Formore than 400 years, the Sassanid Persia was the greatest state in Asia.
Zoroastrianism supported by Shahanshahs had an immense influence on the legal
principles of the state. The Sassanian society was Patriarchy, based on the society’s
gender construction. Because the patriarchal constructions of social practices were
legitimized by religion, the basic limitation of the women’s rights in the Sassanian
period was the obligation to have the male guardian. Below considerations regard the
problem of the civil rights of Sassanian women, based on analysis of the legal status of
women in marital unions. In 2018, in the journal Cogent Arts & Humanities 5, 1, an
article by Mahmoud Emami Namin “Legal status of women in the Sassanid’s Era
(224–651 AD)” was published. In his paper, Dr. Mahmoud Emami Namin, arguments
against two theses presented by the researchers studying the Sassanian history. The
first thesis is related to the assumption that women lacked a legal entity, and, consequently,
could not make use of her rights. The second thesis, challenged by the author
is related to the “opinions about the prevalence of incestuous marriage (next-of-kin
marriage) and loan marriage (wife lending) among the Sassanids”. The author challenges
the arguments regarding the position of the Sassanian women presented by
two distinguished orientalists Christian Bartholomae and Arthur Christensen.
Obviously, he is right. However, it is necessary to note that the picture of Persia depicted
by the above-mentioned researchers was questioned bymodern historians a few years
ago. Theses made by Professor Christian Bartholomae, presented in German University
of Heidelberg, in 1924 (the woman’s rights in the Sassanid’ Empire), related to the lack
of legal status of women in pre-Islamic period, which Dr. Mahmoud Emami Namin polemizes with, were refuted by the research conducted by the expert on Sassanid law
Professor Maria Macuch (see in References). The second problem, Dr. Mahmoud Emami
Namin focusses on, is “the authorization of incest”,which was discussed by Christensen
and Bartholomae. This part of the paper is much more interesting and presents interesting
conclusions. One must agree with Dr. Mahmoud Emami Namin in that the
“incest” was a common practice among Zoroastrians in the Sassanid’s period, andwas
never deemed “weird and offensive”. The paper lacks the analysis related to factors
contributing to the negative picture of Persia in scientific literature written in the
previous century. It seems to have predominantly resulted from cultural differences.
Orientalists studying the history of the Sassanids were from the “western culture”.
Therefore, they did not understand the mentality of the society governed by
Zoroastrian principles, which reflected their descriptions of the pre-Islamic Persia. Their
ethical assessment and interpretation of sources were determined by the system of
values, in which they had been brought up. It should be noted that the manuscript
contains extremely interesting passages in the manuscript related to the legal aspects
of different types of marriages, financial conditions or children’s rights. In the manuscript,
the author presents a slightly different division of marriages that the one
proposed by Dr. MahmoudEmami Namin. It seems that the principal assumptionmade
by the author: “Throughout this paper, the baseless writings of orientalists about the
rights of the Sassanid’s women are critically examined” may be described as preaching
to the converted
