جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « غزنویان » در نشریات گروه « تاریخ »

The presence of Iranian scholars and scientists and the support of the sultans and princes of it, the Persian language, literature and historiography got a special place in the Ottoman Empire. Under the patronage of the Ottoman court, several historical works were written. Idris Bitlisi has a special place among the Persian historians of the Ottoman court, and he can be considered as the most prominent representative of Persian writing and Iranian historiography in the Ottoman court. After presenting a description of the life of Idris Bitlisi, focusing on the text of Hasht Bihisht and Salim Shahnameh as his two historiographical works, the present study aims to identify the main components of his history writing and historiography and explain these components in the final step. The findings of this research show that the detailed report of events, using artificial and literary prose, the mixing of text with poems, verses, and hadiths, the lack of sufficient references to the sources of the narrations, and the Regular division of contents are the most important features of his history writing and the Presenting an imperial image of the Ottoman Empire, the effort to legitimize the Ottomans, using the historical narrative to serve the political purposes of the Ottoman state, placing the court in the center of the narrative, not confining to quoting political history, paying attention to governmental, scientific and social institutions, influential men and scholars, and pay attention to the conditions of neighboring nations are among his historiographical features. Based on the findings of this research, it is possible to prove that Bitlisi's use of complicated and artificial prose aimed to establish his position in the Ottoman court and present an imperial image of the Ottoman Empire, and legitimize it to deal with rivals such as the Safavids and Mamluks.

One of the important cultural issues after the domination of Islam is the attitude to music. In the analyses carried out by Islamic scholars, the use of music was distinguished into two permitted and non-permitted flows. As a result of the use of illegal music, two discourses of sanctions and acceptance were formed, which were qualitatively and quantitatively different. In the Ghaznavid dynasty, these two discourses were manifested in a special way, the limits of which is the main issue of this article. The qualitative research method is based on the description and analysis of content and the method of collecting its sources is library. According to the findings, music in itself was not considered forbidden, and non-musical factors such as the text of poetry, dance, drinking wine were the main causes of music prohibition. Except for exceptional cases, the courtiers were more inclined to acceptance of music, but the discourse of prohibition prevailed in the society. The mentioned cases and the dependence of musicians on the court led to the acceptance of some norms that were far from prohibitions. Court musicians felt more freedom to perform these norms in private places, and this connection could be beneficial to the actors of places that did not set limits for prohibitions.

About forty of the 146 years of Saffarid dynasty is related to the period of formation and the peak of this dynasty. The rest of the life of this government was spent in the form of a local government. However, the successors of the Saffarids did not shy away from the political plans of the founders of this government. Following the death of Amr ibn al-Layth, although the Saffarids are believed to have no longer challenged the Abbasid caliphate in this part of their reign as a local government, scattered reports of sources as well as coins found show that the successors of the Saffarids (287-339 AH) did not always follow the procedure of full obedience of the caliphate in practice.The aim of this study is to identify the conflicts and overlaps in the reports of historiographical sources in comparison with the results of the study of coins minted by this family in relations with the Abbasid Caliphate. The Abbasid Caliphate did not sympathize with the Saffarids, and the Saffarids' attempt to gain lasting political legitimacy from the Caliphate was unsuccessful. The results of this study showed that the study of coins can fill the gap of historical reports. By examining the coins, it was possible to provide a relatively clearer picture of historical events based on the Saffarids' relations with the Abbasid Caliphate.

Elephants’ use dates back to ancient times. As one the after-Islamic dynasties Ghaznavid could take advantage of this animal as one of the pillars of their militarism in the extraterritorial and intra-territorial battles due to their numerous army deployments along the Indian borders. The present study aimed to investigate the militaristic properties of the war elephant in Ghaznavids’ army through a descriptive-analytical method. The elaboration and explication of the position and function of elephant in Ghaznavids’ army deployment is the most important issue of this article. The question is “which of this animal’s militaristic properties were employed by Ghaznavid army and what have been the strengths and weaknesses of using them in the army deployments?”The present study’s findings indicated that the creation of terror and dread, disintegration of the enemy’s army lines, treading of the soldiers, supporting friendlies, carriage of weapons and troopers and destruction of the enemy army’s fortifications have been the most important strengths of this animal. Being hit by an arrow, damage to the trunk and stampeding have been amongst the most distinct weaknesses of this animal in the course of the combats. It has been so that the supply of food and water, taking care and even providing a shelter for them have been amongst the most substantial problems for elephant-keeping.

