted the Cyropedia – an encyclopedia written by the ancient Greeks about Cyrus the Great. The two personal copies of Thomas Jefferson’s Cyropaedia are in the US Library of Congress in Washington DC. Thomas Jefferson’s initials “TJ” are seen clearly engraved at the bottom of each page.

Article by Kaveh Farrokh and Taraneh Farhid on Achaemenid Era Edicts, Stele and the Cyrus Cylinder

An important recent contribution to the field of Iranian Studies is the publication in 2018 of the following textbook:

Arj-e-Xirad: Papers in Honour of Professor Djalal Khaleghi-Motlagh (edited by Farhad Aslani & Massoumeh Pourtaghi). Tehran: Morvarid Publications.

Professor Djalal Khaleghi-Motlagh (Hamburg University, Iranian Studies) is a doyen of Iranian Studies much like Dick Davis and those who have passed such as Richard Nelson Frye (1920-2014) and Shapour Shahbazi (1942-2006).

The above textbook includes scholarly articles by world-class scholars such as Dariush Akbarzadeh, Dick Davis, Richard Foltz, Shaul Shaked, Gholamreza Karamian, Jurgen Ehlers, Touraj Daryee, Kamyar Abdi and a slew of other scholars.

Kaveh Farrokh and Taraneh Farhid have also contributed the following article to the above textbook [this can be downloaded in pdf from]:

Farrokh, K., & Farhid, T. (1396/2018). [استوانه کوروش بزرگ و اسناد “دیگر” در بابل, مصر و ستون سنگی یادبود خانتوس] “Other” Cylinders and Records before and after Cyrus the Great: Kelar, Babylon, Egypt and Xanthus. Studies in Honor of Professor Jalal Khaleghi Motlagh (ed. F. Aslani & M. Pourtaghi), Tehran: Morvarid Publications, pp.379-394.

The above article challenges a number of new Eurocentric theories proposed since 1979 with respect to the history of Cyrus the Great and the Cyrus Cylinder. The new theories were promoted in Spiegel Magazine (by Matthias Schultz, July 15, 2008) and the Daily Telegraph (by Harry de Quetteville, July 16, 2008) … these however were responded to by Kaveh Farrokh:

The Cyrus Cylinder housed at the British Museum (Picture Source:  Angelina Perri Birney).

The “Middle East”: An Invented Term from the 20th Century

The Persian Heritage journal recently published an article by Kaveh Farrokh and Sheda Vasseghi (click the link below in for downloading the entire article):

Farrokh, K., & Vasseghi, Sh. (2017). The “Middle East”: An Invented Term from the 20th Century. Persian Heritage, 88, pp.12-14.

Note that Sheda Vasseghi obtained her PhD recently from the University of new England (click the link below in for downloading her Dissertation):

Sheda Vasseghi (2017). Positioning Of Iran And Iranians In Origins Of Western Civilization. PhD Dissertation, University of New England, Academic advising Team: Marylin Newell, Laura Bertonazzi, Kaveh Farrokh.

As averred to in the initial parts of the Farrokh-Vasseghi article (page 12):

Among one of the 20th century’s most enduring legacies is the invention of the term “The Middle East”. A brief examination of the origins of the “Middle East” term will reveal it to be a contrived geopolitical expression of Anglo-British origin. Despite this the “Middle East” term is often used by scholars, the media and laypersons, as if it were a valid, logical and scientific concept. More specifically the terms “Middle East” and “Middle Eastern” are often assumed to portray a cultural, anthropological and historical unity like the terms “Europe” and “European” for example. In practice the “Middle East” terminology has served to create profound misconceptions with respect to the greater West Asia region. As a simplistic term, the “Middle East” invention has done little to ease growing geopolitical issues at the international level.

The term “Middle East” was first invented by Alfred Thayer Mahan (1840-1914). Mahan’s invention first appeared in the September 1902 issue of London’s monthly “National review” in an article entitled “The Persian Gulf and International Relations”. Specifically, Mahan wrote: “The Middle East, if I may adopt the term which I have not seen…”.  The term – Middle East – when examined in cultural, anthropological and cultural terms makes very little sense. Iran and Turkey for example are not Arab countries and in fact share a long-standing Turco-Iranian or Persianate civilization distinct from the Arabo-Islamic dynamic. Instead, the Turks and Iranians have strong ties to the Caucasus and Central Asia (Image: Encyclopedia Brittanica).

The article discusses the history of how (and why) the “Middle East” term (or myth?) was invented. As noted in the above quote of the article the term [Middle East] is often used by scholars, the media and laypersons, as if it were a valid, logical and scientific concept.

Mahan’s invented term “Middle East” was popularized by Sir Ignatius Valentine Chirol (1852-1929), a journalist designated as “a special correspondent from Tehran” by The Times newspaper. Chirol’s seminal article “The Middle Eastern Question” expanded Mahan’s version of the “Middle East” to now include “Persia, Iraq, the east coast of Arabia, Afghanistan, and Tibet”. Surprised? Yes, you read correctly -Tibet! The term Middle East was (and is) a colonial construct used to delineate British (and now West European and US) geopolitical and economic interests. These same interests help promote the usage of terminology such as “Islamic arts and architecture”  (Image: Ria Press).

