DOCSLIB.ORG

463972 1 En Bookbackmatter 125..131

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
463972 1 En Bookbackmatter 125..131 Index Symbols Algiers Accord, 43, 44 1801 Treaty, 5, 19 Algiers Agreement, 29 1809 Treaty, 5 Algiers Declaration, 43 1913 Protocol, 35, 37, 41 Alireza Pasha, 32 1914 Treaty, 4 Almata Declaration, 61 1937 Border Treaty, 41, 43 Amasieh, 28 1937 Treaty, 4, 42 Amasieh Treaty, 28, 29 1975 Treaty, 4, 44–46 Amasieh Treaty of 1555, 2 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, 59 America, 2, 8, 10, 13, 14, 44, 50, 62–65, 1982 Sea Convention, 58 78–81, 86, 102, 105, 111 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of American, 2, 9, 11, 13, 41, 63, 64, 76–82, 85, the Sea, 51 103, 108, 122 Amir Khosrow Afshar, 43, 111 A Amity Treaty, 54 A Million Palm Island, 96 Andrei Kozyrev, 76 Abadan, 3, 4, 33–36, 39–42, 105 Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, 41 Abbas Aram, 42 Anglo-Persian Oil Company, 110 Abbas Mirza, 31 Anglo-Persian treaty, 102 Abd al-Karim Qasim, 4, 41, 42 Anglo-Russian Convention, 7 Abdolhossein Teymourtash, 109 Anglo-Russian treaty of 1734, 11 Abu Musa, 102, 103, 108, 110 Anzali, 52 Act of Independence, 13 Arab, 3, 4, 13, 28, 30, 32, 34–45, 97, 98, 102, Afghans, 7, 8, 17, 19, 20–22, 30, 31, 52, 100 103, 106, 107, 110, 111 Afghanistan, 5–8, 17–25, 31, 74, 106, 111, Aras River, 20 115, 121 Arav, 11, 89 Africa, 77, 82, 87, 99, 118, 119, 122 Araz, 11, 56, 89 Agha Mohammad Khan, 8, 52, 97, 101 Ardebil, 28 Ahmad Shah Baluch, 24 Armenia, 3, 28, 29 Ahwaz, 23 Asadollah Mirza, 107 Al-Andalus, 2 Asia, 3, 27, 31, 37, 69, 118, 119 Al-Hasa, 96 Asia Minor, 14, 28 Al-Khalifa, 96, 97, 102, 104, 107 Asian, 2, 3, 10, 30, 78 Alborz, 12, 89 Asian-Eurasian transport corridor, 83 Aleppo, 99, 101 Astarabad, 21, 52 © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019 125 M. Ebrahimi et al. (eds.), The Dynamics of Iranian Borders, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89836-0 126 Index Avaal, 96 C Azerbaijan, 3, 5, 8–12, 14, 20, 28, 29, 31, 53, Canary Islands, 2 55, 56, 58–65, 70–78, 84, 88–90 Caspian Basin, 9, 10, 55, 60–62, 64, 72, 123 Azeri, 88 Caspian region, 10, 11, 63, 69–71, 75, 77, 78, 80–89 B Caspian Sea, 1, 8–12, 14, 49–57, 59–66, Back Yard, 75 69–71, 75–77, 79–83, 85, 87–90, 122 Baghdad, 3, 4, 28–30, 32, 33, 36, 43, 44, 120, Caspian Sea Basin, 9, 56, 115, 117, 122 121 Caspian Sea Cooperation Organization, 55, 57 Baghdad Pact, 110 Caspian Sea Legal Regime, 8, 9, 50, 60, 64, 90 Bahrain, 12, 13, 15, 95–98, 100–112, 121 Caspian Seabed, 56 Bahrainian, 15, 109, 111 Caspian Working Group, 58 Bakhtiari Mountains, 36 Caucasia, 19, 23 Baku, 8, 52, 56, 58, 73 Caucasus, 9–11, 14, 33, 62, 63, 65, 69, 73, Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, 77 75–79, 84, 101, 119 Baku-Erzurum-Ceyhan, 87 Central Asia, 1, 6, 7, 10–12, 14, 21–23, 25, 63, Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, 73, 83 65, 73–75, 79, 81, 83, 85, 87, 115–117, Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum, 73, 83 119–123 Baku–Ceyhan route, 87 Central Asian, 6, 7, 63, 64, 76–78, 81, 83, 84 Balkan, 77 Channel Islands, 95 Baluchistan, 8, 17, 24 Charles Belgeru, 109 Bandar Abbas, 99, 100, 104 Chiefs, 13, 18, 31, 101, 106, 118 Bani Utbah, 97, 104 China, 2, 11, 64, 70, 73–75, 80–86, 104, 121 Basra, 3, 4, 19, 29, 30, 32, 36, 39, 42, 96, Chinese, 10, 11, 74, 81, 85, 86 99–101, 104, 121 Chyrak, 88 Beijing, 85 Classical Realism, 1, 6, 10, 12, 119, 121 BG, 73, 82 Closed Sea, 8, 10, 51 Black and Baltic Seas, 77 Cochin, 59 Blue Stream, 77 Cold War, 8, 9, 41, 42 Blue Stream II, 77 Colonel Bruce, 106 Bolshevik, 37, 102 Colonel Charles Edward Yates, 24 Border and Good Neighbourly Relations Colonel Roimeu, 19 Treaty, 43, 44 Colonel Stewart, 22 Border Treaty, 40, 45, 46 Commodore Bruce, 13, 97 Border Treaty of 1937, 4, 39 Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), Boris Yeltsin, 76 8–11, 77, 78, 122 