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

A clear transformation has emerged in the thought of Imami jurisprudence and theology during the 4th and 5th centuries AH, and researchers have often investigated this issue and its factors using two different approaches. Some with a context-oriented approach have highlighted historical contexts and considered the evolution of Imamiyyah theology and jurisprudence in this period to be affected by the context and historical conditions, especially the rise of the Buyid dynasty. Some others, using an invariant approach, have emphasized on the stability of Imami thought from emergence to the period in question, and considered the Imami thought of that period to be merely an expansion of the previous texts of the Imamiyyah. In this paper, the first two approaches mentioned in the researches are introduced, then the third approach called “principle-reality” approach which is based on the tradition of Imamiyyah scholars has been concluded that in the analysis of the evolution of Imami theology and jurisprudence in the discussed period, neither contextualism nor pure invariantism was a comprehensive approach. Meanwhile, the "principle-reality" approach that takes contexts, requirements, historical variables of that era as well as preserving the principles and theological-jurisprudential principles of the Imams (AS) is more credible in explaining the issue.

The first archaeological work in east of Fars, conducted by Sir A. Stein in 1934. However, an intensive survey, directed by De Miroschedji, was carried out in this region in 1971-72. Unfortunately, the materials of this survey were not studied in detail. So, the prehistoric cultures of the Fasa and Darab valleys remained unclear. To comprehend the prehistoric cultural developments of the east of Fars, the Miroscedji’s survey collections were studied first and completed with a stratigraphical excavation at Tappeh Vakilabad. The combination of the results of the survey and excavation provided an appropriate framework for the prehistoric cultures. These results affirmed that the prehistoric cultures of the east of Fars were entirely indigenous after the Bakun period to the beginning of the Kaftari era. The pottery styles of this era (Bakun-Kaftari), are introduced as Vakilabad, Zahak, Jouzjan, Roudbal, and Galyan. Furthermore, the settlement pattern analysis shows a reduction in the number of settlements in the Vakilabad period and more intensely in the second half of the fourth and first half of the third millennium BC. This pattern may indicate a shift in the subsistence economy of the large part of the society from agriculture to animal husbandry. The fourth and third millennium BC settlement patterns of the east of Fars are almost similar to KRB. However, in the second half of the fourth and first half of the third millennium BC, the KRB reached a complicated political and social developments, but the east of Fars became a peripheral region with the limited settled population.

Beyhagh's Treatise is the handwritten version attributed to Abolfazl Baygahi, the author of Massoudi's History book. In this manuscript, 373 words and phrases, sometimes Arabic, have been mentioned and suggested, instead of these words and phrases, Arabic equivalents are used. Considering this fact that Bayhaghi has one of the best examples of Persian prose in his writing (Massoudi's history book), there is a question whether a e writer who is the creator of such a beautiful prose in Farsi, can write or create such an equivalent book in the promotion of Arabic vocabulary? And Does the prevalence of Arabic vocabulary in Persian language and literature result in the performance of people like Bayhaghi and the publication of such that book or letter? This paper, examines the authenticity of the attribution of the Beyhaghi treatise to Abolfazl Baygahi by a historical approach and a descriptiveanalytical method and answers these questions: What evidences are there on the authenticity of this treatise attributed to Bayhaghi? And what is the effect of the diwaniyan / bureaus and the publication of such an equivalent book in the propagation of Arabic vocabulary in Persian language and literature? This study showed that due to the lack of a handwriting and the impossibility of comparing his handwriting with the edition of the handwriting of the dissertation, it is not possible to conclusively confirm the attribution of the Treatise of Loghat to Bayhaghi by simply comparing the Arabic vocabulary with the Arabic vocabulary of Massoudi's book, because only a few recommended proportions have been used in Massoudi history book. In addition, these terms have been used in Persian texts before the Beyhaghi textbook. Based on the writing of such book, we cannot call the bureaus the only factor promoting the Arabic vocabulary in Persian language and literature, Because the use of Arabic vocabulary in Persian language and literature was also common before the writing and publication of this essay.