《土耳其斯坦与欧亚帝国的崛起:政治与传统的研究》,

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 0 ASIAN STUDIES Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies Pub Date : 2021-06-30 DOI:10.18589/oa.959788
Hüseyin Ongan Arslan
{"title":"《土耳其斯坦与欧亚帝国的崛起:政治与传统的研究》,","authors":"Hüseyin Ongan Arslan","doi":"10.18589/oa.959788","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ali Anooshahr’s Turkestan and the Rise of Eurasian Empires: A Study of Pol- itics and Invented Traditions explores how the late medieval and early modern Persianate historians dealt with the Turco-Mongol lineages of the founders of the Ottoman, Safavid, Mughal, Mongol, and Shibanid empires. As Anooshahr claims, the legacy of Turco-Mongol heritage was mostly linked with negative associa- tions of “barbarity,” “plundering,” “violence,” and “paganism,” in the Persianate discursive traditions. Therefore, what the Persianate historians attempted to do is either to distance their patrons from such negative legacies, or to redefine their legacies in subtle ways in accordance with imperial needs. These attempts were part of the imperial response to the internal or inter-imperial legitimacy chal- lenges throughout sixteenth-century Eurasia. By studying five Eurasian empires together in comparative approaches, Anooshahr shows how these attempts shared similarities, even though “the particularities and context of each ‘state’ and their ‘ideologues’ were unique” (5).","PeriodicalId":43709,"journal":{"name":"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ali Anooshahr, Turkestan and the Rise of Eurasian Empires: A Study of Politics and In- vented Traditions,\",\"authors\":\"Hüseyin Ongan Arslan\",\"doi\":\"10.18589/oa.959788\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Ali Anooshahr’s Turkestan and the Rise of Eurasian Empires: A Study of Pol- itics and Invented Traditions explores how the late medieval and early modern Persianate historians dealt with the Turco-Mongol lineages of the founders of the Ottoman, Safavid, Mughal, Mongol, and Shibanid empires. As Anooshahr claims, the legacy of Turco-Mongol heritage was mostly linked with negative associa- tions of “barbarity,” “plundering,” “violence,” and “paganism,” in the Persianate discursive traditions. Therefore, what the Persianate historians attempted to do is either to distance their patrons from such negative legacies, or to redefine their legacies in subtle ways in accordance with imperial needs. These attempts were part of the imperial response to the internal or inter-imperial legitimacy chal- lenges throughout sixteenth-century Eurasia. By studying five Eurasian empires together in comparative approaches, Anooshahr shows how these attempts shared similarities, even though “the particularities and context of each ‘state’ and their ‘ideologues’ were unique” (5).\",\"PeriodicalId\":43709,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18589/oa.959788\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18589/oa.959788","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Ali Anooshahr的《突厥斯坦和欧亚帝国的崛起:政治和虚构传统的研究》探讨了中世纪晚期和现代早期波斯历史学家如何处理奥斯曼帝国、萨法维帝国、莫卧儿帝国、蒙古帝国和什叶派帝国创始人的突厥-蒙古血统。正如Anooshahr所言,突厥-蒙古遗产大多与波斯话语传统中的“野蛮”、“掠夺”、“暴力”和“异教”等负面联想联系在一起。因此,波斯历史学家试图做的要么是让他们的赞助人远离这些负面遗产,要么是根据帝国的需要,以微妙的方式重新定义他们的遗产。这些尝试是帝国对16世纪欧亚大陆内部或帝国内部合法性挑战的回应的一部分。通过比较研究五个欧亚帝国,Anooshahr展示了这些尝试的相似之处,尽管“每个‘国家’及其‘意识形态’的特殊性和背景是独一无二的”(5)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ali Anooshahr, Turkestan and the Rise of Eurasian Empires: A Study of Politics and In- vented Traditions,
Ali Anooshahr’s Turkestan and the Rise of Eurasian Empires: A Study of Pol- itics and Invented Traditions explores how the late medieval and early modern Persianate historians dealt with the Turco-Mongol lineages of the founders of the Ottoman, Safavid, Mughal, Mongol, and Shibanid empires. As Anooshahr claims, the legacy of Turco-Mongol heritage was mostly linked with negative associa- tions of “barbarity,” “plundering,” “violence,” and “paganism,” in the Persianate discursive traditions. Therefore, what the Persianate historians attempted to do is either to distance their patrons from such negative legacies, or to redefine their legacies in subtle ways in accordance with imperial needs. These attempts were part of the imperial response to the internal or inter-imperial legitimacy chal- lenges throughout sixteenth-century Eurasia. By studying five Eurasian empires together in comparative approaches, Anooshahr shows how these attempts shared similarities, even though “the particularities and context of each ‘state’ and their ‘ideologues’ were unique” (5).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Journal of Ottoman Studies has been published continuously since 1980 and has carried the pluralist heritage of the Ottomans to contemporary academe by bringing together Ottomanists from different countries as well as from different disciplines and schools of thought. As the founder of the journal, the late Nejat Göyünç (1925-2001), stated in the preface he wrote for the first volume of the journal, the aim of the journal “is to become a means for the increasingly growing number of students of Ottoman Studies to get together in this journal, to encourage young members of the scholarly profession by publishing their interesting research …, to help them to become known, and to facilitate the presentation of their research to the scholarly world.”
期刊最新文献
Gelibolu Yarımadası’nda İlk Osmanlıların Fetih Güzergâhı ve Gelibolu’nun Fethi (1354) Walter Feldman, Osmanlı’da Mevleviliğin Kültürel Tarihi: Osmanlı İmparatorluğunda Şiir, Müzik ve Tasavvuf, Osmanlı-Kutsal İttifak Savaşlarında Bir Savaş Finansman Kaynağı Olarak Nefîr-i Âmm Bedeli (1688-1689) Ebubekir Ceylan, Modern Irak’ın Osmanlı Kökenleri, Edirne Bâdi Efendi Nüshasının ‘İlk Anonim Kronik’ Olduğu İddiası ile Neşri Üzerine Bazı Mülahazalar
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1