Muslim Arabs Who Conquered Iran: Opponents or Admirers of Nowruz?

Many of the ancient celebrations of Iranians have gradually faded or even disappeared over time. Nowruz, however, remains the most important celebration that has continued to this day. The persistence of Nowruz has always been a topic of discussion. The author of Tabari's history reports instances from the early Islamic period where Iranians were prohibited from celebrating Nowruz. Sociologist Rasoul Nafisi states that the conquering Arabs had a conflict with Nowruz and the customs and celebrations of Iranians, wanting to impose Arab culture on them. However, Khodadad Reza Khani, a history professor at Princeton University, claims that Arab rulers themselves celebrated Nowruz, and there is no evidence that Islam opposed the ancient Nowruz. I am Fahimeh Khodr Haidari. Welcome to Taboo. Let's start the discussion here, Mr. Nafisi. Some believe that the Iranian celebrations, such as Nowruz, Mehregan, Jashn-e Sadeh, and Tirgan, have faded after the Arab invasion and the collapse of the Sassanids. Did the Arab conquerors have animosity towards Nowruz and Iranian celebrations as some believe? Some even say that Muslims referred to Nowruz as 'the festival of the Magi.' It would be good to start the discussion from this point. Rasoul Nafisi: It seems that Nowruz was not particularly opposed by the Arabs and Muslims. There is a narration that Prophet Muhammad attended Nowruz celebrations while carrying Aisha, his wife, who was eight years old, on his shoulder to let her feel joy. Therefore, Nowruz is not significantly opposed in Islamic texts. It does not seem that there was any fundamental opposition to Nowruz as a celebration of Iranians. However, I must point out that regardless of whether there was opposition or not, when the Arabs conquered Iran, it was, unlike other invasions, a cultural invasion. Zoroastrians, who celebrated the festival, were in fear and secrecy, and it was prudent for them not to show themselves. Therefore, the idea that they could hold a regular celebration while the country was occupied by Muslim Arabs seems somewhat unlikely. Amid this situation where a culture is under pressure, it is natural to assume that Nowruz was one of the celebrations that received less attention. Mr. Nafisi, before we turn to the other guest, Mr. Reza Khani, there are reports in Tabari's history from the early Islamic period that Iranians were prohibited from holding their celebrations or were harmed for observing Nowruz customs, such as firework displays and water splashing. Is your reference to such matters when you say that this culture might have been under pressure? Nafisi: Naturally. Pay attention, the aspect of Islam we encountered as an occupied country was the jihadist aspect of Islam. We faced a cultural movement, and you can particularly see this in the Qadisiyyah wars, and this movement was essentially a frowning one. It did not seek joy and happiness. There are instances where, for example, great Arab commanders celebrated the defeat of Iranians in war, and there was suspicion that they had drunk wine, leading the second caliph to summon this commander. It is very plausible that throughout history, given the spirit that prevailed during the Sassanid era, which was one of joy and having a name every day and a celebration every month, there would be a confrontation with this. Therefore, it is very likely that Iranians, instead of engaging in these matters, tried to stay out of trouble. Mr. Reza Khani, you heard Mr. Nafisi's remarks. I want to know your view. Mr. Nafisi says it is very likely that considering what happened in Iran during the Sassanid era—which he describes as a time of joy and celebration—the Arab invasion was in a way in opposition to these celebrations, and throughout history, we see that some of these important celebrations have disappeared. Now, Nowruz remains. What is your view as a historian? Khodadad Reza Khani: Mr. Nafisi probably sees Iran as an occupied country with Arabs as the occupiers. I think this is what is called historical anachronism. From one perspective, my statement seems to apologize for Islamic and Arab conquests. As someone who studies Sassanid history, I hope it is acceptable that I do not fully share this view and do not apologize for anyone. However, the Sassanids were an empire, not just a country. It cannot be said that a foreign force came and specifically sought to stop anyone's activities. One of the first rulers of the conquered region of Iran, which includes present-day southern Iraq and southwestern