BP, 73, 82, 83 Constantinople Protocol, 44 Britain, 1–8, 10–15, 17–25, 29–40, 95–112, Convention of Tehran, 70 115–122 Cooperation Council for the Arab States, 97 British, 2–8, 10–15, 17–25, 30–40, 52, 95–111, Cooperation Organization, 55, 57, 85 115–123 Crimea, 7, 23 British East India Company, 99–101 British Fleet in the Persian Gulf, 13, 97 D British House of Commons, 110 D’arcy Company, 34, 35 British India, 3, 6, 12, 14, 116, 117, 120, 121 Dagestan, 5, 8, 20, 52 British Naval Ministry, 39 Darband, 8, 52 British Navy, 40 Demarcation, 17, 24 British Oil Consortium, 12, 89 Diyala, 36 British Royal Majesty, 20 Doha, 77 Brown Sahibs, 118 Dost Muhammad Khan, 22, 24 Bulgaria, 77, 84 Dr Brydon, 7, 22 Bushehr, 18, 19, 23, 24, 96, 100, 104, 107, 116 Dutch, 97, 99–101, 104 Index 127 E Germany, 5, 33, 77, 102, 118, 119 East Asia markets, 74 Gerry Kearns, 2, 6 East India Company, 19, 30, 96, 100, 102, 104, Ghares, 28 106, 120 Ghasemi dynasty, 100 East India Company in London, 8 Ghorian, 21, 22 East-West Corridor, 10, 64 Great Britain, 10, 108, 111, 122 Eastern Partnership, 84 Great Zab, 36 Energy Reserves, 9, 63, 71, 77, 122 Greater and Lesser Tunb, 102, 103, 108, 110 Energy resources, 9, 14, 15, 64, 69, 70, 75–80, Gulistan Treaty, 8, 20, 21, 52, 53 82, 84, 85, 88, 90, 123 England, 2, 107, 108 H Eurasian, 12, 62, 115 Hague Court, 34 Europe, 3, 5, 11, 27, 34, 37, 69, 72, 77–79, Haj Mirza Aghasi, 22 81–84, 87, 99, 104, 105, 116, 120, 122 Haji Ibrahim Khan Sadr Azam, 19 European, 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 14, 20, 21, 25, 29, Haji Mirza Aghasi, 31 81–84, 87, 95, 99, 102, 103, 111, 118 Haji Muhammad Hossein Khan Amin European colonizers, 8, 14 al-Duleh, 20 European markets, 73 Halford Mackinder, 1, 12, 116 European Nations, 2, 119 Hardan Takrini, 42 European powers, 2, 5, 11, 13, 15, 98, 104 Heartland, 1, 5, 6, 8, 10–12, 116, 121 European Union (EU), 11, 70, 75, 77, 79, Henry Kissinger, 10 81–84, 87 Henry Willock, 7, 106 Exxon, 73, 82 Herat, 6–8, 17, 21–25, 31, 32, 115, 119 Hezareh, 21 F High Sea, 50, 59 Far East, 2, 121 Hirmand River, 24 Farrukh Khan Amin al-Mulk, 23 Holland, 2, 104, 118 Fars, 13, 19, 97, 106, 107 Hormuz, 30, 97–100 Fars Province, 106 Hormuz Customs House, 99 Fath-Ali Shah, 19, 22, 31, 52, 107 Hormuz Island, 3 Fath-Ali Shah Qajar, 5, 18 Hossein Ali Farmanfarma, 13, 97 Fatih Khan, 21 Hossein Ali Mirza Farmanfarma, 107 Federation of Gulf States, 110 Hot Resources War, 82 Finckenstein Treaty, 19 Houari Boumédiène, 43 Finckenstein Treaty of 4 May 1807, 5 First Arbitration’ of 1863, 8 I First Goldsmith Arbitration, 24 Ibn-Saif, 100 First Ten Year War, 8 India, 2, 5–7, 10, 15, 18–25, 30, 31, 33, 70, 74, First Treaty of Erzerum, 31 81, 95, 96, 99, 101, 104, 105, 108, 111, Foreign Minister, 33, 37, 39, 42, 54, 106 115–118, 120, 121 Foreign Ministry, 35, 39, 42, 43, 107 Indian Ocean, 85, 96, 97 France, 5, 11, 12, 18–20, 25, 37, 99, 101, 102, International Council, 4, 38 111, 116, 118–121 International Maritime Law, 51 Franco-Persian, 5, 19, 116 International Monetary Fund, 9, 63, 71 French, 2, 3, 18–20, 30, 41, 99, 101, 116, 118, Iran, 1–9, 11–15, 17–25, 27–45, 49, 50, 52–55, 120 57, 58, 60–62, 64, 69, 70, 72, 74, 76–80, 83, 85, 87–90, 95–112, 115–123 G Iran-Pan American Oil Company, 41 Ganja, 8, 52 Iran’s Eastern Borders, 18, 24 Gazprom Company, 77 Iranian, 1–4, 6–15, 17–25, 28–43, 45, 52–56, General Gardane, 19 59, 61, 62, 64, 78–80, 89, 95, 97–101, General Goldsmith, 8, 24 103–112, 116, 119, 121 George Passman Tate, 24 Iranian Foreign Ministry, 41, 103 Georgia, 3, 5, 8, 19, 20, 28, 33, 52, 73, 76, 87 Iranian National Assembly, 42 128 Index Iranian-Soviet Sea, 8, 50 Legal status, 54, 55 Iraq, 3, 4, 14, 27–29, 33, 34, 36–45, 63, 79, 80, Little Zab, 36 99, 103 Littoral states, 8, 54–57, 62, 63 Iraqi, 4, 36–46 London, 13, 105, 109, 111, 116, 120 Iravan, 8, 20, 21, 53 Lord Curzon, 105, 108 Isa Bin Khalifa, 106 Lord George Nathaniel Curzon, 24 