From pre-Islamic times to the end of the fourth century AH, the political community of the eastern plateau of Iran, especially Khorasan and Transoxiana, consisted of local governments. These local governments were independent in managing their internal affairs. In the fourth century AH, the Samanid society suffered from internal security crises (tensions and conflicts between social groups) and external crises (attacks by Turkmen forces, especially the Karakhanids) due to the changing value patterns and high sectarianism. In this situation, by weakening the voluntary aspects of social order, the political dimension of order (force) was inevitably created with the help of military institutions and led to the transformation of the power structure and the transition from the Samanids to the Ghaznavid military government. In this regard, Ghaznavid law enforcement and military institutions, based on their organizational nature, tried to exercise direct and comprehensive control over Khorasan and neighboring lands by eliminating local governments and applying repression and establishing a security environment. In other words, the goal of Ghaznavid centralism was to use all available capabilities in society to deal with increasing security crises. This article examines the security situation in the Samani-Ghaznavid community and shows why the security crisis led to the removal of local governments in the region and what were the consequences for society. The method of this qualitative research is library study with the approach of contextual analysis.

One of the most important financial sources of the Ghaznavid economy in the early period, from the establishment of slaves led by Alpetikin and Sabuktigin in Ghazni (351 AH) to the end of the reign of Sultan Mahmud (421 AH) was reliance on the system of booty, which was the main support for minting high quality coins. But since the reign of Sultan Massoud (432-421 AH) faced a silver crisis, during which the value of the currency decreased and the number of high-denomination coins also decreased. Hence, the later Ghaznavid sultans turned to other easy-to-reach incomes to cover their current and military expenses. It is assumed that the silver crisis due to the reduction of grade and its lack of equipment for the troops led to the evolution of Ghaznavids' sources of income from the looting system to become more dependent on the revenues of the tax system. The method used in this research is descriptive-analytical based on qualitative and quantitative evidence and coinage study. The results show that the decline in conquests in India, the costs of the succession dispute, and the huge costs in unproductive affairs have left the Ghaznavid facing a silver crisis and a devaluation of the currency and as a result, the Ghaznavid sultans resorted to the revenues of the tax system to compensate for the lost financial resources, especially the provision of cash to their troops in the form of remittances and double impositions, which also added to the difficulty of governing them.

Political marriage was a prudential connection between ruling families and was regarded as an effective method to achieve important governmental goals. This type of marriage became more popular from the fourth century AH onwards, simultaneously with the formation and development of semi-independent governments in Iran. Needed to establish the peaceful relations and to take advantage of the opportunities ahead, the rulers used them to solve the complex and political equations. About the role of political marriages in regulating the relations of governments from the 4th to the 7th century AH, so far has not been conducted any coherent and thematic research, especially based on public histories. The Findings of this research show that some of the Abbasid caliphs, the semi-independent governments of Al-Buwayhids ,Ghaznawids, Seljuks, Qarakhanids and some local governments have benefited the most from it. The results show that governments usually established marital ties to maintain position, confronting the enemy, deepening the friendship, the peace and security, expanding the territory, and rarely threatening and humiliating. The main function of these marriages was to facilitate, guarantee and complete the agreements and sometimes was the only solution of it. The present article will explain the evidences of political marriage in regulation of the relations of governments with a descriptive-analytical method.

The historical sources of the Ghaznavid period have been written in accordance with Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi’s approach based on putting excessive emphasis on Sabuktagin descendents. The Ghaznavid propaganda system has been based on writing historical and literary books during Sultan Mahmud's period. The most important component of Ghaznavid historiography in this system has been heroization of Sabuktagin and Sultan Mahmoud. The method of Ghaznavid historians has also affected the history of pre-Sabuktagin rulers. This way, an important part of Ghaznavid history has been reduced or eliminated in favor of Sabuktagin descendents. The present research aimed to describe a part of historical events distorted by Ghaznavid historians with an attempt to criticize the historiography of the Ghaznavid period by re-reading and reviewing the sources of narrations, especially by searching through the lost parts of Beyhaghi's history, which has remained in other works, such as Majma 'al-Ansab and Nasiri classes. Through an analytical method and by using the first-hand historical sources and comparing their narrations, the current research sought to answer the question of how historians approached the Ghaznavid rulers and sultans. The research findings showed that the historiography of Ghaznavids was mainly written in favor of Sabuktagin descendents and part of the history of Ghazni rulers was removed or reduced from Alptagin until Sabukatgin period, while part of Sabuktagin rulers and their slaves was generally accompanied by putting excessive emphasis on them and highlighting their role in political developments.

