Sacred spaces have always been significant across various religious ideologies, valued by both followers and rulers. In Zoroastrianism, fire temples have been crucial since the Achaemenid period, with many still standing today. However, some of these temples have suffered damage from treasure hunters. On the other hand, many more recent fire temples, particularly from the Qajar era onward, have been restored thanks to the efforts of local communities and philanthropists.
This article briefly compares the architectural features of Zoroastrian fire temples with famous mosques and churches, especially those in regions close to the Zoroastrian centers under Sassanid rule. Despite some similarities, significant differences in architectural form and structure are evident, particularly between fire temples and mosques and churches in Western Asia, from Armenia to Anatolia and the Eastern Mediterranean. References will also be made to churches in Europe.
The key question is: Are there architectural differences between Zoroastrian, Muslim, and Christian religious buildings? Based on my observations and research, the answer is yes. While there are similarities, distinct differences exist in the designs of these buildings.
Another important question is: What are the cultural, religious, economic, and historical reasons behind these architectural differences?
Building Sizes
The tallest dome of a mosque in Iran is found at the Soltaniyeh Mosque in Zanjan, built during the Ilkhanid Mongol period, with a height of 54 meters. In Turkey, there are even taller mosque domes, such as the Hagia Sophia, with a dome reaching about 56 meters, and the Sultan Abdul Aziz Mosque in Malaysia, whose dome exceeds 106 meters, making it taller than both the Hagia Sophia and the Soltaniyeh Mosque.
When it comes to historic Christian churches, some of the largest in the world have domes exceeding 120 meters in height, with central aisles over 100 meters long. A notable example is Salisbury Cathedral in England, which features a 123-meter dome and a main aisle about 135 meters in length. These churches are often decorated with golden stucco, intricate stone carvings of humans, animals, angels, flowers, and stunning paintings, all adding to their awe-inspiring presence.
In Iran, the Jerusalem Church in Isfahan, built during the Safavid period, probably holds the tallest dome among Iranian churches, standing at around 25 meters. The church has no exterior decorations, showing only a photograph of a clay dome with a cross on top. However, the interior is exceptionally beautiful and artistically significant.
The interior view of the walls, altar (facing), and dome ceiling of the Church of the Nativity in Isfahan. Photo by: Amir Pashaei. Source: Wikipedia.
Exterior View of Salisbury Cathedral, England, Photo by: Anthony McCallum, Wikipedia [2]
How do the dome heights of active fire temples in major cities like Yazd, Tehran, Isfahan, and Shiraz compare? From my observations, the height of the roofs of fire temples in Yazd and Tehran doesn’t exceed seven meters above the surrounding ground. The ceiling of the room that holds the fire, however, is usually much lower, typically not more than three meters. In some post-Islamic fire temples in Yazd, the ceiling height is even under two meters. This reduction in height likely serves several purposes: it makes it easier to maintain the fire, enhances its visibility, and protects it from environmental factors such as sunlight, wind, or rain. Another important factor might be the need to protect these temples from enemies and oppressive rulers, especially after the Safavid period, which could explain the more compact and simple design of the spaces.
To better understand the grandeur of ancient Iranian fire temples, such as the ones from the Sassanian era, it’s valuable to look at the ruins of fire temples like the Karyan and Azargoshnasb temples should be observed. Reconstructing their forms and spaces, either virtually or through detailed mapping, can offer insight into their original grandeur and importance.
Distant View of the Azar Gashnasp Fire Temple in West Azerbaijan, With a circular wall, watchtower, and a small lake in the middle. Photo by: Stefan Bechuer [3]
Spiritual and Symbolic Values in Religious Architecture
When visiting iconic mosques of Yazd, Shah Mosque of Isfahan, and others, one is drawn to the towering walls, ceilings, and graceful curves, often decorated with intricate blue tiles. These features are believed by the architects and researchers to reflect the grandeur of the sky, ad led visitors to the divine glory of God. Similarly, the imposing structures of mosques like the Sultanahmet Mosque in Istanbul or Soltaniyeh Mosque in Zanjan evoke awe, not just pointing to God’s greatness but also to the craftsmanship of the builders—architects, artists, and rulers alike.
Researchers have noted that the domes and high ceilings in these religious buildings symbolically direct attention upward, towards the sky and God. Standing beneath such a dome, the viewer instinctively looks up, creating a journey from the ground to the peak, experiencing the beauty of the decor. This look from earth to heaven evokes deep emotions, particularly for the spiritually devoted.
Additionally, these spaces are designed to amplify sound, enhancing the acoustics. In many churches and mosques, the echo of voices or hymns fills the space, adding to the sacred atmosphere. I recall standing under the domes of Isfahan’s Aali Qapu or Kharanq’s caravanserai, where a single tap of my shoe on the floor echoed repeatedly. Similarly, in a church in Florence, I heard a woman singing a hymn, her voice resonating beautifully through the space. On my recent trip to Yazd, I also experienced the beautiful singing of a young girl in the Pir-e Sabz mountain, spreading the message of Zoroaster.
