The rise of the Dorrāni dynasty under Aḥmad Shah Sa-dōzay in 1160/1747 marked the beginning of an independent Afghan statehood, the political center of which was located in Qandahār and shifted to Kabul in 1775. Initially based on a loosely defined tribal polity, the Dorrāni empire was gradually transformed into the modern state of Afghanistan, suffering territorial losses and upheaval along the way (see AFGHANISTAN X. POLITICAL HISTORY). These political developments are mirrored by the historiography of the day, which not only bears witness to the perceptions current at the time but also was subject to reinterpretation as new historical predilections arose. The available historical accounts may thus be read on several levels. Apart from providing (sometimes contradictory) information about the “hard” facts and dates of the period in question, they have a story to tell about stylistic conventions as well as conceptions of royal authority and its manifestations. Certain key events described have yielded the raw material for the 20th century endeavor to mould the notion of a modern nation-state and to fix its beginnings at an early point in time. The Communist period and the resistance unfolding after the Soviet invasion in December 1979 offered the opportunity for a number of minorities to reclaim and redefine their part in the national narrative. This entry will be treated in the following sections: (1) the Sadōzay period, 1747-1818; (2) the Moḥammadzay rulers, 1826-1929; (3) the Moṣāḥebān period, 1930-78; and (4) developments after 1978.
1. The Sadōzay period, 1747-1818. The works of the 17th century poet Ḵošḥāl Khan Ḵaṭak and the 19th century author Moḥammad-Ḥayāt Khan point to the existence of a body of Paṧtō literature produced locally. Per-sian, by contrast, served as the main medium for the historiography concerning concepts of state and administration. Having risen in the ranks of Nāder Shah’s army, Aḥmad Shah Sadōzay modeled the administration of his state according to Iranian standards. With the intent to create a reservoir of personnel for his administrative and military needs, he actively promoted the settle-ment of Qezelbāš groups in his realm. The continuity of Iranian traditions is also reflected in Aḥmad Shah’s effort to give proper representation and commemoration to his bid at state building. Impressed by Moḥammad-Mahdi Kawkabi Astarābādi’s (q.v.; Estarābādi) recently completed Jahāngošā-ye nāderi, he ordered the employment of a historiographer of equal ability to chronicle the events of his reign. Maḥmud al-Ḥosayni, who entered Aḥmad Shah’s service upon the conquest of Mašhad in 1167/1753-54, was personally acquainted with Astarā-bādi. He dedicated the main body of his Tāriḵ-e aḥmad-šāhi to a year-by-year account of Aḥmad Shah’s entire reign up to the king’s death in 1186/1772-73, recording his own observations, news communicated to him by court officials and written documents. Written in 1213/1798, the Tāriḵ-e ḥosaynšāhi was originally intended as a history of Shah Zamān’s reign (1793-1800). Its author Emām-al-Din Ḥosayni joined Shah Zamān in Lahore in 1211/1796-97 and accompanied him to Peshawar, where he produced a history of the Dorrāni ruler. Upon his return to Lucknow he enlarged his work to include the reigns of Aḥmad Shah and his successor Timur Shah (r. 1772-93) on the basis of material he received from his pir Ḵᵛāja Ḥosayn Ḥosayni Češti, after whom this history is named. Completed in 1213/1798, the Tāriḵ-e ḥosaynšāhi traces Aḥmad Shah’s tribal background to the apical ancestor of all Pashtuns, Qays ʿAbd-al-Rašid, and covers the events in the Dorrāni empire up to 1212/1797. Of particular interest to the present-day historian is the section detailing the administrative arrangements in Shah Zamān’s empire and the composition of his army. The Tāriḵ-e aḥmadšāhi and the Tariḵ-e ḥosaynšāhi contain a number of important elements that entered all subsequent accounts of the 18th century and came to form the cornerstones of Afghan historical identity. Apart from Aḥmad Shah’s tribal pedigree and his unique qualifications as a ruler, his impromptu coronation with a few blades of grass on the impulse of the Sufi Shaikh Mo-ḥammad Ṣāber Shah came to form a key theme in the historiography of Afghanistan and was emulated by the founder of the Moḥammadzay dynasty, Dōst-Moḥammad Khan (Kohzād, Men and Events, pp. 93-96). Another noteworthy phenomenon is the contrast between the authors’ projection of the kings’ absolute authority and the ongoing need to suppress instances of rebellion (fesād, fetna, ṭoḡyān) in his realm. The constant military campaigns depicted reflect the underlying problem of maintaining an empire on the basis of a tribally organized and highly segmented followership. This tension became increasingly hard to resolve towards the close of the 18th century.
