نشریه تاریخ ادبیات
سال شانزدهم شماره 1 (بهار و تابستان 1402)

In Persian literary history, many readers of Persian poetry and even those contemporary with old and new poets have not often known the correct and real name of many poets and most poets have been known by their pen names or nom de plumes. Therefore, the poets have always tried scrupulously to choose the most beautiful and appropriate pen names with utmost precision; this is why some poets, due to various reasons, realized after a while that they needed to change their pen names. It must be noted that changing pen names has had a tremendous impact on the formation and durability of the poets' poetry; That is, when a poet with an old pen name had provided a name for himself, and that pen name was the best choice for his poems, there was a possibility that by changing his pen name, he would face many problems in keeping the durability of his poems. In this research, some reasons for changing poets' pen names were analyzed descriptively and analytically and it was shown that changing poets' pen names, as a literary tradition, is influenced by political, social, literal, and individual characteristics among others. Meanwhile, some poets, while choosing new pen names, did not abandon their previous pen names, and some others have replaced their old pen names with the new pen names in their old poems, and still others did not stick to the new pen names either - sometimes using the previous pen names again and sometimes newer ones. All these cases are investigable separately for each poet.

Mirza Mohammad Hossein Shuae Shirazi, pen named "Shuae" and tagged "Shuae al-Mulk", is one of the great biographers and poets of the Qajar era and the early Pahlavi age. Earlier researchers have talked briefly about his life and circumstances and they have not mentioned some of his works or have even made mistakes which are addressed in this essay. Unfortunately, although he is considered one of the greatest poets of Fars in that age, his bulky Divan has not been published yet. There are thirteen manuscripts of his poems scattered in the libraries of the University of Tehran, the center of the Great Islamic Encyclopedia, and the Farmanfarmayan Library; each of those copies will be introduced and discussed in this article. The data of this article have been collected using library sources and an attempt has been made for the first time to analyze the texts that Shuae Shirazi edited, wrote, or composed. In this research, Shuae's personal library, one of the few private libraries in Iran, is recognized as containing the main sources for compiling his biography; besides, some books available in that library have been identified and introduced.

According to the experts in the field of history of literature, enough attention has not been paid to the history of Iranian folk literature so far. Among the reasons for this problem could be the obstacles in compiling the history of folk literature. According to the authors of this article, one of these obstacles is ignoring the importance of the Arabic sources of the first centuries of Islam and also the translation movement in preserving Iranian folk literature while compiling the history of folk literature. The importance of these sources is in preserving the identity, original form, and evolution of the components of Iranian folk culture and literature as well as the reflections on how Iranian culture is blended with Arabic-Islamic culture. Nevertheless, even in the most significant previous researches, such as the folk literature entry in the Encyclopedia of Persian Language and Literature, Folk Language and Literature of Iran by Hassan Zulfaqari, Research and Study on Iranian Folk Culture by Hossein Ali Beyhaqi, or Folk Literature of Iran by Mohammad Jaafar Mahjoub, the role of Arabic sources in the preservation of Iranian folk culture and literature has been relatively overlooked; or in exceptional cases, such as a part of the collection of articles The Context of People's Culture by Jalal Sattari, only the texts containing information about public morality have been emphasized. One of the leading writers whose works are worthy of attention and research in terms of reflecting the components of Iranian folk literature is Ibn al-Muqaffa’. The results of this study show that his works contain an enormous collection of Iranian folk literature components, especially proverbs, sayings, and didactic anecdotes, which are very useful in explaining the historical course, types, and context of using these components.

In the modern system of criticism and analysis of works, the meaning of the text depends on the discovery of the relationships between the subject and the pre-texts, the implicit and explicit memories of the work, as well as the metatextual components that give birth to it; intertextual analysis forms its theoretical basis and methodology. Among the theorists of this method, Roland Barthes allows the audience to get new and creative interpretations and meanings by the arrangement of the texts and the discovery of the overt and covert layers of the works in each other. On the other hand, between history and literature, in addition to commonalities and philosophical confrontations, there are hidden links and emerging meanings; one of the examples of which can be found in the systematic connection between Juvayni's historiography in Jahangushay and Ferdowsi's epic writing in Shahnameh. Therefore, adopting a descriptive-analytical approach, this research tries to discover a new meaning in why Jahangushay history was created in relation to its dominant pre-text, Shahnameh. Considering the relationships between aspects and dimensions of the influence in the formation of some structural elements, the comparative explanation of the literary perspective, and the analysis of the identity and motivational categories of the texts in relation to each other, one can conclude that in his historiography, not only was Juvayni influenced by Ferdowsi's technique and method, but in a confrontational system, he has tried to recreate a text on the level of the Shahnameh and revive a national epic in prose form.