The grandeur and magnificence of historic mosques and churches not only symbolize the greatness of God and the universe but also reflect the competition among rulers throughout history who sought to showcase their power and glory. These structures, like celestial symbols, often served as displays of the rulers’ power, similar to how military strength is showcased in the modern world.
In the architecture of Zoroastrian fire temples, four natural elements—plants, water, earth, and air—hold special significance. Plants such as cypress, myrtle, and boxwood, water in the form of rivers, streams, pools, or even wells, along with earth and air, all come together to create the atmosphere around the fire temples.
Fire in Zoroastrianism is a symbol of purity and divine light, representing warmth, truth, and the presence of Ahura Mazda. In fire temples, fire acts as an intermediary between humans and God, symbolizing the light and warmth of the sun during the cold winter nights and the eternal presence of Ahura Mazda.
Zoroastrian priests have long emphasized that sunlight should not touch the sacred fire in fire temples, as it diminishes the fire’s grandeur and majesty, given its limited radiance (according to priests Dr. Poladi and Dr. Ghadrdan). Similarly, celebrations like Chaharshanbe Suri and Sadeh are traditionally held at sunset or night to showcase the fire’s beauty, although, unfortunately, these events have shifted towards disruption in modern times.
This raises the question: why are Zoroastrian fire temples simpler and less ornate compared to historic mosques and churches?
Similarities Between Fire Temples and Religious Buildings of Christianity and Islam
All these religious buildings have a designated worship direction: the Qibla in mosques, the altar or cross in churches, and the sacred fire in fire temples. While some Christian branches (like Anglican or Evangelical) don’t accept this, the concept remains similar. In mosques, worship faces the Kaaba, in churches, it’s focused on the cross or images of Jesus, and in fire temples, it’s toward the sacred fire, symbolizing purity, light, warmth, and life from Ahura Mazda. In all three religions, there is a specific focus for prayer and worship.
In all three major religions, cleanliness is a fundamental requirement for entering sacred spaces, and individuals must be pure before stepping into these places. Zoroastrians, for example, must wash before entering a fire temple and wear clean sedreh and kusti (if they possess them). Historic mosques often feature beautiful tilework with intricate designs, sometimes showcasing the names of saints or Quranic verses written in Kufic script. I once found a swastika symbol in the tilework of the Mirchakhmaq Mosque in Yazd, which demonstrates the influence of this symbol on Timurid-era architects. In large churches, statues, paintings, and stained-glass windows tell the story of the church’s history or the surrounding region. Similarly, Zoroastrian fire temples include symbolic artwork, such as stone sculptures of lions, mythical birds, eagles, and Faravahar, or lotus motifs in plaster. However, the decorations inside fire temples are minimal due to the sacredness of the space.
Key Differences Between Fire Temples and Mosques/Churches
The most notable difference in a fire temple’s architectural design is its open courtyard, water pool, trees like cypress and pine, and a closed area around the sacred fire. The differences between fire temples and mosques or churches can be summarized as follows:
- The presence of the four natural elements—water, air, plants, and earth—integrated into the fire temple’s structure, allowing visitors to directly interact with them.
- A focus on simplicity and purity within fire temples, emphasizing the sanctity of the fire itself. The fire takes center stage, and during prayer, all focus is directed toward its energy, symbolizing a connection among all professions (farmers, artisans, priests, warriors, and kings) and natural forces like lightning and volcanic fire.
The Absence of Statues and Symbols in Zoroastrian Fire Temples
A key feature of Zoroastrian fire temples is the absence of statues or images of sacred figures. While many texts mention this lack of decoration, we do not have full knowledge of the forms and decorations inside fire temples from the Achaemenid to Sassanid periods. The four-faced fire temple in Baku, which has a fire platform both inside and outside, remains one of the few surviving examples from that time.
Conclusion
The size of a structure is just a superficial appearance sign. And only a few in the cities or villages, or in the mountains away from attacks, could survive. From a historic point of view, the rich and precisely calculated fire temples, which have remained, (the exterior and interior structure) show the rich and deeply cultivated roots of the builders. Therefore, from this point of view the size of a building is not important. Unfortunately, after the fall of the Sassanid dynasty, and specifically from 1000 years ago onwards, with the sharp decline of Iranian Zoroastrians, even the reconstruction or renovation of the destroyed fire temples was not possible. On the other hand, due to the danger and threats from the fundamentalists, Zoroastrians preferred to build small fire temples and as much as possible invisible from the sight of enemies, or would even keep many of them inactive, for their safety.
Following the fall of the Sassanid Empire, the shrinking Zoroastrian population made rebuilding impossible. Fearing persecution, Zoroastrians kept their fire temples small and hidden. If they had more support, they might have built larger, more ornate temples to compete with others.
Ultimately, the true value of religious buildings lies in their role in shaping individuals who are faithful, cultured, wise, and peaceful. If our fire temples have succeeded in this, they have fulfilled their purpose.
