University of IsfahanHistorical Researches2008-625316220240621..11182939410.22108/jhr.2024.29394FAJournal Article20250405https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_29394_d413e3e2c9883f7dc6efe085dbeb8e9c.pdfUniversity of IsfahanHistorical Researches2008-625316220240621Political Order and Nomadic Life in Iran: From the Afsharid Period to the End of the Qajar DynastyPolitical Order and Nomadic Life in Iran: From the Afsharid Period to the End of the Qajar Dynasty1202876510.22108/jhr.2024.141736.2660FAShahramGholamiAssistant professor, Department of History Education, Farhangian University, Tehran, IranSiavashGholipourAssociate professor in Sociology, Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Science, Razi University, Kermanshah, IranJournal Article20240611<strong>Abstract</strong>
This article explored the impact of political order on nomadic lifestyles from the Afsharid period to the end of the Qajar dynasty. The central question of this research was to clarify the factors contributing to fluctuations in nomadic life over nearly two centuries. By the end of the 18<sup>th</sup> century, nomadic lifestyles had significantly increased, whereas in the final decades of the 19<sup>th</sup> century—specifically, at the close of the Qajar era—they declined in favor of sedentary living. The primary inquiry examined whether the dynamics of nomadism during this period were predominantly influenced by geographical conditions or shaped by the political system. The methodology utilized in this study was descriptive-analytical, employing documentary data collection techniques. The findings suggested that, although the nomadic lifestyle might initially seem to be a conscious adaptation to ecological conditions, its expansion during this period was largely driven by political and security concerns. The results indicated that from the Afsharid period through the early Qajar rule, the rise in nomadism was a response to insecurity and governmental policies. In contrast, the final decades of the 19<sup>th</sup> century saw relative political stability, bureaucratic expansion, and integration into the global economic system, which accelerated the transition from nomadic to sedentary lifestyles.
<strong>Introduction</strong>
In ancient times, agriculture was the cornerstone of Iranian life. However, with the invasions by Arab nomads, Turks, and Mongols, agriculture gradually lost its prominent status, leading to nomadism becoming the traditional way of life for many Iranians during the Middle Ages. Some scholars attributed the prosperity of nomadic lifestyles to their adaptability to environmental conditions and seasonal changes. They argued that the cold highlands and tropical plains surrounding the Iranian plateau provided an ideal environment for this mode of living, allowing people to efficiently utilize water and soil resources, ultimately resulting in economic prosperity. Conversely, another group contended that fluctuations in migration patterns were primarily influenced by changes in political systems and defense relations among different human groups. This article sought to critically evaluate the role of environmental adaptability as a cause for the spread of nomadism, aligning more closely with the latter perspective. The central question guiding this inquiry was: What impact did the political system have on the nomadic way of life?
<strong>Materials & Methods</strong>
This research employed a descriptive-analytical approach, focusing on the period from the rise of the Afsharid dynasty to the end of the Qajar dynasty. Data collection techniques included the examination of archival documents from the National Library of Iran, internal written sources, and travelogues. Data analysis was conducted through the systematic organization of the collected information.
<strong>Research Findings</strong>
During the Afsharid, Zandiyeh, and early Qajar periods, alliances among nomadic tribes emerged in response to ongoing wars and insecurity. This led to a decrease in the number of settled villagers and an increase in nomadic groups. The resulting insecurity prompted a transformation in village morphology, evolving into more complex structures resembling castles. Nomadism offered several advantages, including military strength, security, and a sense of freedom. The pride associated with a nomadic lifestyle in contrast to that of townspeople and villagers stemmed from this relatively safer and freer existence. However, this did not translate into improved economic conditions; nomadic economies were primarily subsistence-based with little surplus for market supply. The lack of a unified warehouse and market further exacerbated these challenges. Additionally, nomadic practices often misaligned with the optimal productivity of water and soil resources. Agricultural capacities within nomadic territories were diminished and livestock frequently damaged crops. As a result, much of the fertile agricultural land fell into disrepair and neglect.
The establishment of a new political system during the Qajar period—marked by an expanding administrative bureaucracy, relative security, and the growth of foreign trade—facilitated the settlement of nomads in certain regions. The Qajar government delegated some administrative responsibilities to nomadic leaders and encouraged urban settlement among their communities. The expansion of global trade in the mid-19<sup>th</sup> century integrated some nomadic economies into the global capitalist framework, prompting a shift from traditional nomadism to settled agriculture. Many nomads found it more economically viable to cultivate cash crops, such as tobacco, leading some to settle in villages at the initiative of their leaders. In certain areas, nomadic leaders' acquisition of communal lands contributed to the emergence of feudal societies.
By the end of the Qajar period, the settlement of tribal leaders and weakening of government authority resulted in ethnic and tribal conflicts spilling into urban areas, causing clashes and looting in some neighborhoods. These tensions intensified during the Constitutional Revolution and World War I, creating conditions that stifled commercial and industrial activities. As a result of these conflicts—often exacerbated by both internal factions and powerful foreign influences—many villages were devastated. The insecurity faced by settled villagers increased, leading to a decline in rural living conditions. Following the coup of 1299, the re-establishment of central government authority and heightened pressure to collect back taxes during the ensuing chaos led to rising dissatisfaction. Some settlers began to view migration as a potential solution. Overall, political instability caused many individuals to flee, intensifying migration. Additionally, the dominance of a nomadic system hindered the development of agricultural productivity and the growth of urban and commercial communities.
<strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong>
The stability of the government and continuity of the political system could foster a sense of unity among the populace. In contrast, insecurity, ongoing conflicts among power claimants, and tax pressures had exacerbated migration, leading to mass exoduses among villagers. As a result, the people of Iran and the broader Middle East frequently oscillated between migration and settlement. Contrary to popular belief, the choice of a nomadic lifestyle was not solely driven by its economic advantages over sedentary living. Factors like freedom, independence, and the ability to defend oneself—especially during periods of political unrest—were often prioritized. There was insufficient evidence to suggest that nomads experienced greater prosperity than their settled counterparts. Moreover, in a nomadic lifestyle—whether focused solely on herding or involving a mixed approach of herding and agriculture—the optimal exploitation of natural resources was often unattainable. As a consequence, general economic prosperity, surplus production, and wealth accumulation remained largely elusive for nomadic communities.<strong>Abstract</strong>
This article explored the impact of political order on nomadic lifestyles from the Afsharid period to the end of the Qajar dynasty. The central question of this research was to clarify the factors contributing to fluctuations in nomadic life over nearly two centuries. By the end of the 18<sup>th</sup> century, nomadic lifestyles had significantly increased, whereas in the final decades of the 19<sup>th</sup> century—specifically, at the close of the Qajar era—they declined in favor of sedentary living. The primary inquiry examined whether the dynamics of nomadism during this period were predominantly influenced by geographical conditions or shaped by the political system. The methodology utilized in this study was descriptive-analytical, employing documentary data collection techniques. The findings suggested that, although the nomadic lifestyle might initially seem to be a conscious adaptation to ecological conditions, its expansion during this period was largely driven by political and security concerns. The results indicated that from the Afsharid period through the early Qajar rule, the rise in nomadism was a response to insecurity and governmental policies. In contrast, the final decades of the 19<sup>th</sup> century saw relative political stability, bureaucratic expansion, and integration into the global economic system, which accelerated the transition from nomadic to sedentary lifestyles.
<strong>Introduction</strong>
In ancient times, agriculture was the cornerstone of Iranian life. However, with the invasions by Arab nomads, Turks, and Mongols, agriculture gradually lost its prominent status, leading to nomadism becoming the traditional way of life for many Iranians during the Middle Ages. Some scholars attributed the prosperity of nomadic lifestyles to their adaptability to environmental conditions and seasonal changes. They argued that the cold highlands and tropical plains surrounding the Iranian plateau provided an ideal environment for this mode of living, allowing people to efficiently utilize water and soil resources, ultimately resulting in economic prosperity. Conversely, another group contended that fluctuations in migration patterns were primarily influenced by changes in political systems and defense relations among different human groups. This article sought to critically evaluate the role of environmental adaptability as a cause for the spread of nomadism, aligning more closely with the latter perspective. The central question guiding this inquiry was: What impact did the political system have on the nomadic way of life?
<strong>Materials & Methods</strong>
This research employed a descriptive-analytical approach, focusing on the period from the rise of the Afsharid dynasty to the end of the Qajar dynasty. Data collection techniques included the examination of archival documents from the National Library of Iran, internal written sources, and travelogues. Data analysis was conducted through the systematic organization of the collected information.
<strong>Research Findings</strong>
During the Afsharid, Zandiyeh, and early Qajar periods, alliances among nomadic tribes emerged in response to ongoing wars and insecurity. This led to a decrease in the number of settled villagers and an increase in nomadic groups. The resulting insecurity prompted a transformation in village morphology, evolving into more complex structures resembling castles. Nomadism offered several advantages, including military strength, security, and a sense of freedom. The pride associated with a nomadic lifestyle in contrast to that of townspeople and villagers stemmed from this relatively safer and freer existence. However, this did not translate into improved economic conditions; nomadic economies were primarily subsistence-based with little surplus for market supply. The lack of a unified warehouse and market further exacerbated these challenges. Additionally, nomadic practices often misaligned with the optimal productivity of water and soil resources. Agricultural capacities within nomadic territories were diminished and livestock frequently damaged crops. As a result, much of the fertile agricultural land fell into disrepair and neglect.
