فصلنامه مطالعات تاریخ فرهنگی
پیاپی 11 (بهار 1391)

The historical evidence indicates that Arsacid kings tried to introduce themselves as heirs and the legitimize successors of Achaemenid kings; accordingly, they claimed their ancestral lands. They used this idea as means to legitimize their rule over Iran and to consolidate their political power. The aim of this paper, based on sources and documents and by using historical research methods is to show: first Arsacids claimed themselves as heirs and successor of Achaemenids in order to legitimize their political power; second, the study concludes that this idea took shape during the presence of Arsacids in East of Asia Minor and through political and cultural relations with Iranian governors and families in this region.

Construction and foundation of temples and welfare buildings is one of the most important thematic of the ancient texts of Near East and Middle East such as the tracts of Torah (Old Testament). Studying the Book of Ezra, one of the tracts of Torah, determines that Cyrus possibly issued a decree to permit the reconstruction of the Yahweh Temple in Jerusalem. But this decree was the “permission” for reconstruction of the temple not a “defense” for the construction process. Thus the acknowledgement of the Cyrus’s “decree” does not means that he had supported the heterogeneous local religions such as Judaism in his territory and defended their building construction. Moreover, there is no evidence regarding the Cyrus’s or any other Achaemenid King’s belief and faith to Yahweh. Thus, historical documents show, contrary to the public opinion, that Achaemennids had no interest to support the reconstruction of the Jerusalem temple. Historical data specify that Darius I supported the reconstruction of Jewish temple following a change in Achaemenid’s policies over provinces.

The aim of this article is to signify the problem of Iranian citizenry in Atabaat Aliyaat with the attitude and remedy of Iran and Ottoman Empire for solving these problems. It seemed that after the conclusion of second Erzurum treaty (2nd Jumada al-thani 1263 AH/ 31 May 1847 AD) conflicts between Iran and Ottoman Empire would be solved in a peaceful fashion, whereas the vast presence of Iranians in Atabaat Aliyaat and the social, legal and financial problems that Ottoman government posed for them, sorely destabilized the Irano - Ottoman Empire relation. The efforts of two governments for solving this crisis were indecisive until the end of Qajar period.

Though thoughts and ideas of Ibn Khaldun had special originality and innovation with numerous creative subjects, there is no doubt that some of these issues are under the influence of preceding thoughts and there are some commonalities between his thoughts and those of preceding Muslim scholars. One of the predecessors who influenced Ibn Khaldun was Ibn Athir, the writer of al-Kāmil, who had a spark of historical thoughts in his work. Ibn Khaldun had been impressed by Ibn Athir in al-Kitābu l-ibār, but he did not mention him in the introduction (Muqaddimah known as Prolegomena) of his book. The aim of this article is to signify the influence of Ibn- Athir on Ibn Khaldun and discuss the issue of Ibn Khaldun’s silence on Ibn Athir’s influence in his works.

One of the reasons for Achaemenid’s achievements in wars and administration of the state was the innovation and accurate organization in the administrative and military affairs. These organizations, in some cases, have originated in previous governments and Achaemenids had revolved them. Army units of Achaemenids are amongst these matters that somehow have originated in Ancient East and the aim of this article is to make clear the duty of Immortal Army based on works of ancient and contemporary writers and archeological documents while analyzing that whether the name Herodotus have imputed to them and have been rejected by some of the writers is correct or not. Beside these sources, linguistic references have been used also for better conclusion.

The beginning of Hassanids uprising for gaining power dated back to the Umayyid period which resulted different reactions from unofficial base of power in the society and gathered variant spectrum of supporters for confronting dominant power. Though researchers have studied different aspects of Hassanids uprisings, this article will discuss the reason for advocacy or accompaniment of some followers of Islamic sects such as Zaydiyyah, Mu’tazilids and Murjids with the first Hassanids uprisings, the descendants of Hassan Mothana, in an analytic approach. According to researches, the homogeneity and heredity preeminence of Mohammad and his brother Ebrahim amongst other claimer for leadership, the necessity for uprising against oppressive ruler and the interpretation from the meaning of savior in the title "Mahdi", are characteristics which have had the most influence on advocacy and accompaniment of some religious sects with the first Hassanids Saadat's uprisings. It has to be mentioned that some groups of the Prophet's family from Hassanids Saadat believed in the necessity for a struggle with the oppressive ruler, conduced to their maximum convergence with Hassanids, their attendance in uprising and the final formation of the sect Zaidiyyah.