نشریه تاریخ اسلام و ایران
سال سی و دوم شماره 54 (تابستان 1401)

According to Alexander’s historians, the Macedonian conqueror has respected the memory of Cyrus the Great, founder of the Achaemenid Empire, as he conquered the Persian territories. It seems very interesting that the destroyer of the Achaemenid dynasty be a lover of its founder. However, it has already been proven that Alexander, parallel to his battles, has ever attempted to show his eligibility to succeed the great Achaemenid kings. Yet, it is another matter when Strabo reports that Alexander’s surrender to Cyrus the Great was so obvious that he was attributed as Philocorus ( a lover of Cyrus). The problem is, to what extent does the study of the career of Alexander the Great in dealing with the memory of the founder of the Achaemenid Empire allow us to make such an impression as claimed by his historians? Was Alexander really a lover of Cyrus the Great? Focusing on the reports to which they have somehow linked the Macedonian conqueror to the memory of the founder of the Achaemenid Empire and based on modern historical research, the present article indicates that the Macedonian conqueror, due to his Greek upbringing and extensive knowledge of the power structures and legitimacy of the Achaemenid kings as well as his political position, before and after the death of Darius III, has shown a quite dual and actually political treatment towards the memory of the founder of the Achaemenid Empire Cyrus the Great.

The occurrence of the disease by challenging the physical and mental health, ultimately leads to the extinction of human beings, so the present study is based on the issue of how to identify, prevent and treat the infectious and deadly disease cholera in the Safavid era? Findings of the present study based on descriptive-analytical method indicate that the fight against cholera within the framework of the Iranian medical system in the Safavid era and in accordance with the epistemological fields of medicine based on humors view(physicians), concepts of religious healing (religious community and scholars)and vulgar and magical beliefs were practiced. Depending on the type of cognition of the disease, various methods of prevention and treatment were used.Due to the nature of the issue, most of the information is provided in the approach of humors view medicine and with regard to the opinon of former prominent physicians. In this view, cholera is classified as a fever that was common following the outbreak of cholera weather(Havāy-e Wabāīī).In this approach,observing the principles of hygiene in the form of six measures to prevent the disease was given priority. In addition,various forms of religious healing and vulgar treatments were used to prevent and treat the disease

Islamist historiography in the Pahlavi period, despite its weak body and not very wide scope, focused on re-reading the history of Islam from the perspective of identity. On this basis, a range of Islamist historians, such as Morteza Motahhari and Ali Shariati, by taking a sympathetic and convergent approach to the history of Islam, especially the history of Islam in Iran, seeks to highlight the role of Islam and Islamic thought in the cultural situation. - The identity of contemporary Iran emerged. The Safavid studies of these two Shiite historians and thinkers, under the influence of their intellectual and ideological attachments, as well as their concern for strengthening their nationalist and Islamist ideas and ideals, led to a distinct Safavidism in the discourse of historiography. It became the Pahlavi period. The question of this research is in fact what relation did Motahhari and Shariati Safavid studies have with their Islamist ideas?The hypothesis of this research, which has been done analytically, is based on the claim that despite the important differences in Shariati and Morteza Motahhari Safavid studies, what connects their view of Safavid history is the insight. Islamism and their identity concerns are nationalist and reformist; In a way, these characteristics have distinguished and highlighted the Safavid studies of the two in the historical discourse of the Pahlavi period.

The occupation of the Qirim Khanate by the Russians and their gradual advance in the areas of Ottoman rule in the Caucasus endangered the security of Anatolia and exposed the sensitive position of the Caucasus to the Ottomans. On a local scale, there was fierce rivalry between Khan Karabakh and the governor of Georgia, and with the protection of the Georgian oracle by the Russians, the balance of power in the Caucasus in his favor and the loss of Ibrahim Khan Changed. Threats and common enemies and cultural-religious ties laid the foundation for Khan Karabakh relations with the Ottoman government. This study seeks to answer this question; What were the goals of Ibrahim Khan , the ruler of Karabakh and the Ottoman government in establishing relations with each other? Maintaining the principle of governance from the threat of the annexationist policy of the Iranian and Russian states and creating a balance of power against local powers such as the Khan of Tbilisi was one of the goals of Khan Karabakh. Countering the infiltration and intensification of Russian expansionism in the Caucasus and securing the Anatolian borders with the help of local rulers under the slogan of Islamic Unity was one of the main plans of the Ottoman government near Khan Karabakh. The study of the nature of Khan Karabakh relations with the Ottoman government and the problems facing these relations is one of the issues of this research.

Uniform shape in dressing Iranian people known as the law of imposing dress code to Iranian citizen inside the country (approved by the seventh legislative assembly) had been one of the most important constituent elements of the assimilation ethno-cultural policies of the era of RezaShah. This challenging law, which aimed to forcefully change the traditional lifestyle of highly traditional Iranian society, cause to various reactions among the elites, the press, and the general public. The present paper explores the reaction and approach of Ettelaat newspaper as one of the most important constituent of the press community of that era in regards to the implementation of this law.Qualitative Content analysis method based on the context of the papers and news published in various edition of Ettelaat newspaper, the applied method in this paper, and the theory of emotional-motivation assimilation which are considered as one of the levels of ethnic-cultural assimilation are the theoretical framework for guiding this discussion. The result of the research illustrates that the newspaper had acted as a tool in order to assimilation emotional– motivation ethnically-cultural by publishing a wide range of content related to the policy of impose a dress code in two forms: paper and news.

After the martyrdom of Imam Ali (AS) and due to the expansion of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) family, the differences between the children of the Imams (AS) to obtain the position of Imamate, which undoubtedly had a high spiritual and material status, increased. Some of the sons of the Imams (AS) who did not reach the position of Imamate, considered this position as their right and did not accept the Imamate of their brother, and even opposed his brother and tried to usurp the position of Imamate. Among these people was Abdullah Afteh, who after the death of his father, Imam Sadegh (AS), considered Imamate as his right and claimed Imamate. The purpose of this study is to investigate in a descriptive-analytical manner the reasons why Abdullah took the position of his brother and although there is evidence of his Imamate, on the basis of which his Imamate is rejected. The results show that many factors, including the belief of the narrators of the hadith, the support of the Shiites and especially the silence of Imam Kadhim (AS), make Abdullah more determined in his claim and various reasons such as scientific disability, not having a son and not introducing a successor. The passage of time caused the Shiites to turn away from believing in his Imamate.

Thinking about the nature and quality of the periods that human beings have gone through or are going through in their history has been one of the concerns of philosophers, thinkers, historians and theologians. Hence, the history of the world is divided into different periods from different perspectives. The history of Iran is no exception to this rule. One of the most famous and common historical periodicals of Iran is its division into ancient, medieval and contemporary periods. The hidden point in these periodicals is to determine the origin of the new period of Iranian history. In fact, the question is whether Iran lacks a new era and has stepped directly from the Middle Ages to the contemporary era? If not, where is the origin of modern Iranian history and where does it begin and end? After evaluating the available data and criticizing the most important ideas in this regard, the article concludes that in the period of Iranian history, most of the controversy is over determining the origin of contemporary Iranian history and determining the origin of history. The new Iran is in a haze of ambiguity. The author then argues that for political, intellectual, social, and economic reasons, the new era of Iranian history begins with the Golestan Treaty at the end of the first period of the Iran-Russia wars and continues until the Constitutional Revolution, with the Constitution the beginning of the period. It is contemporary with Iran.