عنوان مقاله [English]
As a transition period, the Afshariya period is located in the middle of two important periods in the history of Iran (Safaviyya and Qajariya). On the one hand, this situation is the reason for the great importance of this course and the special research attractions in it; because the study of related issues can be an important key to achieving a better and deeper understanding of the continuous and developing trends of the Safavid-Qajarid period. On the other hand, such a situation, along with the short life of the Afshariya government compared to the Safavid and Qajar governments, has caused the research related to this period to be overshadowed by the periods before and after it, and less research on an original and independent document about the Afshariya period should be compiled. Most researchers have considered the issues of this period as a subsidiary to the events of the Safavid era or an introduction to the issues of Qajar and have rarely researched independently about the events and currents governing this period. This lack of independent research in the world's Persian-language works is noticeable. The purpose of this article is to examine the research and opinions of famous Iranologists about the history of the Afshariya period. He wants to explain the main points of view governing this research along with their study, analysis, and classification.
Meanwhile, the main focus of this study is on the works of three of the most important researchers in this field, such as Lawrence Lockhart, Michael Axworthy, and Ernest Tucker. The activities of these researchers can be investigated in the field of English-language Iranian studies and the comparison of their opinions and their different perspectives on the issues of the Afshariya period can provide a diagram of the different views and viewpoints of Iranology regarding the events of this period. The method of examining the opinions of these three researchers is the historical method based on their works and books.
With the formation of the knowledge of Orientalism and Iranology as a new academic field of study, and with the importance of finding the history of Iran and its related subjects, the history of Iran became important in the Middle Ages. Amongst the famous researchers and Iranologists, the opinions of three of the most important Iranian researchers who specifically chose the Afshariya period as the focal point of their work have been selected for study in this article. First, we can mention Lawrence Lockhart, a well-known researcher and specialist of the Afshariya period. After him, the opinions of two other Iridologists who have different perspectives on the events of this period: One is Peter Avery and the other is
Willem Floor. Peter Avery, has mainly emphasized military issues and Floor has also tried to reread the history of this period in terms of intellectual issues and the challenge of legitimacy.
Peter Avery has written an entry related to the Afshariya period in the history of Cambridge Iran. In this article, he tries to examine the way of confronting Nader with his Safavid material and spiritual heritage. His studies on the archive documents of the East India Company in the Netherlands, parallel to the Afghan attacks on Isfahan, and in particular, his book entitled The Rise and Fall of Nader Shah, according to Dutch sources, provide valuable information about the reign of Nader Shah, especially his initial conflicts. It presents the Safavid princes from the eyes of Dutch witnesses.
Material & Methods
We know that the history of Iran is one of the most important fields of research in the world, which is of interest to most Iranian researchers.
Amongst the wide-ranging research, it seems that the Afshariya period has received less attention and the volume of research produced about it is not large. We know that the history of Iran is one of the most important fields of research in the world, which is of interest to most Iranian researchers.
Amongst the wide-ranging research, it seems that the Afshariya period has received less attention and the volume of research produced about it is not large. This article wants to examine study, analyze, and classify the opinions of three famous Iranologists, Lawrence Lockhart, Michael Axworthy, and Ernest Tucker about the history of the Afshariya period and, in the end, the main viewpoints governing research. Explain. We want to examine the activity of these researchers in the. Iranology space of the English-speaking world and compare their opinions and get their similar or different characteristics about the issues of the Afshariya ruling period and answer the question about the opinion. What do these researchers think about the events and history of the Afshariya period? The research method of these three researchers is the historical method based on their works and books.
Discussion of results & conclusions
In this article, the opinions of three Iranologists specializing in the Afshariya period were analyzed, and the studies showed that three different perspectives can be seen in their works: Lawrence Lockhart, as an advanced researcher, tried to give a comprehensive description and a holistic view. is to examine the era of rare rule in a very wide context. Michael George Andrew Axworthy emphasized the military aspects and, using the keyword "military revolution", considers Nader Shah as the founder of the new army in Iran. Ernest Tucker has also focused on Nader Shah's legitimacy challenges and has introduced the two projects "Jafari Religion" and "Creation of Turkmen Links" as rare solutions to this challenge.
For the first time, Martin Dickson, in criticizing Lockhart's works, pointed out the supremacy of orientalists and admitted that Lockhart wrote the history of this period based on the supremacy and authority of Western figures. Although Dickson's view was criticized, in recent years, Michael Axworthy, who is an expert in the history of this period, pointed to this issue differently and attributed the indifference of Iranian scholars to the study of the history of this period as a result of the British historiography system In the 19th century, he realized that they portrayed Iranian kings as weak and passive, and since Nader Shah did not fit into this perception, he was marginalized. This shows that the course of research and study of the history of the Afshari era in the non-Iranian world requires scientific investigations to be able to analyze the developments of this study from the first reports of contemporary non-Iranian witnesses to later Iranologists