دکتر ابوالفضل محبی

Criticism of new historicism has been formed in opposition to traditional historicism. Contrary to traditional historicism, which speaks of the one-sided influence of history on literature, new historicism believes in the mutual influence of literature and history on each other. The story of Bahram and Golandam is one of the remarkable poems in Kurdish literature, which are called "Beit". Beits are syllable-weighted folktales recited by beit readers. It can be said that there are some similarities between the stories of Bahram and Golandam and Zal and Rudabeh. Therefore, it is possible to measure these two stories with each other. In this research, relying on library and documentary studies and with an analytical-comparative approach, we have tried to give a reading of the two stories in question based on the concepts of new historicism. The findings show that although both stories are apparently romantic and the conflicts are about love and marriage; But inside the story, power and discourse interests are fundamental issues. Every discourse tries to maintain its political and social interests.

Modern historicism is one of the theories in the field of literary criticism and one of the sub-branches of post-structural criticism, which was founded by Steven Greenblatt in the late seventies and early eighties. Contrary to traditional historicism, which speaks of the one-sided influence of history on literature, modern historicism believes in the two-sided influence of literature and history on each other. In this research, relying on library and documentary studies and with an analytical-descriptive approach, we have tried to examine the story of Qubad Pirouz in Ferdowsi's Shahnameh based on the criticism of modern historicism, identify and analyze its discourses, and finally get a new meaning from it. Based on the obtained results, it can be said that there are five discourses in Qabad's story, whose conflict with each other forms the basis of the narrative and moves it forward. The identified discourses are: Qabad, Blash, Sokhrai, Mazdak and Mobdan discourses. Each of these discourses gain power in a period of time and are placed in the center; But the amount of friction is such that they are pushed from the center to the margins again. All in all, in this research, an effort has been made to get a new understanding of the story by analyzing the relationships between the discourses and shedding light on the dark corners of the story.

Abstract
Literary criticism is the analysis of the text's semantic layers based on theories that are mostly drawn from other fields of the humanities. The new historicism, which was established by Stephen Greenblatt in the late 1970s and early 1980s, is one of the most current theories in this area. Modern historicism holds that literature and history both have an impact on one another, in contrast to conventional historicism, which speaks of the one-sided influence of history on literature. Modern historians contend that literature does more than just reflect history; rather, the link between history and literature is dialectical rather than reflective. Based on current historicism, library, and document studies, and using a descriptive-analytical approach, this study has looked into and analyzed the story of Fereydoun and Zahak, and has offered a new interpretation of it. According to the study's findings, the conflict between the Iranian discourse and the non-Iranian discourse (Fereydoun and Kaveh) in this story is driven by power, which ultimately leads to the dominance of the Iranian discourse. The characters of this story are each representative of discourse in the story community. Iranian discourse is on the margins and out of power at first, while non-Iranian discourse is dominant and in power. However, by the end of the story, the situation has changed. The plot is driven by the conflict between Iranian and non-Iranian discourse on power.
The story in question was composed as a poem in one of the most sensitive historical situations, that is, the time when the Arab element thought itself superior to Iran and Iranians. The ideological pressures from the Arabic discourse have become more sophisticated throughout this time, and they now want to marginalize the Iranian discourse, which takes the shape of the Shu'ubiyya movement. The space for Shu'ubiyya's Iranian discourse has been constrained by these restrictions from the Baghdad-based authority and its close allies in Iran, notably the Ghaznavid empire. In such a circumstance, Ferdowsi uses the story of Fereydoun and Zahak, which is rich in elements of battle and resistance, to rekindle Iranians' spirit of battle and resistance against the notion of Arab superiority. This story reflects the struggle between Iranian discourse (Feryedoun and Kaveh) and non-Iranian discourse (Zahhak); the struggle that existed during Ferdowsi's period and the Shu’ubiyya movement has been in conflict with what was against Iran and Iranians. Freyedoun, an Iranian aristocrat, is related to Jamshid. Zahak pulled Jamshid down from the kingdom and killed him. Since then, Fereydoun and all other Jamshidis have lost their position in the society and privileges. Fereydon's fight against Zahak is motivated by three different reasons, considering the fact that Zahak also murdered his father Abtin and the Bermaye cow that Fereydon fed on as a child. The reasons were 1) national motivation (saving Iran from the oppressive non-Iranian element), 2) class motivation (restoring the social position and privileges of the Jamshidian class), and 3) personal motivation (taking revenge on Zahhak for murdering Abtin and Barmayeh cow). As a patriotic Iranian, Fereydoun finds Zahak's existence intolerable and feels it is his national responsibility to rebel against the foreign, alien, and oppressive forces that have imposed themselves on Iran.
In this study, an effort is made to analyze the Fereydoun and Zahhak battle story in Shahnameh using modern historicism and to provide a novel interpretation of it. The research is based on new theories and schools, text analysis, and criticism. By using library and documentary studies, as well as descriptive and analytical approaches, we have attempted to offer a novel interpretation of the text under discussion and respond to the following research questions: 1) What are the dominant (in power) and marginal (outside of power) discourses, and what is their connection to power? 2) Why did Ferdowsi favor a particular discourse? 3) What was the reason for it and how did this favoritism occur? 4) What is the relationship and similarity between the story of Fereydoun and Zahak with the history of Ferdowsi's time? 5) What genre and group are the target audience of the story? And 6) what is the intertextual relationship of this story with other Persian literary texts?
Research The study's findings demonstrate that the struggle between the Iranian discourse (represented by Fereydoun and Kaveh) and the non-Iranian discourse in this story is motivated by a desire for power which ultimately leads to the dominance of the Iranian discourse. The characters of this story are each representative of discourse in the story community. Other discourses are on the margins and outside of power, but Zahak's discourse is dominant and in power. The effort and struggle between these marginal discourses to gain power and the center gave rise to the story, and these conflicts between the marginal discourses and the dominant discourse (Zahak) serve as its driving force. The element of conflict in the story is represented through disobedience, rebellion, and war. As a poet, Ferdowsi has clearly taken the side of the marginal discourses centered on Fereydoun. Ferdowsi is inclined toward the usage of positive adjectives and phrases. He sets his supported discourses apart from other discourses in this way.
Discussion of Results and Instead of focusing on the characters' specific historical actions, this story attempts to explore the universal nature of man by narrating the behavior of the characters in a way that makes the reader think about the historical patterns of the members of their society or even the general nature of mankind. As a result, any autocratic, murderous, and cruel dictator may be likened to Zahhak, and every person fighting for liberation from tyranny can be compared to Kaveh. In addition, there are similarities between the characters in the story and historical figures from Ferdowsi's era that are worthy of consideration and come about as a result of how we interpret the story. For instance, Zahhak and the Abbasid caliphs are comparable in terms of race, autocracy, and animosity toward the Iranian race. In other words, the murder, repression, and brutality of the Abbasid caliphs have been demonstrated in the form of the myth of Zahhak. Additionally, there are similarities between Abu Mansour Abd al-Razzaq and Abtin in the Zahhak stories; both of them were murdered by Iranians and are of Iranian ancestry and royal descent. That is, Abtin was murdered by Zahhak Tazi and Abu Mansour by Abul Hasan Simjur of Arabic descent. Additionally, both of their children seek revenge; Fereydon rises against Zhahak, and Mansour, the son of Abu Mansour Abd al-Razzaq, rises against Simjurians and Samanians, and is murdered in this manner.