By recognizing the writers and rulers’ purposes in creating historical books, historians’ narratives will be better understood. Rulers’ desires have been among the influential components on historians’ approaches. In the Ghaznavid period, historians wrote their books generally under the influence of Ghaznavid sultans’ desires, especially Sultan Mahmud’s. Since Ghaznavid historians’ narrations were repeated in later periods, not many different works were found for comparing their narrations about the Ghaznavids. It seemed that Bayhaqi’s history was made with a different approach from those of other historians based on some narrations and the missing parts could force us carefully review some historical narratives about the Ghaznavids. Therefore, the author took a critical approach to reading the narrations in the historical sources according to their authors’ purposeful verbal actions and by comparing the historical books and taking a list of contradictions in their narrations. Also, based on some remaining narrations probably in Bayhaqi’s history, an analytical study of Ghaznavid historiography was conducted. Accordingly, the present article was written on the basis of questions about how and why the historians in the Ghaznavid period took such an approach in favor of the rulers and sultans related to this dynasty. In response to these questions, this hypothesis was raised that the historians’ approaches were generally adopted in accordance with Mahmoud Ghaznavi’s propaganda system, while the relevant narrations led to putting excessive emphasis on Sabuktagin’s descendents.

With an analytical approach and through comparison of the main historical sources and based on library studies, the present research sought to find the answer to the question of what effects Mahmoud Ghaznavi's propaganda system had on Ghaznavid historiography.

The historiography of the Ghaznavid period developed on the basis of Sultan Mahmoud's propaganda system and historians served as an important part of this system. In this approach to historiography, on the one hand, Sultan Mahmoud in Iran and Ghazi in India were shown as heroes, based on Yamini history written in Arabic, while Arabic sources, such as Ibn Al-Athir, Ibn Al-Jawzi, and others were influenced by Utbi heroism, thus expanding it. On the other hand, the history of rulers before Sultan Mahmoud was written according to his desires and opinions. According to Sultan Mahmud's father, who had a small government dependent on the Samanids, a hero in Ghaznavid historiography was shown to be the savior of the Samanids and repellent of Indians. In this historiography, it was felt necessary to remove his predecessors and reduce Ghaznavid history to the history of Sabuktagin’s descendents.  Aloptagin's actions in Ghaznavid historiography were represented only because they were related to Sabuktagin. Hence, in Ghaznavid historiography, the rulers from Sabuktagin until Aloptagin periods were removed just to show that Sabuktagin was the most prominent surviving Turkish commander in Ghazni Province after Aloptagin’s death. Balkategin and Burytegin’s names and rules were probably mentioned contrary to Sabuktagin’s professionalism and merits. Many later historians attributed Sabuktagin’s rule to Aloptagin’s death. However, Ghaznavid historians, who presented different details, and Bayhaqi, who wrote his book at the time when Ghaznavid power and their propaganda system were weakened, used narrations that might have remained in Ghazni and represented parts of the events distorted by Utbi and Gardizi.

The slaves under Alpetikin did not rely on certain financial resources in their group movement independent of the Samanid government. Therefore, from the beginning of moving and settling in Ghazni city (351 AH), they based their required financial resources on the system of booty. However, their target groups were more than non-Muslims in India, which in this sense also gave their plunder religious legitimacy. This process is accompanied by a period of interruption in the period of several of Alpetikin successors; It resumed with the coming to power of Sabuktikin (386-366 AH). And in the time of Sultan Mahmud (388-421 AH) it had become the most important component of their economic resources. The main question is why the economy of Ghaznavids in the early period was driven to rely on the system of booty? The obvious assumptions are that religious motives or so-called jihad in the way of God and the spread of Islam, as well as economic motives and the plunder of India's wealth have been effective in this regard. The present paper uses historical description and analysis method, while validating the above motives, has presented another important factor, namely the change in Ghaznavid land relations as an alternative factor in this field as a result of Amir Sabuktikin reforms in preventing the troops from engaging in agriculture and revoking their land ownership.

The internal contradiction among the militants in Qaznavid era from the advent of the first to the last sultans of this dynasty particularly in time of Masoud (421-432 After Hijrah) and Mahmood (389-421 After Hijrah) is considered the main reason of failure of government. After a review on the political and military structure of Qaznavid government, the article studies the reasons of collapse of Sultan Masoud’s government with the emphasis on the existent conflicts in the foundation of military authority of Qaznavids in form of internal chaos, external battles, struggle to achieve authority, and aggressions among the governmental individuals. This internal conflict was to the extent that the strategies towards getting rid of the present instable situation were neutralized.

