BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.

138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

Describing Ancient Intracity Castlesof Iran in Narrations of Islamic Historians
Dr kurosh Salehi
1
Arezou Nazar
1
Assistant Professor, Department of history, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Sistan and Baluchestan
University. Box. 987-98135Zahedan. Iran

2
M.A Islamic History of Sistan and Baluchestan University, Box. 987-98135Zahedan. Iran

Abstract:
Background: In ancient time, the existence of castles has been considered a factor of stability and power of
governments and the construction of these buildings has been one of the measures taken by kings for expanding the
scope of their influence and power. In Islamic descriptions, castles have had a special standing. In most cases,
Islamic historians have attributed their date of construction and name of constructors to mythological era and
considered them to be the most important after altars. Although the main reasons for the construction of these
buildings by kings have been less mentioned, it can be said that, considering their main functions, these buildings
have been constructed by mythological or historical heroes and kings with a defensive and protective purpose.
Objective: we want to explain Ancient Intracity Castles of Iran. Results: Among the main reasons for the
construction of these buildings by the constructors is protection from themselves and their subordinates against all
life hazards, such as natural disasters and particularly the attack of enemies and wars. In most descriptions of
historians, the name of these castles has been widely known by the name of wars. In these descriptions, other
functions of these buildings considering their spatial domains have been mentioned in addition to their main
function. On this basis, it can be mentioned that the construction of castles in some ancient historical cities has had
other functions than protection for kings, including power and wealth demonstration, treasury stock, safe place for
coins and guns, and food warehouse for the time of difficult situations and siege of enemies. Conclusion: This
research seeks to show the position of ancient historical castles based on the historical data obtained from works of
historians in Islamic period using descriptive and analytical method
Keywords: Ancient castles, Iran, Islamic historians, Intracity castles, Old fort

1. Introduction
In different mythological and historical periods
related to Iran's civilization, castles have been one of
the most important military structures. These
important defensive structures have been dispersed
all over the Iranian Plateau and their different types
have increased civilization stability of the residents.
Historical resources of Akhamanids history are the
basis of Caravansaries. Since Achamanid some
buildings related to road such as Caravansaries,
bridge and ravine are not discovered but indeed, its
different and equipped ways of that era were not
without these installations. Specially, old historians
wrote about the existence such buildings Herdot
admired the comfort provide for the comfort of the
passengers and called midway inns Rastathmos.
Intracity and extracity castles are the largest
division which can be extensively used. Function of
the castles constructed around villages with elevated
towers and bulwarks has been to protect against the
brigands and attackers. These castles used to be
applied in terms of defense in plains and flatlands and
thus have imposed higher defensive costs to the
castellans. Castle, citadel, old fort, canyon, and the
like show a form of strategies of Iranians and other
nations of the world in terms of protecting
themselves and others in historical ancient periods. In
Iran, TepeSialk in Kashan, Hasanlu Castle in Urmia,
and Falak-ol-Aflak Castle in Khorramabad are
among the early and late examples of these defensive
structures.
These castles, whether in mountains or plains
have had different construction materials depending
on the available materials in each location. Main
design of castles in mountains has been engrained
based on the slope and form of the ground; i.e. the
form of mountains and cliffs has drawn the form of
castles. In these castles, the emphasis has been on the
impermeability of structures; but, square or
rectangular forms have been more applied in plain
castles, because the ground form has led to designing
and forming regular and organized structures. Most
of the materials of these castles have been initially
mud and adobe, and plaster and brick have been less
applied. As humans gradually found the strength of
brick against moisture and also due to consecutive
defeat in fully adobe castles, attempts have been
made to reinforce castles.
Applying rock mixed with lime and clay has
been a new development in making strong and secure
castles in terms of defense in the ancient world. In
mythological era, names of zinc and iron castles have
been mentioned, which not only indicates the tale of
impermeability but also reveals such a change.
Considering the conditions of that period, it can be
hardly accepted that zinc or iron has been extensively
used in these castles. This type of building is
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

seriously reflected in texts of the early Islamic
period; since the range of Islamic victories has been
expanded, Muslims got familiar with ancient and
very old structures such as historical castles and also
started the movement of writing in the 'roots and
realms' genre (writing in the al-Maslikwal-
Mamlik).
No special works have been conducted on describing
the ancient intracity castles of Iran in narrations of
Islamic historians. Most of the works have been on
the generality of castles and related to Islamic period
or the Middle Ages and have been individually given
in books and papers; thus, they are not related to the
subject of this paper, which describes and reflects the
function of ancient castles in the works of Islamic
historians (Burton, Peter (2007), Creighton, Oliver;
Higham, Robert (2003), McNeill, Tom (1992),
Thompson, M. W. (1991), Nossov, Konstantin
(2012).

