جغرافیای تاریخی و نام‌جای‌شناسی ارجان در دوران ساسانی و اسلامی

ارجان یکی از خوره های مهم ایالت فارس در دوران ساسانی و اسلامی بود. درخصوص نام جای ارجان اختلافات عدیده ای هم در منابع مکتوب و هم در میان پژوهشگران معاصر وجود دارد. از علت های اصلی این اختلافات، اطلاعات مختلف منابع مکتوب و ناهمخوانی شواهد باستان شناختی با این منابع است و همین امر منجر شده تا نقطه نظرات گونا گونی در این راستا مطرح شود. در اینجا نگارنده با ذکر دیدگاه های مختلف و تلفیق آن ها با شواهد باستان شناختی سعی دارد به درک و شناختی روشن تر از این موضوع دست یابد. از دیگر مواردی که در این مقاله بدان پرداخته خواهد شد، موضوع تغییرات اداری و مرزی است که درطول دوران مختلف، ارجان را دستخوش تغییر و تحول کرده است. ارجان در دوران مختلف دچار تغییرات اداری و مرزی فراوانی شده است؛ به طوری که در سده های نخستین اسلام، این خوره همان ساختار و حدود دورۀ ساسانی را در خود داشت، اما در دوره های بعد شاهد جابه جایی از ایالتی به ایالت دیگر، تغییر نام و کم شدنِ حدود و ثغور نواحی و بخش های وابسته به آن هستیم. این نوشتار تلاش دارد به دو پرسش مهم در ارجان پاسخ دهد؛ نخست، تغییرات اداری و مرزی رخ داده در پهنۀ ارجان تا به امروز چگونه بوده است؟ و دیگری آن که، دلایل اصلی ناهمخوانی های موجود میان پژوهشگران بر سر نام واقعی ارجان چیست؟ دلایل اصلی ناهمخوانی های موجود میان پژوهشگران برسر نام جای ارجان چیست؟ پرواضح است که محققان اشاره ها و توضیحات بسیاری درراستای شناخت سیمای ارجان، تغییرات اداری و مرزی این منطقه بیان داشته اند؛ با این حال، تلفیق و ترکیب داده های تاریخی و باستان شناختی موردی است که کمتر در مطالعاتشان مشاهده می شود. از این رو نگارنده سعی دارد تا با تلفیق هر دو رویکرد تاریخی و باستان شناختی به موضوع نام جای و تغییرات اداری و مرزی ارجان در دوران ساسانی و اسلامی بپردازد. انجام پژوهش حاضر از طریق بررسی و تطبیق یافته ها و شواهد باستان شناسی با مواد و اطلاعات مستخرج از منابع مکتوب است.