Isa Bin Salman al-Khalifa, 103 Lord Palmerston, 7 Island of the World, 10 LUKOIL, 73, 88, 89 Istanbul, 3, 33–35, 38, 87 LUKOIL Company, 59 Istanbul Protocol, 34, 35, 38 M J Machiavellian, 119 Jask, 99 Mackinder, 4, 5, 8, 10, 116, 121, 122 Justice Minister, 39 Mahmarah, 23, 32 Mahmud Kabuli, 21 K Major Frank Holmes, 110 Kabul, 22–24 Makran, 17 Kadhimiya, 29 Manama, 96 Kandahar, 24 Mashhad, 22, 23, 31 Kapaz, 60 Mazandaran, 52, 55 Karabakh, 8, 52, 80 Mazar-e Sharif, 22 Karbala, 28, 29 Mecca, 2, 28 Karim Khan, 100 Medina, 3, 28 Karim Khan Zand, 29 Mediterranean Sea, 76, 86 Karun River, 36, 40 Mesopotamia, 28, 35 Kazakhstan, 8–11, 14, 55–65, 71–78, 84, 88, Mesopotamian, 28, 37 89 Middle East, 9, 11–13, 27, 29, 33, 62, 63, 71, Kerden Treaty, 3, 30 77, 79–81, 86, 87, 95, 103, 105, 116, Khanaqin, 34, 35 117, 122 Kharazm, 21 Middle Eastern, 13, 63, 81, 82 Khark Island, 6, 22, 23, 31, 36, 116, 119 Ministry of Energy, 9, 63 Khayyen River, 34, 44 Ministry of War, 103 Khorasan, 8, 17, 19, 21, 22, 24, 31 Mirza Abul Qasim Farahani, 21 Khorramshahr, 23, 24, 34–36, 41 Mirza Agha Khan Nouri, 23 Khosro Abad, 36, 41, 42 Mirza Muhammad Shafi` Mu`tamid al-Duleh, Khosro Abad Port, 41, 42 20 Khozestan, 23 Mohammad Ali Khan, 35 Khyber Pass, 23 Mohammad Mirza, 31 King Abdulaziz al-Saud, 4 Mohammad Reza Shah, 13, 103, 110–112 King Faisal, 38 Moscow, 54, 58, 81, 85, 86, 89 King of the Hejaz, 109 Mosul, 4, 28, 36 King Safi, 29 Mughal, 98 Kolkata, 19 Muhammad Shah, 22 Kong Port, 3, 30 Muhammad Vali Mirza, 21 Krasnosk Bay, 58 Muhammarah, 23 Kurdish, 28, 86 Mumbai, 18, 98 Kurds, 42–44, 86 Muqan, 8, 52, 53 Kurman Ghazi, 59 Muscat, 97, 100–102 Kuwait, 30, 80, 97, 102, 104, 109 N L Nabucco, 77, 79, 87 League of Arab States, 97 Nader Shah, 29, 97, 100 Legal Regime, 8, 9, 14, 15, 49–51, 54, 56–62, Nader Shah Afshar, 8, 52, 100 64–66, 69, 70, 87–90 Najaf, 28, 29 Index 129 Najd, 97 R Nakhjavan, 8, 21, 53 Rajahs, 118 Napoleon, 2, 3, 5, 18–20, 30, 101, 116 Ras al-Khaimah, 98, 102 Nasir al-Din Shah, 23 Rasht, 52 NATO, 10, 64, 76, 78, 81, 85, 122 Reza Khan, 1, 98 Naval Ministry, 40 Reza Shah,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cabinet of Armenia, 1920
    Cabinet of Armenia, 1920 MUNUC 32 TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ Letter from the Crisis Director…………………………………………………3 Letter from the Chair………………………………………….………………..4 The History of Armenia…………………………………………………………6 The Geography of Armenia…………………………………………………14 Current Situation………………………………………………………………17 Character Biographies……………………………………………………....27 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………...37 2 Cabinet of Armenia, 1920 | MUNUC 32 LETTER FROM THE CRISIS DIRECTOR ______________________________________________________ Dear Delegates, We’re very happy to welcome you to MUNUC XXXII! My name is Andre Altherr and I’ll be your Crisis Director for the Cabinet of Armenia: 1920 committee. I’m from New York City and am currently a Second Year at the University of Chicago majoring in History and Political Science. Despite once having a social life, I now spend my free-time on much tamer activities like reading 800-page books on Armenian history, reading 900-page books on Central European history, and relaxing with the best of Stephen King and 20th century sci-fi anthologies. When not reading, I enjoy hiking, watching Frasier, and trying to catch up on much needed sleep. I’ve helped run and participated in numerous Model UN conferences in both college and high school, and I believe that this activity has the potential to hone public speaking, develop your creativity and critical thinking, and ignite interest in new fields. Devin and I care very deeply about making this committee an inclusive space in which all of you feel safe, comfortable, and motivated to challenge yourself to grow as a delegate, statesperson, and human. We trust that you will conduct yourselves with maturity and tact when discussing sensitive subjects.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Overview on Karabakh History from Past to Today