The establishment of a new political system during the Qajar period—marked by an expanding administrative bureaucracy, relative security, and the growth of foreign trade—facilitated the settlement of nomads in certain regions. The Qajar government delegated some administrative responsibilities to nomadic leaders and encouraged urban settlement among their communities. The expansion of global trade in the mid-19<sup>th</sup> century integrated some nomadic economies into the global capitalist framework, prompting a shift from traditional nomadism to settled agriculture. Many nomads found it more economically viable to cultivate cash crops, such as tobacco, leading some to settle in villages at the initiative of their leaders. In certain areas, nomadic leaders' acquisition of communal lands contributed to the emergence of feudal societies.
By the end of the Qajar period, the settlement of tribal leaders and weakening of government authority resulted in ethnic and tribal conflicts spilling into urban areas, causing clashes and looting in some neighborhoods. These tensions intensified during the Constitutional Revolution and World War I, creating conditions that stifled commercial and industrial activities. As a result of these conflicts—often exacerbated by both internal factions and powerful foreign influences—many villages were devastated. The insecurity faced by settled villagers increased, leading to a decline in rural living conditions. Following the coup of 1299, the re-establishment of central government authority and heightened pressure to collect back taxes during the ensuing chaos led to rising dissatisfaction. Some settlers began to view migration as a potential solution. Overall, political instability caused many individuals to flee, intensifying migration. Additionally, the dominance of a nomadic system hindered the development of agricultural productivity and the growth of urban and commercial communities.
<strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong>
The stability of the government and continuity of the political system could foster a sense of unity among the populace. In contrast, insecurity, ongoing conflicts among power claimants, and tax pressures had exacerbated migration, leading to mass exoduses among villagers. As a result, the people of Iran and the broader Middle East frequently oscillated between migration and settlement. Contrary to popular belief, the choice of a nomadic lifestyle was not solely driven by its economic advantages over sedentary living. Factors like freedom, independence, and the ability to defend oneself—especially during periods of political unrest—were often prioritized. There was insufficient evidence to suggest that nomads experienced greater prosperity than their settled counterparts. Moreover, in a nomadic lifestyle—whether focused solely on herding or involving a mixed approach of herding and agriculture—the optimal exploitation of natural resources was often unattainable. As a consequence, general economic prosperity, surplus production, and wealth accumulation remained largely elusive for nomadic communities.https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_28765_80fa61a633f0cdc88616e155ce245107.pdfUniversity of IsfahanHistorical Researches2008-625316220240621. Historical Analysis of Imam Sajjad's Strategies for Reviving Shiism after the Ashura Event Based on Diffusion Theory. Historical Analysis of Imam Sajjad's Strategies for Reviving Shiism after the Ashura Event Based on Diffusion Theory21392920010.22108/jhr.2025.142126.2672FAHamid RezaMotahariAssociate professor, Department of Ahl al-Bayt (A.S.) Biography, Ahl al-Bayt (A.S.) History and Biography Research Institute, Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy, Qom, IranMahmoudBakhtiariPh.D. student in Islamic History, Faculty of History and Political Studies, Baqir-ul-Ulum University, Qom, IranJournal Article20241006<strong>Abstract</strong>
Shiism experienced a significant crisis following the tragedy of Ashura characterized by oppression, fear, isolation, and the practice of taqiyyah. This study focused on the strategies employed by Imam Sajjad (A.S.) to revive Shiism in the aftermath of this event. Specifically, it addressed this question: How can we analyze Imam Sajjad’s strategies for revitalizing Shiism after the Ashura event? It appeared that Imam Sajjad (A.S.) utilized components of diffusion theory—namely, the destination of diffusion (environments that were both receptive and intolerant, along with political and cultural barriers), paths of diffusion (including displacement, contagious, and hierarchical diffusion), and timing of diffusion. By leveraging various tools, such as the community's reverence for the Prophet’s family, he transformed the emotional landscape created after Ashura, mitigating the effects of the oppressive Umayyad regime and countering the influence of pro-Umayyad scholars. Through initiatives like cadre building and promoting pilgrimage, he effectively revived Shiism after the Ashura event. This research elucidated Imam Sajjad's actions through the lens of diffusion theory, demonstrating how Shiism was revitalized in the wake of Ashura. Employing a historical methodology, the study analyzed Imam Sajjad's activities aimed at reviving Shiism, including cadre development, exposing Umayyad injustices, mobilizing the populace post-Karbala, challenging beliefs in predestination, elucidating the fundamental principles of Imamate, addressing key issues, and countering deviation through prayer and supplication.
<strong>Keywords<em>:</em> </strong>Strategies of Imam Sajjad (A.S.), Revival of Shiism, Ashura Event, Diffusion Theory, Umayyad Era.
<strong>Introduction</strong>
The era of Imam Sajjad (A.S.), which commenced on Ashura in 61 AH, unfolded under exceptional circumstances. The oppressive measures of the Umayyads coupled with the suppression of dissenting movements and emergence of deviant intellectual currents underscored the urgent need for the revitalization of Shiite life. In light of the political, social, and cultural conditions of his time, Imam Sajjad (A.S.) adopted various approaches to articulate the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt, employing methods, such as prayer and pilgrimage. This study sought to analyze how Imam Sajjad (A.S.) revived Shiism following the Ashura event and identify the factors that influenced this revival. Several books and articles have been published regarding Imam Sajjad's role in the resurgence of Shiism. Notably, Seyyed Ja'far Shahidi's Life of Ali ibn al-Hussein (2001) examined and critiqued some well-known historical accounts of Imam Sajjad (A.S.). While this work shared common themes with the present research, it offered a new perspective by integrating theoretical frameworks. Additionally, Mohsen Ranjbar's Studying the Role of Imam Sajjad (A.S.) in Shiite Leadership after the Karbala Incident (2002) explored the cultural and political landscape of Imam Sajjad's era, focusing on his stance against the caliphate. However, this article distinguished itself by analyzing the environmental factors and components of diffusion theory relevant to Imam Sajjad's context. Another significant work was Madrasah Kalami Medinah from the Beginning to the Imamate of Imam Baqir (2024) written by Seyyed Ali Hussainizadeh from Khizrabad, which reviewed the history of Imamiyyah thought up to the end of Imam Sajjad's era through historical reports. Unlike the other two works, it did not provide an analysis of Imam Sajjad (A.S.) based on diffusion theory. Finally, Seyyed Gholam Hossein Hosseini's article, Headlines of the Political Movement of Imam Sajjad (A.S.) in the Karbala Movement (2002), touched upon similar themes; yet, it did not specifically apply diffusion theory, revealing a gap in independent research on this topic.
<strong>Materials & Methods</strong>
Diffusion theory introduced by Swedish geographer Hagerstrand in 1935, explored how innovations, phenomena, ideas, and thoughts spread. Initially applied to agriculture and disease transmission, this theory has since found relevance in political science and international relations. It effectively explains the reasons behind the spread of various intellectual and physical innovations, detailing how they disseminate, the pathways they follow, and the factors that may halt or re-ignite their spread. Additionally, it accounts for the stability of certain trends and the decline of others. In the modern era, cultural elements and innovations cross borders at unprecedented speeds, akin to jet travel and satellite communication. Contagious and hierarchical diffusion represent two rapid forms of expansion diffusion, where ideas and concepts migrate from new sources without the need for physical relocation. When analyzing the impact of any political innovation through the lens of diffusion theory, key factors like origin and destination, timeframes, tools, and channels of dissemination are considered. Furthermore, diffusion barriers and competing waves serve as mitigating factors that must be addressed in the examination of the phenomenon and its diffusion.
<strong>Research Findings</strong>
Imam Zayn al-Abidin (A.S.) aimed to restore order in a society that had succumbed to misguidance and moral decay, striving to revive authentic Islam (Shi'a). Alongside the Sahifa al-Sajjadiyah, which encapsulates the principles and teachings of Islam, the Treatise on Rights outlines fundamental rights that govern human life and ensure its happiness. Indeed, religion and Sharia were revealed to uphold these rights. Through this guidance, the Imam demonstrated that only an Imam, intimately connected to the source of revelation, possesses the authority to enact progressive laws that resonate with the human spirit.
<strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong>
The continuation of Umayyad rule under Yazid and Abdul Malik ibn Marwan following the martyrdom of Imam Hussein (A.S.) coupled with the atmosphere of fear and repression that ensued after the Ashura event posed significant challenges for Imam Sajjad (A.S.) in his efforts to revive and expand Shiism. Despite these obstacles, Imam Sajjad (A.S.) emerged as a pivotal figure in this revival, leveraging the emotional climate following events, such as the incident of Hurra and the destruction of Kaaba by Yazid's forces, alongside the public’s growing interest in the Prophet's family. To navigate the unwelcoming environment, the Imam implemented several strategies: he focused on training and building a cadre of supporters, exposed the injustices of the Umayyad regime, and sought to awaken the populace in the aftermath of Karbala. He also challenged the legitimacy of predestination and clarified the fundamental principles of Imamate. Through prayers and invocations, he addressed key issues and countered deviations, significantly advancing his goals. Utilizing methods like prayer and pilgrimage (path of diffusion) and disseminating religious concepts through his students and trained followers (path of contagion), Imam Sajjad (A.S.) endeavored to revive Shiism even amid the oppressive rule of the most tyrannical Umayyad caliphs, including Yazid and Abdul Malik ibn Marwan. This period marked a crucial phase in the diffusion of Shiism.