Literary criticism is the exploration of a text's semantic layers using theories and methodologies that are mostly drawn from other humanities disciplines. New Historicism, which Steven Greenblatt developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, is one of these theories. Modern historicism holds that literature and history both have an impact on one another, in contrast to conventional historicism, which speaks of the one-sided influence of history on literature. In this study, we attempted to evaluate the tale of Rostam and Sohrab in relation to modern historicism, identify and analyze its discourses, and propose a novel interpretation from it. In this narrative, a variety of discourses have generally been depicted, and they develop the plot in conflict with another. These discourses include the Nirani discourse (Afrasiab), the official wrestling discourse (Rostam), the informal wrestling discourse (Sohrab), the women's discourse (Tahmina and Gerd Afrid), and the Shahriari discourse (Kikavos) (other Iranian and Nirani wrestlers).

Mantiq Al-Tir Khaqani's ode is one of the brilliant examples of Persian literature. This ode is also one of the remarkable examples of the language and journey of the birds. A number of birds have gathered in the spring season and each one is praising a flower and arguing about the superiority of the flower in question. In this research, we have tried to examine this ode from a new angle based on the theory of intertextuality and with a descriptive-analytical approach and relying on documentary studies. The theory of intertextuality is one of the methods of examining the text, which was formed by Julia Kristeva, under the influence of the theory of conversational logic of Mikhail Bakhtin. The basis of this theory is that it explains the meaning of the text based on the conversation and interaction with other texts before and after it; Because meaning is the result of conversation and conversation has different ways. The findings of this research show that this text (ode) is the meeting place of various discourses, including musical, mystical-philosophical, epic, religious, historical and literary. All these discourses have been involved in the formation of this text (ode) like pieces of a puzzle, and finally they have all reached unity in the form of poetry.

The myth of Keyumarth is one of the most important myths of Iranian culture enjoying a high research capacity in various aspects and qualities. Therefore, it requires systematic and consistent theory-based research and literal criticism. In the present research, an attempt has been made to analyze Keyumarth myth based on the theory of structuralist mythology from Levi Strauss. Since enough and even more traditional literary criticism-related studies have been conducted on books such as Shahmnameh, and systematic and modern critiques have not received enough attention, a theory-based research considering literary criticisms approaches richly needs to be carried out in this area. The present study followed a qualitative design making use of a plenty of literary and documentary studies; i.e., first, the narratives related to Keyumarth myth were extracted from various books and then they were classified. Then, mythological units were extracted from among the narratives, arranged in a dichotomous manner and finally analyzed. The results of the present study revealed that the structure of Keyumarth myth is based on three dichotomies: holy/ unholy dichotomy, power/ power decline dichotomy, and nature/ culture dichotomy.