Iran in Khuzestan and Fars, was a man named Ziyad ibn Abih, the half-brother of Muawiya. Ziyad's mother was Iranian, and he is known for having an Iranian accent in his Arabic. Ziyad's wife also spoke Persian. His son, Obaidullah, inscribed his name on the early coins he minted in the style of Khosrow Parviz, translating his name into Persian. So, he did not write Obaidullah ibn Ziyad but rather Obaidullah Ziyadan. Regarding Nowruz, we do not have precise information about the celebrations of any of the festivals. The fact that each day of the month has a name and that any day where the month and day name coincide is a celebration means it is a religious celebration, Yezeshn, meaning going to the fire temple and praying. It does not mean that people came into the streets and celebrated with fireworks. We even have more than one Nowruz. We have Nowruz that is not necessarily at the beginning of spring. Jamshidi Nowruz is at the beginning of spring. There were also Nowruz celebrations in the middle of summer. Therefore, we do not know when these Nowruz celebrations were held to even discuss who might have prevented them. We even have people from the Umayyad and Abbasid governments—who you can put in parentheses as Arabs—who celebrated Jashn-e Sadeh. It seems that the caliphs and commanders lived in that cultural context and celebrated those festivals, and yes, some of them have remained more enduring. Right now, in front of you and me, the celebration of Chaharshanbe Suri is gradually disappearing because its context is no longer there; there is no specific reason. Mr. Reza Khani, I apologize. Well, some may tell you that there is a specific reason. The government's opposition is one of the reasons. Reza Khani: Yes, the government's opposition is one reason, but the real reasons that people do not celebrate Chaharshanbe Suri are the propaganda that it is dangerous and may harm your children, and hundreds of other reasons like this could have caused some celebrations to disappear while others did not, and some celebrations have emerged. For example, we do not have much ancient evidence of Sizdah Be Dar. Celebrations emerge and disappear. Mr. Nafisi, we return to you. Well, Mr. Reza Khani disagrees with you. As he puts it, Iranians could have easily held their celebrations after the Arab invasion, and before that, he believes that contrary to what you say, celebration and joy were a common occurrence during the Sassanid era, and this was a calendrical matter and not much news of it existed from his perspective. We will hear your response. Nafisi: Mr. Reza Khani rejected me on two points. One regarding my historical knowledge and the other regarding the claim that Iran was an occupied country. By doing so, he closed the door to dialogue, but I will not be discouraged. To say that Iran was not a country but an empire, well, even if it was an empire, its heart was the Iranian land. This occupation was very serious. They had no friendship with each other at all. Very bloody events occurred. Jihadist Islam had no joy with national culture. Look at what it did to Egypt! A huge country like Egypt with all its history became an Arab country. If someone from a Zoroastrian family converted to Islam, after the father's death, all the property would go to him. [The Arabs] gradually acclimatized the countries under their control to Arab culture, not just to Islam but to Arab culture, as we have specific historical records that in Qom and Fars, the Arabs would set up tents next to Iranian houses to prevent them from speaking in their local language. They would punish them. I do not understand if they did not occupy Iran, then where did they occupy? As it is, in Isfahan, people spoke Arabic for about 400 years. Therefore, imposing Arabic and Arab culture required the suppression of local culture. How much tolerance do Arabs today have compared to what they had back then? Ibn Khaldun completely explained this destructive nature of Arab culture, stating that Arabs are not compatible with civilization. This is what Ibn Khaldun says, who proudly states that for seven or eight generations, Arabs were clearly from Arabia. Therefore, we should not simply overlook this and say that they lived peacefully together and could hold their celebrations while the Arabs held theirs. This is not the case at all. The Arabs also had their celebrations, such as Eid al-Fitr, Eid al-Adha, and Eid al-Ghadir, which did not have roots in Iran before. Perhaps our listeners may ask you how these suddenly emerged from Iranian culture and are now part of the Iranian calendar.