<strong>Abstract</strong>
Shiism experienced a significant crisis following the tragedy of Ashura characterized by oppression, fear, isolation, and the practice of taqiyyah. This study focused on the strategies employed by Imam Sajjad (A.S.) to revive Shiism in the aftermath of this event. Specifically, it addressed this question: How can we analyze Imam Sajjad’s strategies for revitalizing Shiism after the Ashura event? It appeared that Imam Sajjad (A.S.) utilized components of diffusion theory—namely, the destination of diffusion (environments that were both receptive and intolerant, along with political and cultural barriers), paths of diffusion (including displacement, contagious, and hierarchical diffusion), and timing of diffusion. By leveraging various tools, such as the community's reverence for the Prophet’s family, he transformed the emotional landscape created after Ashura, mitigating the effects of the oppressive Umayyad regime and countering the influence of pro-Umayyad scholars. Through initiatives like cadre building and promoting pilgrimage, he effectively revived Shiism after the Ashura event. This research elucidated Imam Sajjad's actions through the lens of diffusion theory, demonstrating how Shiism was revitalized in the wake of Ashura. Employing a historical methodology, the study analyzed Imam Sajjad's activities aimed at reviving Shiism, including cadre development, exposing Umayyad injustices, mobilizing the populace post-Karbala, challenging beliefs in predestination, elucidating the fundamental principles of Imamate, addressing key issues, and countering deviation through prayer and supplication.
<strong>Keywords<em>:</em> </strong>Strategies of Imam Sajjad (A.S.), Revival of Shiism, Ashura Event, Diffusion Theory, Umayyad Era.
<strong>Introduction</strong>
The era of Imam Sajjad (A.S.), which commenced on Ashura in 61 AH, unfolded under exceptional circumstances. The oppressive measures of the Umayyads coupled with the suppression of dissenting movements and emergence of deviant intellectual currents underscored the urgent need for the revitalization of Shiite life. In light of the political, social, and cultural conditions of his time, Imam Sajjad (A.S.) adopted various approaches to articulate the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt, employing methods, such as prayer and pilgrimage. This study sought to analyze how Imam Sajjad (A.S.) revived Shiism following the Ashura event and identify the factors that influenced this revival. Several books and articles have been published regarding Imam Sajjad's role in the resurgence of Shiism. Notably, Seyyed Ja'far Shahidi's Life of Ali ibn al-Hussein (2001) examined and critiqued some well-known historical accounts of Imam Sajjad (A.S.). While this work shared common themes with the present research, it offered a new perspective by integrating theoretical frameworks. Additionally, Mohsen Ranjbar's Studying the Role of Imam Sajjad (A.S.) in Shiite Leadership after the Karbala Incident (2002) explored the cultural and political landscape of Imam Sajjad's era, focusing on his stance against the caliphate. However, this article distinguished itself by analyzing the environmental factors and components of diffusion theory relevant to Imam Sajjad's context. Another significant work was Madrasah Kalami Medinah from the Beginning to the Imamate of Imam Baqir (2024) written by Seyyed Ali Hussainizadeh from Khizrabad, which reviewed the history of Imamiyyah thought up to the end of Imam Sajjad's era through historical reports. Unlike the other two works, it did not provide an analysis of Imam Sajjad (A.S.) based on diffusion theory. Finally, Seyyed Gholam Hossein Hosseini's article, Headlines of the Political Movement of Imam Sajjad (A.S.) in the Karbala Movement (2002), touched upon similar themes; yet, it did not specifically apply diffusion theory, revealing a gap in independent research on this topic.
<strong>Materials & Methods</strong>
Diffusion theory introduced by Swedish geographer Hagerstrand in 1935, explored how innovations, phenomena, ideas, and thoughts spread. Initially applied to agriculture and disease transmission, this theory has since found relevance in political science and international relations. It effectively explains the reasons behind the spread of various intellectual and physical innovations, detailing how they disseminate, the pathways they follow, and the factors that may halt or re-ignite their spread. Additionally, it accounts for the stability of certain trends and the decline of others. In the modern era, cultural elements and innovations cross borders at unprecedented speeds, akin to jet travel and satellite communication. Contagious and hierarchical diffusion represent two rapid forms of expansion diffusion, where ideas and concepts migrate from new sources without the need for physical relocation. When analyzing the impact of any political innovation through the lens of diffusion theory, key factors like origin and destination, timeframes, tools, and channels of dissemination are considered. Furthermore, diffusion barriers and competing waves serve as mitigating factors that must be addressed in the examination of the phenomenon and its diffusion.
<strong>Research Findings</strong>
Imam Zayn al-Abidin (A.S.) aimed to restore order in a society that had succumbed to misguidance and moral decay, striving to revive authentic Islam (Shi'a). Alongside the Sahifa al-Sajjadiyah, which encapsulates the principles and teachings of Islam, the Treatise on Rights outlines fundamental rights that govern human life and ensure its happiness. Indeed, religion and Sharia were revealed to uphold these rights. Through this guidance, the Imam demonstrated that only an Imam, intimately connected to the source of revelation, possesses the authority to enact progressive laws that resonate with the human spirit.
<strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong>
The continuation of Umayyad rule under Yazid and Abdul Malik ibn Marwan following the martyrdom of Imam Hussein (A.S.) coupled with the atmosphere of fear and repression that ensued after the Ashura event posed significant challenges for Imam Sajjad (A.S.) in his efforts to revive and expand Shiism. Despite these obstacles, Imam Sajjad (A.S.) emerged as a pivotal figure in this revival, leveraging the emotional climate following events, such as the incident of Hurra and the destruction of Kaaba by Yazid's forces, alongside the public’s growing interest in the Prophet's family. To navigate the unwelcoming environment, the Imam implemented several strategies: he focused on training and building a cadre of supporters, exposed the injustices of the Umayyad regime, and sought to awaken the populace in the aftermath of Karbala. He also challenged the legitimacy of predestination and clarified the fundamental principles of Imamate. Through prayers and invocations, he addressed key issues and countered deviations, significantly advancing his goals. Utilizing methods like prayer and pilgrimage (path of diffusion) and disseminating religious concepts through his students and trained followers (path of contagion), Imam Sajjad (A.S.) endeavored to revive Shiism even amid the oppressive rule of the most tyrannical Umayyad caliphs, including Yazid and Abdul Malik ibn Marwan. This period marked a crucial phase in the diffusion of Shiism.
https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_29200_3da0e2b94bdda9178f5f6e641a71f228.pdfUniversity of IsfahanHistorical Researches2008-625316220240621A Critical Approach to Crone's Method in the Article “How Did the Quranic Pagans Make a Living" by Relying on the Method of Historical ReconstructionA Critical Approach to Crone's Method in the Article “How Did the Quranic Pagans Make a Living" by Relying on the Method of Historical Reconstruction41562918010.22108/jhr.2025.142473.2685FAElhamAqadoostiPh.D. student, Department of Quranic Sciences and Hadith, Faculty of Theology and Ahl-Al-Bayt, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, IranAmirAhmadnezhadAssistant professor, Department of Quran and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Theology and Ahl-Al-Bayt, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, IranJournal Article20240910In one of her articles, Patricia Crone explored how the pagans of Mecca sustained themselves during the period of the Quran's revelation. Relying solely on the Quran as the authoritative source, she compiled various Meccan and Madani verses related to her central inquiry and concluded that the polytheists of Mecca were engaged in farming, gardening, ranching, and fishing. However, this assertion conflicted with the geographical conditions of Mecca, leading Crone to propose that the city was originally situated in a location different from its current one.
This study critically analyzed and evaluated Crone's claims by employing her own methodology of "historical reconstruction", which relied exclusively on Quranic verses. It became evident that Crone had overlooked significant factors, such as the context of the surah, timing of its revelation, and intended audience of the verses. This oversight had resulted in a generalized perception that all Meccan surahs pertained to polytheists living in a rural society.In one of her articles, Patricia Crone explored how the pagans of Mecca sustained themselves during the period of the Quran's revelation. Relying solely on the Quran as the authoritative source, she compiled various Meccan and Madani verses related to her central inquiry and concluded that the polytheists of Mecca were engaged in farming, gardening, ranching, and fishing. However, this assertion conflicted with the geographical conditions of Mecca, leading Crone to propose that the city was originally situated in a location different from its current one.
This study critically analyzed and evaluated Crone's claims by employing her own methodology of "historical reconstruction", which relied exclusively on Quranic verses. It became evident that Crone had overlooked significant factors, such as the context of the surah, timing of its revelation, and intended audience of the verses. This oversight had resulted in a generalized perception that all Meccan surahs pertained to polytheists living in a rural society.https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_29180_3aab1b07c5b917fda51334ec60d49984.pdfUniversity of IsfahanHistorical Researches2008-625316220240621How to Reflect Zangids Uprising (255-270 AH) in Tabari HistoryHow to Reflect Zangids Uprising (255-270 AH) in Tabari History57752899610.22108/jhr.2024.139500.2592FABahadorShahriaryAssistant professor, Department of History, Faculty of Islamic Studies, Comprehensive University of Imam Hossein (P.B.U.H.), Tehran, IranAbolghasemForoozaniPh.D., Department of History, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Shiraz, Shiraz, IranJournal Article20231028<strong>Abstract</strong>
The Zangids Uprising stands as one of the most significant movements in the mid-third century Hijri within the Abbasid Caliphate. Tabari's historical accounts serve as the primary and foundational source for understanding the events surrounding this uprising. The discussions regarding the developments of uprising and their portrayal in Tabari's History of the Prophets and Kings offer a promising avenue for research. This article specifically investigated how the Zangids Uprising was reflected in Tabari's historical narrative, employing a method of historical description and analysis.