    Volume: 8 Issue: 2 Year: 2011 A Brief Overview on Karabakh History from Past to Today Ercan Karakoç Abstract After initiation of the glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) policies in the USSR by Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet Union started to crumble, and old, forgotten, suppressed problems especially regarding territorial claims between Azerbaijanis and Armenians reemerged. Although Mountainous (Nagorno) Karabakh is officially part of Azerbaijan Republic, after fierce and bloody clashes between Armenians and Azerbaijanis, the entire Nagorno Karabakh region and seven additional surrounding districts of Lachin, Kelbajar, Agdam, Jabrail, Fizuli, Khubadly and Zengilan, it means over 20 per cent of Azerbaijan, were occupied by Armenians, and because of serious war situations, many Azerbaijanis living in these areas had to migrate from their homeland to Azerbaijan and they have been living under miserable conditions since the early 1990s. Keywords: Karabakh, Caucasia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Ottoman Empire, Safavid Empire, Russia and Soviet Union Assistant Professor of Modern Turkish History, Yıldız Technical University, [email protected] 1003 Karakoç, E. (2011). A Brief Overview on Karabakh History from Past to Today. International Journal of Human Sciences [Online]. 8:2. Available: http://www.insanbilimleri.com/en Geçmişten günümüze Karabağ tarihi üzerine bir değerlendirme Ercan Karakoç Özet Mihail Gorbaçov tarafından başlatılan glasnost (açıklık) ve perestroyka (yeniden inşa) politikalarından sonra Sovyetler Birliği parçalanma sürecine girdi ve birlik coğrafyasındaki unutulmuş ve bastırılmış olan eski problemler, özellikle Azerbaycan Türkleri ve Ermeniler arasındaki sınır sorunları yeniden gün yüzüne çıktı. Bu bağlamda, hukuken Azerbaycan devletinin bir parçası olan Dağlık Karabağ bölgesi ve çevresindeki Laçin, Kelbecer, Cebrail, Agdam, Fizuli, Zengilan ve Kubatlı gibi yedi semt, yani yaklaşık olarak Azerbaycan‟ın yüzde yirmiye yakın toprağı, her iki toplum arasındaki şiddetli ve kanlı çarpışmalardan sonra Ermeniler tarafından işgal edildi.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Readings on the Iran-Iraq Conflict and Its Effects on U.S. Foreign Relations and Policy
    Reference Services Review, v. 17, issue 2, 1989, p. 27-39. ISSN: 0090-7324 DOI: 10.1108/eb049054 http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?issn=0090-7324 © 1989 MCB UP Ltd Current Readings on the Iran-Iraq Conflict and Its Effects on U.S. Foreign Relations and Policy Magda El-Sherbini The conflict between Iran and Iraq is not new; it dates from long before September 1980. In fact, the origins of the current war can be traced to the battle of Qadisiyah in Southern Iraq in 637 A.D., a battle in which the Arab armies of General Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas decisively defeated the Persian army. In victory, the Arab armies extended Islam east of the Zagros Mountains to Iran. In defeat, the Persian Empire began a steady decline that lasted until the sixteenth century. However, since the beginning of that century, Persia has occupied Iraq three times: 1508-1514, 1529-1543, and 1623-1638. Boundary disputes, specifically over the Shatt al-Arab Waterway, and old enmities caused the wars. In 1735, belligerent Iranian naval forces entered the Shatt al-Arab but subsequently withdrew. Twenty years later, Iranians occupied the city of Sulimaniah and threatened to occupy the neighboring countries of Bahrain and Kuwait. In 1847, Iran dominated the eastern bank of the Shatt al-Arab and occupied Mohamarah in Iraq. The Ottoman rulers of Iraq concluded a number of treaties with Iran, including: the treaty of Amassin (1534-55); treaties signed in 1519, 1613, and 1618; and the treaty of Zuhab, signed in 1639. Yet another treaty, the treaty of Erzerum in 1823, failed once again to resolve the dispute.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coming Turkish- Iranian Competition in Iraq
