Iranian concrete state that was established by Safavid owed its existence to cumulative that had created on the bases of religious beliefs and thoughts. In fact safavid Sheikhs and trained some followers for themselves during many years that they were ready to support Skeikhs humbly. Safavid again established Iranian identity some centuries after Sassanian Emperor that Shah Esmail was leading them and their political slogan and aim was foundation of Shiite in the Iranian culture and arranging all Iranian tribes. Regarding to newly founded structure of Safavid State and also its sensitive position and geopolitical weight, it had operation ability against its challengers and also it was so impressed. Safavid State geopolitical situation made them to enter to global and regional competitions so that even European States tried to have political relation with Safavid State in order to reduce Ottoman Empire on them. This essay by studying and surveying on Safavid monastery and dynasty and considering political geography of the Safavid State and studying on its essence and geopolitical analysis about foreign relation tries to answer this question that the role of Safavid State in creating and stabilizing of Iranian answer this question that the role of Safavid State in vreating and stabilizing of Iranian identity affected from what factors?

With the formation of the Shiite state government, the Safavid government, in the beginning of 14th (A.D) century the Uzbecks of Dasht-i- Qepchaq occupied the north of Timurid territory in Mavry Alnahr and Kharazm areas. In both the areas, Sheibani clan and Arbashahi clan controlled the situation, respectively. In the beginning, in addition to their religious differences, the Uzbecks claimed Khorasan’s possession and this was the main cause of their conflict with Safavid. Although, Sheibani clan continued its hostile relations with Safavid until their extinction; the Arabshahi clan acted different in their relations with Safavid. Arabshahi’s relation with Safavid was based on a contradiction. The Arabshahi khan’s attacked the Safavid territory borders, murdered, plundered, captured Iranian Shiieas and sold them as slave. Arabshahi khan’s had a peaceful relationship with Safavid based on consensus and convergence; they exchanged ambassadors, also they released hostages and send them to Safavid court and kind of accepted Safavids as their foster. The attempt is made here to identify the internal evolutions in Khwarazm during Arabshahi rules and the correlation between Arabshahi khans and Safavid government with an emphasis on the affecting factors.

Until the rise of the Safavids, Guilan enjoyed relative independence and was governed by local governments. Guilan's local rulers had political and economic relations with governments outside Guilan, especially the Safavids and the Ottomans. Guilan's local governments, especially the Karkiya dynasty, played an important role in the rising to power of the Safavids, so the Safavids were initially tolerant of them. However, after the transfer of the Safavid capital to Qazvin, their political independence, especially their relations with the Ottomans, was not bearable by the Safavids, so Guilan became one of the areas of conflict between the Ottomans and the Safavids. The main question of the present article concerns the why and the how of the conflicts between Ottoman and Safavid governments over Guilan. By examining historical sources and analyzing them, the findings show that the Ottomans and the Safavids were competing for religious dominance in Guilan and dominating economic resources, especially the silk industry and its international trade route until finally with the conquest of Guilan by Shāh Abbās, most people of Guilan inclined to the Twelve Shi'ites, and the economic and commercial interests of Guilan were entirely placed at the disposal of the Safavids.