As expostulated in the article, the term “Middle East” is a geopolitical term. Western media outlets, political platforms and entertainment venues have been using the “Middle East” term since the early 20th century, however the term itself is neither scientific nor historical.

Mahan and Chirol’s invention (Middle East) provided the geopolitical terminology required to rationally organize the expansion of British political, military and economic interests into the Persian Gulf region. After the First World War, Winston Churchill (above –  1874-1965) became the head of the newly established “Middle East Department”.  Churchill’s department redefined Mahan’s original “The Middle East” invention to now include the Suez Canal, the Sinai, the Arabian Peninsula, as well as the newly created states of Iraq, Palestine, and Trans-Jordan. Tibet and Afghanistan were now excluded from London’s Middle East grouping. The decision to include non-Arab Iran as a member of the “Middle East” in 1942 was to rationalize the role of British political and Petroleum interests in the country (Image: Wikipedia).

As discussed towards the concluding sections of the Farrokh-Vasseghi article (page 14):

The first and foremost impact of the “Middle East” concept is in how Iranians continue to be classified by the majority of North Americans as an Arab country. Jack Shaheen for example had discovered as far back as the 1980s that over 80 percent of North Americans believe Iranians to be Arabs and Arabic-speaking. Again the term “Muslim” (pronounced /Moozlem/ in North American outlets) appears to be the catalyst for these misconceptions – the notion that if a region is Islamic in religion (regardless of sect or denomination, etc.) then all persons associated with that region must somehow be automatically Arabs and/or share the same language, culture and civilization. However not all Arabs are Islamic in faith as there are also Christian Arabs whose roots go back for centuries before the arrival of the Islamic religion. Thus even the Western conception of Arabs is simplistic and misleading.

Words and terminologies can have a significant impact, especially when these are applied erroneously with respect to the understanding of identity and culture. Put simply, politically invented terminologies such as “Middle East” and “Muslim World” often represent a colonialist-economic power viewpoint. “

The “Middle East” myth has in turn led to the rise of yet more politically-based terminologies. These in turn have entered the domains of scholarship, popular media outlets and political discourse. One such example is noted by Souren Malekian (see full article here …):

“Political bias often leads to absurd categorization. Even so, few among the arbitrary constructs adopted by the West as a result of 19th-century colonial attitudes can beat the meaningless concept of “Islamic art.” Its corrosive effect on academic thinking is matched by its counterproductive effect in the art market. By lumping together works of art that are not remotely related aesthetically or conceptually, it leads to a visual confusion that is unhelpful, to put it mildly. … Orientalism has barely changed its colors…”

The landmark textbook “Orientalism” by the late Edward Said (1935-2003) originally published in 1979 (for more information on this text see – As noted in the link: This entrenched view [of the “Orient”] continues to dominate western ideas and, because it does not allow the East to represent itself, prevents true understanding.”

Professor Jalal Matini has been addressing concerns with respect to (politically motivated) terminology such as “Islamic Science” and “Islamic Arts” since the early 1980s. Matini was the chief editor of the peer-reviewed Iranshenasi journal which examined and published a review of Kaveh Farrokh’s second text Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War-Персы: Армия великих царей-سایه‌های صحرا- (click the link below in for downloading a copy of the review of Farrokh’s text by Farhad mafie in the peer-reviewed Iranshenasi journal):

Mafie, Farhad (2010). Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War, by Dr. Kaveh Farrokh. Iranshenasi, Volume XXII, No.1, Spring 2010, pp.1-5.

Professor Jalal Matini (standing at podium), the Chief Editor of the Iranshenasi journal  flanked by the late Iranian poet and thinker, Nader Naderpour (seated at left) at UCLA.

The Farrokh-Vasseqhi article endeavors to provide an educational and dispassionate examination of the challenges posed by the invention and application of simplistic terminologies aimed at rationalizing geopolitical interests.

Persian Heritage Journal article: The “Clash of Civilizations” Paradigm

The Persian Heritage Journal has published an article by Kaveh Farrokh and Javier Sánchez Gracia:

Farrokh, K., & Gracia, J.S. (2017). The “Clash of Civilizations” paradigm and the portrayal of the “Other”. Persian Heritage, 85, pp.12-14.

Spanish historian Dr. Javier Sánchez Gracia of the University of Zaragoza during the book signing of his recent text “Imperios de las Arenas: Roma y Persia Frente a Frente” (Empires at the sand: Rome and Persia Face to Face). The book signing above occurred during the “Feria del Libro de Zaragoza” book fair in Zaragoza, Spain on April 23, 2017.

As averred to in the initial parts of the Farrokh-Gracia article (page 12):

It was the late Professor Samuel Huntington (1927-2008) whose New York Times Bestseller “The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order” proposed two main premises: (1) that all wars are the result of a “Clash of Civilizations” and that (2) there has been a hostile long-term “East (mainly “Islamic” & “Middle East”) vs. West” dynamic. Bernard Lewis, who first coined the “Clash of Civilizations” myth in his article “The Roots of Muslim Rage” (penned for the September 1990 issue of the Atlantic Monthly) defined the dynamic as thus: the “Islamic World” (itself a simplistic concept) has been at war with the “West” for centuries.”