2. Materials
2.1. Ancient intracity castles of Iran in written
works of Islamic period
Abundant reports in the works of historians in
Islamic period have been about the existence of
castles in Persia land in ancient time. In the report by
Estakhri in the 3
rd
century A.H., the number of castles
in cities and castles was mentioned as 5000 (Estakhri,
1949: 105). Although this seems to be a too big
number for castles in ancient time in Islamic era, two
types of castles can be pinpointed in the ancient
period according to this report: 1- Castles which have
to be constructed inside cities or in flatlands for
governments, and 2- extracity castles which have
been constructed by governments during ancient era
in mountains and highlands, considering the security
position of these places.
Although some reports have referred to all kinds
of castles in ancient period, they actually indicate
these two kinds of castles. Based on these reports,
there have been three types of castles in ancient time:
1- Castles inside cities, 2- Walled or fenced old forts,
and 3- Mountainous castles (IbnHawqal, 1947: 41 43,
Estakhri, 1949: 104). According to these reports, the
first type of these buildings is the old forts located
inside cities, which are regarded independent owing
to their surrounding walls; they are called bulwarked
castles. The second type includes castles inside the
cities which can be regarded royal ones. These two
types of castles visualize castles on flatlands.
Considering these reports, the present research
studies these buildings and their functions in different
regions of Iran in ancient time. In some examples,
there are castles in which all three characteristics can
be relatively recognized. Considering the Islamic
reports, old forts can be assumed as the first buildings
which have been constructed in ancient time with a
defensive function or they may be regarded as the
first and oldest castles which have been constructed
in ancient Iran. These buildings have been mentioned
in one of the other important states of Iran during
mythological period: Pars. For example, castles such
as Karzin (IbnHawqal, 1947: 41, Estakhri, 1949:
105), Samiran (IbnHawqal, 1947: 41; Jeihani, 1949:
111; Estakhri, 1949: 105), and city of Fasa have been
reported to have old forts and bulwarks (Estakhri,
1949: 105, Jeihani, 1949: 117, Hudud al-Alam, 1943:
134). Even in these reports, an old fort called Shah
Mobez has been mentioned in Pars (IbnHawqal,
1947: 41; Hudud al-Alam, 1943: 131, Jeihani, 1949:
111). The reason for the construction of these old
forts in this state was the point that it was the capital
since the beginning. According to these detailed
descriptions about these buildings in Pars, it can be
said that the construction of these buildings has been
less considered, because most of Islamic descriptions
have been related to royal castles in states; but, it can
be said that old forts have been among the first
defensive buildings which have been considered by
the kings in these states. Despite these characteristics
and considering Islamic texts, old forts can be
regarded as the dominant buildings in terms of
defense in the east of Iran, since they have been
continuously mentioned in these regions. Such an
issue can be probably attributed to the point that
Islamic authors have always focused in their
descriptions about periods of mythological kings on
the events of east and attack of eastern enemy of Iran
(i.e. Turkestan) to Iran. Existence of the eastern
enemy has necessitated the construction of these
buildings by kings against Turkestan. In Islamic
texts, presence of these old forts is evident in most of
eastern cities; but, the most important ones are only
studied in this paper.
Considering the design of old plans and their
adaptation with the texts related to Islamic period,
some cities with old forts are mentioned to be located
on a direct line. These cities include Samarkand,
Bukhara, and Marv, which have been located in
Fararood (Transoxiana of Islamic period) as the
important eastern region of Iran in ancient period,
and later entered Khorasan, one of the important
states of Iran in ancient time. In Khorasan, the most
important city which has always owned an old fort is
Neishabur. Therefore, Neishabur has been on the
entrance route of enemies attacking to Iran and, thus,
it has been necessary to construct this building there.
In Islamic period, although authors have separately
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

described each of these old forts, some of them have
referred to cities with old forts besides some other
cities (Samani, 1962: vol. 10, 525 526: Hamawi,
1995: vol. 4, 419; Hamawi, 1943: 155 156).
Probably, the reason for mentioning these buildings
altogether is that the attack of the eastern enemies to
Iran has been mostly through these routes in ancient,
particularly mythological period. It does not mean
that there has been no old forts in other cities of
Khorasan; but, existence of some of these buildings
in some cities has been briefly mentioned in Islamic
reports, according to which some characteristics of
these buildings in ancient time can be found; some of
them such as old forts of Kath, Herat, and Balkh will
be mentioned below.
In a report, only the old fort of Kath city was
mentioned (IbnHawqal, 1947: 207). In another report
in the 3
rd
century A.H., water proximity to this old
fort and fear of its destruction have been mentioned
(Estakhri, 1949: 235 236). As is evident, water has
played an important role in the construction of this
old fort and other eastern ones, because water supply
has been one of the determined principles in the
foundation of these buildings. Regarding Herat, the
existence of a castle which is higher than human
height and is inside a bulwark with the distance of
more than 30 steps has been mentioned (IbnHawqal,
1947: 171). Mentioning distance not only indicates
the far distance of this castle from the bulwark, but
also admits the presence of old fort, because there has
been a wall around all the old forts in the ancient
east. These walls have been installed around the
buildings for more protection and also the entrance
and exit control of people residing in these buildings.
Presence of these walls mostly refers to their
defensive function. Even governments have
established strong bulwarks for providing more
efficient defense. For example, installing houses
above the bulwark of city of Balkh by Lohrasb has
been stated (Majma-ul-Tawarikhwa al-Qesas, 51).
Author of Majma-ul-Tawarikhwa al-Qesas has
mentioned the presence of a thousand houses above
this bulwark; this figure is unacceptable, because old
forts have not so large in their primary period that the
constructor could build such a large number of
houses or towers in them. Presence of these houses
indicates the presence of towers in this bulwark. This
report demonstrates that the construction of this
bulwark has been so important for its constructor that
s/he has constructed such towers. Although the
reporter has not pointed out the reason for the
construction of these houses or towers, it can be said
that the major reason for their installation can be
more protection from the surrounding of bulwarks
and faster actions of the people inside bulwarks and
old forts at the time of attacks and wars, particularly
battles with Turkestan. These measures mostly refer
to the defensive function of such buildings. In fact,
some reports have exaggerated in their emphasis on
the defensive aspects of bulwarks and old forts. For
instance, there have been three bulwarks or walls
around city of Balkh based on a report (Yaqubi,
1924: 63 64). It is necessary to note that most reports
have mentioned the construction of bulwarks, instead
of old forts, around cities in the eastern cities of Iran.
As an example, the construction of bulwark of city of
Balkh has been attributed to Lohrasb (Balami,
1958:vol. 1, 82; IbnBalkhi, 1944: 48, Saalabi, 1964:
159).
In fact, reporters have aimed to mention the
presence of bulwark around the old fort of this city,
because it can be said that cities have been expanded
in their primitive periods as a result of the
construction of these old forts, as the first buildings
constructed by kings in cities. Based on Islamic
reports, this point holds true for other old forts,
particularly the one in four historical cities of
Neishabur, Marv, Samarkand, and Bukhara.
Accordingly, first, old forts have been constructed in
these cities and, later on, the construction of these
bulwarks has been required by each city and thus the
government has constructed them.
It has been reported that the bulwark of
Samarkand city was in ruins in the 3
rd
century A.H.
(Yaqubi, 1924: 70). Although the construction time
of this bulwark is not specified, this building has
existed for centuries after Islam owing to strength, as
revealed in this text. The old fort of this city has been
mentioned in some reports, particularly in reports of
wars. At the time of Islamic victories, in addition to
capturing the castle of princes, the attack of Arabs to
Samarkand old fort has been mentioned (Yaqubi,
1967: vol. 2, 172). On this basis, the governmental
castle or castles, specifically belonging to royal
families, can be named beside the old forts in
Samarkand; but, there is little information in this
regard. Following these attacks, the destruction of
this old fort has been mentioned (Baladhuri, 1927:
296). As stated previously, destiny of this old fort has
been linked to wars and it might have been destroyed
after every attack; in addition to this destruction, its
destruction in a farther period from the era when
Arabs were defeated by Shemr-ebneAfrighas and
then its reconstruction with two iron doors by Taba-
ebeneAghran have been mentioned (IbnFaqih, 1930:
175 176). It is evident that this building has been
destructed by strangers at any time. By reconstructing
this building, the necessity of its existence for
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