Dar al-arshad of Ardabil as the beginning point of the Safavid movement; as will be proved by the convent of the mausoleum of Sheikh Safi city, the patriarch of the Safavid Sufi sheikh and their important role in the Safavid movement. Although the Safavid era had artistic developments and scholars on the subject of art history are cleared but it seems that there still some issues related to genealogy and religious orientation because of the complexity of the subject and considerable political Safavid era is a controversial issue. The rise of the Safavid dynasty in Iran and the Middle East from the religious and political history viewpoint are special. In other words, the Safavid in the history of the region are not only the role of government policy in 907 AD by Shah Ismail, but since the rise of the dynasty, the Abbasid Caliphate coincided with the start. This era in historical debates by historians is remembered as the pre- Safavid period. By this period, Religion was assigned to the descendants of the Prophet Muhammad. Discussion and debate about the Iranian Safavid and foreign scholars, the sovereignty of the family mentioned in the period leading to the hypothesis are caused at least two major groups. Review and analysis of this comparative approach to the study of historical documents and archaeological findings can helpful responding the ambiguities of history being discussed. The stone commands documents and information are valuable as research by prominent religious and political figures, under the provisions of binding of religious monuments and other public places has been installed for announcement. This study is aiming to read and introduce a newly found decree stone command which is the result of archaeological investigations of the Sheikh Safi al-din khanegah and shrine ensemble of Ardabil, and attempts to look at the relative instruments subject to the Lordship of the Safavid dynasty in the Safavid period. The stone is representing that the power steering gradually growing along with the descendants of the Safavid period between Aghkoyunlularand Koyunlu and sovereignty and the government is scrambling to reach. The provisions of this command stones in the last ten centuries AD, under Sultan Ali Mirza, the eldest son of Sheikh Haydar al-safavid ordered to be issued, is about the Ardabil Forgiveness tax rice market. In the stone commond lordship of the Sheikh Safi al-din khanegah and shrine ensemble in Ardabil is with titles such Velayet Sema (Divine or heaven Leader) and seyed al-sadat, abol al-hedaye(Great navigator), Keramet penah (Great Compassionate) Indicates the presence of the Lordship (Siyadat) of the Safavid dynasty. This unique effect which should be referred to as stone of lordship (Sange siyadat) Not only a valuable document to prove the supremacy and sovereignty in the absence of anti-rejection theory Safavid dynasty in the Safavid period but also Reflects the gradual growing simultaneously with the descendants of the Safavid rule Qara Qoyunlu and Aq Qoyunlu and force them ahainst the government. This could be the emergence of a new social structure of the Safavids in Iranian political and religious history.

Mazandaran also, like other areas of Iran, after establishment of Safavid dynasty, became a part of realm of this dynasty, but because this zone like some areas of this country was administered by local rulers, the measure of influence of Safavids government in Mazandaran depended on relations between local rulers of this area with Safavid kings, but due to being ruled by local rulers, the degree of Safavids influence over them depended on how close their relation was. As the Mazandaran rulers were disinclined for obeying Safavids, during the first half of this period (907-1007), Safavids power over them was weak and in the second-half period Safavids was encountered with serious challenges in spite of using different policies such as empowering some of the local rulers by giving them more responsibilities or supporting one of them against the others. Safavids, as one of the most powerful governments in Iran history, either did not have any decisive domination over Mazandaran or, even during some years, they did not have any relative influence over this area.

Safavid Iran’s relations with the Mughal Empire constitute one of the most volatile epochs in Iran-India foreign relations. An important element bearing upon the calibration of Iran’s and India’s foreign relations was their common enemy, i.e. Sheibani Uzbeks which were deemed as a common threat on the borders of Iran and India. On the other hand, Ottomans extensive activities on Iran’s western borders drove the Safavid Empire to seek amicable relations with the Mughal Empire in order to maintain peace to the east. In addition to political drivers of relations, historical relations between Iran and India and ample cultural commonalities wove Safavid kings and Mughal rulers ever closer. Like other bilateral ties, Safavid-Mughal relations had its share of tension; local Shiite rulers in Dakan were always supported by the Safavid Empire and Mughal rulers were opposed to the expansion of relations between Indian local dynasties and Iran. Although the Safavid attached great importance to local rulers in Dakan, the most important factor that marred Safavid-Mughal relations was Qandehar which led to several military encounters. The current research draws upon historical method to identify and explain the main drivers of Safavid-Mughal relations.

