چكيده لاتين
This study conducts a critical discourse analysis of the story of King Goshtaspʹs reign in Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh. The primary aim of this study is to examine and interpret the ideological dimensions and power relations within this section of the epic. It also explores the phenomenon of polarization between the ʹSelfʹ and the ʹOtherʹ. Adopting a qualitative approach, the research draws upon the theoretical frameworks of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), particularly Norman Fairclough’s three-dimensional model (description, interpretation, explanation) and Teun A. van Dijk’s ideological square, to analyze the textual data. The corpus includes selected parts of the story of Lohrasp’s reign and the entirety of Goshtasp’s kingship narrative, excluding the battle between Rostam and Esfandiyar as edited by Dr. Jalal Khaleghi-Motlagh. The findings reveal how the text reproduces beliefs and values through various linguistic and discoursal mechanisms. Firstly, the narrative systematically legitimizes the dynastic transfer of power by invoking divine will and hereditary lineage. The attribution of power to farr-e izadi (divine glory) and the ancestral link to mythical rulers collectively support a monarchy-centered ideology that sanctifies kingship as immutable and sacred. Secondly, the analysis of different types of polarization illustrates the strategic use of van Dijk’s ideological square to construct a dichotomous image of the Self (Iranians and Zoroastrians) versus the Other (Romans, Turanians, and non-Zoroastrians). Iranian heroes are portrayed with positive and valorized traits, while their flaws are minimized; conversely, their adversaries are represented through pejorative and demonic language, with any virtuous qualities disregarded. This polarization facilitates the justification of military conflicts and the negative portrayal of enemies. Thirdly, the research uncovers that the introduction of Zoroastrianism is not merely a religious transformation but a fundamental ideological reconfiguration of the state. Through the use of metaphors and an authoritative tone, the new religion is institutionalized as a hegemonic and obligatory discourse, intricately linked to national identity. As a result, the struggle against the Other is elevated from a political confrontation to a cosmic battle between good and evil. Finally, the analysis of the conflict between Goshtasp and Esfandiyar highlights how absolute royal power, reinforced by manipulative language and courtly justifications, overrides familial loyalty and justice. This reveals an underlying ideology wherein the preservation of the kingʹs authority is prioritized over all other values, and any potential challenge, even from the crown prince, is repressed. In sum, the study demonstrates that Shahnameh, beyond its literary value, functions as an active agent in shaping collective memory and power relations. By offering an interdisciplinary methodological framework, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of the role of language in reproducing socio-political order within classical texts and paves the way for future studies at the intersection of literature and linguistics.
