310 REVIEWS previous volumes. As an instance, the entry of Jānevar/ Jānevaršenāsī (animals/zoology) is presented in an article including the literature and morphology, zoology among , animals of , and ani- mals of the Islamic countries. In the section of literature and mor- phology the relevant terms are analysed in the , Zo- roastrian literature, Persian literature, lexicology, Arab litera- ture, and the literature and culture of the Turkic-speaking peoples. An interesting detailed piece of information regarding the topic in the part of the Persian language is the mentioning of the word asb (horse) and the synonymous terms čarmeh and bāreh in Šāhnāmeh; as well as the significance of this animal as a life requirement among people of the time, its obtaining the proper names of Raxš, the horse of Rustam, and Behzād, the horse of Kay-Xursraw, and the use of the term in naming newly born sons, etc. In the section of “Zoology among Muslims”, two aspects of Qur’ānic references, and the mentioning of animals in the works of the medieval authors are discussed. The presence of certain animals embodying human traits, reincarnation of animals, and the Qur’ānic verses containing topics of animal names are elaborated as well. All in all, the current volume of the “Encyclopaedia of the world of ” is a considerable contribution into the field and an indis- pensable manual for academics interested in things Oriental.

Garnik Asatrian Yerevan State University

Manūčehr-e Mortaẓavī, Zabān-e dīrīn-e Azarbāyǰān [The Old Language of ], Ganǰīne-ye qalamrov-e zabān-e fārsī va adabīyyāt-e darī―4 (Mouqūfāt-e Maḥmūd Afšār-e Yazdī), Tehran, 1384/2005, 198 pp.

The study of Azari (Āδarī), the Old Iranian language of Azerbaijan,1 has a very short history; it goes back to the first decades of the 20th century. The domination of the Turkic dialects in the northern parts of Iran for a long period overshadowed the Iranian past and the non- Turkic ethno-linguistic realities of the area. Yet, the emergence of

1 The territories to the north of the Arax river, embracing the present-day Azerbai- jan Republic, have never been part of the Iranian Āturpātakān (in its modern form, Āzarbāyǰān, or Āzerbāyǰān) province. The name Azerbaijan for the Transcaucasian his- torical provinces Arran and is relatively young; it was fabricated in 1918 by Musavatists, on a pure political purpose.

REVIEWS 311 the Panturkist Movement and following it the active propaganda in Turkey and in the Azerbaijan Republic, aimed at dissemination of the separatist ideas in the turkophone provinces of Iran, stimulated Ira- nian and foreign scholars to closely approach the issues of the Azari language2 and ethnic belonging of the population of Āturpātakān. The book by M. Mortazavi is an important contribution to the field. Before treating the very subject of his work, the author gives a brief historical survey of the process of turkification in Āturpātakān, stressing correctly in this regard the decisive role of the Safavid dy- nasty, which, though being Iranian-speaking and Iranian by origin, had close connections with the Turkic groups of the region (Istāǰlū, Šāmlū, Rūmlū, Afšār, Qāǰār, and others), and contributed to the spreading of their language, which resulted in the dominance of Turkic dialects in the big towns of the area from the times of Shah Abbas II. The author insists that in spite of the fact that the popula- tion of Āturpātakān speaks today a local Turkic vernacular, this can- not be considered as a proof of its Turkic ethnic origin. In presenting the history of the Azari Studies, Mortazavi gives an almost complete list of works on Azari, though the researches made in the latest period are unknown to the author. Speaking about the use of the terms āδarī and fārisī in the medie- val Arab historiography, Mortazavi rightly notes that, as a rule, the Iranian dialects of Iran and Central Asia were called fārisī by the Muslim authors. The book offers a list of all the written documents in Azari, the so-called fahlavīyyāt: verses, separate sentences and the lexical items in dictionaries, etc., which are the main source for the study of this extinct language. However, as the author says, the Arabic writing system used in a non-normative manner, makes the translation and interpretation of these texts a very difficult task: almost each form requires a meticulous analysis and linguistic-historical argumenta- tion. A separate chapter is dedicated to the survived Azari speaking enclaves of Āturpātakān, which are actually at the edge of disap- pearance.3

2 A conventional term designating the group of Iranian dialects spoken in Āturpā– takān (Āzerbāyǰān) before the linguistic turkification of the region. 3 The inhabitants of these Iranian-speaking enclaves in the prevailing turkophone environment are usually called Tāts. The term Tāt is a common label applied to any Iranophone community by the surrounding population speaking Turkish.