The problem of identity in the Ilkhanate era according to Castells' model (Case study: Discourse analysis of Khajeh Nasir al-Din al-Tusi) مقالة

ملخص الجهاز:

45) As happened during the Mongol era, Vasily Bartold (1970: Rogers & Barthold) was the first to become aware of this truth, and Petrushkevsky, Karl Jan, and John Mason Smith, authors of “The Social and Economic History of Iran in the Mongol Period,” referred to it and realized that the root of all conflicts between Iranians and Mongol occupiers lay in two political ideologies: nomadism and settled life. “And Plato in the fifth discourse of his book Politics alluded to this group in this way: ‘They are the owners of great and superior powers,’ and Aristotle said: ‘They are those to whom God’s grace is greater,’ and if there is a need for a person to determine judgments who is distinguished by divine confirmation and from others, so that they can complete him, that person was called ‘King in the absolute sense’ they said, and his rulings were called “the art of kingship,” and in the words of scholars, he was called “Imam,” and his actions were called Imamate, and Plato called him “Administrator of the World” (Tusi, Akhlaq-e Naseri, edited by Siavash Khoshdel, p. This issue is so intertwined with the rebirth of Iran-Shahr that some have even considered it a kind of Iranian revenge against the Persians and placed it in opposition to the Battle of Nahavand; because in the event of the conquest of Baghdad, Iranian and Shiite elements such as Khwaja Nasir, Shams al-Din, and Atamalek Jovayni are present alongside Hulagu. This issue is so intertwined with the rebirth of Iran-Shahr that some have even considered it a kind of Iranian revenge against the Persians and placed it in opposition to the Battle of Nahavand; because in the event of the conquest of Baghdad, Iranian and Shiite elements such as Khwaja Nasir, Shams al-Din, and Atamalek Jovayni are present alongside Hulagu.