Document Type : Research Paper
Author
Department of History, Faculty of Literature and Human Sciences, Lorestan University
Abstract
Abstract
Coins, as one of the important movable properties and a documented historical artifact, play a significant role in complementing and expanding our knowledge of historical developments. By utilizing the science of numismatics, it is possible to explain and interpret some important historical events and issues. Years after Western researchers paid special attention to the coins of Iranian dynasties and kings and authored numismatic books, Iranian researchers and collectors, relying on the knowledge of numismatics, also wrote books on the coins of various periods in Iranian history. Bahram Alaaeddini is among the individuals who have made a significant contribution in this field, and his book “Coins of Iran during the Safavid Period 907-1168” is his latest work, published in 1403.This study, with a descriptive-analytical approach, aims to examine, with a fair critique, the scientific and research value as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the mentioned book. The findings of the research indicate that although Alaaeddini has attempted to benefit from his many years of experience as a coin collector and historian in writing this book, despite the book’s strengths such as the use of coins from various Safavid mints, inclusion of precise weights, and accurate reading of the coin inscriptions’ rhymes the book suffers from several weaknesses. These include the dominance of images over text, inefficient use of sources and recent research, focusing on political history rather than core numismatic topics such as mint mechanisms, coin striking processes, and counterfeiting methods, as well as unclear identification of coin names and their monetary values. These issues have turned the book into an illustrated catalog rather than a scientific composition and research work.
Introduction
Coins are among the most important movable historical artifacts and constitute valuable documentary evidence for reconstructing political, economic, cultural, and ideological transformations in historical societies. In historical studies, numismatics is not merely concerned with the description of coins as material objects; rather, it serves as an interdisciplinary field that contributes to the understanding of monetary systems, political legitimacy, economic fluctuations, dynastic symbolism, religious representations, and state administration. In the context of Iranian history, Safavid coinage occupies a particularly significant position because the Safavid dynasty (907–1168 AH) represented a major turning point in the political and religious formation of early modern Iran. Through the establishment of Twelver Shi‘ism as the official state religion and the consolidation of centralized authority, the Safavid state transformed many aspects of Iranian political culture, administrative organization, and symbolic representation, all of which were reflected in its coinage system.
Over the past decades, Western and Iranian scholars have increasingly devoted attention to Iranian numismatics, producing catalogues, descriptive studies, and analytical works concerning the coins of different Iranian dynasties. Among contemporary Iranian numismatists, Bahram Ala’ al-Dini has contributed several works in this field, including the book Coins of Safavid Iran (907–1168 AH), published in 2024. The book contains images and descriptions of 496 Safavid coins minted in 88 mints and seeks to provide an illustrated catalogue for researchers and collectors interested in Safavid numismatics. One of the major strengths of the book lies in the author’s careful reading and transcription of inscriptions appearing on the obverse and reverse of the coins, accompanied by iconographic descriptions and technical specifications.
Despite these contributions, the book has also generated critical scholarly discussion regarding its methodological, structural, historiographical, and analytical limitations. The article under investigation, titled “Analytical and Critical Review of the Book Coins of Safavid Iran (907–1168 AH),” attempts to evaluate the scientific value of Ala’ al-Dini’s work through a systematic and critical approach. The study emphasizes that historical and numismatic research should not be limited to descriptive narration and cataloguing but must also incorporate analytical interpretation, critical engagement with primary sources, historiographical awareness, and methodological rigor.
Accordingly, the purpose of the present review article is to examine the strengths and weaknesses of Ala’ al-Dini’s book from four principal perspectives: structural criticism, methodological criticism, literary and historiographical criticism, and content criticism. The article also seeks to determine to what extent the book fulfills the requirements of a scholarly historical study and whether it succeeds in integrating numismatic evidence into broader historical analysis. By evaluating both the achievements and shortcomings of the work, the study contributes to the development of critical scholarship in Iranian numismatics and historical writing.
Research Methodology
The present study employed a descriptive-analytical and critical methodology grounded in historiographical evaluation and textual criticism. The primary source of analysis was Bahram Ala’ al-Dini’s book Coins of Safavid Iran (907–1168 AH), published in 2024. The reviewer systematically examined the structure, references, historical narratives, literary style, methodological foundations, and content organization of the book in order to identify both its scholarly strengths and its deficiencies.