historical geography and the toponym of arrajan in the sasanian and islamic eras

abstractarrajan had been one of the important xoras of the fars state in the sasanian and islamic eras. regarding the toponym of arrajan, there is numerous differences both in written sources and among researchers. one of the main reasons for these differences is the different information of written sources and the inconsistency of archaeological evidence with these sources, which has slightly led to various points of view as to this issue. here, the author tries to reach an obvious understanding of the subject matter by mentioning different views and combining them with archaeological evidence. among other things that will be noted in this article is the issue of geographical changes that have undergone arrajan in a span of different periods. arrajan has gone through many border and administrative changes in different times, as in the early centuries of islam, it had the same structure and scope as the sasanian epoch, but in later eras it saw a shift from one state to another, renaming and diminishing its boundaries. this article is an attempt to address two important questions: the first, how have administrative changes been in arrajan up to the present? and the second, what are the main reasons for existing discrepancies among scholars over the real name of arrajan? it is obvious that researchers have made many references and explanations in order to recognize the picture of arrajan and its administrative and border changes; however, the combination of historical and archaeological data is less common in the studies of these researchers. therefore, the author tries to combine both historical and archaeological approaches to the subject of toponym and administrative and border changes of arrajan during the sasanian and islamic eras. the article under study is conducted by examining and comparing archaeological evidence and materials with information extracted from written sources.keywords: arrajan, qobadxora, behbahan, sasanian era, islamic epoch.introductionthe connection between archaeology and historical geography can be traced back to both time and place. today, in the field of archaeology, there is the identical attention to time and place, and in order to understand and recognize the past with all its features, both elements of time and place must be considered together. there are various definitions and approaches regarding historical geography and its field of study, and no clear consensus exists over it. historical events do not occur in a vacuum, but come under the influence of temporalspatial conditions. in space, no phenomenon whether natural or manmade is stationary and evolves over time. research in the field of historical geography is valuable because it can provide a clear picture of the historical geography of events in a place and its surroundings. in the present article, in addition to studying the process of administrative and border changes of arrajan during these periods, an attempt is made to examine the written and archaeological evidence such as seals and coins and to put together prominent experts’ points of view to a new understanding of the toponym of arrajan and resultant changes in its historical geography.archaeological backgroundsthe behbahan plain is archaeologically known as a part of “greater susiana” (darabi et al. 2017). the existence of numerous prehistoric sites, elamite ones, the historic period manuments and the islamic city of arrajan have led to field studies in the area. field studies of nissen and redman (1971) are the first ones conducted in arrajan. at the meantime, hans nissen carried out an excavation in the area in 1973 (nissen 1973). the greatest archaeological discovery on the plain was the neoelamite tomb which was haphazardly found in arrajan in the early 1980s (see alizadeh 1985; majidzadeh 1992; potts 1999; alvarezmon 2006). since 2000 on, surveys and excavations have carried out in behbahan area. one of the studies specifically dedicated to the hydraulic structures and facilities of this region is esmaeili jelodar’s (2004) one. since 2005, excavation team of behbahan plain headed by kamyar abdi commenced the survey in the region. of the most important studies done in behbahan after 2010 may be mentioned abbas moghaddam’s (2016) excavation and hojjat darabi’s (2017) one. a few researchers have investigated the historical geography of arrajan. among them, it can be refered to heinz gaube (1980) who, in a detailed and specialized manner, using historical, geographical and archaeological findings, has been focusing on the evaluation and analysis of arrajan since the time of the conquest of the arab by the end of the safavid era. ahmad eqtedari (1996) is one of the other important researcher who worked on the region. although the aforementioned has benefited from the gaube’s valuable studies as to arrajan and its areas, there are some positive points in the eqtedari’s studies. eqtedari was able to see the parts of the northwest of behbahan, where today they are located in bahmai county and its dependent areas (those parts that gaube could not see due to insecurity in that areas) and published his valuable results. ebrahim rayegani and colleagues also discussed reasons behind the decline and recession of arrajan in the sasanian and islamic eras (rayegani et al 2015).conclusionin the present article, an attempt was made to study and analyze written sources, both historical and geographical ones, archaeological evidence and researchers’ opinions, for better understanding the toponym of arrajan, as well as historical geography and developments in its political borders from sassanid era to the present. as mentioned above, there is a consensus about the creation of arrajan by qobad i and its location between fars and khuzestan, but no agreement on its exact name has been reached. tabari’s reference to two names, ram qobad and barm qobad, led researchers to believe that the two names were for the same area. researchers such as john walker believes that barm qobad was the name of a large area that arrajan was the name of its ruling part; h. gaube considers bram qobad the official name of the region and arrajan the unofficial one. however, numismatic evidence does not support these claims and shows that arrajan and barm qobad are two separate places. ardashir babakan points to arrajan as he crossed the area, prompting other scholars to believe that the region were probably inhabited before establishment of qobadxora near the tab river. regarding the geographical and administrative changes in this region, it seems that from the beginning of the sixth century a.d. to the seljuk period, arrajan was part of the fars state. during the buyid dynasty period, arrajan not only preserved borders of the sasanian epoch, but also expanded from the north and northeast, and the ports of siniz and janabah were joined to it. during this period, we are witnessing the prosperity of this region, as adud aldawla aldaylami says: “i want iraq because of its name and arrajan for its income.” however, during the seljuk period, the region witnessed changes; all northern parts of arrajan were attached to shapurxora and arrajan itself was joined to khuzestan. there is no mention of arrajan in the historical books of the ilkhanid period, but other areas of xora are mentioned. it is possible that arrajan was nothing more than a ruin during this period.