    UNITeD StateS INSTITUTe of Peace www.usip.org SPeCIAL RePoRT 2301 Constitution Ave., NW • Washington, DC 20037 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPO R T Sean Kane This report reviews the growing competition between Turkey and Iran for influence in Iraq as the U.S. troop withdrawal proceeds. In doing so, it finds an alignment of interests between Baghdad, Ankara, and Washington, D.C., in a strong and stable Iraq fueled by increased hydrocarbon production. Where possible, the United States should therefore encourage The Coming Turkish- Turkish and Iraqi cooperation and economic integration as a key part of its post-2011 strategy for Iraq and the region. This analysis is based on the author’s experiences in Iraq and Iranian Competition reviews of Turkish and Iranian press and foreign policy writing. ABOUT THE AUTHO R in Iraq Sean Kane is the senior program officer for Iraq at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). He assists in managing the Institute’s Iraq program and field mission in Iraq and serves as the Institute’s primary expert on Iraq and U.S. policy in Iraq. Summary He previously worked for the United Nations Assistance Mission • The two rising powers in the Middle East—Turkey and Iran—are neighbors to Iraq, its for Iraq from 2006 to 2009. He has published on the subjects leading trading partners, and rapidly becoming the most influential external actors inside of Iraqi politics and natural resource negotiations. The author the country as the U.S. troop withdrawal proceeds. would like to thank all of those who commented on and provided feedback on the manuscript and is especially grateful • Although there is concern in Washington about bilateral cooperation between Turkey and to Elliot Hen-Tov for generously sharing his expertise on the Iran, their differing visions for the broader Middle East region are particularly evident in topics addressed in the report.
    [Show full text]
  • The La Trobe Journal No. 91 June 2013 Endnotes Notes On
    Endnotes NB: ‘Scollay’ refers to Susan Scollay, ed., Love and Devotion: from Persia and beyond, Melbourne: Macmillan Art Publishing in association with the State Library of Victoria and the Bodleian Library, 2012; reprinted with new covers, Oxford: The Bodleian Library, 2012. Melville, The ‘Arts of the Book’ and the Diffusion of Persian Culture 1 This article is a revised version of the text of the ‘Keynote’ lecture delivered in Melbourne on 12 April 2012 to mark the opening of the conference Love and Devotion: Persian cultural crossroads. It is obviously not possible to reproduce the high level of illustrations that accompanied the lecture; instead I have supplied references to where most of them can be seen. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those at the State Library of Victoria who worked so hard to make the conference such a success, and for their warmth and hospitality that made our visit to Melbourne an unrivalled pleasure. A particular thanks to Shane Carmody, Robert Heather and Anna Welch. 2 The exhibition Love and Devotion: from Persia and beyond was held in Melbourne from 9 March to 1 July 2012 with a second showing in Oxford from 29 November 2012 to 28 April 2013. It was on display at Oxford at the time of writing. 3 Scollay. 4 For a recent survey of the issues at stake, see Abbas Amanat and Farzin Vejdani, eds., Iran Facing Others: identity boundaries in a historical perspective, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012; the series of lectures on the Idea of Iran, supported by the Soudavar Memorial Foundation, has now spawned five volumes, edited by Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis and Sarah Stewart, vols.
