تحليل، بررسي و مقايسه تاريخ‌نگاري «روضة الواعظين» فتال نيشابوري با «اعلام الوري» طبرسي

The analysis, review an‎d comparison of the historiography Aʹlam-Wara by Tabarsi an‎d Rewdat al-Waʹizin by Fattal Neyshaburi

تاريخ

The present study aims to analyze, examine, an‎d compare the historiographical approaches of Aʿlām al-Warā bi-Aʿlām al-Hudā by Faḍl ibn Ḥasan al-Ṭabarsī an‎d Rawḍat al-Wāʿiẓīn by Fatḥāl al-Nayshābūrī. The research employs a descriptive-analytical method with a comparative approach an‎d, in terms of data collection, is based on library research. The research data were collected through a close examination of the two works an‎d relevant sources, using note-taking an‎d systematic extraction of information. Subsequently, content analysis an‎d comparative analysis were employed to examine an‎d compare the structure, authorship methods, sources, historiographical methods, an‎d approaches of the two works. The findings indicate that both works are among the significant sources of Imami historiography in the fifth an‎d sixth centuries AH. Drawing upon reliable Shiʿi sources an‎d, in some cases, Sunni sources, both authors sought to present the biography an‎d virtues of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) an‎d the Ahl al-Bayt (AS). Both authors viewed history as more than merely a record of events an‎d employed it to explain doctrinal teachings, strengthen Shiʿi religious identity, an‎d transmit religious values. However, the comparative analysis demonstrates that al-Ṭabarsī, through his use of diverse sources, systematic organization of material, extensive citation of sources, theological an‎d argumentative approach, an‎d purposeful use of historical accounts, produced a comprehensive an‎d well-structured work of Imami historiography. In contrast, Fatḥāl al-Nayshābūrī relied primarily on the transmission of traditions, omitted chains of transmission, selec‎ted influential narratives, an‎d emphasized ethical an‎d educational dimensions, thereby placing history at the service of preaching, guidance, an‎d the promotion of the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS). The findings further demonstrate that the differences in the historiographical methods of these two works were influenced less by differences in their doctrinal foundations than by the objectives of their authors, their scholarly positions, the nature of their intended audiences, an‎d the political, social, an‎d cultural circumstances of the Seljuk period. Accordingly, Aʿlām al-Warā an‎d Rawḍat al-Wāʿiẓīn may be regarded as two distinct yet complementary models of Imami historiography, each of which, in accordance with its particular objectives an‎d the circumstances of its time, played an important role in preserving, explaining, an‎d transmitting the historical an‎d doctrinal heritage of Shiʿism.

4

171781