[Right] Professor Bernard Lewis, original architect of the “Clash of Civilizations” thesis (Source: The Commentator); [Left] The late Professor Samuel Huntington (1927-2008) at the Annual World Economic Forum, Davos, 2008 (Source: Public Domain; Logo “Clash of Civilizations”: Fabius Maximus). Huntington adopted Lewis’ thesis by claiming that (1) the “East” and the “West” have always been isolated from one another (with no civilization links) and that (2) East-West relations have always been only characterized by war and hostility throughout history.

As cited in the Farrokh-Gracia article (page 13) note that the “Clash of Civilizations” myth has resurrected a …

“… racial image … and … transferred this to the Ancient World to justify it. So, for example the late John Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario, produced volumes of studies claiming to have proven that persons of “whiter” complexion (and Chinese descent) are more intelligent than persons with darker complexion. Despite the fact that the scientific validity of Rushdon’s studies have been seriously questioned by top international experts in the field of intelligence studies, Eurocentrist and racialist activists continue to cite his works. What is significant is how works such as those of Rushdon are used by Eurocentrists to promote the “Clash of Civilizations” myth.”

The late Canadian (British-born) Psychology Professor John Philippe Rushton (1943-2012) (Source: SPLC) who claimed to have found “scientific” evidence linking complexion and intelligence. His viewpoint was duly expressed at the 2000 American Renaissance conference (cited in the SPLC – Southern Poverty Law Centre) “Whites have, on average, more neurons and cranial size than blacks… Blacks have an advantage in sport because they have narrower hips — but they have narrower hips because they have smaller brains.” In practice, mainstream scientists, intelligence experts, neurologists and academics overwhelmingly reject the late Rushton’s claims, however Eurocentrists who believe in the “Clash of Civilizations” continue to cite his (unsubstantiated) claims. For more on the late professor’s views visit the Southern Poverty Law Centre website …

As noted in the Farrokh-Gracia article (page 13):

There are also several positive references to ancient Iran in the Classical sources, such the role of Cyrus the Great in his governance and especially religious and cultural freedoms. Eurocentrists … made a point at dismissing all ancient sources citing Cyrus in a favorable light as “ancient propaganda” … claiming that the “East” (ergo: Persia) had no contributory role [in the evolution of human rights] … when in effect ancient Greece (and the later Roman Empire) were influenced by several innovations in Persia such as the postal system and Royal road, aqueduct systems, the water wheel, etc. Put simply: the “West” and “East” have mutually influenced each other in highly constructive ways over the millennia in the fields of arts, architecture, technology, communications, theology and mythology, and culture. This information exposes the fraudulent nature of the Eurocentrist “Clash” myth

Is there really a “Clash of Civilizations”? One of the lecture slides from Kaveh Farrokh’s Fall 2014 course at the University of British Columbia Continuing Studies Division “The Silk Route: Origins and History [UP 829]”. The slide above – Left: Reconstruction of a European Renaissance Lute; Right: Moor and European play their respective Oud-Lutes in harmony (from the Cantingas of Alfonso el Sabio, 1200s CE) – note that Oud-Lutes were derived from the Iranian Barbat and Tanbur originating in pre-Islamic Persia.

For more on links between “East and West” download the following in

Farrokh, K. (2016). An Overview of the Artistic, Architectural, Engineering and Culinary exchanges between Ancient Iran and the Greco-Roman World. AGON: Rivista Internazionale di Studi Culturali, Linguistici e Letterari, No.7, pp.64-124.

PhD Dissertation by Sheda Vasseqhi (University of New England; academic supervision team Academic advising Team: Marylin Newell, Laura Bertonazzi, Kaveh Farrokh): Positioning Of Iran And Iranians In Origins Of Western Civilization.– see also News Release …

A Refreshing view of History and the Movie 300

The below YouTube video “Why The Persians Should Be The Good Guys In ‘300’ ” was posted by Cracked on December 27, 2016 and received 70k hits in less than a day. This is a remarkable posting by young western bloggers and writers who question Eurocentrist historical revisionism and place the ancient Greco-Persian wars in a more even-handed perspective. Readers may also find the article “The 300 Movie: Separating Fact from Fiction” of interest (posted in 10 segments below):

  1. Introductory notes — see also: The Notion of Democracy and Human Rights
  2. What really led to War
  3. The Military Conflict: Separating Fact from Fiction
  4. The Error of Xerxes: The Burning of Athens
  5. The “West” battling against the “Mysticism” of “the East”
  6. The Portrayal of Iranians and Greeks
  7. A Note on the Iranian Women in Antiquity
  8. “Good” versus “Evil”
  9. Bibliography
  10. ترجمه مقاله کاوه فرخ به فارسی توسط غزال خاكسارى: فیلم 300: افسانه یا واقعیت

Consult also John Trikeriotis’ article: False depictions of Xerxes and Artemesia in “300: Rise of an Empire”; See also articles under: “کوروش بزرگ -Cyrus the Great & the Cyrus Cylinder