The analytical framework of the study was divided into four major dimensions: structural criticism, methodological criticism, literary-historiographical criticism, and content criticism. In the structural dimension, the reviewer evaluated elements such as the organization of chapters, the use of introductions and footnotes, citation methods, and consistency in referencing primary and secondary sources. In the methodological dimension, attention was devoted to the author’s use of historical approaches, source criticism, analytical interpretation, and engagement with primary documents and modern scholarship.
The literary and historiographical analysis focused on narrative style, historical interpretation, language precision, historiographical awareness, and the avoidance of anachronism. Furthermore, the content analysis investigated the relationship between the title and actual content of the book, the balance between political history and numismatic discussion, and the degree to which the book addressed broader historical contexts related to coin production, mint administration, and monetary policies during the Safavid period.
The reviewer also compared the book with important primary chronicles, travel accounts, and modern historical studies that were either omitted or insufficiently used in Ala’ al-Dini’s work. Through this comparative critical approach, the study sought to assess the scientific reliability and historiographical depth of the book while simultaneously acknowledging its positive contributions to Iranian numismatic scholarship.
Discussion
1. Structural Strengths and Weaknesses of the Book
One of the major strengths of Ala’ al-Dini’s book is its extensive visual documentation of Safavid coins. The book presents images of 496 coins minted in 88 Safavid mints, several of which are rare and previously unpublished in Iranian numismatic publications. The author carefully records the physical characteristics, inscriptions, and iconographic features of the coins, thereby creating a useful illustrated catalogue for researchers and collectors. Particularly valuable is the author’s effort to accurately decipher and transcribe inscriptions appearing on the coins, a task requiring considerable technical expertise and patience.
Nevertheless, the reviewer argues that the structural organization of the book suffers from significant shortcomings. One of the most important deficiencies is the absence of a proper scholarly introduction. Instead of providing a systematic explanation of the research problem, methodological framework, historical significance, and research limitations, the author merely offers a brief two-page preface concerning the importance of the Safavid dynasty and the assistance received from fellow numismatists.
The study also criticizes the inconsistency and disorder of the footnote and citation system. The author frequently changes citation formats, omits essential bibliographical details, and inconsistently refers to sources across different sections of the book. In several cases, references lack publication dates, volume numbers, publishers, or page numbers. Such inconsistencies weaken the scientific reliability and professional presentation of the work.
Another structural criticism concerns the insufficient use of maps, diagrams, and visual contextualization. Given that the book deals with minting and coin production, the reviewer argues that the author should have devoted separate sections to mint administration, coin production procedures, and the geographical distribution of Safavid mints. Maps illustrating the locations of active mints and visual reconstructions of minting procedures could have substantially enhanced readers’ understanding of Safavid political geography and monetary administration.
2. Methodological Deficiencies and Historiographical Limitations
The reviewer strongly criticizes the methodological foundations of the book. According to the article, historical scholarship requires more than simple narration and compilation; it demands critical analysis, historiographical interpretation, and methodological awareness. Ala’ al-Dini’s work, however, is described as largely descriptive and compilatory rather than analytical. The author relies heavily on narrative transmission and direct quotation without critically evaluating sources or constructing interpretive arguments.
A major methodological issue identified in the study is the insufficient engagement with primary historical sources and modern scholarly research. Although the book contains numerous references, many important Safavid chronicles, administrative treatises, travel accounts, and contemporary historical studies are absent. The reviewer specifically notes the omission of essential works such as Tadhkirat al-Muluk, Khulasat al-Tawarikh, Tarikh-i Ilchi-yi Nizam Shah, and several important European travel accounts. Similarly, influential modern studies on Safavid administration, economy, and monetary history receive little or no attention.
The article also criticizes the author’s excessive dependence on a limited number of secondary works. For example, while discussing the reign of Shah Tahmasp I, Ala’ al-Dini repeatedly cites a single modern source while neglecting important contemporary chronicles such as Ahsan al-Tawarikh. Such repetitive dependence on isolated references reduces historiographical depth and limits the analytical richness of the historical narrative.