governments and kings at any time can be
understood. This is one of the few reports, which
have referred to the installation of iron doors on the
eastern old forts. Goal of installing doors on old forts
has been to have more control and provide faster
travelling for the people residing there. In addition to
the doors of the old fort, some other doors have
seemingly existed on Samarkand bulwark during the
attacks of Shemr-ebeneAfrighas and the city
occupation by these doors. The number of these
doors has been mentioned to be 4 (Balami, 1958: vol.
1, 682-684; IbnAsir: 1952: vol. 5: 810). It is evident
that it has had bulwark and wall in addition to old
forts. All of these measures have been taken for
defending and preventing the attack of enemies.
Although Neishabur Old Fort has had a wall
around it, it has been reported to have two doors, like
Samarkand Old Fort (IbnHawqal, 1947: 166). It
should be mentioned that Neishabur Old Fort has
been constructed in east-west direction while
observing climatic factors, because in one of the
Islamic descriptions, it has been mentioned to be
located on the east side of this old fort around
Torbabad (Neishabouri, 1955: 226). Undoubtedly,
the position of Neishabur in a mountainous region
has necessitated the construction of its buildings
according to the azimuth angle from the very
beginning and their constructors have paid special
attention to this case. For this reason, ShapurSasani
has involved climatic factors in the construction of
Neishabur city. It is worth mentioning that Shapur
has decided to construct city of Neishabur according
to the existence of this old fort. Here, it should not be
assumed that this old fort has been constructed by
Shapur. Ferdowsi has also made such a mistake and
attributed the construction of the old fort, instead of
city of Neishabur, to Shapur (Ferdowsi, 1970: 473).
Neishabur Old Fort can be regarded as the kind of old
forts which have been located outside cities, because
it has been mentioned to be out of the city in a
description (Estakhri, 1949: 204). According to
Neishabouri, it can be said that this old fort has been
located opposite to Neishabur old city (Neishabouri,
1955: 226). History of this old fort goes long before
the construction of its city by ShapurSasani and this
point confirms the previous point that eastern cities
of Iran have been constructed and expanded around
old forts. When talking about the time of this old fort,
Neishabouri found it as a stone castle in the periods
before Iraj, who constructed it after Afrasiab's attack
to Iran owing to its neighboring mountain. This old
fort has been existed before Iraj; thus, Neishabouri
stated its construction in three stages. Its first
construction was attributed to Anoosh, its second
construction after being worn was done by Zoliekh II,
king of Yemen, and the third time construction was
done in the period of Noah's Flood (ibid, 196-197). In
fact, none of these reports have historical reality;
however, several points are understood from this
report; first, Neishabur Old Fort has been the only
stone old fort in east of Iran and it has been probably
stable until Shapur's time and motivated Shapur to
construct Neishabur around it. Second, attacks by
Turkistan have played an important role in the
construction of this defensive building and the
presence of a mountain in line with the previous point
confirms the role of natural factors in its construction
based on climatic factors.
Islamic descriptions about city of Bukhara have
indicated the existence of an old fort in addition to
the wall. Also, there are some descriptions about the
wall of the city (Moghaddasi, 1942: vol. 2, 386;
Estakhri, 1949: 231, Hudud al-Alam, 1943: 106,
IbnHawqal, 1947: 202). These authors have not
talked about the background of this wall; but,
Masoudi in his book al-Tanbihwa al-Ishraf
mentioned the presence of a large wall around city of
Bukhara, which had been constructed in ancient time
by one of the Sogdian kings to prevent the attack of
Turkans (Masoudi, 1946: 62). It is evident that this
city, besides other cities, has been attacked by its
eastern enemies. As a result of attacks by Turkans to
this city, other defensive buildings were also
constructed. In addition to this wall, some references
have mentioned the presence of old fort of this city
(IbnKhordadbeh, 1952: 27; IbnFaqih, 1930: 175).
This old fort has been probably constructed in a
prosperous and highland, because people going to the
top of this building would not see anything other than
prosperity around them (Estakhri, 1949: 231;
IbnHawqal, 1947: 202). This point refers to the role
of natural factors, i.e. existence of highlands, in the
construction of this building. In addition to the
information about the elevation of this building,
another characteristic of this building, i.e. its sacred
nature due to the permanent burial of its rulers and
victory of the people of this land in wars against
enemies, has been mentioned in other descriptions
(IbnHawqal, 1947: 210). IbnHawqal has referred to
the castle, instead of mentioning the old fort. In fact,
this castle refers to the old fort, because it denotes its
old age by mentioning the name of kings. Narshakhi's
statements in his report on the old fort refer to its
sacred dimension and confirm IbnHawqal's ideas.
Sacredness of this building seems to be unrealistic
according to historical pieces of evidence. In fact,
stating these characteristics, particularly lack of
failure of its people, only emphasizes the defensive
function and resistance of this building. According to
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