The investigation concluded that Tabari's perspective centered on "defending the caliphate", emphasizing the importance of preserving its authority and rejecting any dissent or opposition. This viewpoint significantly influenced how the uprising and its developments were depicted in his history. This was evident in 3 key aspects: First, Tabari's accounts failed to address the dimensions, contexts, and potential ramifications of the uprising formation. Second, the uprising and its leaders were explicitly evaluated in a critical light. Third, the actions and activities of the Zangids were portrayed within a narrow framework characterized primarily by looting, destruction of settlements, and widespread slaughter.
<strong>Keywords<em>:</em> </strong>Zangian Uprising, Sāheb al-Zanj, Abbasid Caliphate, Tabari History.
<strong>Introduction</strong>
The Zangids Uprising (255-270 AH) stands as a significant socio-historical event in the Islamic world. Occurring at the northern tip of the Persian Gulf, specifically in the commercial port of Basra, this uprising unfolded over a span of 14 years and 4 months in the 3<sup>rd</sup> century AH. It is regarded as one of the most notable and thought-provoking occurrences of this period, particularly distinguished from other developments in the Islamic realm that were predominantly political and military in nature. The manner, in which historians have reflected on this event, warrants careful consideration. Additionally, the existing ambiguities surrounding the motivations, goals, and underlying reasons for the uprising highlight the necessity of examining its various dimensions.
Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari, a renowned historian of the 3<sup>rd</sup> century AH and the author of the influential work Tarikh al-Rosol wa al-Moluk, is among the first historians to provide a detailed account of the Zangids movement. Three key factors underscore the importance of analyzing Tabari's perspective on this uprising: First, Tabari lived during a period that closely followed the events in question, making him one of the nearest historians to the time of the incident. Second, he is the only historian, who has extensively documented the uprising, with subsequent historians relying heavily on his accounts for their discussions. Finally, Tabari confronts the leaders and actions of the uprising in a manner that diverges from his typical historiographical style.
This article explored how the Zangids Uprising was represented in Tabari's Tarikh al-Rosol wa al-Moluk, focusing on his narratives and reports from the uprising inception in Bahrain to its conclusion in Mokhtara. It sought to elucidate the actions and performance of the Zangids through the lens of Tabari's historical perspective.
<strong>Materials & Methods</strong>
This article examined the subject and research problem through 4 key axes. The first axis presented Tabari's scholarly persona and historiographical methodology, discussing the intellectual and social characteristics of his era, as well as his approach to historical writing. The second axis focused on how the Zangids Uprising was represented in Tabari's history, primarily avoiding other narratives regarding the uprising. The subsequent analysis concentrated on the unfolding events and developments of the uprising as depicted in Tabari's works. In the final axis, the article explored Tabari's persistent portrayal of looting, destruction, and violence in relation to the uprising, emphasizing that he framed the events within this context. By referencing primary historical sources and utilizing existing research, the study investigated the research problem and hypothesis through a method of historical description and analysis.
<strong>Research Findings</strong>
This study revealed several key insights regarding the Zangids Uprising as reflected in Tabari's Tarikh al-Rosul wa al-Muluk. The findings indicated that Tabari’s portrayal of the uprising was heavily influenced by his allegiance to the Abbasid Caliphate and his specific historiographical approach.
<strong><em> One-Sided Perspective:</em></strong> Tabari adopted a clear stance that supported the caliphate while rejecting the legitimacy of the Zangids Uprising. This bias was evident in his selective reporting, where he emphasized the negative aspects of the uprising—namely, looting, destruction, and violence—while largely neglecting its broader social and political contexts.
<strong><em> Limited Coverage of the Uprising Dimensions:</em></strong> The research findings showed that Tabari failed to explore the various dimensions and underlying causes of the uprising. His accounts lacked a comprehensive examination of the motivations, goals, and responses of the participants, leading to a one-dimensional narrative that focused solely on the destructive consequences of the uprising.
<strong><em> Focus on Abbasid Centrality:</em></strong> The analysis demonstrated that Tabari’s recounting of the uprising was predominantly centered on the actions and reactions of the Abbasid caliphate. This focus often sidelined external influences and the broader implications of the uprising within the Islamic world, illustrating a narrow interpretation of the historical events.
<strong><em> Destructive Nature of the Uprising:</em></strong> Throughout his historical narrative, Tabari framed the Zangids Uprising as a movement characterized primarily by chaos and violence. This portrayal reinforced the perception of the uprising as a threat to social order rather than a legitimate expression of dissent or a complex social movement.
<strong><em> Implications for Historical Understanding:</em></strong> The study concluded that while Tabari's account was invaluable as a primary historical source, it required careful interpretation. Researchers must consider the limitations of his perspective and seek additional narratives that might provide a more nuanced understanding of the Zangids Uprising, including its socio-political dimensions and its leaders’ motivations.
In summary, the findings indicated that Tabari's historiographical method significantly shaped his depiction of the Zangids Uprising, highlighting the need for further investigation into the complexities of this pivotal historical event.
<strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong>
This article investigated how the Zangids uprising was portrayed in Tarikh al-Rosol va al-Moluk. The significance of this research lay in the fact that Tabari's history was considered one of the most important sources on the Zangids uprising, with many older and newer studies drawing extensively from it. Notably, Tabari approached this event in a manner that diverged from his established historiographical methods, aligning instead with his religious beliefs and political discourse. He adopted a one-sided stance that fully supported the caliphate while rejecting the Zangids uprising, which could be summarized in 3 key points:
First, Tabari did not explore the various dimensions and potential perspectives of the uprising, omitting numerous reports related to the event. Rather than presenting a range of narratives, he offered a specific interpretation that decisively condemned the uprising using strong rhetoric.
Second, his account of the uprising was primarily centered on the actions of the Abbasid caliphate, reflecting developments that were directly connected to it. In Tabari's history, there were few discussions that engaged with external factors related to the Abbasid caliphate system in the context of the Zangids uprising.
Third, in line with his viewpoint, Tabari framed the actions of the uprising and its leaders as primarily characterized by looting, destruction, and widespread violence against cities and villages. Consequently, his portrayal suggested that the uprising was fundamentally a movement marked by devastation and bloodshed. The prevailing impression from Tabari's account was that the uprising was defined by themes of "looting, killing, and destruction" from beginning to end.
In conclusion, while Tabari's history emphasized a clear position and specific interpretation of the uprising, it was essential to consider the significant narratives throughout the stages of the uprising formation, continuation, and decline. These narratives provided a context that invited further reflection beyond purely political and military interpretations. Thus, examination of the Zangids uprising in Tabari's history warrants deeper inquiry and ongoing scholarly attention.
<strong>Abstract</strong>
The Zangids Uprising stands as one of the most significant movements in the mid-third century Hijri within the Abbasid Caliphate. Tabari's historical accounts serve as the primary and foundational source for understanding the events surrounding this uprising. The discussions regarding the developments of uprising and their portrayal in Tabari's History of the Prophets and Kings offer a promising avenue for research. This article specifically investigated how the Zangids Uprising was reflected in Tabari's historical narrative, employing a method of historical description and analysis.
The investigation concluded that Tabari's perspective centered on "defending the caliphate", emphasizing the importance of preserving its authority and rejecting any dissent or opposition. This viewpoint significantly influenced how the uprising and its developments were depicted in his history. This was evident in 3 key aspects: First, Tabari's accounts failed to address the dimensions, contexts, and potential ramifications of the uprising formation. Second, the uprising and its leaders were explicitly evaluated in a critical light. Third, the actions and activities of the Zangids were portrayed within a narrow framework characterized primarily by looting, destruction of settlements, and widespread slaughter.
<strong>Keywords<em>:</em> </strong>Zangian Uprising, Sāheb al-Zanj, Abbasid Caliphate, Tabari History.
<strong>Introduction</strong>
The Zangids Uprising (255-270 AH) stands as a significant socio-historical event in the Islamic world. Occurring at the northern tip of the Persian Gulf, specifically in the commercial port of Basra, this uprising unfolded over a span of 14 years and 4 months in the 3<sup>rd</sup> century AH. It is regarded as one of the most notable and thought-provoking occurrences of this period, particularly distinguished from other developments in the Islamic realm that were predominantly political and military in nature. The manner, in which historians have reflected on this event, warrants careful consideration. Additionally, the existing ambiguities surrounding the motivations, goals, and underlying reasons for the uprising highlight the necessity of examining its various dimensions.
