نشریه مطالعات تاریخی جنگ
سال ششم شماره 2 (تابستان 1401)

One of the influential Berber states in the Islamic Maghreb that managed to rule Maghreb and Andalusia after establishing their power in the 6th century AH was the Almohad Caliphate. The prosperity of the political system and the continuation of the authority of Almohads was formed during the period of consolidation of power through a process of planning and development by Abu Yusuf Mansour (580-595 AH /1184-1198 AD). He showed a lot of activity and extraordinary intelligence to manage this land by organizing administrative and judicial organizations, paying attention to industry and innovation in military affairs. This research, thus, concerns the study of changes in the military policies of Almohads during the period of Abu Yusuf Mansour and the review of war tactics in this period. With a descriptive- analytical approach and by emphasizing the sources of this period, this research tries to shed lights on the changes occurring in the military policies of Almohads during the time of Abu Yusuf Mansour. The findings of the research indicate that by adopting an appropriate military strategy and policy, Mansour first suppressed the internal claimants of power and then confronted the foreign enemies and brought the Almohad government to the peak of power.

After the allies' attack on Iran—despite Iran's declaring neutrality in the Second World War—a number of military personnel and ordinary people stood up against the aggressors to defend the country and the people. Among others, we can mention many navy personnel who resisted the former Soviet aggressors in the north and the British ones in the south and who were unjustly martyred. Admiral Gholamali Bayandor was the commander of these forces. Using new documents, the current descriptive-analytical research, aims to illuminate the performance of the Iranian Navy in World War II under the command of Admiral Gholamali Bayandor against the Allies. The results of the research indicate that Gholamali Bayandor, due to the difference in taste with Reza Shah, did significant activities in the field of expelling the British from some islands of the Persian Gulf and establishing Iran's national sovereignty in the islands. On the third of Shahrivar 1320, in the attack of the allies on Iran, the Iranian navy also showed great resistance, which led to the sinking of Stormes and the martyrdom of Admiral Bayandor and 600 officers, non-commissioned officers and sailors.

One of the common features of epic texts is war and belligerence. A high volume of such texts is devoted to describing war as well as war methods and techniques. The tendency to exaggerate in depicting battles is a main feature of epic language. This feature can be clearly observed in ‘Rostan and Shorab’ tragedy and ‘Amr ibn Kulthum’. The present study made an attempt to comparatively analyze this literary device in the lines depicting battles in ‘Rostam and Sohrab and ‘Amr ibn Kulthūm'. The results show that natural factors form the main elements of exaggeration accompanied by such literary devices as metaphor and simile. In ‘Rostam and Sohrab’, the psychological aspects are also visualized besides the sensory aspect, but the visualizations in ‘Amr ibn Kulthum’ do not go beyond visual and sensory aspects and no abstract element is represented. Among the different types of exaggeration, auxesis is very frequent in Ferdowsi’s poem whereas overstatement and hyperbole predominate ‘Amr ibn Kulthum’. Another difference between the two literary works is the chain of exaggerative visualizations, which are absent from Arabic pre-Islamic poetry in general and from ‘Mu'allaqat’ in particular.

Minarets, as the spiritual heritage of diverse cultures, have continued to exist for thousands of years with different functions of navigation, call to prayer (Adhan), grandeur, turning buildings into landmarks, as well as economic and commercial functions. These ancient and Islamic structures have also had military and security functions that have not received much attention so far. This research thus aimed to study the role of minarets in domestic security and military. Investigating historical texts shows that minarets have played an important role in wars and conquests, capture of castles or their defense, and making commercial highways secure. Furthermore, the construction of military minaret-inscriptions next to towers of skulls in order to tell of the military campaigns and causes of the buildings of towers of skulls, which per se have been considered as a form of historiography, is only a part of the security and military functions of minarets as discussed in this research.

From 1927 to 1930, Turkish Kurds in Ararat region rebelled against the government of that country. The goal of this uprising was the independence of the Kurdish regions of Turkey. The Iranian government initially supported the Ararat rebels due to border disputes with Turkey. Using library and documentary sources and a descriptive-analytical method, this article aimed to illuminate the position of the Iranian government towards the Ararat rebellion and the role this stance played in drawing the northwestern borders of Iran. The main hypothesis of the research is that the Pahlavi government did not have a fixed strategy for the Ararat rebellion, and from the beginning until the suppression of the rebels by the Turkish government, the position of the Iranian government was multiple and variable. The findings of the research show that the Iranian government, influenced by factors such as the territorial threats of the Soviet Union and Turkey, the lack of support of the international community for the Ararat rebellion, and the Pahlavi government's focus on internal reforms, finally turned to cooperation with the Turkish government in suppressing the Ararat rebellion and accepting the border agreement signed in 1932 AD.

In the history of the administrative organization of some Islamic governments, it has been common to have “Aareḍ” (a commander parading the troops as registrar) as an army rank. Although the mentioned term is an Arabic word, it was not used in the administrative organization and military organization of the Abbasid Caliphate, and it was popular only in the Iranian governments formed in the east of the territories of the Abbasid Caliphate. Therefore, we might ask whether this position was specific to the Iranian governments emerged in the heart of the Abbasid Caliphate. This hypothesis is thus proposed that it seems that “Aareḍ” arose and was derived from the administrative organization of the time of the Sassanid rule in ancient Iran, and it seems that its functions and duties in the post-Islamic period continued among the Iranian governments in the lands east of the Abbasid Caliphate. This article aims to clarify the historical roots of the term and position of "Aareḍ" in a descriptive and analytical way. According to the findings of this research, there is an authentic report that shows that “Aareḍ” as a military rank has at least been taken from a common example in the days of Anushirvan Sassanid or a similar example, and it has been used since the beginning of the rule of the Saffarid and has accordingly continued to be used in the Islamic era.