Narshakhi, eastern gate of the old fort, owing to
Death of Siavash.not only has had a special value for
Magi of this city, but also has been a place for annual
slaughtering of roosters by the people of this city at
the start of spring to show respect for Death of
Siavash (Narshakhi, 1932: 34-35). This point
indicates wars of Turkans and Iranians during
mythological period, because Siavash has been killed
by Turkans during this period, and it conveys the role
of these buildings in terms of being valuable and
defensive. Mentioning the name of the eastern gate of
this old fort, like Neishabur Old Fort, demonstrates
its construction in the east-west direction and the role
of geographical factors. As can be understood from
Islamic texts, this old fort has existed until the
Samanid Empire (Bayhaqi, No date; 195; Gardizi,
1944: 335).
Islamic descriptions about Marv city, like other
cities, include its bulwark and old fort. In these
descriptions, the construction of its bulwark, like that
of Bukhara, has been linked to the narrations of
battles between Iranians and Turkans. Construction
of this old fort has been attributed to Afrasiab
(Majma-ul-Tawarikhwa al-Qesas, 44).
However, considering the hostility of Afrasiab
and destruction of buildings by his attacks to Iran, the
construction of this building cannot be done by him.
Construction location of this bulwark has been
mentioned to be between the old fort and one of the
gates of this city, called Nigh (Hamzah al-Isfahani,
1948: 34). This report has mostly emphasized the
presence of old fort within this bulwark. To
understand the antiquity of Marv old fort, it can be
said that this building has been constructed in the
early mythological period, Tahmuras era (Saalabi,
1964: 5; IbnBalkhi, 1944: 28). In the descriptions of
other authors, another function of this building has
been revealed. While describing the construction of
this old fort by Tahmuras, the anonymous author of
Hudud al-Alam has referred to it as the place of
Khosravan (Hudud al-Alam, 1943: 94). Accordingly,
it can be said that this old fort has specifically
belonged to the royal family. Although other old forts
have not been mentioned to exclusively belong to the
royal family, this idea can be generalized to all old
forts in the east, because these buildings, in addition
to palaces and castles, have been considered the
safest points for the residence of kings during wars.
FakhruddinAs'adGurgani has referred to this issue in
his poem (As'adGurgani, 1970: 507).
Placing treasuries in old forts more evidently
indicates their structure and importance for kings.
Besides, it is necessary to mention another point for
the construction of this old fort. While talking about
the construction of this old fort by Tahmuras,
Moghaddasi also has first mentioned the construction
of a market in Marv by him and then has referred to
the fulfillment of all needs of the workers of the old
fort via this market (Moghaddasi, 1942: vol. 2, 433).
Considering these descriptions, it should be
mentioned that this building has also been
economically important in the ancient time.
Via constructing this market for the purpose of
supplying the demands of workers, Tahmuras has
managed to save and maintain his property in this
city. In the 3
rd
century A.H., this building was
mentioned in Yaqubi History (Yaqubi, 1967: vol. 2,
299). But, after one century, its destruction has been
reported due to the excessive amount of water
(IbnHawqal, 1947: 169). Destiny of the old fort in
Kath has been also similar to that of this old fort.
2.2. Function of intracity castles in descriptions of
Islamic historians
Based on the descriptions of Islamic authors, these
castles have existed in most cities of Iran. In ancient
time, although kings used to spend most of their time
in palaces and castles, they have needed some
buildings which could protect their life and property
at some times, particularly during wars and
resurrections in cities. In fact, royal castles, owing to
their resistance and strength, have played such a role
for kings in important cities. These castles can be
regarded as the most dominant buildings in terms of
defensive and aggressive functions in ancient period,
since they have been constructed all over Iran. In
most ancient texts, these castles have been mentioned
to exist at any time and place. Considering their
importance for governments and kings, some of these
castles have had other functions, which will be
mentioned later. In the south of Iran, in which there
have been many royal castles, particularly in city of
Pars, these buildings have been considerably utilized.
During the ancient time, two major factors have
motivated the construction of these buildings in this
city: first, their high political importance for kings,
because it was capital of Iran and thus defensive
aspect and construction of castles in this city have
complemented its political aspect. Second, because of
such importance, it has been more exposed to the
attack of enemies than any other place; hence, it has
been necessary for kings to protect it in defensive
terms.
Estakhr Castle was one of the first buildings
constructed in this city. In Islamic descriptions, the
construction of three castles called "Sehgonbadan" or
"Estakhr, Shekasteh, and Sheknavan castles" by
Jamshid has been mentioned in this city (IbnBalkhi,
1944: 127 125). It is not correct to imagine that these
three castles have been constructed in one city in the
ancient period; but, they have been regarded as
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