Muhammad bin Jarir Tabari, a renowned historian of the 3<sup>rd</sup> century AH and the author of the influential work Tarikh al-Rosol wa al-Moluk, is among the first historians to provide a detailed account of the Zangids movement. Three key factors underscore the importance of analyzing Tabari's perspective on this uprising: First, Tabari lived during a period that closely followed the events in question, making him one of the nearest historians to the time of the incident. Second, he is the only historian, who has extensively documented the uprising, with subsequent historians relying heavily on his accounts for their discussions. Finally, Tabari confronts the leaders and actions of the uprising in a manner that diverges from his typical historiographical style.
This article explored how the Zangids Uprising was represented in Tabari's Tarikh al-Rosol wa al-Moluk, focusing on his narratives and reports from the uprising inception in Bahrain to its conclusion in Mokhtara. It sought to elucidate the actions and performance of the Zangids through the lens of Tabari's historical perspective.
<strong>Materials & Methods</strong>
This article examined the subject and research problem through 4 key axes. The first axis presented Tabari's scholarly persona and historiographical methodology, discussing the intellectual and social characteristics of his era, as well as his approach to historical writing. The second axis focused on how the Zangids Uprising was represented in Tabari's history, primarily avoiding other narratives regarding the uprising. The subsequent analysis concentrated on the unfolding events and developments of the uprising as depicted in Tabari's works. In the final axis, the article explored Tabari's persistent portrayal of looting, destruction, and violence in relation to the uprising, emphasizing that he framed the events within this context. By referencing primary historical sources and utilizing existing research, the study investigated the research problem and hypothesis through a method of historical description and analysis.
<strong>Research Findings</strong>
This study revealed several key insights regarding the Zangids Uprising as reflected in Tabari's Tarikh al-Rosul wa al-Muluk. The findings indicated that Tabari’s portrayal of the uprising was heavily influenced by his allegiance to the Abbasid Caliphate and his specific historiographical approach.
<strong><em> One-Sided Perspective:</em></strong> Tabari adopted a clear stance that supported the caliphate while rejecting the legitimacy of the Zangids Uprising. This bias was evident in his selective reporting, where he emphasized the negative aspects of the uprising—namely, looting, destruction, and violence—while largely neglecting its broader social and political contexts.
<strong><em> Limited Coverage of the Uprising Dimensions:</em></strong> The research findings showed that Tabari failed to explore the various dimensions and underlying causes of the uprising. His accounts lacked a comprehensive examination of the motivations, goals, and responses of the participants, leading to a one-dimensional narrative that focused solely on the destructive consequences of the uprising.
<strong><em> Focus on Abbasid Centrality:</em></strong> The analysis demonstrated that Tabari’s recounting of the uprising was predominantly centered on the actions and reactions of the Abbasid caliphate. This focus often sidelined external influences and the broader implications of the uprising within the Islamic world, illustrating a narrow interpretation of the historical events.
<strong><em> Destructive Nature of the Uprising:</em></strong> Throughout his historical narrative, Tabari framed the Zangids Uprising as a movement characterized primarily by chaos and violence. This portrayal reinforced the perception of the uprising as a threat to social order rather than a legitimate expression of dissent or a complex social movement.
<strong><em> Implications for Historical Understanding:</em></strong> The study concluded that while Tabari's account was invaluable as a primary historical source, it required careful interpretation. Researchers must consider the limitations of his perspective and seek additional narratives that might provide a more nuanced understanding of the Zangids Uprising, including its socio-political dimensions and its leaders’ motivations.
In summary, the findings indicated that Tabari's historiographical method significantly shaped his depiction of the Zangids Uprising, highlighting the need for further investigation into the complexities of this pivotal historical event.
<strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong>
This article investigated how the Zangids uprising was portrayed in Tarikh al-Rosol va al-Moluk. The significance of this research lay in the fact that Tabari's history was considered one of the most important sources on the Zangids uprising, with many older and newer studies drawing extensively from it. Notably, Tabari approached this event in a manner that diverged from his established historiographical methods, aligning instead with his religious beliefs and political discourse. He adopted a one-sided stance that fully supported the caliphate while rejecting the Zangids uprising, which could be summarized in 3 key points:
First, Tabari did not explore the various dimensions and potential perspectives of the uprising, omitting numerous reports related to the event. Rather than presenting a range of narratives, he offered a specific interpretation that decisively condemned the uprising using strong rhetoric.
Second, his account of the uprising was primarily centered on the actions of the Abbasid caliphate, reflecting developments that were directly connected to it. In Tabari's history, there were few discussions that engaged with external factors related to the Abbasid caliphate system in the context of the Zangids uprising.
Third, in line with his viewpoint, Tabari framed the actions of the uprising and its leaders as primarily characterized by looting, destruction, and widespread violence against cities and villages. Consequently, his portrayal suggested that the uprising was fundamentally a movement marked by devastation and bloodshed. The prevailing impression from Tabari's account was that the uprising was defined by themes of "looting, killing, and destruction" from beginning to end.
In conclusion, while Tabari's history emphasized a clear position and specific interpretation of the uprising, it was essential to consider the significant narratives throughout the stages of the uprising formation, continuation, and decline. These narratives provided a context that invited further reflection beyond purely political and military interpretations. Thus, examination of the Zangids uprising in Tabari's history warrants deeper inquiry and ongoing scholarly attention.
https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_28996_2ed6b1714d5176bcc55368afc0885791.pdfUniversity of IsfahanHistorical Researches2008-625316220240621The Prophet’s Mantle and Its Diverse NarrativesThe Prophet’s Mantle and Its Diverse Narratives77942925710.22108/jhr.2025.143635.2736FAMarziyeRamazani MobarakePh.D. student of Islam History, Payame Noor University, Tehran, IranYazdanFarrokhiAssociate professor, Department of History, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran0000-0002-0874-4253MojtabaSoltani AhmadiAssociate professor, Department of History and Civilization of Islamic Nation, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran0000-0001-6123-8512MehdiEbadiAssociate professor, Department of History and Civilization of Islamic Nation, Payame Noor University, Tehran, IranJournal Article20241214<strong>Abstract</strong><br />The Burda, believed to be the mantle of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), is claimed to have served as a symbol of legitimacy for Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs during investitures and other significant events. According to the prevailing narrative, the Burda was passed from Ka’b bin Zuhair to Mu’awiyah and subsequent Umayyad caliphs, eventually reaching the Abbasids, where it remained in Baghdad until the end of the Abbasid Caliphate. It is further asserted that the relic was transferred to Egypt and ultimately to the Ottomans, where it resides today. While the Burda’s fame and significance are widely recognized, its origin and historical trajectory are subjects of considerable debate and uncertainty. This article employed a descriptive and analytical approach, gathering textual data from historical sources through documentary methods coupled with a critical evaluation of relevant scholarship. It investigated the reliability and trustworthiness of the historical narrative concerning the Burda attributed to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), examining the content of historical texts. The research revealed that this narrative was absent from early historical sources and was fraught with inconsistencies regarding its origin and accessibility. It argued that the caliphate's pressing need for such a symbol had led to the perpetuation of claims about its existence and authenticity, which were reflected in historical texts. Consequently, contemporary researchers had often accepted this narrative uncritically.<br /><strong>Keywords<em>:</em> </strong>Prophet’s Mantle, Ka’b ibn Zuhair, Ahl-e Ila, Muslim Governors.<br /><strong>Introduction</strong><br />During the Abbasid Caliphate, prominent customs and rituals included draping the Burda (mantle), holding the Qadib (staff), and wielding the Saif (sword), particularly during the Bay’ah (oath of allegiance) ceremony for the Caliph. These items were claimed to be part of Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) legacy, symbolizing the Caliph’s authority and legitimacy. By utilizing these relics, the Caliphs aimed to present themselves as the rightful successors to the prophet (PBUH) in the eyes of the Muslim community. The possession of these symbols was deemed essential for ascending to the Caliphate, underscoring their significance in legitimizing the ruler’s authority.<br />Given their historical and legitimizing roles, it is important to investigate when and how these symbols came into the possession of the Caliphs. Notably, these relics, especially the Burda, were not directly given to the Caliphs by the prophet (PBUH). Furthermore, numerous contentious accounts exist regarding how the Burda reached the Caliphs, raising questions about the authenticity and historical accuracy of these narratives.