The Essential Necessity of History Study and Education: A Historical Paradox

Objective and Background: This study aims to explore the tension between two perspectives on history: history as an instructive and realistic account, and history as a narrative written by rulers and permeated with distortion, with a focus on ancient Iran. Method: To achieve this, the researcher employed a library–documentary method, consulting works, books, articles, and historical documents related to ancient Iran. Given the breadth of available sources, four historical periods—the Elamite, Achaemenid, Parthian, and Sasanian eras—were selected as case studies for data collection. Note-taking and card-indexing tools were used to organize and classify the findings more effectively.Finding: The results indicate that both dimensions of historical recognition exist: history as instructive and factual, and history as distorted and biased. Conclousion:  Crucially, however, history should not be treated as sacred; what survives from the past is neither wholly factual nor entirely fabricated. Rather, the events of ancient Iran represent realities that, shaped by the interests of rulers and authoritarian powers, have been subject to distortion and bias. Some aspects remain instructive, but distinguishing these requires triangulation and the comparison of both aligned and opposing sources—a process referred to here as “confrontation of sources.” Emphasizing this critical perspective is an important necessity in the teaching of history.