independent buildings. Here, Hamzah al-Isfahani's
quotation mentioning three buildings of
"MasaneEstakhr" called "HezarSotoun" in three
different places of Estakhr, Darabgard, and on the
way to Khorasanhas to be pointed out (Hamzah al-
Isfahani, 1948: 38).
If so, these three buildings should be individually
discussed so that Estakhr castle has been mentioned
in other descriptions by itself and without mentioning
these buildings.
Independence and main functions of this castle
can be understood from other reports. The thing that
mostly refers to the independence of this building is a
report relating to Dara's era, in which wheat storage
was constructed for overcoming distress and drought
despite the presence of gold and silver treasuries
(Tarsousi, 1955: vol. 1, 351 352).
In this report, the importance and position of
this castle can be found owing to the existence of
royal treasuries. Storing wheat by kings shows that
they have taken all the measures to provide the
independence of these buildings.
This castle has been a royal one and there have
been monuments, properties, and treasuries of kings
in them, according to another report (Samani, 1962:
vol. 1, 285). Other reports have narrated another
function for it; in a report relating to Kianian
mythological periods, placing book of Zoroastrians
on gilded skins based on the order of Gashtasb has
been mentioned (Saalabi, 1964: 118 119; Owfi, 1955:
83; Gardizi, 1944: 51). Gashtasb took this action to
maintain the religious heritage of Iran and
undoubtedly he kept these skins in this castle owing
to its political and military security.
Then, it can be said that this castle has had an
important function because of this heritage. This
castle must be "Dejnevesht" belonging to Homay's
period, which was fired according to Eskandar's order
during his attack (Gardizi, 1944).
Thus, it is evident that this castle has protected its
scientific function since Gashtasb to Eskandar's
period owing to its written heritage and, since then,
only its fire report has been made; even, there is no
report about its reconstruction after Eskandar.
If there are any reports on Estakhr's castle in
ancient texts, it may be related to a building or castle
which has been constructed by kings after Eskandar;
Estakhr castle has been reported to have the width of
one league and cisterns in the 4
th
century A.H.
(Moghaddasi, 1942: vol. 2, 665).
As can be observed, there is no report about the
burning of this castle; in contrast, its prosperity has
been reported; hence, kings must have constructed
another castle instead of the burnt one after Eskandar,
because the existence of castles was required by
kings in this city, owing to its general importance.
Another castle which has been mentioned in Pars to
have a very long antiquity is Goodarz Castle. Islamic
writers have related the etymology of this castle to
Goodarz, one of the relatives and soldiers at the time
of Keikhosrow (Jeihani, 1949: 112; IbnHawqal,
1947: 41; Hamawi, 1963: vol. 2, 98). On this basis, it
can be said that, in addition to kings, some people
from high classes such as soldiers (one of whom was
Goodarz) have played a role in the construction of
these buildings. Location of this castle has been
mentioned to be close to KamFirooz (Estakhri, 1949:
106).
Sharif al-Idrisi has mentioned the strength of
this castle and also its conquest probability (Sharif al-
Idrisi, 1988: vol. 1, 419). For this reason, this castle
does not seem to be very resistant, demonstrating that
the constructors of these buildings have not
accumulated all defensive aspects of these buildings
only in the castle; but, military force has also played
an important role in its defense. Moreover, each of
the castles has had different importance and function,
for which the owners have spent costs for a time
section.
In the west of Iran, these types of castles have been
mentioned in city of Hamedan. Destiny of this castle,
which has been called Sarough, has been linked to
the war events of Dara and Eskandar, as narrated by
Hamedani in the 4
th
century A.H, when he was near
the caste and attributed its construction to Eskandar's
period. Hamedani has only referred to the story of
Eskandar and another person from the farmer's class
without any more description (IbnFaqih, 1930: 72).
Accordingly, this building has existed during
centuries after Islam.
The thing that has mostly confirmed the relation
of this building with the events of Dara's period is the
existence of other Islamic reports. In a report, the
construction background of this castle has been
related to Jamshid's period, which was followed by
the action of Dara regarding building a wall around
it. Hamawi has referred to it as Saru and attributed its
completion to BahmanibnEsfandiyar's period.
Although other reports have not referred to the
construction time of this building, they have
attributed the reconstruction of its ruins to Dara
(Hamawi, 1995: vol. 3, 170).
It can be said that Dara's measure regarding the
wall construction aimed to take defensive actions
against the attacks of Eskandar. This castle has been
regarded only a royal castle before Dara; but, since
Dara's time, while maintaining its main function as a
royal castle, this castle has developed a defensive and
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

military aspect due to Eskandar's attack. The report
on the destruction of city of Hamedan has provided
more information about this castle, either before or
after Dara. According to this report, when Bakht Nasr
attacked it, city of Hamedan was ruined due to the
strength of its bulwark. Afterward, when Eskandar
attacked Iran, he, according to the idea of his
consultants, decided to reconstruct city of Hamedan
at its primary location and build its buildings in
different colors in order to hide his family and
treasures.
Following the reconstruction of this city, he
constructed Sarough Palace in three views or a palace
with 300 hiding places for his family, the attendants,
and treasuries. Hamedani first talks about Dara's
decision on the construction of the fort and then
refers to the residence of the family and placement of
treasures belonging to Dara in Sarough palace or
castle, both of which imply one building or Sarough
(IbnFaqih, 1930: 36 37; Nihayat al-Arab: 1955: 116
117).
City of Hamedan is not assumed to be ruined
before Dara and it cannot be accepted that this city
has been destroyed before Eskandar. This report
mostly emphasizes the importance and role of
internal palace of the city for Dara during Eskandar's
attack. Sarough which has been regarded as a palace
must have been the middle palace of the city, in
which the king along with his family and treasures
has been residing, because different colors for its
buildings imply the presence of different classes in it
and every color has belonged to a special class. This
report has referred to the role of this castle as a royal
one and a castle which has assumed a more defensive
and military role at this time.
Hamedani has mentioned the defensive and
military functions along with the hideouts of this
building in two parts of AjayebNameh; once, he has
referred to a small building in the castle as a stall, on
top of which Arash's was arrow throwing site
(IbnFaqih, 1930: 449). Presence of this stall indicates
the existence of a square room or tower on top of the
building. In another part, he refers to the construction
of a castle called Abiaz (white) by Dara, which has
eight gates with towers and a palace in the middle of
another palace.
Hamedani first says about Dara's decision to
construct the castle and later refers to the residence of
family and placement of treasures belonging to Dara
in Sarough palace or castle, both of which imply one
building or Sarough (ibid: 487). On this basis,
another name of Sarough Palace has been Abiaz; as
mentioned before, Dara has constructed this castle in
different colors and Abiaz Castle must be the internal
castle, in which Dara has resided. This report
confirms all of the present statements about Sarough
Castle. It is evident that this royal castle, which has
took a military function since this time, has kept this
function to the middle of Sassanian Empire, when it
has been said that Ghobad has used a spell in this
building and, as a result of people's insurgency, all
weapons and military equipment are transferred from
that place by Sassanid kings after Ghobad (IbnFaqih,
1930: 68-69). Name of this castle should not interfere
with the recognition of Sarouyeh Building in Isfahan.
IbnRustah has made such a mistake and mentioned
Sarouyeh under the name of Sarough as a very old
castle in Isfahan (IbnRustah, 1946: 191). Sarouyeh
Building cannot even be regarded as an independent
castle; it has been an independent building in Isfahan
castle or old fort. In Islamic texts, Isfahan Castle has
been mentioned as an old fort. However, it is not
possible for this castle to be among the old forts,
particularly with its astronomical and scientific
function. Hamzah al-Isfahani has considered it a
wonderful building inside the old fort of city of Jay
(Abu Naeem, 1957: 154). Different function of this
building causes it to be considered different from
Sarough. Since it is said that there are skins, books
written in old scripts, and zijes in this biolding
(Hamzah al-Isfahani, 1948: 182 184), thus, it can be
said that this building has had a scientific function
and been used as a library and observatory and kings
has found this building as the best place for
protecting their scientific works and zijes. Other
authors have also reported the existence of these zijes
and skins there. For example, Mafroukhi has reported
the presence of skins with Persian script (Mafroukhi,
1965: 38 39).
IbnRustah has cited Abu Ma'sharMonjam about
the protection of royal zij against water damage and
also strength of Sarouyeh at that time (IbnRustah,
1946: 191). Considering this report, it is necessary to
note that this building has been constructed in water
in order to prevent the destruction of books, skins,
and zijes against the potential hazards and damage
such as wars and fires. This strong building has been
mentioned in the 6
th
century as "Haft Mekka".
IbnBalkhi has also talked about its construction in
water and attributed its destruction to a person called
Rokn-o DowlehKhomartegin (IbnBalkhi, 1944: 29).
The reason for such naming is not clear; but, it is
evident that this building has existed for centuries
after Islam owing to its strength and it has been
ruined by human, not natural, agents. Owing to its
strength and resistance, Sarouyeh has been likened to
Egyptian pyramids in a description. Ibn al-Nadim has
presented the most complete description about this
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

