Introduction and Research Objectives

This study aimed to conduct a psychological analysis of the behaviors of the characters Rostam and Sohrab in Ferdowsi's Shahnameh based on William Glasser's choice theory. As a foundational epic in Persian literature, Shahnameh not only holds literary and historical values but also contains profound insights into human behavior. The central issue of the research was to explore the psychological roots of tragedy in the narrative of the father-son battle, particularly how the seemingly free choices of these characters, influenced by unconscious forces, lead to a tragic destiny. The research hypothesis posited that the conflict between basic psychological needs (survival, love and belonging, power, freedom, fun) and ineffective responses to reality is the main driver of tragic behaviors. This study provides a novel framework for reading classical texts by linking psychology and literary criticism.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework of the research is based on Glasser's choice theory, which considers human behavior a product of five inherent needs: survival (physical/psychological security), love and belonging (emotional connections), power (sense of self-worth), freedom (autonomy), and fun (pleasure/learning). Other key concepts include responsibility (acceptance of the consequences of choices), realism (distinction between objective and perceived worlds), behavioral system (integration of the four components: action, thought, emotion, and physiology), and the contrast between internal control (responsibility) and external control (efforts to change others). Within this framework, the actions of Rostam and Sohrab are analyzed as concrete examples of conflicting needs and failures in managing their perceived worlds.

Research Methodology

The research utilized an analytical-descriptive method with a qualitative approach, employing content analysis of the Shahnameh text (Khalaghi Motlaq version). Data were gathered from verses related to the narrative of Rostam and Sohrab and analyzed in three stages: aligning behaviors with Glasser's theoretical components, examining causal relationships between conflicting needs and tragic choices, and analyzing the role of the “behavioral system” in shaping actions.


Discussion and Analysis

The findings indicated that tragedy stems from unresolved conflicts of needs: Sohrab was caught between "belonging" (search for father) and "power" (defeating the hero), while Rostam prioritized "survival" and social status over "fatherly belonging". Rostam’s avoidance of responsibility (a clear example of external control) combined with Sohrab’s perceptual distortion (viewing Rostam as an invincible hero) created a vicious cycle. Sohrab’s behavioral system, encompassing thought (“defeating Rostam = proving my power”), emotion (anger from paternal rejection), action (insistence on deadly combat), and physiology (physical tension), integrally accelerated destructive choices. The gap between the perceptual Rostam (myth) and the real Rostam (vulnerable father) rendered any salvific dialogue impossible.

Conclusion

The research concluded that tragedy is not merely a matter of fate but a consequence of a chain of choices inconsistent with reality. Glasser's choice theory has the capacity to explain "communicative tragedies" in ancient texts and redefines the conflict between "free will" and "psychological determinism" in Shahnameh. This model can be generalized to analyze other tragic characters in classical literature (such as Siavash and Esfandiar). The practical implication of the research emphasizes the role of "balancing needs" in preventing destructive conflicts.