    [Show full text]
  • The Russo-Persian War of 1804-1813 and the Treaty of Gulistan in the Context of Its 200Th Anniversary)
    Volume 7 Issue 3-4 2013 141 THE CAUCASUS & GLOBALIZATION Ganja showed that the Georgian state played the main role on the anti-Seljuk front in the Caucasus and that, despite the crippling Seljuk inroads, it remained the leading political force in the Caucasus. Conclusion My analysis of the sources and historiography, as well as my interpretation of what was hap- pening on the Byzantine-Seljuk front on the eve of the battle of Manzikert, provide a fairly plausible explanation of why the otherwise belligerent sultan retreated from his previously confrontational policy toward the audacious Georgian king. In the late 1060s, when Bagrat IV carried out his offensive operations in Eastern Georgia, which directly infringed on the military and political interests of the Seljuk sultan, the latter was tied down by preparations for the final offensive on the Byzantine Empire. He had to show caution when dealing with Bagrat IV, a potential ally of Byzantium. There is every reason to believe that his unexpectedly friendly gesture, instead of a punitive expedition, was caused by his desire to keep Georgia away from an imminent global clash with Byzantium. Oleg KUZNETSOV Ph.D. (Hist.), Deputy Rector for Research, Higher School of Social and Managerial Consulting (Institute) (Moscow, the Russian Federation). THE TREATY OF GULISTAN: 200 YEARS AFTER (THE RUSSO-PERSIAN WAR OF 1804-1813 AND THE TREATY OF GULISTAN IN THE CONTEXT OF ITS 200TH ANNIVERSARY) Abstract he author looks at the causes and some sus, which went down to history as the of the aspects and repercussions of Great Game or the Tournament of Shad- T the Russo-Persian War of 1804-1813 ows.
    [Show full text]
  • Political and Economic Transition of Ottoman Sovereignty from a Sole Monarch to Numerous Ottoman Elites, 1683–1750S
    Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hung. Volume 70 (1), 49 – 90 (2017) DOI: 10.1556/062.2017.70.1.4 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC TRANSITION OF OTTOMAN SOVEREIGNTY FROM A SOLE MONARCH TO NUMEROUS OTTOMAN ELITES, 1683–1750S BIROL GÜNDOĞDU Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen Historisches Institut, Osteuropäische Geschichte Otto-Behaghel-Str. 10, Haus D Raum 205, 35394 Gießen, Deutschland e-mail: [email protected] The aim of this paper is to reveal the transformation of the Ottoman Empire following the debacles of the second siege of Vienna in 1683. The failures compelled the Ottoman state to change its socio- economic and political structure. As a result of this transition of the state structure, which brought about a so-called “redistribution of power” in the empire, new Ottoman elites emerged from 1683 until the 1750s. We have divided the above time span into three stages that will greatly help us com- prehend the Ottoman transition from sultanic authority to numerous autonomies of first Muslim, then non-Muslim elites of the Ottoman Empire. During the first period (1683–1699) we see the emergence of Muslim power players at the expense of sultanic authority. In the second stage (1699–1730) we observe the sultans’ unsuccessful attempts to revive their authority. In the third period (1730–1750) we witness the emergence of non-Muslim notables who gradually came into power with the help of both the sultans and external powers. At the end of this last stage, not only did the authority of Ottoman sultans decrease enormously, but a new era evolved where Muslim and non-Muslim leading figures both fought and co-operated with one another for a new distribution of wealth in the Ottoman Empire.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Role of State Identity in Foreign Policy Decision-Making
    The London School of Economics and Political Science UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF STATE IDENTITY IN FOREIGN POLICY DECISION-MAKING The Rise and Demise of Saudi–Iranian Rapprochement (1997–2009) ADEL ALTORAIFI A thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy London, October 2012 1 To Mom and Dad—for everything. 2 DECLARATION I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of the author. I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. The final word count of this thesis, including titles, footnotes and in-text citations, is 105,889 words. 