The Face of Zoroaster in Iranian belief

Probably not, no one even knows what Jesus (if he even existed) looks like. As far as I know Cyrus, there arent any physical descriptions of Zoroaster, but I might be wrong.


Edited by TheGreatSimba - 04-Jan-2010 at 13:44

Originally posted by TheGreatSimba Probably not, no one even knows what Jesus (if he even existed) looks like. As far as I know Cyrus, there arent any physical descriptions of Zoroaster, but I might be wrong.

Cyrus! Just what seperates your version of Zoroaster from numerous representations of Mithra? Certainly it seems the represention shown above wears a "Freedom Cap", or as it is also called a "Mithra Cap?", no, I don't remember it ever called such?, but it could well have been since Mithra is most often shown wearing just such a head covering! Oh! I just remembered it is also called the "Phrygian Cap!"

Yes, those pesky Phrygians or Galatians, etc.!

Supposedly Roman soldiers from the time of Christ wore such head devices/coverings! Hundreds or possibly thousands of Christian churches were supposedly either taken over from the Mithratic Church, or Christian Churches were built upon the foundations of such!

One rather famous one, I think it is called "St. Peters in the Vatican?", is supposedly one also! How quaint!

Just how does this head device / cap / bonnet survive such a long time? The same device / cap has been used as recently as in "American" representations as well as during the French Revolution!

At the lowest guess, that would make this "cap" about 1,800 years old when the French used it! It is also assumed that it had some meaning to people? And, it seems that meaning was; "free" or "Freedom", or some related meaning! Maybe it meant "relief?", etc.

So, just how did Zoroaster inherit such a sign or emblem?

One must remember that the live of both Christ and Caesar have been compared with amazing results with that of "Mithra!" Just how do all three compare with Zoroaster?

Regards,

Looks like Jesus xD

Originally posted by opuslola Cyrus! Just what seperates your version of Zoroaster from numerous representations of Mithra?

Ron,

About Ali ibn Abi-Talib, this one is said to be the real one:

I earlier wrote; "Messopotamian, Thank you! I would dare anyone to place your remarks below those of any "Expert" in the field? But, the things seen in the hands of these "subjects" might well differentinate?"

I am sorry my post was so vague! I should have responed to your post in a clear affirimative! You were precisely correct in your post!

I was also attempting to make another point of sorts when I mentioned this; "But, the things seen in the hands of these "subjects" might well differentinate?" Again I wrote a difficult sentence that was not clear! Sorry!

What I meant to suggest is that if one examines enough of these representations, of Jesus, Mithra, Moses, Muhammad, Zoroaster, St. Peter, etc., one will see that most of them are very stylized. That is in a great deal of them, one hand is usualy free of any device or object, and the "upward pointing finger is pointing up!" In the left hand, some other type of object is usually seen, thus we might see a "staff" or "rod" or another religious or kingly authority symbol such as a mitre', etc.

Since I have literally examined hundreds of different representations done in this style, I have tended to notice what might well be either obvious hand signals or maybe hidden hand signs! It seems to depend upon where the thumb in the exposed and upheld hand (the right one) is placed versus the rest of the fingers! That is one one representation the thumb may be touching the third finger, or the second, or even the little finger! But, in all of the similar representations shown above, we merely see one type of finger pointing, thus the thumb is basically touched by the middle figure, and I cannot duplicate the position with my own rather short fingers! While the representations shown above do not automatically make one feel that the pose is unusual, it appears to me, at least, that it is an artifical pose! Of course some of the representations seen above also have both hands enveloping items or objects, including swords, etc.

One might also note, that most all so called ancient statues of saints, etc., seem to have the hand or arm of the right arm missing. I am proposing that there well be a reason why so many are found in this manner! Maybe they were deliberately maimed to hid the original hand signal?

Cyrus, your representation above, with the light blue robes and the golden sash, also shows the almost impossible position of the fingers as they are related to the hand! If anyone wants he or she might well try to duplicate this position in front of a mirror, and see if it is possible for you to make it look the same!

But, regarding the Light blue robe and golden sash, (and the presence of what can only be described as a cane rod) I don't know if any of you noticed something that I think is most interesting of all? That is continuing down the robe from the down hanging end of the sash, there appears a row of what can only be described as "Chevrons!"

I have made a study of the "Chevron" since they can be seen most prominately displayed upon the tunics worn by the "Sea Peoples" or "People from the Sea", etc., in bas relief, in the Temple of Rameses III, at Medinet Habu in Egypt! These chevrons have been used in the past in but a few examples, one of them being designations of military rank, and sometimes found upon the shields of Coats of Arms, etc.!

As you may well know, Imanuel Velikovsky wrote an entire work connecting the times of Rameses III with the later (newer) King of Egypt Nectanabo I! And as such, he has also connected those sailors / marines seen in bas relief at Medinet Habu, with the expedition of the Persians and Greecian allies, into Egypt! Thus, in effect, if you could accept Velikovsky's proposal, he removed about 1,000 years from Egyptian history, or at worst he placed a King in the right times instead of the very distant past! So, with that aside, and accepting Velikovsky, it was the Persians and Greeks who wore the tunics which seem to display, depending upon the person depicted, to have upon their torso / tunic any where from one to five chevrons!

I have thus deduced that it is possible that this was a distinctive way for those Persian and Greek commanders to identify officers or rank in the heat of battle! I.e., the more chevrons displayed, the higher the rank! If any of you would like to read my essay about this subject, I would be glad to place it before you for comment! Yes I like the attention! Laugh!

But, beside my contentions, just what do any of you have to think about the four chevrons found on the above representation?

Regards,

opuslola, your post about the "Chevron" is really interesting and I like to read more about it, I also believe that chevrons and epaulettes were mostly used as military insignias, especially about ancient Sassanid generals these things were seen more, for example you can read about one of them here: http://www.transoxiana.org/Eran/Articles/callieri.html "the trousers have a long band decorated with chevron pattern along the vertical border of the right leg, while the cloak, tied on the chest, has two round epaulettes."

Cyrus, Anatolian Alevi and Shia s too use 2rd picture for Hz.Ali bin Abu Talib