Among the symbols and images presented in these sources, the absence of images identified as Ahura Mazda and YHWH is glaring. Despite the fact that this discussion has focused on only two sources for each modern religion, the breadth of information necessary for such introductory surveys makes it is reasonable to assume that if any such figurative images were strongly associated with these religions in the modern world they would appear in these sources. Consider the English-language Wikipedia entry on “Ancient Egyptian Religion.”¹ All but one of the 14 images include either a depiction, or a symbol associated with, a deity; ten of these are art deemed religious, the subject of which, is one or more deities. The various entries on “Hittite Mythology and Religion,” “Ancient Mesopotamian Religion,” and “Hinduism” each contain numerous images the subjects of which are identified as deities.² The obvious categorical differences between these religions might lead one to believe that images depicting deities are associated only with religions deemed polytheistic, but the incredible volume (and history) of art rendering the divine (or deified) Christ for adherents of a religion deemed monotheistic suggests otherwise.³

The absence of images associated with YHWH and Ahura Mazda in Judaism and Zoroastrianism, respectively, appears to confirm the consensus among scholars that no such images can be confirmed in sources dated to Before the Common Era. In “The Origins and Beginnings of the Worship of YHWH: The Iconographic Evidence” Angelika Berlejung writes “The attempt to reach back to the origins and beginnings of the worship of YHWH iconographically is destined to fail if one approaches the problem by seeking visual material from Israel/Palestine that clearly depicts YHWH (or depicts him for the first time). During the entire span of time from the beginnings of the worship of YHWH through the Hellenistic period, there are no depictions of deities that can interpreted beyond doubt as pictorial representations of YHWH.”⁴ Berlejung’s comments suggest that, like temples dedicated to the worship of YHWH, any images that might be confirmed to be depicting the deity would constitute an exception, not a trend. The nearest example of this might be a drawing of humanoid figures found on a pot sherd at Kuntillet ‘Ajrud in the northern Sinai. An inscription on the sherd appears to accompany the image and has been taken by many to identify at least one of the figures as YHWH, though there are only two names mentioned on a drawing of three entities. Berlejung identifies a variety of issues with the object, not least of which is the likelihood that the drawing and inscription were produced at different times.⁵ It is not incidental that the image appears to be singularly unique among the attestations of YHWH or Israel in the archaeological record. 

The images that appear to have been concretely linked with Ahura Mazda are few and specifically date to the first centuries of the Common Era. Shenkar notes that although only one “unquestionable” depiction of Ahura Mazda (found on four Kushan coins) is found in eastern Iran, numerous anthropomorphic representations of the deity originate in the Sasanian Persian empire.⁶ He writes, “The first fully anthropomorphic representation of Ahura Mazdā appears in Western Iran simultaneously with the rise of the Sasanian dynasty on three rock-reliefs attributed to the first Sasanian king, Ardašīr.”⁷ Significant to the discussion regarding modern images associated with the Zoroastrian worship of Ahura Mazda, is the question of where did the Sasanian image go? Why does no “fully anthropomorphic representation of Ahura Mazdā” appear on the cover of Rose’s book or within the English-language Wikipedia entry on Zoroastrianism? If the worship of Ahura Mazda was linked to these images, how did the religion survive the dissolution of the Sasanian empire under Muslim conquest in the seventh century CE? The answer appears to lie in the likelihood that communities of worship were not dependent upon these images.

Consider the chronological gap between the composition of the Old Avestan texts (likely before the mid-first millenium BCE) and the rise of Ardashir and the Sasanian empire (early third century CE): a minimum of one thousand years of worship without unquestionable visual representations. Like the eventual development of buildings deemed religious, whatever images may have been developed at later points must be considered signals of change, rather than remnants of the context from which worship of the deity arose. The failure of Sasanian images to survive in the formation of modern Zoroastrianism may reflect this history as well as attest to the limits of Sasanian imperial decision-making power as concerns popular worship of Ahura Mazda across the continent. It seems clear that a major strategic tool deployed by the Sasanian rulers in asserting their political ambitions was to differentiate themselves from the Parthian empire and appropriate (or reinterpret) visual political messages from the Achaemenids. Shenkar remarks that the absence of any potential representations of Ahura Mazda from Parthian imperial art is a signal of the cultural and religious affinity between the Parthians and mobile pastoralist societies in northeastern Iran.⁸ Shenkar’s insight speaks directly to the argument taken up in this dissertation: the general absence of visual representations of Ahura Mazda may be connected to the mobile pastoralist (and agriculturally marginal) context in which this religion developed. The fact that the Sasanians, whether they understood the intended or historically perceived meaning of images left behind by the Achaemenids centuries prior, had art (thus deemable) preserved in stone to draw upon for inspiration and build upon for political gain.