<br />The <em>Mafatih al-Ulum</em> encyclopedia authored by Abu Abdullah al-Khwarizmi presents a unique narrative concerning the Burda. It states: “It is the garment or mantle that the Messenger of God (PBUH) bestowed upon the poet Ka’b bin Zuhair and Mu’awiyah purchased it from Ka’b and thereafter the Caliphs inherited it”. Al-Khwarizmi’s account implies the existence of a single Burda—the one given by the prophet (PBUH) to Ka’b, which subsequently passed to Mu’awiyah and then to the Abbasid Caliphs. This narrative has been widely accepted by contemporary historians and is frequently cited in encyclopedias, scholarly articles, and research books. However, as this article demonstrated, this view is inconsistent with the content of early historical texts and established scholarly standards of historical research, rendering its presentation as a definitive “historical proposition” highly questionable. Thus, the central question arises: to what extent are the historical accounts regarding the Burda—claimed by the Caliphs to be attributed to the prophet (PBUH)—historically credible based on the available evidence?<br /><strong>Materials & Methods</strong><br />This article employed a descriptive and analytical approach, focusing on the collection of data from historical texts through documentary analysis and a critical evaluation of relevant scholarship. The study aimed to differentiate between various narratives, traced their earliest origins in historical texts, and analyzed their evolution over time. By critically examining the sources and their contexts, this research sought to assess the reliability and authenticity of the claims surrounding the Burda.<br /><strong>Research Findings</strong><br />Contrary to al-Khwarizmi’s 4<sup>th</sup>-century AH account regarding the Burda, which he claimed was given by the prophet (PBUH) to Ka’b bin Zuhair—a narrative accepted by some contemporary researchers—this historical proposition was not entirely tenable. Early Hadith sources discussing the Burda do not mention its gifting to Ka’b Ibn Qutaybah Dinawari’s <em>Kitab al-Shi’r wa al-Shu’ara</em>, often cited as the oldest source for this claim, was fundamentally a work of “literary history” rather than historiography or Hadith literature. Consequently, its account was neither widely disseminated nor elaborated upon by later historians. Furthermore, <em>Lata’if al-Ma’arif</em>, the first source to relay Dinawari’s narrative, was not considered an early or reliable source as its content was influenced more by anecdotal and entertaining storytelling than by rigorous historical analysis.<br />Al-Mawardi and Ibn Farra’ were among the first to highlight the disagreements and doubts surrounding the Burda narrative. The existence of “disagreement” among their contemporaries regarding the authenticity of the Burda gifted by the prophet (PBUH) to Ka’b warranted further scrutiny. Some accounts from that era suggested that the Burda in the possession of the Caliphs was the one given by the prophet (PBUH) to the “people of Ayla”, indicating that the Umayyad Caliphs had been deprived of it until the reign of Marwan ibn Muhammad. However, the narrative of the “Burda of the people of Ayla” was itself contentious. In the 7<sup>th</sup> century AH, Yaqut reported that the people of Ayla claimed to still possess the Burda of the prophet (PBUH). The situation became even more complex with the assertions of Imami Hadith scholars, who maintained that a Burda of the prophet (PBUH) was held by Ali (AS) during his caliphate. The existence of at least 3 competing narratives—the “Burda of Ka’b”, the “Burda of the people of Ayla”, and the “Burda of Ali (AS)”—challenged the authenticity of the Abbasid Caliphs’ claim to the unique Burda of Ka’b.<br />Additionally, historical accounts often mentioned the loss or destruction of the Burda while in the possession of the Abbasid Caliphs. For example, there were reports of its temporary loss to the Seljuks, al-Mas’udi’s account of its disappearance following the assassination of al-Muqtadir and its alleged destruction during Hulagu Khan’s conquest of Baghdad. Iranian historians of the Ilkhanate, who were closer to these events, emphasized the Burda's definitive disappearance, a claim supported by the silence of 7<sup>th</sup> and 8<sup>th</sup>-century Mamluk texts. However, references to its presence re-emerged in the 9<sup>th</sup> and 10<sup>th</sup> centuries, noting its association with the Abbasid Caliphs in Egypt and later the Ottoman Sultans. Ottoman texts, while corroborating this narrative, offered justifications for the earlier reports of its loss to the Mongols, distinguishing between the “Burda of Ka’b” (lost) and the “Burda of the people of Ayla” (preserved).<br /><strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong><br />The findings of this research indicated that the acceptance of the Burda as a legitimizing symbol for the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman rulers was highly contentious when examined through the lens of early historical texts. There was no definitive or unquestionable narrative regarding its transmission to the Caliphs. The claims made by the Abbasids in Egypt and later by the Ottomans lacked convincing evidence and were riddled with inconsistencies. Ultimately, the authenticity of the Burda remained uncertain and historians could only discuss the “perceptions” and “claims” of individuals from each historical period regarding this relic. The narratives surrounding the Burda, rather than reflecting historical facts, revealed the political and symbolic needs of ruling dynasties to legitimize their authority through connections to the prophet (PBUH).<strong>Abstract</strong><br />The Burda, believed to be the mantle of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), is claimed to have served as a symbol of legitimacy for Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs during investitures and other significant events. According to the prevailing narrative, the Burda was passed from Ka’b bin Zuhair to Mu’awiyah and subsequent Umayyad caliphs, eventually reaching the Abbasids, where it remained in Baghdad until the end of the Abbasid Caliphate. It is further asserted that the relic was transferred to Egypt and ultimately to the Ottomans, where it resides today. While the Burda’s fame and significance are widely recognized, its origin and historical trajectory are subjects of considerable debate and uncertainty. This article employed a descriptive and analytical approach, gathering textual data from historical sources through documentary methods coupled with a critical evaluation of relevant scholarship. It investigated the reliability and trustworthiness of the historical narrative concerning the Burda attributed to Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), examining the content of historical texts. The research revealed that this narrative was absent from early historical sources and was fraught with inconsistencies regarding its origin and accessibility. It argued that the caliphate's pressing need for such a symbol had led to the perpetuation of claims about its existence and authenticity, which were reflected in historical texts. Consequently, contemporary researchers had often accepted this narrative uncritically.<br /><strong>Keywords<em>:</em> </strong>Prophet’s Mantle, Ka’b ibn Zuhair, Ahl-e Ila, Muslim Governors.<br /><strong>Introduction</strong><br />During the Abbasid Caliphate, prominent customs and rituals included draping the Burda (mantle), holding the Qadib (staff), and wielding the Saif (sword), particularly during the Bay’ah (oath of allegiance) ceremony for the Caliph. These items were claimed to be part of Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) legacy, symbolizing the Caliph’s authority and legitimacy. By utilizing these relics, the Caliphs aimed to present themselves as the rightful successors to the prophet (PBUH) in the eyes of the Muslim community. The possession of these symbols was deemed essential for ascending to the Caliphate, underscoring their significance in legitimizing the ruler’s authority.<br />Given their historical and legitimizing roles, it is important to investigate when and how these symbols came into the possession of the Caliphs. Notably, these relics, especially the Burda, were not directly given to the Caliphs by the prophet (PBUH). Furthermore, numerous contentious accounts exist regarding how the Burda reached the Caliphs, raising questions about the authenticity and historical accuracy of these narratives.<br />The <em>Mafatih al-Ulum</em> encyclopedia authored by Abu Abdullah al-Khwarizmi presents a unique narrative concerning the Burda. It states: “It is the garment or mantle that the Messenger of God (PBUH) bestowed upon the poet Ka’b bin Zuhair and Mu’awiyah purchased it from Ka’b and thereafter the Caliphs inherited it”. Al-Khwarizmi’s account implies the existence of a single Burda—the one given by the prophet (PBUH) to Ka’b, which subsequently passed to Mu’awiyah and then to the Abbasid Caliphs. This narrative has been widely accepted by contemporary historians and is frequently cited in encyclopedias, scholarly articles, and research books. However, as this article demonstrated, this view is inconsistent with the content of early historical texts and established scholarly standards of historical research, rendering its presentation as a definitive “historical proposition” highly questionable. Thus, the central question arises: to what extent are the historical accounts regarding the Burda—claimed by the Caliphs to be attributed to the prophet (PBUH)—historically credible based on the available evidence?<br /><strong>Materials & Methods</strong><br />This article employed a descriptive and analytical approach, focusing on the collection of data from historical texts through documentary analysis and a critical evaluation of relevant scholarship. The study aimed to differentiate between various narratives, traced their earliest origins in historical texts, and analyzed their evolution over time. By critically examining the sources and their contexts, this research sought to assess the reliability and authenticity of the claims surrounding the Burda.<br /><strong>Research Findings</strong><br />Contrary to al-Khwarizmi’s 4<sup>th</sup>-century AH account regarding the Burda, which he claimed was given by the prophet (PBUH) to Ka’b bin Zuhair—a narrative accepted by some contemporary researchers—this historical proposition was not entirely tenable. Early Hadith sources discussing the Burda do not mention its gifting to Ka’b Ibn Qutaybah Dinawari’s <em>Kitab al-Shi’r wa al-Shu’ara</em>, often cited as the oldest source for this claim, was fundamentally a work of “literary history” rather than historiography or Hadith literature. Consequently, its account was neither widely disseminated nor elaborated upon by later historians. Furthermore, <em>Lata’if al-Ma’arif</em>, the first source to relay Dinawari’s narrative, was not considered an early or reliable source as its content was influenced more by anecdotal and entertaining storytelling than by rigorous historical analysis.