building and confirmed all the statements (Ibn al-
Nadim, 1924: 439 440), because the building of
pyramids in ancient Egypt has not been assumed to
have astronomical and scientific functions. When
mentioning the history of Sarouyeh Building, some
authors have related it along with Mehrin Building to
Tahmuras (Beizavi, 1962: 17; IbnBalkhi, 1944: 29).
Although these authors have referred to the long
antiquity of Mehrin Building beside Sarouyeh, they
have not told anything about the type of Mehrin
Building; however, the statement by IbnHawqal
should be cited when he has mentioned a castle in
Mehrin beside an altar (IbnHawqal, 1947: 108-109).
In another description, the construction of a wall
around both Mehrin and Sarouyeh buildings has been
mentioned 1000 years after the construction by
Tahmuras (Majma-ul-Tawarikhwa al-Qesas, No date,
39). This description has mostly referred to the castle
nature of this building, because using wall around
castles has been conventional in ancient time in order
to provide a better function for these castles in
defensive and aggressive terms.
In their descriptions of other cities in Iran,
Islamic writers have referred to the presence of
castles. Although these castles have had other
functions, such descriptions have led to envisaging
royal castles, because they have not been mentioned
as old forts and mountainous castles.
One of these castles has been "Tabark" Castle in
Rey, which was constructed by Afrasiab during his
wars with Manouchehr and was called DezRashkan
in Dialameh's era (IbnEsfandiyar, 1969: 60 61).
Considering the wars between Turkans and Iranians
during mythological time, this castle, like most
others, has been used for military purposes. Although
the construction of this castle cannot be attributed to
AfrasiabTurani, the presence of this building since
the mythological time cannot be denied according to
other reports.
The point that this castle has been constructed
like a scorpion (Majma-ul-Tawarikhwa al-Qesas, No
date, 64) more highlights the existence of this
building since mythological period, because cities
and buildings were made as animals since that time.
During this period, Iranians have had paid special
attention to animals and their forms.
In DarabNameh, this castle has been also
mentioned when Darab appoints a prince as castellan
of this castle (Tarsousi, 1955: vol. 1, 345).
Mentioning the existence of a prince as a castellan
guard reveals the importance and specialty of this
castle for the royal family. During the period of
FakhrOlDowlehBoyah, this castle was reconstructed
and named Fakhrabad (Hamawi, 1995: vol. 4, 238). It
is evident that this castle has existed and been
important before Ale Boyah's period and
FakhrOlDowleh, a Boyah governor, has
reconstructed it to get survived. Some authors have
named another building while talking about the
distance of Rey, Qom, and Isfahan, which refers to a
castle that is not the same as this castle, because their
location and form are different from Tabarak Castle
according to Islamic statements. During his trip and
on the way from Qom to Rey, Abu Dolaf mentioned
this building as "Deiroljes or DeirGachin" and he
stated that Arabs had destroyed Iranian monuments
and buildings in this building (Abu Dolaf, 1935: 71
72).
Undoubtedly, such destruction has caused
Islamic authors not to present information about this
castle, unlike AljesArjan Castle.
In contrast to Abu Dolaf, Derioljes was
mentioned as a brick and plaster castle in the late 5
th

century A.H., in which people and soldiers have
resided (Sharif al-Idrisi, 1988: vol. 1, 452). Although
there is little information about this building, it can
be said that it has been reconstructed after Abu
Dolaf's period and continued its main role as a castle,
especially a military one. In a poem, the construction
of this building has been attributed to the
mythological period: (Abalkheir, 1951: 594 597).
Such Deiroljases have not been mentioned in any
other texts as a city.
It can be stated that it is regarded as a city in this
poem owing to the residence of the king and the
army; accordingly, its function as a military and royal
castle is more extensively confirmed.
Name of Sistan has been continuously mentioned
in the works related to historical events and wars,
particularly during Kianian period.
In the only report in which these royal castles
have been mentioned, the reporter does not talk about
the name of this old fort and links their names to the
name of Iranian kings and the time of Eskandar's
attack.
Abundance of these castles outside cities can be
understood from these reports. According to this
report, during his passage from this Sistan and before
attacking India, Eskandar entered a castle which was
built by Keikhosrow in the north of Sistan Castle
(Tarikh-e Sistan, 1947: 10).
Based on this report, two castles in the north of
Sistan can be mentioned before the attack period of
Eskandar: one is the castle built by Keikhosrow and
the other is the one which has existed before
Keikhosrow and has been his pattern in the
construction of his own.
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