3 ABSTRACT The objective of the thesis is to study the concept of state identity and its role in foreign policy decision-making through a constructivist analysis, with particular focus on the Saudi–Iranian rapprochement of 1997. While there has been a recent growth in the study of ideational factors and their effects on foreign policy in the Gulf, state identity remains understudied within mainstream International Relations (IR), Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA), and even Middle Eastern studies literature, despite its importance and manifestation in the region’s foreign policy discourses. The aim is to challenge purely realist and power-based explanations that have dominated the discourse on Middle Eastern foreign policy—and in particular, the examination of Saudi–Iranian relations.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Pye Phd Thesis
    IN THE BELLY OF THE BEAR? SOVIET-IRANIAN RELATIONS DURING THE REIGN OF MOHAMMAD REZA PAHLAVI Michael Pye A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 2015 Full metadata for this item is available in St Andrews Research Repository at: http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/9501 This item is protected by original copyright IN THE BELLY OF THE BEAR? SOVIET-IRANIAN RELATIONS DURING THE REIGN OF MOHAMMAD REZA PAHLAVI CANDIDATE: MICHAEL PYE DEGREE: DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DATE OF SUBMISSION: 26TH OF MAY 2015 1 ABSTRACT The question mark of the project's title alludes to a critical reexamination of Soviet- Iranian relations during the period and aims to offer an original contribution to scholarship in the field by exploring an aspect of Pahlavi foreign relations that lacks any detailed treatment in the literature presently available. In pursuit of this goal, research has been concentrated on recently-released western archival documentation, the Iranian Studies collection held at the University of St Andrews, and similarly materials from the Russian Federal Archive for Foreign Relations, to which the author was granted access, including ambassadorial papers relating to the premiership of Mohammad Mosaddeq. As far as can be ascertained, the majority of the Russian archival evidence presented in the dissertation has not been previously been utilised by any Western-based scholar. At core, the thesis argues that the trajectory of Pahlavi foreign relations specifically (and to a certain degree Mohammad Reza's regency more broadly) owed principally to a deeply-rooted belief in, and perceived necessity to guard against, the Soviet Union's (and Russia's) historical 'objectives' vis-à-vis Iran.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
    B 1.172.553 Digitized by Coogle Digitized by Coogle Digitized by Coogle THE RUBA’IYAT OF OMAR KHAYYAM Digitized by Google This Edition has bttn specially revised by the Translator for L. C. Page and Company. Digitized by Google *-' THE RUBA IYAT OF OMAR KHAYYAM AFACSI M I LE-OFTHE MSifl*! *1 ik INTHEBODLE lAN-LI B RARY-lf TRANSLATEDANOEDITEO# ,‘EbmRDHERONALLENl m Digitized by Google ?K G5I> .ES nsc ! Digitized by Coogle THE RUBA’IYAT OF OMAR KHAYYAM BEING A Facsimile of the Manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, with a Transcript into modem Persian Characters, TRANSLATED, WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES, AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY, AND SOME SIDELIGHTS UPON EDWARD FITZGERALD’S POEM BY EDWARD HERON-ALLEN ,iyj lia^ )l iS kilc SECOND EDITION Carefnlty Revised and considerably Enlarged BOSTON L. C. PAGE AND COMPANY, INC. MDCCCXCVIII Digitized by Google ?\( (iSlI COPYRIGHT i8o8 by L. C. PAGE AND COMPANY. INC. Entered at Stationers,' Hall, Loyidon. Digitized by G Digitizod by Google fJt). /./f- TABLE OF CONTENTS fAGI Introduction i— ulii English tfansUtion i Photographic facsimile of MS. 29 Bibliographical references, for abbreviationb in tlic notes ns Facsimile pages with transcript, translation, and notes 110 Bibliography of Omar Khayyam - • • 281 Some Sidelights upon Edward FitzGerald's Poem, ’’ “ The Rnba'iyat of Omar Khayyam - • 280 Digitized by Google PREFATORY NOTE TO THE SECOND EDITION I CONFESS that I am surprised—and agreeably so—to find that, within six months of the first publication of this volume, a second and larger edition is called for. I am not, however, so blinded with satisfaction as not to realize that the success of my book has been brought about, not so much by any intrinsic merits of its own, as by the ever-widening interest that is felt in the matchless poem of FitzGerald which was primarily responsible for its appearance.