<br />Al-Mawardi and Ibn Farra’ were among the first to highlight the disagreements and doubts surrounding the Burda narrative. The existence of “disagreement” among their contemporaries regarding the authenticity of the Burda gifted by the prophet (PBUH) to Ka’b warranted further scrutiny. Some accounts from that era suggested that the Burda in the possession of the Caliphs was the one given by the prophet (PBUH) to the “people of Ayla”, indicating that the Umayyad Caliphs had been deprived of it until the reign of Marwan ibn Muhammad. However, the narrative of the “Burda of the people of Ayla” was itself contentious. In the 7<sup>th</sup> century AH, Yaqut reported that the people of Ayla claimed to still possess the Burda of the prophet (PBUH). The situation became even more complex with the assertions of Imami Hadith scholars, who maintained that a Burda of the prophet (PBUH) was held by Ali (AS) during his caliphate. The existence of at least 3 competing narratives—the “Burda of Ka’b”, the “Burda of the people of Ayla”, and the “Burda of Ali (AS)”—challenged the authenticity of the Abbasid Caliphs’ claim to the unique Burda of Ka’b.<br />Additionally, historical accounts often mentioned the loss or destruction of the Burda while in the possession of the Abbasid Caliphs. For example, there were reports of its temporary loss to the Seljuks, al-Mas’udi’s account of its disappearance following the assassination of al-Muqtadir and its alleged destruction during Hulagu Khan’s conquest of Baghdad. Iranian historians of the Ilkhanate, who were closer to these events, emphasized the Burda's definitive disappearance, a claim supported by the silence of 7<sup>th</sup> and 8<sup>th</sup>-century Mamluk texts. However, references to its presence re-emerged in the 9<sup>th</sup> and 10<sup>th</sup> centuries, noting its association with the Abbasid Caliphs in Egypt and later the Ottoman Sultans. Ottoman texts, while corroborating this narrative, offered justifications for the earlier reports of its loss to the Mongols, distinguishing between the “Burda of Ka’b” (lost) and the “Burda of the people of Ayla” (preserved).<br /><strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusion</strong><br />The findings of this research indicated that the acceptance of the Burda as a legitimizing symbol for the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman rulers was highly contentious when examined through the lens of early historical texts. There was no definitive or unquestionable narrative regarding its transmission to the Caliphs. The claims made by the Abbasids in Egypt and later by the Ottomans lacked convincing evidence and were riddled with inconsistencies. Ultimately, the authenticity of the Burda remained uncertain and historians could only discuss the “perceptions” and “claims” of individuals from each historical period regarding this relic. The narratives surrounding the Burda, rather than reflecting historical facts, revealed the political and symbolic needs of ruling dynasties to legitimize their authority through connections to the prophet (PBUH).https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_29257_a0e66b0fa0dfcf8a693d12f377e5d6f8.pdfUniversity of IsfahanHistorical Researches2008-625316220240621Surviving Persecution: Ismailism and Taqiyyah in the Centuries after the Mongol InvasionSurviving Persecution: Ismailism and Taqiyyah in the Centuries after the Mongol Invasion951182918110.22108/jhr.2025.141823.2665FAShafique N.ViraniDistinguished professor of Islamic Studies, University of Toronto, Toronto, CanadaSeddighehKardanPh.D. student, Institute of Islamic Studies, McGill University, Montreal, CanadaZeinabFarokhiAssistant professor, Department of Historical Studies, University of Toronto, Toronto, CanadaJournal Article20240618<strong>Abstract</strong><br />ʿAṭā-Malik Juwaynī concluded his <em>History of the World Conqueror</em> (<em>Taʾrīkh-i jahān-gushāy</em>) by celebrating the Mongol destruction of the Ismailis at Alamut. For many centuries, historians assumed the community had ceased to exist. However, today, Ismaili communities flourish in many parts of the world. In the absence of any sustained historical narrative, the subfield known as subaltern historiography provides tools to examine their survival. Thus, following the descriptive-analytical method, this article draws upon not only historical sources butdoctrinal treatises, poetry, and similar works to highlight the role of pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>) in the community’s persistence through these centuries, highlighting the multivalent meanings of the term. The study sheds light on how this method of both survival and self-perception allowed esoterically inclined communities like the Ismailis to live quietly among others who did not share their spiritual ethos, or who were openly hostile. It also discusses the dangers to self-identity inherent in practicing pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>).<br /><strong>Keywords:</strong> Taqiyyah, Ismailism, Shiism, Sufism, polemics and apologetics, Nizārī Quhistānī<br /><strong>Introduction: </strong><br />They must be slain … attack them and snatch the wealth from their hands … their property and children are to be distributed as booty … may Almighty God abase them and curse them!<br />Thus, spewing fire and brimstone, Jalāl-i Qāʾinī advised Sulṭān Shāhrukh (d. 850/1447) on how the Ismailis in his territories should be treated. This diatribe in his <em>Counsels to Shāhrukh</em> (<em>Naṣāʾiḥ-i Shāhrukhī</em>) is found in a hitherto unpublished manuscript in the Imperial Library of Vienna. It is one of the few surviving historical sources testifying to the continued existence of the Ismailis in this period. Sulṭān Shāḥrukh, Tamerlane’s son and successor, had sent Qāʾinī ‘to exterminate, suppress … kill, banish, and expel the [Ismaili] community from Quhistān.’ In his memoire, Qāʾinī is less concerned with the question of whether or not the Ismailis should be massacred than with the legal nicety of whether this should be done because they are apostates (<em>ahl-i riddat</em>), rebellious (<em>ahl-i baghy</em>), or non-Muslims against whom war was required (<em>ahl-i ḥarb</em>). An adherent of the Ḥanafī school of Sunnī Islam, he was charged by Sulṭān Shāhrukh with the task of suppressing ‘heretics’ (<em>bad-madhhabān</em>), presumably including not only the Shīʿah, but perhaps even non-Ḥanafī Sunnīs. One of the most frightening aspects of his tirade is its vilification of those in his own religious community who wished to live in peace with the Ismailis. He threatens these moderates with the same dire fate as those whom he deemed heretics.<br />This brief passage from the <em>Counsels to Shāhrukh</em> demonstrates that some earlier historians exaggerated in their depiction of the Ismailis’ destruction. The Mongol historian ʿAṭā-Malik Juwaynī concluded his <em>History of the World Conqueror</em> (<em>Taʾrīkh-i jahān-gushāy</em>) depicting how the triumphant Mongols had destroyed the Ismailis of Alamūt. Of the Ismaili Imam Rukn al-Dīn Khwurshāh and his adherents Juwaynī writes, “He and his followers were kicked to a pulp and then put to the sword; and of him and his stock no trace was left, and he and his kindred became but a tale on men’s lips and a tradition in the world.” However, recent research has demonstrated that, despite Juwaynī’s claims, even politically, the Ismailis remained active for some time in the South Caspian region and Alamūt itself. Soon, however, new information about them disappears from the writings of historians. How, then, did they survive, hidden from the eyes of the hostile world?<br /><strong>Material & Methods </strong><br />Advances in historiography have helped us realize that traditional histories often discuss only those in power. How, then, can the histories of religious and ethnic minorities, women, and other marginalized people be preserved? In the absence of sustained historical narratives, subfields like “subaltern studies” provide us tools and avenues for such documentation. This article analyses the Ismaili practice of pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>) as a method adopted by marginalized communities to ensure their survival in hostile circumstances. In so doing, it draws upon not only historical sources but doctrinal treatises, poetry, and similar works to highlight the role of pious circumspection in the Ismaili community’s persistence through these difficult centuries, highlighting the multivalent meanings of the term <em>taqiyyah</em>. The study sheds light on how this method of both survival and self-perception allowed esoterically inclined communities such as the Ismailis to live quietly among others who did not share their spiritual ethos, or who were openly hostile. It also discusses the dangers to self-identity inherent in pious circumspection.<br /><strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusions </strong><br />The section of Background explores historical understandings of <em>taqiyyah</em> in Ismailism and other communities prior to the Mongol debacle. “Hiding the Imam” discusses a recently discovered and unpublished passage in a manuscript that describes how the first post-Alamut Ismaili Imam, Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad, resorted to <em>taqiyyah</em> and how later Ismaili sources depicted the <em>taqiyyah</em> of the post-Alamūt Imams. “The Proof (<em>ḥujjat</em>) and Religious Hierarchy (<em>ḥudūd-i dīn</em>) in Times of Concealment” examines the religious hierarchy, and how it operated to maintain the community’s organizational structure. “Passing on a Persecuted Religious Tradition” draws on the poetry of Nizārī Quhistānī, who reminisces about his own upbringing and how his family maintained their religious heritage despite hostility. “The Cloak of Sufism” discusses the writings of both Ibn Khaldūn and Jalāl-i Qāʾinī, and their contemporary testimony that the Ismailis had survived as Sufis, a community that shared several elements of faith with them, but was not as severely persecuted. “Opportunities and Challenges of Spreading ʿAlid Devotion” speaks of how changing dynamics in parts of the Muslim world made devotion to the Ahl al-Bayt much more acceptable in general society. This allowed the Ismailis to appear as their sister Shiʿah community, the Twelvers. However, the closeness of the belief systems of the two communities also posed challenges, as those practicing <em>taqiyyah</em> as Twelvers could eventually become Twelvers themselves. The conclusion then summarizes the findings about how <em>taqiyyah</em> was adopted by the post-Mongol Ismaili community to survive the destruction of the Mongols and later hostility.