There have been many discussions about the origins of the story of Weiss and Ramin for a long time. Some researchers do not believe that this story belongs to a specific time and place and refer to it as "fictional". Others have given it a historical identity and attributed its origin to the Sassanid, Parthian, or other historical periods. Based on Minorski's research, the attribution of this story to the Parthian era is more likely than other periods. In the current research, an attempt has been made to present new evidence and references about the Parthian origin of the story by analyzing historical and literary sources from a new perspective, in addition to Minoruski’s evidence. Furthermore, more evidence has been provided in support of some of his views. The method used in this research is to avoid generalization and try to get clear details related to the Parthian origins of the story. First, the background, various hypotheses, and theories about the origins of this story are mentioned; then, by studying the history and sources related to the Parthian era, it is shown that the events of this era are reflected in Weiss and Ramin. In this regard, new evidence from the Parthian period in connection with the geographical territory, narrative, epic and oral traditions, rituals, entertainment and games, the importance of horses, riding and shooting, the structure of the army, and the like are examined and analyzed.

According to the phonological rules of New Persian, the name "Isfandiyar," which belonged to Gushtasp’s brave son, is an irregular word. This name is derived from Old Iranian "*Spanta.dāta-", and should be pronounced in New Persian as "Ispandiād", as in Middle Persian. However, there is no attestation of this pronunciation in Persian books. This article argues that the proper name "Isfandiyar" is actually a loanword in New Persian, originating from the Azari dialects. A phonological peculiarity of Azari is changing Old Iranian */t/ to /r/ in postvocalic or intervocalic positions. Furthermore, we provide evidence that the Parthian house of Mihran, who claimed that Isfandiyār was one of their ancestors, was the primary source of stories about this hero. As rulers of the Caucasus and Azerbaijan, they delivered the Azari form of his name to the central and eastern Iranian regions in two stages. During the rebellion of Bahram Chobin, they made prominent resemblances between the stories of Isfandiyar and Bahram, which helped to spread the Azari form of his name. In the second stage, the rulers of the Samanid dynasty, who claimed to have descended from Bahram Chobin, extended the Mihranī version of the heroic exploits of Isfandiyar to Khorasan and eastern Iranian regions. As a result, the Azari form of the name became more prevalent, and other forms of this proper name were forgotten, as evidenced by the works of contemporary poets and authors in other regions of Iran.

This article studies the roots of the dispute between the Sām dynasty and the central Kayanian government in Balkh (the old mythical reign of Persia). Although in Shahnameh, the Sām dynasty is presented as hostile to the Zoroastrian beliefs, and their opposition to Gushtāsp’s rule appears to be due to religious motives, the existence of political unrest in the Sistān region suggests that the conflict between the Sām family and the house of Gushtāsp is rooted in political issues, and the religious conflict is also a part of this political conflict. This means that if the demand for political independence and power had not been raised in the emirate of Sistān, religious differences could not have caused the marshaling of the two dynasties, whose conflict is reflected in significant parts of the national epic, especially in the story of Rostam and Esfandiyar.

This study introduced Persian dictionaries and prominent lexicographers and explored the evolution of the concept of “farhang” and lexicographers’ criticism of each other in Persian-Persian dictionaries. It examined chronologically twenty-three dictionaries from Fors to Bahar-e Ajam and clarified some of the reasons why the words “farhang” (literally meaning culture, but here meaning dictionary) and “loghat” (meaning vocabulary) – juxtaposedly meaning dictionary – have been applied. Exploring the changes of the word “farhang” showed this trajectory of change: a) not dedicating an entry for the word “farhang” (meaning dictionary), b) including one entry for “farhang” including its various meanings like “dictionary”, and c) dedicating one entry for each meaning of the word. Criticisms have also shifted in Persian-Persian dictionaries from structure to content (i.e., from form to meaning). Exploring the works of the lexicographers in the studied period, including criticisms of twelve lexicographers on the works of each other, showed that they have dealt at first with ordering words, ordering entries and chapters, and the quality and number of poetry examples, and then have dealt with the correctness and falseness of words, and finally the correctness of meaning. That is, they have gone from focusing on general issues to details. The most prominent critic and lexicographer is Lala Tek Chand Bahar, the compiler of Bahar-e Ajam. He adopted methods like “including his own criticizing ideas”, “mentioning others’ criticizing ideas without mentioning his own judgement”, and “mentioning others’ criticizing ideas and simultaneously including his own critical ideas”. Dealing more than anyone with criticism, he shows that his works are in line with other criticism methods of India in the 12th century AH.