Two important histories were produced in India. Abu’l-Ḥasan b. Moḥammad-Amin Golestāna, the author of Moj-mal al-tawāriḵ pas az Nāder, suffered imprisonment by Karim Khan Zand in 1164/1750-51 and subsequently fled to Moršedābād in Bengal, where he composed his work in 1195-96/1780-82. As the title suggests, Mojmal al-tawāriḵ covers the events after Nāder Shah’s death, the rise of Aḥmad Shah and his campaigns to Khorasan and India, as well as events in the western parts of Persia during this period. While the early part of the book borrows heavily from the final chapters of Astarābādi’s Jahāngošā-ye nāderi, the author seems not to have been acquainted with the Tāriḵ-e aḥmadšāhi but recounts the events he witnessed himself until his flight between 1166/1752-53 and 1169/1755-56. Yet this work is of little reliability for the developments which occurred subsequent to the author’s departure for India (Mann, 1898, p. 107). The Majmaʿ al-tawāriḵ was also written in Moršedābād by a refugee from Persia. Its author, Moḥammad-Ḵalil Marʿaši, was the grandson of Mirzā Sayyed Moḥammad, the motawalli of Imam Reżā’s shrine at Mašhad, who assumed the royal title of Shah Solay-mān II for forty days in 1163/1750. While his father Solṭān Dāʾud Mirzā had left Mašhad as early as 1165/1751-52, Moḥammad-Ḵalil arrived in Moršidābād in 1192/1778. The Majmaʿ al-tawāriḵ covers the period from the Ḡilzay rebellion in 1120/1708-09 to the year 1207/1792. As Moḥammad-Ḵalil based his account on notes left by Solṭān Dāʾud Mirzā, this book is relevant for the affairs of Khorasan only up to the year 1750, that is four years prior to its incorporation into the realm of Aḥmad Shah (Lockhart, pp. 510-12, Mann, 1898, pp. 163, 351).
While not fitting into the framework of official historiography, the memoirs of Moḥammad-Reżā Barnābādi (1751-1815) provide interesting information on the political situation in Herat in the late 18th century. Born into a wealthy family of court officials based in Barnā-bād near Ḡoryān in present-day Afghanistan, Moḥammad-Reżā suffered complete impoverishment when his family fell from grace after 1793. In order to preserve the memory of the Barnābādis’ past grandeur, he compiled his Taḏkera in 1806-11 and included copies of documents attesting his ancestors’ close relationship with the Safavid and Sadōzay rulers. In 1233/1818 Mir ʿAbd-al-Karim b. Mir Esmāʿil Boḵāri, the head scribe of a Bukharan mission to Istanbul, produced a work concerning the developments in Central Asia subsequent to the death of Nāder Shah in 1160/1747. The first part of this book is devoted to the Sadōzay sphere of influence and discusses the fate of the various members of the royal family up to the final years of Shah Maḥmud’s second reign (1809-18) with particular reference to the events in Herat. Translated into French in 1876, it became known as Histoire de l’Asie Centrale.
2. The Moḥammadzay rulers 1826-1929. The historiography of the 19th century bears witness to the emergence of Afghanistan as a territorial entity. Loosely de-fined as comprising “Iran,” “Turkestān,” and “Hendustān” in the Tāriḵ-e aḥmadšāhi (ed. Homāyun p. 8; edition Saidmuradov fol. 11a), the Sadōzay state derived its identity not so much from a clearly delimited territorial space but was rather conceived of as a web of personal allegiances between the ruling family and the local leadership. Writing in the early 19th century, Mir ʿAbd al-Karim Boḵāri described the shrinking Sadōzay state as consisting of “Khorasan” and “Hendustan” (Schefer, Persian text, p. 4). As late as 1855, Mirzā ʿAṭā-Moḥammad’s Nawā-ye maʿārek consistently refers to the territory of present-day Afghanistan as “Khorasan.” Originally a resident of Šekārpur in Sind, Mirzā ʿAṭā-Moḥammad entered the service of the Moḥammadzay Sardārs of Qandahār and accompanied them on their military campaigns. Upon his return to his native town, he produced a first-hand account of the transition of power from the Sadōzays to the Moḥammadzays after 1818. Describing the changing status of Sind from a tributary to the Sa-dōzay empire to its forceful incorporation into the British empire in 1843, Nawā-ye maʿārek also documents the local effects of the vast change the region underwent in the early 19th century.
