فصلنامه مطالعات تاریخ اسلام
پیاپی 56 (بهار 1402)

One of the disputed issues between Iran and the Ottomans from the second half of Naser al-Din Shah's reign onwards was the construction of the boundary fortifications of Marivan, Avroman, and Lahijan on the Iranian-Ottoman boundary. This research seeks to find the answer to this question: What effect did the construction of boundary fortifications on the boundaries of Marivan, Avroman, and Lahijan have on Iran-Ottoman relations and transformation of Iran's western boundaries in the Qajar era? The findings of this research, which is carried out with descriptive-explanatory method using historical documents and maps, and desk study, showed that following the construction of new boundary fortifications by the Iranian government in Ardalan Kurdistan and Mukriyan, the Ottoman government tried to induce tensions in the western boundaries of Iran by making claims on the boundary blocks of Marivan, Avroman, and Lahijan, and with an emphasis on the claim that these areas are inside the Status Quo plan in order to impose its own desired terms in the provisions of the boundary committees. Finally, with the intervention of intermediary governments and based on the protocols of Tehran and Istanbul and the Boundary Commission in the year 1332 A.H., these areas were recognized as belonging to the Iranian government.

Many ancient Persian historical resources became at the Arabs’ disposal upon arrival of Islam at Iran and the spread of the Arabic language. One of such Arabic resources which deals with the history of the ancient Iran is “Hadith of Rass” from a book named Oyoun Akhbar al-Reza. The purpose of this research is to study the historical geography of the story of Companions of the Rass from Oyoun Akhbar al-Reza. The research seeks to answer the fundamental question that: Where is the scene of the Companions of the Rass story quoted by Oyoun Akhbar al-Reza? The research methodology is descriptive-analytical with a comparative approach, and the data collection method includes both desk study and field study. The statistical population of the research has been chosen based on written resources using qualitative content analysis method from written historical, geographical, and literary resources, and the proper geographical locations have been selected and analyzed using field evidences to measure their accuracy from viewpoint of written resources. The results of the research provide the exact geography and location of “Hadith of Rass”, so that more accurate information can be obtained regarding the history of ancient Iran in its darkest eras.

The art of the Middle East has received the attention of the media, museums and art institutions in the context of the political developments of the 21st century. However, the art of this region cannot be reduced to political history, but the cultural history of the art of the Middle East shows another aspect of the formation mechanism of this art movement. Cultural history shows how the artists of this region try to get out of the alienating view of the West. In this paper, the following question is pursued: How can Middle Eastern artists overcome the dualism of self/other or the otherness of the West in the face of Middle Eastern art? It is shown how the transition from the post-modern to the trans-modern paradigm has created a context for crossing self/other dualism in the experience of artists. Results of analyzing the content and themes of the works of regional artists indicate that some of the contemporary artists follow a new path in the contemporary art of the Middle East by using indigenous, local and traditional meanings in their works.

The geographical location of Dulghadϊr Emirate (1339-1521), which was located in an area bordered with both Ottoman and Safavid territories, caused it to be affected by the political circumstances of these two governments. Dulghadϊr government, which sought to find an ally and join a more powerful government for its survival, adopted a contradictory policy in relation to the Safavid and Ottoman governments. At the beginning of the formation of the Safavid government, the Dulghadϊr were supporters and obedient to Shāh Ismāil I (1501-1524), then they supported his enemy, i.e. Murād Beg Aq Quyūnlu (1500-1508). On the other hand, Dulghadϊr ruler also took the path of hypocrisy towards the Ottoman government. Sultān Selim I (1512-1520), who witnessed Alā-al-dawlah Dulghadϊr's (1479-1515) continuous failures towards the Ottomans, took advantage of the weakness of this government and attacked Dulghadϊr, defeating its government and capturing its territory. This paper is aimed to investigate the effect of the Dulghadϊr conflict with the both Safavid and Ottoman governments on the process of the fall of the Dulghadϊr Emirate, in a descriptive-analytical way.

According to some historical reports, the revelation of some verses of the Qur'an was based on the wish or prediction of Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh. While writing the Qur'an, he sometimes changed the verses and the said changes were approved by the Prophet. The aim of this study is to examine the validity and reliability of these historical narratives. Examining the above-mentioned reports is important because the aforementioned reports are found in most Sunni resources and, accordingly, in some Shia resources, and many orientalists and skeptics have referred to them to criticize the Qur'an. The critique of these reports can prove the revelation of the words, non-distortability, and the impossibility of matching with the Holy Qur'an and can answer some doubts in the mentioned fields. The study has been conducted using a descriptive and analytical method, by referring to old texts and documentary and argumentative examination of reports. The findings suggest that the idea that the sentence "Fatabarak Allah Ahsan Al-Khaliqeen (So blessed be Allah, the best to create)" was predicted or added to the Qur'an by Abdullah, Umar bin Khattab or Mu'az bin Jabal, is distorted in terms of documents and arguments. Abdullah was one of the authors of divine revelation for some time, he was apostatized and then became a Muslim. However, he never responded to the challenge of the Quran (Tahaddi) and it was not possible for him to change and distort the verses. Those historical reports in Shia and Sunni resources that indicate Abdullah bin Sa'ad wrote "Samee' Alim" instead of "Wa Allah Samee' Basir" when writing verses, or instead of "Wa Allahu bima Ta'amaloun Khabeer" he wrote "Basir" instead of "Khabeer", are all incorrect.

The Battle of Karbala is one of the important issues and topics in the history of Islam, which Shia and Sunni thinkers and experts in the fields of historical, theological, jurisprudence and hadith studies have looked at and discussed it with different viewpoints. One of the famous personalities and theoreticians in the field of Sunni jurisprudence and theological thought is Abu Bakr ibn Arabi, whose views on the battle of Karbala have long been exploited by Salafi movements. In his book named "Al-Awasem Men Al-Qawasem Fi Tahghigh Mawaghef Sahabeh Ba’ad Wafat al-Nai ((PBUH)" he has analyzed the battle of Karbala in the form of a discursive order/structure. In this discursive order, the insider discourse or discourses have been highlighted, and the outsider discourse has been marginalized. In this research, using the discourse analysis method of Laclau and Mouffe, it was determined that the discourse structure in Ibn Arabi's report is a combination of three emotional, historical and political discourses. In the meantime, political discourse has become dominant and two other discourses have been intelligently and consciously placed at the service of political discourse and marginalized.