درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Dahān-e Qolāmān is one of the Achaemenid sites in the eastern part of Iran. Archaeologically, it is significant since it is the only excavated Achaemenid site at eastern half of Iran and relatively revealing information on urbanization, architecture, administrative, religious, industrial buildings as well as pottery manufacturing.  The most important structure of Dahān-e Qolāmān is “Building No. 3” that has attracted the attention of different archaeologists and experts on its function. Ovens and fireplaces are among most important features of the structure that culminated to high variations at period “B”. Considering finding archaeological evidences and their comparison to Zoroastrian written sources, especially Avesta, it appears that the Building No. 3 belonged to Zoroastrians from Dranka province, and the regional Satrap supervised its construction according to orthodox religious basics, while fundamentally differs from Zoroastrian beliefs of western Iran.

The conflict between the Akhbārīs and Uṣūlīs dates from the time of Mawlá Muḥammad Amīn Astarābādī (d. 1033/1624). However, limited usage of the two terms can be traced back to before that period. Kitāb al-Naqḍ , written by ʿAbd al-Jalīl Qazwīnī Rāzī (d. 560/1165), is one of the few Imāmī sources that contains a group of references to a similar conflict between the Shiʿa Uṣūlīyyah and Shiʿa Akhbārīyyah. The former term, in particular, repeatedly appears in the book. The aim of this paper, adopting a conceptual approach to history, would be to demonstrate that the Akhbārī/Uṣūlī terms in medieval Iran do not refer to a legal concept, nor to the dispute between the moderate/extremist Shiʿis in that context. Despite the first impression which the term conveys, it will be suggested that the term “uṣūlīyyah” does not have its roots in uṣūl al-fiqh (Islamic legal methodology), but rather, refers to some specific rational uṣūl (principles) usually applied to uṣūl al-ʿaqāʾid (Islamic theological principles). That is, “uṣūlīyyah,” according to Qazwīnī, refers to those whose religious knowledge has been based on rational principles. However, the Akhbārī-Uṣūlī terminology introduced by Qazwīnī cannot be paired with the historical Shiʿi schools and figures of his period. If we consider the social and political pressures under which Iranian Imāmīs were living, it will appear that employment of such terms has had a strategic purpose. In this case, calling most of his contemporaries “uṣūlīs,” and attributing controversial Shiʿi beliefs to the Akhbārīs, Qazwīnī has attempted to exonerate Imāmīs from their accusations, and to improve their social position.

History of the nations and national identity has always been considered one of the major issues in the social sciences and political geography. The identity of each nation is primarily related to the circumstances under which that particular nation has emerged and evolved. Thus, every country is independent when it has primarily an independent national personality. The origin and evolution of the concept of Iran has gained a considerable attention in the context of national identity since the establishment of the Medes 705 BC Government in the Iranian Plateau. After the fall of the Sassanids 636 AD and the emergence of independent and semi-independent governments in Iran, this concept lost its particular geopolitical framework, but in the historical process, Iran's political identity was based on a geographical integration and at one point in history, some historians recreated this concept in their works and applied it as a sign of a new evolution in line with reviving the geographical, cultural, and political and social dimensions. With the formation of the Safavid government in Iran and its reliance on the revival of Iranian land based on the heritage of ancient borders, the Iranian concept has transcended the cultural and ethnic aspect as a socio-political and basic concept for the national identity. This research is based on the theory of return in historical sociology with the method of content analysis, has been an attempt to prove the role-playing factors in the development and consolidation of Iranian identity,

Iran suffered three catastrophic famines in the seventy-five-year span of 1869 to 1944. The population in 1945 was unchanged from that of 1840, a classic case of a Malthusian catastrophe. This article aims to assess the impact of the famines on Iran’s population level. It is first shown that the human losses in the Great Famine of 1869-1873 have been vastly understated in much of the literature. Two-thirds of the population was lost. Barely had Iran recovered its 1869 population when the Great Famine of 1917-1919 in World War I had carried off nearly half of the population. Finally, World War II and the resulting 1942-1944 famine and typhus epidemic had claimed a quarter of the population and again restored the 1840 population level. Only after 1945 was Iran able to shake off the Malthusian trap into which it had fallen for more than a century.