    [Show full text]
  • FABRICATING FIDELITY: NATION-BUILDING, INTERNATIONAL LAW, and the GREEK-TURKISH POPULATION EXCHANGE by Umut Özsu a Thesis
    FABRICATING FIDELITY: NATION-BUILDING, INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THE GREEK-TURKISH POPULATION EXCHANGE by Umut Özsu A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Juridical Sciences Faculty of Law University of Toronto © Copyright by Umut Özsu (2011) Abstract FABRICATING FIDELITY: NATION-BUILDING, INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THE GREEK-TURKISH POPULATION EXCHANGE Umut Özsu Doctor of Juridical Sciences (S.J.D.) Faculty of Law University of Toronto 2011 This dissertation concerns a crucial episode in the international legal history of nation-building: the Greek-Turkish population exchange. Supported by Athens and Ankara, and implemented largely by the League of Nations, the population exchange showcased the new pragmatism of the post-1919 order, an increased willingness to adapt legal doctrine to local conditions. It also exemplified a new mode of non-military nation-building, one initially designed for sovereign but politico-economically weak states on the semi-periphery of the international legal order. The chief aim here, I argue, was not to organize plebiscites, channel self-determination claims, or install protective mechanisms for vulnerable minorities Ŕ all familiar features of the Allied Powers‟ management of imperial disintegration in central and eastern Europe after the First World War. Nor was the objective to restructure a given economy and society from top to bottom, generating an entirely new legal order in the process; this had often been the case with colonialism in Asia and Africa, and would characterize much of the mandates system ii throughout the interwar years. Instead, the goal was to deploy a unique mechanism Ŕ not entirely in conformity with European practice, but also distinct from non-European governance regimes Ŕ to reshape the demographic composition of Greece and Turkey.
    [Show full text]
  • The Second Edition of Edward Fitzgerald's Rubá'iyyát of 'Umar
    llttidUi THE SECOND EDITION OF EDWARD FITZGERALD'S RUBA'IYYAT OF 'UMAR KHAYYAM THE SECOND EDITION OF EDWARD FITZGERALD'S rubA'iyyat of 'umar khayyam (LONDON : 1868 : B. QUARITCH) EDITED, WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND NOTES, BY EDWARD HERON-ALLEN LONDON DUCKWORTH AND CO. 1908 A II rights reserved BetJtcation iL/o " ji^ Jl^ ^:S ^ iuU> ^5 j*l-3 ij :Nrour-i-iitaij O Name of Thine, the best heading of a commencement, Without Thy Name how shall I begin my book ? Nizam'i—Leila and Majnun Ion 536^7 Kal 6 fiev rau noLrirav e^ ciWris Movarjs, 6 8e i^ nWrjs e^TjpTrjrai— ovofid^ofiev 8e dvro KarexfraL, to 8i fan rrapaTrXrjcriov e'jj^erai yap— fK 8e TovTuiv Twv TTpoiTOiv daKTvXiwv, T(bv TTOtJ/raJj', aXXoi e^ oXXou ail r]pTr]p.ivoi (ia\ Koi ivdovcria^ovai, ol fi€i> e^ Op(f}ia)s, ol de (k Movddiov 61 di TToXXtii e^ 'Op,r]pov Karexovrdi re koi e'xovrai. Ion 536 * 4-536 «^ 3: 2)1/ av, ft) "lo)v, eis ei Kal KarixTH ^$ 'Ofirjpov, koI eneiSav p-iv ris aXKov Tov TTOirjTov aBr), Kadivdeis re kcL aTTopfls brt, X4yi]s, eireidav Se TovTov TOV TTOirjTov (pdey^yjTaL tis p,f\os, evdvs eypijyopas koX opxeiTai fj '^"' f^'^opels ort Xtyrjs' ov ovS' eiri(rTrjp,T} crov V^'^'X') yap Tixyu TrepX 'Op,fjpov Xeytis a Xiyeis, dXXa diia p.6ipa koi KaTOKaxf], Stfrtrep ol KopvjBavTiS)VTes fKcivov p^ovov alaOdvovTai. tov p,iXovs o^ecos o &i> rj TOV deov i^OTOv tiv KaT€X(>>vTai, Kal els eicetvo to p^eXos Kal crx^paTuiv Kal pt]p,dT(ov eviropovaif tu)v fie hXXwi' ov (j)povTi^ov(riv ovtco Kal(rv, 0) "lav, Trepl pev 'Oprjpov oTav tis p,vrja6fj, (VTropeis, vrepi de tS)v (iXXoJV aTTopeis' tovtov S' e'crrt to uitiou, 6 p epcuTas, 81 on cri) nepl pev 'Op,7]pov eviroptis, wepl 8e tcov (iXX<ov ov, on ov Texv;/ dXXd Oiia pLOipa 'Opijpov 8eiv6s et enaipeTtjs.
    [Show full text]