The intellectual, literary and scientific record of Mohtasham Kashani and Feyz Kashani is worth considering in terms of their political relations with the Safavid government. A comparison of these two worldviews shows that the influence of the discourse of the Safavid era and its cultural productions and direct intellectual structure on these two personalities caused them to interact with the Safavid court in two distinct ways and inevitably have two types of connections and dealings with it. A comparison of their relationship with the center of power and politics of the Safavid era shows that these two Kashani personalities, under the influence of political, historical and cultural contexts, intellectual foundations and psychological capacities as well as their life period established two distinct relations with the Safavid court, which was directly influenced by components such as their view of Shiism, their distance and proximity to the Safavid court, intellectual and literary interests and backgrounds, the critical spirit and the companionship and empathy with the court. In this study, we try to explain the role of this influence on their attitude towards the Safavid court and the results of each of these two attitudes, by examining the effect of the discourse and intellectual-ideological atmosphere of Safavid Iran on the worldview of these two Kashani personalities.

The relationships between the Safavids and the Shirvānshāhs and the situation of the Shirvān province during the Safavid’s reign comprise one of the important chapters in Safavid history from the politico-military dimension and on the internal and regional level. The appearance of Shah Ismā‘īl I in the scene of political challenge and his attack on Shirvān in 906/1500، destabilized the power of the local Shirvānshāhī government and the age-old relationship based on enmity and violence between the two dynasties of Shirvānshāhī and Safavids turned into compromise and submission of the Shirvānshāhs to the Safavids. In the developments emerged in the political arena with the establishment of the Safavid state، the Shirvānshāhs lost their independence and turned into tribute payers to the Safavids، which continued until the early decades of the reign of Shāh Tahmāsb I. Finally، despite frequent revolts by the Shirvānī claimants and the involvement of the Ottoman، Tartar، and Daghestan forces in the existing clashes، the Safavids were able to transform Shirvān from the situation of submission and tribute paying into their own explicit sovereignty and managed to put an end to the political life of the Shirvānshāhāns. In this article، the relationship between the Safavids and the Shirvānshāhān during the years 930/1523 to 995/1586 from the beginning of the Monarchy of Shāh Tahmāsb I until the rising of the Safavid Shāh ‘Abbās I to power، which underwent many ups and downs، the factors influential in these bilateral relations، the position of the Shirvānīs versus the Safavid sovereignty، and the role of peripheral forces in the conflicts of the Safavids with the Shirvānīs، are studied and analyzed.

Zahabiya was a Shia Sufi genealogy practiced during the whole Safavid rule in Iran. It played various roles in the social and political arenas. This genealogy experienced fewer ups and downs in comparison with the other genealogies such as Shia or Sunni, in the Safavid era. Its relationship with the Safavid dynasty, under the influence of the religious and political conditions of Iran, could be divided into three distinct periods. Using a descriptive-analytical approach, relying on library resources and implementing original historical and Sufi texts, this research tried to find an answer to these questions: What were the socio-political activities of the Zahabiya genealogy?, and How was their interaction with the Safavid kings? The findings indicated that this genealogy was different from the other Sufi genealogies because of the four following reasons: 1 – the proximity of the Safavid dynasty to the Zahabiya 2-Zahabiya''s efforts to save and stabilize the Safavid dynasty 3- Zahabiya''s attempts to resurrect the Sufi background of the Safavid dynasty and their refusal to accept positions in the court and the government, and eventually 4- Zahabiya''s mild mystic behaviors.

In the early days of the Safavid government, there was a favorable ground for the claim of deputyship of the Imam of the Time for the Safavid kings. Some Western scholars studying the Safavid, having learned about these conditions and ideals of the Safavid kings to realize the establishment of the Shi’a religion, have suggested that the Safavid kings have claimed to be the deputy of the Imam of the Time for their own government. By examining the various factors influencing the arguments of these researchers, the incorrectness of this theory is proven. In this research, it has been attempted to present a proper and correct image of the beliefs and claims of the Safavid kings in relation to the issue of Mahdism and the type of relationship between the Safavid and Imam Mahdi’s government.