نشریه مطالعات تاریخی جنگ
سال سوم شماره 4 (زمستان 1398)

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.

For centuries, the Abbasid caliphs turned the centers of their caliphate into secure business areas through controlling and securing Iraq and its surrounding territories. Several factors contributed to such flourishing economic condition which consisted of staying away from the opposition and their bases, proximity to their governments' supporters, and the political geography of Baghdad in terms of being close to the Tigris and Euphrates. These rivers and their numerous waterways had two important commercial and military functions for the Abbasids. The most important function of rivers for the Abbasids, however, was military and strategic helping them to suppress domestic and foreign rebels. The present study that takes a historical-descriptive-analytical approach seeks to answer the following questions, relying on the method of collecting information from historical sources: What was the military importance of the Arab Iraq's rivers for the Abbasids' caliphate? And what strategies and methods of warfare did they employ in the Iraq’s rivers? The findings show that the Iraqi rivers, including the Tigris and Euphrates, were important to the Abbasids for several reasons such as providing dominance of commercial and communicative routes, and distancing from government opposition centers. They used a variety of offensive and deterrent methods to defeat insurgents, including spying, information and intelligence systems, sudden attacks, deceit, deploying signs and flags, and psychological warfare.

With the outbreak of World War I, both Russia and Britain sought to expand their military power in Iran. The British established Southern Police Force, and the Russians upgraded the Cossack Brigade to the level of the division. Following the October Revolution and the Bolsheviks' rising to power in Russia, Russian forces left Iran, and the British sought to expand their influence into northern Iran and the Caucasus and to fill the vacuum created by the Russian withdrawal. It was while the Cossack division under the commanded of Vsevolod Starosselsky saw itself as protecting Russia's interests in northern Iran. The present study aimed to answer the question of what the British did to expand their influence in northern Iran and how did they deal with the Cossack division?The paper analyzes the issue using a descriptive-analytical method and concludes that the British attempted to take possession of all Iranian military forces, including the Cossack division, through the 1919 treaty, but due to Starosselsky's resistance against them as well as the expansion of the risk of Bolshevik advancement into Iran, they found it advisable to withdraw their troops from Iran, expel Russian officers from the Cossack division, and entrust its leadership to trusted Iranian commanders.

Castles were solid structures used in various ways in historical periods, depending on the circumstances. The course of the Iranian history also shows that castles have been used by residents for a variety of reasons. Extensive invasions of Iran and the need to have durable defensive structures provided the background for the construction of new buildings or the restoration of existing defenses. The Safavid era was no exception. Therefore, the construction of new castles and the restoration of old fortifications were taken seriously by Safavid government officials. Given the abundance of castles and their various uses in the Safavid era, this article seeks to examine some of the most important functions of castles. The main question of this research concerns the significance and the variety of the castles in the Safavid era. The results show that during this period castles were considered by the government as an efficient defensive tool at the borders.  In addition, castles were used as a safe place to protect valuables and keep prisoners. Furthermore, in cases of desirable security, castles were rulers' residences.

With the revival of the production and trade of Persian carpet in the second half of the 19th century, domestic and foreign capital used in this productive field, led to investment by local and foreign merchants and companies in the carpet industry of the country. With the expansion of these investments and the creation of carpet-weaving workshops in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, not only did carpet production enjoyed a boost, but its business also globally flourished. Despite World War 1 (1914-1918s/ 1332-1336AH) and the resulting fluctuations, this trend continued until late Qajar era. The present descriptive-analytic study, using the available documents, aimed to investigate the production and trade of carpet during World War I, and to answer this question that what impacts this war has had on the country's carpet production and trade. The research findings show that with the onset of the war and the resultant insecurities, besides the closing down of the productive activities of the investment companies, carpet production decreased internally. In addition, with the blocking of international trade routes and the emergence of problems in exporting carpets abroad, as well as the economic turmoil in carpet importing countries and the downturn in carpet markets, exports of carpet also greatly diminished.

Participation is a phenomenon that can be described as contributing to decisions, actions, and involvement of individuals in collective situations, which works to fulfill the objectives of groups. This phenomenon has specific conditions in Iran due to the presence of different ethnic and religious groups, and the synergy and cooperation of different groups of the population play an essential role in the formation of participation. The Iran-Iraq War is a significant part of Iranian history, and the motivation of different groups of people for participating in this war is worth being examined. Zoroastrians were among minority religious groups who participated in the war. Based on Talcott Parsons’ action theory, the present descriptive-analytical study thus investigated Zoroastrians’ motivations and intellectual and cultural backgrounds for participating in the Iran-Iraq War. The findings revealed that the cultural system of Zoroastrianism and a sense of duty and personal satisfaction among Zoroastrians motivated them to perform the action of participating in the war.