The point which should be attended in this regard
is that castles of Sistan have been constructed in the
north-south direction. This statement indicates the
extent of Sistan and existence of these buildings in
these directions.
3. Results and discussion
Following their recording style of ancient events
and adopting the Arabic translation of Pahlavi works
and books of kings, Islamic historians have generated
a relationship between ancient castles of Iran and
their constructors in mythological era.
The castles considered by Islamic historians
consist of several types of royal old forts,
mountainous castles, individual castles located in
plains, and castles inside cities and villages.
Descriptions of Islamic historians are mostly related
to the castles which have been stable during their
period; but, the relics left from the past and their
ruins either have not been considered or have been
superficially mentioned.
After altars, Iranian ancient castles have been
among the most important buildings considered by
Islamic historians. In most descriptions by these
historians, name of these castles has become well-
known with the name of wars.
Based on the information presented in Islamic
texts, the abundance of castles in flatlands has
followed a pattern of regular buildings with a specific
function, while mountainous castles have had
proportional forms to the geometrical form of their
location and have been mostly irregular with different
elevations and diameters.
Functions of these castles have been also more
different from the castles of flatlands. Based on this
information, the number of regular castles with
determined defensive functions has been more than
that of mountainous castles with different functions.
In fact, considering the accessibility or inaccessibility
of these castles, there are different reflections of
materials in this regard in Islamic sources and texts.
Intracity castles have been successively described in
the related references.
Another factor which exists in the frequency of
descriptions is the spatial distance of these castles
from the center of Muslim World so that, the closer
these buildings to the center of Muslim world, the
more the description in references, and the farther
these structures, the less the reference to them.
In these descriptions, other functions of these
buildings than their main function have been
mentioned considering their spatial domains.
Accordingly, it can be said that the construction of
castles in some ancient historical cities had other
functions for kings than their defensive aspects.
In the ancient period, the existence of castles has
been regarded as the factor of stability and strength
and their construction has been required for the
expansion of influence and power of governments.
Government of states, border guards, villages, cities,
commercial highways, large ranges, political and
military events, etc. have procured a type of castle
and tower for themselves, depending on the climate.
Need for large shelters which can save people of a
country exposed to historical events of the ancient era
against the hazards of looting and plunder has been
one of the most important Iranian government
principles.
In fact, authors of Islamic period have also had a
glance at these strategic phenomena and also visited
these buildings some centuries after their prosperity.
It is evident that some of them have been destroyed,
some have been ruined, and some have changed their
land use; thus, the present descriptive perspective
could not reconstruct the functional space of these
buildings in the ancient period
The serious thing that should be considered is
that a building is not living as a segregate identity
and autonomous from structural- urban, social,
economical, cultural, ecological and environmental
textures and the things relating the building to a
bigger environment are disparate.
The historical buildings are organized gently to
meet various requirements by people. These
environments were containing human activities in the
past reflecting the habits and confidences and latent
knowledge in the societies and its good recognition
can help us to know the importance of the depth and
quality of the places people living in them.
The important thing here is protecting heritage
values as unparalleled examples of them in the
former life and it is unfortunately it is less observed
in the plans from private and public institutions.
Examples of prehistoric and pre-Islamic architecture
are found in ancient huts, remnants of old towns and
villages, fortresses, temples and fi re temples,
mausoleums and palaces, dams and bridges, bazaars,
highways and roads, towers and outposts, garden
pavilions, and monuments.
The castle could operate as a fort and dungeon
but was also a place where a knight or lord could
occupy his peers. Over time the aesthetics of the
design became more important, as the castle's advent
and size began to reverberate the prestige and power
of its inhabitant. Convenient homes were often
fashioned within their fortified walls.
Although castles still prepared protection from
low levels of violence in later periods, finally they
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

were succeeded by country houses as high status
residences
6. Conclusion
Following their recording style of ancient events
and adopting the Arabic translation of Pahlavi works
and books of kings, Islamic historians have generated
a relationship between ancient castles of Iran and
their constructors in mythological era
References
1. Abalkheir, IranshahibnAbalkheir (1951),
BahmanNameh, Edited by Rahim Afifi, Tehran,
Scientific and Cultural Publication.
2. Abu DolafKhazraji (1935), Abu Dolaf's Travel
Account in Iran, Translated by
SeyedAbolfazlTabatabaei, Tehran. Zavar
Bookshop.
3. Abu Naim, Ahmad ibnAbdollahIsfahani (1957),
ZikrAkhbar Isfahan, Translated by
NourollahKasaei, Tehran, Soroush.
4. AsadGorgani, Fakhraddin (1930), Vis and
Ramin, Corrected by Magali A. Todua and
Alexander A. Gwakharia, Tehran, Iran Culture
Foundation.
5. Balami, Abu Ali (1958), Tarikh al-Tabari
(Balami History), vols. 1, 3, 4, Corrected by
Mohammad Roshan, Tehran, Soroush.
6. Balkhi, AbiBakr Abdullah ibn Omar (1931),
Virtues of Balkh, Translated by Abdullah
Mohammad ibn Mohammad Balkhi, Corrected
and annotated by AbdolhayHabibi, Tehran,
Culture Foundation Publication.
7. Bayhaqi, Abul-Hassan Ali ibnZeydBayhaqi
(IbnFandogh), No date, Tarikh-e Bayhaqi,
Corrected by Ahmad Bahmanyar, Tehran,
Foroughi Bookshop.
8. Baladhuri, Ahmad ibnYahya (1927), Futuh al-
Buldan (chapter on Iran), Translated by
AzartashAzarnoush, Tehran, Iran, Culture
Foundation Publication.
9. Dinvari, Abu Hanifeh (1963), Akhbar-olTaval,
Translated by Mahmoud MahdaviDamghani,
Tehran, Nei Publication.
10. Estakhri, Abu Ishaq Ibrahim (1949),
Maslikwal- Mamlik, By IrajAfshar, Tehran,
Scientific and Cultural Publication Company.
11. Ferdowsi, Abolghasem (1970), Shahnameh, The
Moscow edition and contrasted with Jules Mohl's
edition, With the introduction by
MojtabaMinavi, Tehran, Negah.
12. Gardizi, Abu Saied AbdulhayibnZahak, 1944,
Zayn al-Akhbar (History of Gardizi), Corrected
by AbdulhayHabibi, Tehran, Book World.
13. Hamawi, Yaghout (1943), Common Extracts of
Yaghout, Translated by ParvinGonabadi, Tehran,
Amir Kabir.
14. Hamawi, Yaghout (1963), Mujam al-buldan,
vol. 2, Mujam al-buldan, Tehran, Iran Cultural
Heritage Organization.
15. Hamawi, Yaghout (1995), Mujam al-buldan,
vols. 3 and 4, Beirut, Dar Sader, Afghan Print.
16. Hamedani, Mohammad ibn Mahmoud (1955),
Ajayebnameh (Aja'ib al-MakhluqatwaGhara'ib
al-Mawjudat), Edited by JafarModaresSadeghi,
Tehran, Markaz Publication.
17. Hamzah al-Isfahani, Abu Abdullah Hamzehibn
Hassan (1948), History of Prophets and
Sovereigns, Translated by Dr. JafarShoar,
Tehran, Amir Kabir.
18. udd al-lam(1943), By Dr.
ManouchehrSotoudeh, Tehran, Tahouri Library.
19. Ibn al-Nadim (1924), al-Fihrist. Translated by
M. Reza Tajadod, Tehran, Avicenna Library
Publication.
20. IbnAsir, Ezodin (1952), Complete History of
Islam and Iran, vol. 5, Translated by Abbas
Khalili and AbolghasemHalat, Tehran, Institute
of Scientific Press.
21. IbnAtham al-Kufi (1953), Al-Futuh, Translated
by Mohamed ibn Ahmed MostofiHeravi,
Research by GholamrezaTabatabaeiMajd,
Tehran, Islamic Revolution Publication and
Education.
22. IbnBalkhi, Abu Zayd (1944), Farsnameh,
Corrected by Reynold Allen Nicholson and
Lestrange, Tehran, Book World.
23. IbnEsfandiyar, Mohammad ibn Hassan (1969),
History of Tabaristan, Corrected by Abbas
IqbalAshtiani, By Mohammad Reza Ramezani,
Tehran, Asatir.
24. IbnFaqih, Ahmad ibn Mohammad
ibnIshaqHamedani (1930). Mukhtasarul-Baladan
(chapter on Iran), Translated by H. Masoud,
Tehran, Iran Culture Foundation.
25. IbnHawqal (1947), IbnHawqal's Travel Account
(Iran in rat al-'Ar), Translated and explained
by Dr. JafarShoar, Tehran, Amir Kabir.
26. IbnKhordadbeh (1952), al Masalikw'alMamalik,
Translated by Saied Khakrand, Tehran, Nations
Heritage Historical Studies and Publication
Institute.
27. IbnRustah, Ahmad ibn Omar (1946), Alagh al-
Nafiseh, Translated and suspended by
HosseinGharehChanlou, Tehran, Amir Kabir.
28. Jeihani, Abul-Ghasemibn Ahmad (1949),
Ashkal-ul-Alam, Translated by Ali ibn Abdul-
Islam Kateb, Mashhad , AstanGhodsRazavi
Publication.
29. Mafroukhi, Mafzalibn Sad (1965), Isfahan's
virtues, Translated by Hosseinibn Mohammad
Avi, By Abbas IqbalAshtiani, Isfahan,
BRIS Journal of Adv. S & T (ISSN. 0971-9563) www.brisjast.com Vol.2 (3):PP.138-148