Sunni was the state religion of Iran during the Ghaznavid dynasty and they got their governmental legitimacy such as samanid empire and Seljuk dynasty from Abbasids caliph, so protection of religion and its spread was one of the basic duty of Ghaznavid. They were religious fanatic and confined to other religions such as Ismailism, Alawites, and Sadat. The method of this study is based on library books and was the descriptive and analytical approach and survey on the social and political life of Shiite sects against the Ghaznavid fanaticism which lead to two points of view. One is Taqiya which is used by Alawites and Sadat. The other is extremist methods of Ismailism. Ghaznavids had a negative view to Ismailism because they were extremist and had religious communication to Fatimid of Egypt.

After the establishment of the Ghaznavid government in 351 AH, the kings of this government attacked different parts of India in order to expand their territory and to gain political legitimacy and economic benefits. The scope and intensity of these attacks expanded especially during the reign of Sultan Mahmud. This research, using a descriptive-analytical method and based on library sources, seeks to answer what repercussions the attacks of Sultan Mahmud had on the sources of this era. According to the findings of this study, the poetic and prose works of the Ghaznavid era, though highlighting the economic dimensions of those conquests, by addressing issues such as ruining Hindu temples and constructing mosques instead, teaching Islamic principles, sending portions of trophies to the center of the Islamic Caliphate, and also allocating some portions to Sadat, religious motives of Sultan Mahmud has been said to be the main reason behind those conquests.

The barbarian people who came to Iran in the middle centuries, and sometime later came to power, despite the claims of protecting and respecting the Shari'a, did not adhere to the teachings of Islam in protecting the rights of others, especially the opposition, in practice. It is noteworthy that this approach was not only taken by them, and rival groups and other actors in the field of politics practically took such a course, and on that basis, a huge amount of the means of punishment in the religious political conflicts of Iran was used at that time.Therefore, this research seeks to answer the main question why and how these tools were used to punish the guilty and innocent ones!  In order to answer this question, the authors, using descriptive-analytical method and using library resources, first of all investigated the type and manner of using punitive instruments, and then their degree of conformity with the Shari'a doctrines and their application in the course of the intended period were reviewed

Abdol Rashid ibn Mahmoud, in 441 AH, succeeded in relying on the throne as one of the Ghaznavid sultans. But, due to the lack of power and ability to govern the territory of the Emperor Ghaznavi, he soon faced a major crisis, and his rule ended after two years with the rebellion of Tughrul Usurper. The present study tries to call for the dark angles the assassination of Abdolrashid Mahmoud by his commander-in-chief (=Sepahsalar) servant, namely, Tughrul, who is variously nicknamed in the sources and studies of Ghaznavid era as the Denier of God’s blessings, The Forsaken, and the Usurper. The real character of this servant remains obscured. Moreover, the reasons for his uprising against his master have not been clarified. The present study is descriptive-analytical and, relying on library resources, tries to find appropriate answers for the research questions regarding the real Ghaznavid master of Tughrul, and his ruling years. The findings of the research show that Tughrul, contrary to the imagination of some sources, was the servant of Sultan Mahmoud, and later he was present at the time of Sultan Masoud's successors in the Ghaznavid court, and his ruling, based on historical data is more than what is usually mentioned sources.

The formation and development of the emirate system and its functioning in the history of Iran is of Islamic significance. The system of emirates as a political structure in the Middle Ages and in an era in which the Iranian identity was in crisis has led to the revival and continuation of Iranian identity. In this regard, considering the role and position of the Emirate system in the continuity and continuity of Iranian identity, this paper tries to answer this important question: the Emirate system as a symbol of the political system and the historical interlude of Iranian society in the third to fifth centuries What kind of special efforts did they revitalize and strengthen the Iranian identity? The results of this paper, which have been carried out with the usual descriptive-analytic approach in historical research, suggest that Emirati systems such as Samanids, Ghaznavids and Albayeh, utilizing historical and cultural factors as well as in the light of Islam in restoring identity The Iranian people have been struggling to persuade the Iranian identity in the shadow of the Emirate system and in the context of Iranian culture and society during Islamic period.

