I understand that spices like chilis weren't always a part of Indian and East Asian cuisine, but I have always wondered why Persian cuisine (other than the heavily Arab influenced South) is almost devoid of spicy dishes. Persia/Iran has been trading with India for centuries. There are many similarities between traditional modern Persian and Indian cuisines (stews, rice dishes, kabob, a love for yougurt), and even the name for chicken is almost identical in both Farsi and some northern Indian dialects. But it seems to me like too much of a coincidence for the lack of spicy dishes in Persian cuisine to be something other than a conscious cultural choice to reject spiciness by Persians. I know that food plays a huge part in cultural Identity, and i think it's safe to rule out the lack of availability of chilis, so is there any historical record or cultural context that explains this apparent rejection of spiciness by Persians?
Hey there,
Just to let you know, your question is fine, and we're letting it stand. However, you should be aware that questions framed as 'Why didn't X do Y' relatively often don't get an answer that meets our standards (in our experience as moderators). There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, it often can be difficult to prove the counterfactual: historians know much more about what happened than what might have happened. Secondly, 'why didn't X do Y' questions are sometimes phrased in an ahistorical way. It's worth remembering that people in the past couldn't see into the future, and they generally didn't have all the information we now have about their situations; things that look obvious now didn't necessarily look that way at the time.
If you end up not getting a response after a day or two, consider asking a new question focusing instead on why what happened did happen (rather than why what didn't happen didn't happen) - this kind of question is more likely to get a response in our experience. Hope this helps!