(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/0971-9563.2014/2-3/BRIS.15)

Municipality Cultural and Recreational
Organization.
30. Majma-ul-Tawarikhwa al-Qesas, No date,
Studies and Corrected by Malek al-
ShoarayeBahar and Behjat Mohammad
Ramezani, Tehran, KalaleyeKhavar.
31. Masoudi, Abul-Hassan Ali ibnHossein (1946),
al-Tanbihwa al-Ishraf, Translated by
AbulghasemPayandeh, Tehran, Scientific and
Cultural Publication.
32. Moghaddasi, Abu Abdullah Mohammad ibn
Ahmad (1942), Ahsan al-Taqasim Fi Ma'rifat al-
Aqalim, vol. 2, Translated by AlinaghiMonzavi,
Tehran, Iran Authors and Translators Company.
33. Narshakhi, AbiBakr Mohammad ibnJafar (1932),
History of Bukhara, Corrected by
ModaresRazavi, Tehran, Iran Culture
Foundation.
34. Neishabouri, Abu Abdullah Hakem (1955),
History of Neishabur, Translated and corrected
by Mohammad Reza ShafieiKadkani, Tehran:
Agah Publication.
35. Nihayat al-Arab (1955), Studied and corrected
by Mohammad TaghiDaneshPajooh, Tehran ,
Cultural Works and Glories Association.
36. Owfi, SadidalDin Mohammad (1955), Javame
al-Hikayat, Corrected and annotated by Dr.
JafarShoar, Tehran, Sokhan.
37. Qomi, Hassan ibn Mohammad (1942), History of
Qom, Translated by SeyedJalaleddinTehrani,
Tehran, Toos.
38. SaalabiNeishabouri, Abdul-Malekibn
Mohammad (1949), GhurarAkhbarMuluk al-
Furs wa-Siyarihim, Translated by Mohammad
Fazayeli, Tehran, Noghreh Publication.
39. Saalabi, Abu Mansour Mohammad ibn Abdul-
Malek (1964), Shahnameh-ye Saalabi,
Translated by Mahmoud Hedayat, Tehran,
Asatir.
40. Samani, Abu Saeid Abdul-Karimibn Mohammad
(1962), Ansab, vols. 1 and 10, Research by
Abdul-RahmanibnYahya al-Mo'lami al-Yamani,
Heydar Abad, MajlisDa'irat al-Ma'arif al-
Uthmaniyah.
41. Sharif al-Idrisi, Abu Abdullah Mohammad ibn
Mohammad Idris al-Hamudi (1988), Nuzhat al-
Mushtaq fi Ikhtiraq al-Afaq, vol. 1, Beirut ,
Alem al-Kotob Publication.
42. Tarikh-e Sistan (1947), Corrected by Malek al-
ShoarayeBahar, Tehran, Padide-ye Khavar.
43. Tarsousi, Abu Taher Mohammad ibn Hassan
(1955), DarabNameh, vol. 1, By ZabihollahSafa,
Tehran, Scientific and Cultural Publication.
44. Yaqubi, Ahmad ibnAbiYaghoub (1924), al-
Baladan, Translated by Mohammad Ibrahim
Ayati, Tehran, Book Translation and Publication
Agency.