Affective Fallacy in Historiography A Critical Look at Shahab Al-Dyn Nasavi’s Sirat-e Jalal Al-Dyn and Nafsat Al-Masdovr

Abstract

It is the historians who determine to what extent historical events are important and reliable. Since historians’ ideas are to a great extent affected by the circumstances of the time, even their most objective historical interpretations and writings are more or less contaminated by prejudices and emotional attitudes.This study aimed at investigating Shahab Al-dyn Nasavi’s ways of historiography in his two historical works, Sirat-e Jalal Al-Dyn and Nafsat Al-Masdovr which are on the Kharazmshahian Dynasty and Tatar’s invasion. In contrast to Nafsat Al-Masdovr, Sirat-e Jalal Al-Dyn has been less affected by the author’s affections; consequently, its way of historiography is more objective and scientific and its narrative language is simpler. On the contrary, Nafsat Al-Masdovr, rather than being concerned with facts and events, involves the king’s feelings, personal suffering, and phraseology. As a result, he generally describes the historical events rather than reporting them and his historical interpretation is affectively contaminated. The main research question of the study is that to what extent and in what manner Nasavi’s prejudices and emotional impressions have influenced his representation of historical events. To answer this question, this issue was investigated through drawing on the language and narration of the two books.

Keywords

• narrative
• historical prose
• historiography
• affective criticism
• shahab al-dyn nasavi
• sirat-e jalal al-dyn
• nafsat al-masdovr