In the early centuries of Muslim entry to Iran, domestic and foreign trade of Iran compared to the pre-Islamic periods, due to the collapse of politics., since the end of the third AH century, powerful governments were formed in Iran, including the Samanids and the Ghaznavids. These two powers dominated the communication paths and various parts of Iran, where in pre-Islamic periods, extensive communication was taking place. Certainly, at this time, the proper conditions for commercial communications were provided because many governments which sought to consolidate their power as much as possible, were formed. As a result of these conditions, different craftsmen, merchants and traders could operate in a calm and relatively secure environment. Given the realm of the two governments in question, these dynasties could have a major impact on the growth and prosperity of the targeted activities by providing the appropriate grounds and carrying out the necessary activities through the application of specific controls in the commercial sectors. It would have had a great deal of benefit for them, and this could have become an important and effective part of the communications and the rivalries of these dynasties with other governments and countries inside and outside Iran. Considering the importance of the issue of trade and commerce in surviving the political life of governments, the aim of this study is to examine the general commercial and commercial aspects of the above-mentioned

Based on the sociology of order approach, the present paper seeks to deal with the relationship between the militants' promoted role and the establishment of social order. This paper is a case study of the status of the society of the Middle Ages in the fourth century A.H. A historical review of the texts of this era using the sociology of order approach shows that - contrary to the state-centered understanding of the concept of security, the studies of the Middle Ages indicate the centrality of the concept of security in the concept and definition of social order and the mechanisms of its preservation and durability, because the establishment of social order and security faced many problems in the fourth century A.H due to the intensified process of segregation and propagation of various social groups as well as the appearance of various social disorders in the eastern geography of the Islamic society. Under these conditions, the community was getting away from the cognitive standards, the normative system, and a common and universal value reference. Furthermore, the state's mobilization ability, concentration of power and legitimacy declined due to the increased tensions and various social classifications. In these circumstances, the groups close to power began competing and even fighting together in order to establish the external order of the society. This process, which resulted in the collapse of the Samanids and the rise of the Ghaznavids, provided the conditions for the establishment of external order in the society.

This paper has studied the reflection of equipment,techniques and military instruments during Ghaznavian and Seljuks in the texts of "Tarikh Behagi ","Rahatolsodor & Ayatolsoroor" and "Farsnameh" in a comparative form. It is a response to the question that to what extent the mentioned texts encompass the issues related to the equipment,techniques and military instruments during Ghaznavian and Seljuks? The authors of this paper have tried to reflect the military issues in these three works and compare them comprehensively. The research method is descriptive _analytical in a librarian form . The research objective is to study the texts of these three works,then it will examined the obtained data regularly. The result of this research indicates that in all three works the military issues are investigated .But in comparison, the text of Tarikh Beihaghi has depicted the military aspects more than others.

Ghaznavids (360 -431) were from the middle ages with the origin of the Gholami who came to rule after the abduction of their believers in eastern Iran. Taxes were comon and traditional sources of this government›s economy, and since the iqtas due to political problems were never considered by the Ghaznavid sultans, the achievement of India›s spoils became the source of the livelihood of this dynasty, which, though financed by the government, The great army were kept active, but these spoils, elephants and slaves did not create the expected results in the production, development and economic prosperity of the Ghaznavids, and the abundance of problems caused a rise in liquidity, inflation and high prices. In this article, we have been examining the effect of military expedition to India on the financial strength of the armies, that caused transformed them from brave and agile warriors to wealthy class. This political and moral degeneration caused failing the Ghaznavids against the Turkmen movements in Khorasan, and losing their financial and military powers by plunder. The Ghaznavid peasantries that because of the campaign to India, had received a lot of tax pressure, with heavy taxes and the emersion of famine, they gradually found an impartial or even biased approach to the Turkmen, where the ultimate defeat of the Ghaznavids was in the battle of the Dandanghan.

The central government of Ghazni, despite the powerful empire, faced many problems at the end of its rule in Khorasan, and the danger of the Seljuk Turks being present for Ghaznavids was a very significant threat. The study of security, disciplinary, and economic dimensions of cities, including Khorasan, which is one of the central issues in history, is important in this period.Ghaznavids were unsuccessful in adapting their policies to the economic and political interests of Khorasan.The heavy cost of the Ghaznavi court caused extortion of huge sums of money from the peasant and confiscation of wealthyby the Ghaznavi tax collectors.On the other hand, the presence of pressure groups in the plains of the Transoxiana, which sought to reach suitable pasture lands and escape the looting of the Ghazans, placed Khorasan in their desires.Thenumerousbattles between the Ghaznavids and the Seljuks made Khorasan a ruin.The conditions of security, climate, environment, and geography of Khorasan were effective in defeating the Ghaznavids from the Seljuks. Famine, dehydration, the preferential attitude of merchants and landowners of Khorasan to the policies of the Ghaznavid government were one of the main factors in the defeat of Ghaznavids in the Battle of Dandanaqan.