Furthermore, the reviewer emphasizes that the author fails to employ a genuinely critical historical methodology. Instead of interrogating historical narratives and examining the ideological or political contexts in which sources were produced, the book often reproduces existing narratives without analytical scrutiny. Consequently, the work resembles a descriptive catalogue rather than a rigorous academic study grounded in historical criticism.
3. Literary and Historiographical Criticism
From a literary and historiographical perspective, the reviewer argues that the book lacks analytical depth and interpretive sophistication. Historical writing should combine documentary accuracy with interpretive reasoning, yet Ala’ al-Dini’s narrative is characterized primarily by compilation and paraphrasing. The reviewer compares this approach to what philosophers of history describe as “cut-and-paste historiography,” in which historical narratives are assembled mechanically without critical interpretation or analytical synthesis.
The study further argues that the book contains examples of historical anachronism and terminological inaccuracy. One example concerns the author’s characterization of early Safavid figures as defenders of Shi‘ite Islam before the official establishment of Shi‘ism by Shah Isma‘il. According to the reviewer, this interpretation projects later ideological perspectives onto earlier historical contexts.
Another example involves the use of the term “Turkey” when referring to the Ottoman Empire during the Safavid period, despite the fact that the modern Republic of Turkey emerged centuries later. Similarly, the reviewer criticizes several factual inaccuracies regarding the Battle of Chaldiran, including exaggerated troop numbers and incomplete explanations for the Ottoman withdrawal from Tabriz.
The article also notes that the author’s treatment of political history is often superficial. Important economic, cultural, and administrative developments influencing coin production, mint policies, and monetary debasement receive inadequate attention. As a result, the broader historical significance of Safavid coinage remains underdeveloped.
4. Content-Related Criticism and Scientific Value
One of the central criticisms concerns the imbalance between the title of the book and its actual content. Although the book is presented as a study of Safavid coins, a substantial portion of its 646 pages is devoted to general political history unrelated directly to numismatics. Approximately 115 pages consist primarily of political narrative rather than detailed numismatic analysis.
The reviewer argues that the book should have explored important themes such as mint administration, monetary reforms, coin debasement, mint personnel, and the political-economic factors influencing coin production. The absence of systematic discussion regarding officials such as mint masters, assayers, money changers, and engravers limits the book’s analytical usefulness for historians of Safavid administration and economy.
Despite these shortcomings, the reviewer acknowledges that the book remains valuable as an illustrated numismatic catalogue. Its extensive visual material, accurate inscriptional readings, and documentation of rare coins make it an accessible reference for researchers interested in Safavid numismatics. Although the work lacks many characteristics of a rigorous scholarly monograph, it nevertheless contributes useful material to the field of Iranian coin studies.
Conclusion
The present critical review examined Bahram Ala’ al-Dini’s Coins of Safavid Iran (907–1168 AH) from structural, methodological, literary, historiographical, and content-related perspectives. The study concluded that although the book possesses notable strengths—particularly in its visual documentation, inscriptional analysis, and presentation of rare Safavid coins—it also suffers from substantial scholarly deficiencies.
Among the principal weaknesses identified are the absence of a systematic scholarly introduction, inconsistent citation practices, insufficient engagement with primary and modern sources, lack of methodological rigor, superficial historical interpretation, and limited analytical treatment of numismatic evidence. The reviewer argues that the book frequently prioritizes descriptive narration over critical historiographical analysis and therefore resembles an illustrated catalogue more than a comprehensive academic monograph.
The article further demonstrates that the author occasionally falls into historical anachronism and terminological inaccuracy, weakening the historical precision of the work. Additionally, the imbalance between political narrative and numismatic analysis reduces the coherence between the book’s title and its actual content.
Nevertheless, the study acknowledges the importance of Ala’ al-Dini’s contribution to Iranian numismatic scholarship. The careful recording of coin inscriptions, presentation of rare specimens, and compilation of visual material provide researchers and collectors with a useful resource for the study of Safavid coins. The review ultimately suggests that future works in Iranian numismatics should combine detailed cataloguing with stronger historiographical analysis, broader engagement with primary sources, and deeper integration of numismatic evidence into political, economic, and cultural history.
Keywords
Subjects