Nima Youshij's position as the father of modern Persian poetry is widely recognized nowadays, but in the past decades, there have been long debates on the issue of the modernization of Persian poetry and its leadership. One of these controversies concerns the claim that Nima fabricated the dates of his poems. The claim was made during Nima's lifetime and has been raised again in recent years and caused considerable debate. Poets and critics from two opposing fronts have made this cl aim first, those who were more radical than Nima in breaking away from tradition and considered Nima a reformer rather than a revolutionary poet, and secondly those who considered Nima too radical and were in favor of a more conservative or moderate type of modernism. In this article, we examine the history of this controversy and assess the robustness of the evidence presented to support it. Through this analysis, an intriguing observation is made concerning the dating of Nima's poems. It is revealed that Nima sometimes initially composed his poems in prose, dating them at the end, and subsequently transformed them into verse while retaining the original date. This practice has likely led some researchers to suspect Nima of falsifying the date of the poem “Qorab” (The Raven). Ultimately, the article concludes that the allegations of fabrication in the dating of Nima's poems do not have substantial implications for the history of modern Persian poetry.

Despite fierce opposition, Sufism continued to exist until the end of the Qajar period. There were still many monasteries in Iran and pashmina-clad Sufis were seen in the cities. But with Reza Shah's coming to power, Sufism declined to the extent that at the end of his reign, there was little sign of Sufis in Iranian society. The Khanqahs were abandoned and they no longer had the prosperity of the past; the Sufis had abandoned the Sufi turbans and put on the traditional clothes of the time. This article examines the political, economic, and intellectual grounds of the decline of Sufism in the First Pahlavi period and recounts their role in the decline of Sufism. The sharp criticism of Sufism and its teachings by the intellectuals of this period was one of the main reasons for the decline of Sufism in the first Pahlavi period; for example, Taghi Erani - who is the first significant figure of Iranian Marxism - considered mysticism/sufism to be the opiate of the masses. According to him, the function of mysticism/sufism was nothing but subjugating the poor classes of society (slaves and the like). Despite the influence of these criticisms on many elites of the society, the main reason for the decline of Sufism should be sought in the laws enacted by the Pahlavi government in matters such as endowments. In accordance with these laws, endowments - which were the most important sources of income for Khanqahs - were confiscated and their supervision was left to the government; by making the livelihood of Sufis more difficult, it practically made monasticism and seclusion impossible and prepared the ground for the dismantling of Sufism.

In this article, we will examine the relationship between tradition and modernity in the articles about Qaani. Contrary to existing stereotypes that see the relationship between tradition and modernity as antagonistic, we use the term dialogue to describe the relationship between the two. This dialogue was formed in the period between 1285 and 1320 SH on three levels: the formation of stereotypes, the debate of the modernists, and the revision of the previous notions. The dialogue between tradition and modernity in the articles of Bahar and Vahid shows a new form of relationship between these two concepts which does not fit into the stereotypical duality of tradition and modernity; therefore, they challenge the common perception of these two concepts. In the second stage, modernists argue with each other about Qaani, and the attempt to confine Qaani in the tradition creates a dialectical relationship between tradition and modernity while assigning him modern attributes. Finally, in the third stage, the dialogue between tradition and modernity expands into tradition and causes the resistance of tradition against tradition to collapse. This research can also be conducted on other poets, but due to his standing, accomplishments, and works, Qaani has provided a better context for this dialogue.

The role of society and political factors regarding the differences of human language is undeniable, and such issues, together with biological factors, forces, and multiple impositions, causes the differences between male and female languages. This difference, along with the theme of betrayal in poets' poems, has created remarkable examples. In this research, considering the betrayal component and based on Robin Lakoff's opinions, an attempt has been made to introduce the languages of four contemporary poets, and finally to compare with each other. Such an approach leads to the recognition of the differences in the views on woman and man, and in general, the perception of these poets about the relationship between the earthly lovers centered on betrayal. The findings of this research indicate that the languages of Farrokhzad and Behbahani are very clear in the use of color words, promise words, etc. Compared to these two, the languages of Shahryar and Mo'ayyeri, due to the use of masculine language, are indifferent toward these elements. The type of gender perspective and attention to feminist issues is also more obvious in the poems of Farrokhzad and Behbahani, and besides recounting issues related to infidelity, they try to change the audiences' views toward woman. But in comparison with these two, in Shahryar's poems, the components of betrayal and disloyalty have never caused the gender distinction, or the superiority of man over woman. On the other hand, a gender distinction can be seen in the poems of Rahi Mo'ayyeri.