<br />The aftermath of the Mongol invasions was certainly a time of darkness and oppression for the Ismaili community. While there is evidence of cooperation between the Ismailis and other Muslim communities, including the <em>mullahs</em> and other religious functionaries in those communities, it is equally true that certain members of the clergy allied themselves with political leaders bent on destroying the Ismailis. One of their methods of survival was pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>), in its multiple meanings. Ismailis were cautioned to conceal the name and whereabouts of the Imam. Many accessed the Imam through the dignitaries of the Ismaili hierarchy (<em>ḥudūd-i dīn</em>), and particularly through the Imam’s Proof (<em>ḥujjat</em>). These were described as the stars and the moon that give light when the sun of the imamate is hidden. As the writings of the poet Nizārī Quhistānī demonstrate, the religious tradition was often passed down by word of mouth within individual families. A shared religious ethos and the cultivation of a common poetic vocabulary enabled Ismailis to appear as Sufis in Quhistān, and most likely elsewhere as well. Increasing ʿAlid devotion in many parts of the Islamic world eventually allowed the community to adopt the outward appearance of Twelver Shīʿīsm in many places, rather than of Sunnism. This had the advantage of allowing greater openness about their dedication to the Prophetic family, but it also held the inherent danger of absorption into the sister community. Sources such as <em>The Counsels of Chivalry</em> (<em>Pandiyāt-I Jawānmardī</em>) indicate the emphasis placed on the recognition of and access to the living, present (<em>ḥāḍir</em>)<em> </em>Imam, rather than the occulted (<em>ghāʾib</em>) Imam, claiming that the clergy had tried to usurp the role of the Imam in his absence. Throughout all of this, as the Fāṭimid period Ismaili luminary al-Muʾayyad fī’l-Dīn Shīrāzī wrote, the Ismailis must have hoped that the continued Godwariness, prudence, and pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>),<em> </em>practised in the times of darkness and oppression, would ennoble their souls at a time yet to come, when the earth would “shine with the light of her Lord” (Quran XXXIX: 69).<strong>Abstract</strong><br />ʿAṭā-Malik Juwaynī concluded his <em>History of the World Conqueror</em> (<em>Taʾrīkh-i jahān-gushāy</em>) by celebrating the Mongol destruction of the Ismailis at Alamut. For many centuries, historians assumed the community had ceased to exist. However, today, Ismaili communities flourish in many parts of the world. In the absence of any sustained historical narrative, the subfield known as subaltern historiography provides tools to examine their survival. Thus, following the descriptive-analytical method, this article draws upon not only historical sources butdoctrinal treatises, poetry, and similar works to highlight the role of pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>) in the community’s persistence through these centuries, highlighting the multivalent meanings of the term. The study sheds light on how this method of both survival and self-perception allowed esoterically inclined communities like the Ismailis to live quietly among others who did not share their spiritual ethos, or who were openly hostile. It also discusses the dangers to self-identity inherent in practicing pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>).<br /><strong>Keywords:</strong> Taqiyyah, Ismailism, Shiism, Sufism, polemics and apologetics, Nizārī Quhistānī<br /><strong>Introduction: </strong><br />They must be slain … attack them and snatch the wealth from their hands … their property and children are to be distributed as booty … may Almighty God abase them and curse them!<br />Thus, spewing fire and brimstone, Jalāl-i Qāʾinī advised Sulṭān Shāhrukh (d. 850/1447) on how the Ismailis in his territories should be treated. This diatribe in his <em>Counsels to Shāhrukh</em> (<em>Naṣāʾiḥ-i Shāhrukhī</em>) is found in a hitherto unpublished manuscript in the Imperial Library of Vienna. It is one of the few surviving historical sources testifying to the continued existence of the Ismailis in this period. Sulṭān Shāḥrukh, Tamerlane’s son and successor, had sent Qāʾinī ‘to exterminate, suppress … kill, banish, and expel the [Ismaili] community from Quhistān.’ In his memoire, Qāʾinī is less concerned with the question of whether or not the Ismailis should be massacred than with the legal nicety of whether this should be done because they are apostates (<em>ahl-i riddat</em>), rebellious (<em>ahl-i baghy</em>), or non-Muslims against whom war was required (<em>ahl-i ḥarb</em>). An adherent of the Ḥanafī school of Sunnī Islam, he was charged by Sulṭān Shāhrukh with the task of suppressing ‘heretics’ (<em>bad-madhhabān</em>), presumably including not only the Shīʿah, but perhaps even non-Ḥanafī Sunnīs. One of the most frightening aspects of his tirade is its vilification of those in his own religious community who wished to live in peace with the Ismailis. He threatens these moderates with the same dire fate as those whom he deemed heretics.<br />This brief passage from the <em>Counsels to Shāhrukh</em> demonstrates that some earlier historians exaggerated in their depiction of the Ismailis’ destruction. The Mongol historian ʿAṭā-Malik Juwaynī concluded his <em>History of the World Conqueror</em> (<em>Taʾrīkh-i jahān-gushāy</em>) depicting how the triumphant Mongols had destroyed the Ismailis of Alamūt. Of the Ismaili Imam Rukn al-Dīn Khwurshāh and his adherents Juwaynī writes, “He and his followers were kicked to a pulp and then put to the sword; and of him and his stock no trace was left, and he and his kindred became but a tale on men’s lips and a tradition in the world.” However, recent research has demonstrated that, despite Juwaynī’s claims, even politically, the Ismailis remained active for some time in the South Caspian region and Alamūt itself. Soon, however, new information about them disappears from the writings of historians. How, then, did they survive, hidden from the eyes of the hostile world?<br /><strong>Material & Methods </strong><br />Advances in historiography have helped us realize that traditional histories often discuss only those in power. How, then, can the histories of religious and ethnic minorities, women, and other marginalized people be preserved? In the absence of sustained historical narratives, subfields like “subaltern studies” provide us tools and avenues for such documentation. This article analyses the Ismaili practice of pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>) as a method adopted by marginalized communities to ensure their survival in hostile circumstances. In so doing, it draws upon not only historical sources but doctrinal treatises, poetry, and similar works to highlight the role of pious circumspection in the Ismaili community’s persistence through these difficult centuries, highlighting the multivalent meanings of the term <em>taqiyyah</em>. The study sheds light on how this method of both survival and self-perception allowed esoterically inclined communities such as the Ismailis to live quietly among others who did not share their spiritual ethos, or who were openly hostile. It also discusses the dangers to self-identity inherent in pious circumspection.<br /><strong>Discussion of Results & Conclusions </strong><br />The section of Background explores historical understandings of <em>taqiyyah</em> in Ismailism and other communities prior to the Mongol debacle. “Hiding the Imam” discusses a recently discovered and unpublished passage in a manuscript that describes how the first post-Alamut Ismaili Imam, Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad, resorted to <em>taqiyyah</em> and how later Ismaili sources depicted the <em>taqiyyah</em> of the post-Alamūt Imams. “The Proof (<em>ḥujjat</em>) and Religious Hierarchy (<em>ḥudūd-i dīn</em>) in Times of Concealment” examines the religious hierarchy, and how it operated to maintain the community’s organizational structure. “Passing on a Persecuted Religious Tradition” draws on the poetry of Nizārī Quhistānī, who reminisces about his own upbringing and how his family maintained their religious heritage despite hostility. “The Cloak of Sufism” discusses the writings of both Ibn Khaldūn and Jalāl-i Qāʾinī, and their contemporary testimony that the Ismailis had survived as Sufis, a community that shared several elements of faith with them, but was not as severely persecuted. “Opportunities and Challenges of Spreading ʿAlid Devotion” speaks of how changing dynamics in parts of the Muslim world made devotion to the Ahl al-Bayt much more acceptable in general society. This allowed the Ismailis to appear as their sister Shiʿah community, the Twelvers. However, the closeness of the belief systems of the two communities also posed challenges, as those practicing <em>taqiyyah</em> as Twelvers could eventually become Twelvers themselves. The conclusion then summarizes the findings about how <em>taqiyyah</em> was adopted by the post-Mongol Ismaili community to survive the destruction of the Mongols and later hostility.<br />The aftermath of the Mongol invasions was certainly a time of darkness and oppression for the Ismaili community. While there is evidence of cooperation between the Ismailis and other Muslim communities, including the <em>mullahs</em> and other religious functionaries in those communities, it is equally true that certain members of the clergy allied themselves with political leaders bent on destroying the Ismailis. One of their methods of survival was pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>), in its multiple meanings. Ismailis were cautioned to conceal the name and whereabouts of the Imam. Many accessed the Imam through the dignitaries of the Ismaili hierarchy (<em>ḥudūd-i dīn</em>), and particularly through the Imam’s Proof (<em>ḥujjat</em>). These were described as the stars and the moon that give light when the sun of the imamate is hidden. As the writings of the poet Nizārī Quhistānī demonstrate, the religious tradition was often passed down by word of mouth within individual families. A shared religious ethos and the cultivation of a common poetic vocabulary enabled Ismailis to appear as Sufis in Quhistān, and most likely elsewhere as well. Increasing ʿAlid devotion in many parts of the Islamic world eventually allowed the community to adopt the outward appearance of Twelver Shīʿīsm in many places, rather than of Sunnism. This had the advantage of allowing greater openness about their dedication to the Prophetic family, but it also held the inherent danger of absorption into the sister community. Sources such as <em>The Counsels of Chivalry</em> (<em>Pandiyāt-I Jawānmardī</em>) indicate the emphasis placed on the recognition of and access to the living, present (<em>ḥāḍir</em>)<em> </em>Imam, rather than the occulted (<em>ghāʾib</em>) Imam, claiming that the clergy had tried to usurp the role of the Imam in his absence. Throughout all of this, as the Fāṭimid period Ismaili luminary al-Muʾayyad fī’l-Dīn Shīrāzī wrote, the Ismailis must have hoped that the continued Godwariness, prudence, and pious circumspection (<em>taqiyyah</em>),<em> </em>practised in the times of darkness and oppression, would ennoble their souls at a time yet to come, when the earth would “shine with the light of her Lord” (Quran XXXIX: 69).https://jhr.ui.ac.ir/article_29181_90d098b6986f71494412f6901e51fe6f.pdf