Results 81 to 90 of about 231 (142)
Some of the next articles are maybe not open access.
2019
Abstract The Safavids (1501–1722) controlled a land-based empire that comprised the modern-day nation of Iran, with extensions into Iraq, the Caucasus, and Afghanistan. The family of the Safavids originated as Sufi mystical sheikhs based in the region of Azerbaijan but were later imperialized thanks to the dynastic founder, Shah ...
openaire +1 more source
Abstract The Safavids (1501–1722) controlled a land-based empire that comprised the modern-day nation of Iran, with extensions into Iraq, the Caucasus, and Afghanistan. The family of the Safavids originated as Sufi mystical sheikhs based in the region of Azerbaijan but were later imperialized thanks to the dynastic founder, Shah ...
openaire +1 more source
2021
Abstract Safavid, Iran, was a modest economic player in West and South Asia in terms of population numbers, productivity, and resources. Yet its strategic location at the crossroads of Asia’s commercial arteries allowed it to punch well above its weight in terms of trade—especially trade in transit. The reign of Shah ‘Abbas I (r. 1587–
openaire +1 more source
Abstract Safavid, Iran, was a modest economic player in West and South Asia in terms of population numbers, productivity, and resources. Yet its strategic location at the crossroads of Asia’s commercial arteries allowed it to punch well above its weight in terms of trade—especially trade in transit. The reign of Shah ‘Abbas I (r. 1587–
openaire +1 more source
Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 2009
AbstractThis paper examines the organizing ideological and infrastructural principles of the Safavid state structure and questions whether the Safavid state had the capacity and universality to qualify as an empire. Until now, the Safavid state has only been given equal status to the Ottoman and Mughal state as a “gunpowder empire”.
openaire +2 more sources
AbstractThis paper examines the organizing ideological and infrastructural principles of the Safavid state structure and questions whether the Safavid state had the capacity and universality to qualify as an empire. Until now, the Safavid state has only been given equal status to the Ottoman and Mughal state as a “gunpowder empire”.
openaire +2 more sources
2019
Ruling from 1501 through 1722, the Safavid dynasty unified the eastern and western halves of the Iranian plateau and imposed Twelver Shiʿism on the population. The interpretation of the Safavid Empire as a revival of an Iranian imperial tradition dating back to the Achaemenids is not credible, but the dynasty did create the framework in which modern ...
openaire +1 more source
Ruling from 1501 through 1722, the Safavid dynasty unified the eastern and western halves of the Iranian plateau and imposed Twelver Shiʿism on the population. The interpretation of the Safavid Empire as a revival of an Iranian imperial tradition dating back to the Achaemenids is not credible, but the dynasty did create the framework in which modern ...
openaire +1 more source
2018
The nascent Safavid uprising by the militant shaykhs Junayd and Haydar (grandfather and father of Shah Isma‘il) tried to create cohesion among their motley army of Turkic recruits from Anatolia and others through uniformization, the rapid distribution of booty, and even the recruitment of slave soldiers.
openaire +1 more source
The nascent Safavid uprising by the militant shaykhs Junayd and Haydar (grandfather and father of Shah Isma‘il) tried to create cohesion among their motley army of Turkic recruits from Anatolia and others through uniformization, the rapid distribution of booty, and even the recruitment of slave soldiers.
openaire +1 more source
Iranian Studies, 1974
I regard the arguments about nationalism or the lack of it, and about whether or not the Safavid state can be called a nation-state, as in many ways sterile. What I am much more interested in is the question whether or not the Safavids created a state at all, in any generally accepted sense of the word.
openaire +1 more source
I regard the arguments about nationalism or the lack of it, and about whether or not the Safavid state can be called a nation-state, as in many ways sterile. What I am much more interested in is the question whether or not the Safavids created a state at all, in any generally accepted sense of the word.
openaire +1 more source