The earliest mention of “Afghanistan” as a political entity is to be found in the Tāriḵ-e solṭāni, which Solṭān Moḥammad Ḵāleṣ b. Musā Dorrāni Bārakzay began to write in 1280/1865 and published as late as 1298/1880. In the introduction Solṭān Moḥammad identifies Afghanistan as a territory located between Hendustān, Iran, and Turkestān and subject to Russian, British, and Iranian imperial ambitions. At the same time, he distinguishes different uses of the term “Afghanistan,” firstly its conno-tation as the area the Afghans/Pashtuns call their home and, secondly, as the territory controlled by the Afghan kings during various phases of history. In his attempt to tell the history of the Afghans from their genealogical beginnings to the incorporation of Herat into the Mo-ḥammadzay state in 1279/1863, Solṭān Moḥammad relies on a number of written sources, including Moḥammad-Qāsem Ferešta’s Tāriḵ-e ferešta, Neʿmat-Allāh’s Maḵzan-e afḡāni, the works of Sir John Malcolm, Astarābādi’s Jahāngošā-ye nāderi, and Shah Šojāʿ’s diary (Wāqeʿāt-e Šāh Šojāʿ, see below), as well as Farhād Mirzā Moʿtamed-al-Dawla’s translation of William Pinnock’s Modern Geography and History entitled Jām-e Jam. For the events of the 19th century, he also draws on oral information furnished by prominent Bārakzay elders, including his father.
Statements by or about the principal political actors form another important source for the events of the 19th century. Shah Šojāʿ commissioned a chronicle entitled Wāqeʿāt-e Šāh Šojāʿ, which was published subsequent to his death in 1842. The events of the First Anglo-Afghan War of 1839-42 (see ANGLO-AFGHAN WARS) are commemorated in two poetical works. In 1259/1843 Mo-ḥammad-Ḡolām b. Mollā Timur Shah composed an epic concerning the fate of Amir Dōst-Moḥammad Khan and his family until 1841. Written in the Kōhestān of Kabul, this work mentions a number of local leaders who spearheaded the resistance to the British in autumn 1840. Completed in 1260/1844, Ḥamid Kašmiri’s Akbar-nāma depicts the period from 1809 to 1843, focusing on the accomplishments of Amir Dōst-Moḥammad Khan’s son Moḥammad-Akbar (1816-47). Nur-Moḥammad Nuri’s Golšan-e emārat is devoted to the career of Amir Šēr-ʿAli Khan (r. 1863-66, 1868-78) from his birth in 1823 up to 1870. Originally from Qandahār, the author was closely connected with the royal court and sprinkles his eulogistic account with purported quotes from the Amir’s diary (tozok/tozuk). In 1303/1886 Amir ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Khan (r. 1880-1901; see BĀRAKZAY DYNASTY) published an autobiography entitled Pand-nāma-ye donyā wa din, in which he described his role in the administration of Afghan Turkestān under Amir Dōst-Moḥammad Khan, his power struggle with Amir Šēr-ʿAli Khan, 1864-69, and his exile in Samarkand between 1870 and 1880. In 1896, the Amir commissioned Solṭān Moḥammad, a Punjabi secretary at his court, to enlarge on this work and to include the events of his entire reign. Bearing the title The Life of Abdur Rahman, this work was completed after Solṭān Moḥammad’s departure from Afghanistan and was published in London in 1900. The second volume, concerning ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Khan’s effort at state building, the nature of his administration, and the delineation of the borders of Afghanistan between the Russian and British spheres of influence was clearly written without any input or control on the part of the Amir. This book was, in turn, translated into Persian by Ḡolām-Mortażā Qandahāri in Mašhad and was subsequently published in Mašhad and Bombay under the title of Tāj al-tawāriḵ (Fayż-Moḥammad, p. 656; Farhang, I, pp. 435-36; Ḡobār, 1999, pp. 135-39).
The formation of the Moḥammadzay state and the cumbersome transition from a tribally organized polity to a centralized state is best reflected by a number of histories that were produced in the early 20th century. At the same time, the biographies of some of the authors in question bear witness to the fact that Amir ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Khan’s endeavor to impose order created a thin line between “obedience” and “rebellion” and entailed imprisonment and/or exile for many individuals not fitting into the narrowly defined base of state. Located in a region of overlapping Iranian and Afghan interests, Moḥammad-Yusof Riāżi (1290-1330/1873-1911) is a case in point. Linked by ancestry both to the old Sadōzay elite and the Shiʿite community of Herat, Riāżi was doubly suspect to Amir ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Khan. He was forced to leave the country for the first time at the beginning of the war against the Hazāras (q.v.) in 1309/1891 and suffered imprisonment on his return. Riāżi eventually settled in Mašhad, where he published his voluminous work, Kolliyāt-e riāżi (Baḥr al-fawāyed) in 1906. In keeping with his allegiance to the twelve Imams, Riāżi divided his work into twelve manuscripts (nosḵa) of varying length, each of which is subdivided in twelve plus two sections. ʿAyn al-waqāyeʿ, the third and by far the longest part in the volume, begins with a brief history of the Sadōzay rulers and continues with a chronology of the events of 1217-1326/1802-1906. This work not only contains news concerning the region of Herat but also covers events in Iran and other parts of the world and displays a clear orientation towards the contemporaneous Iranian historiography. An abridged version of ʿAyn al-waqāyeʿ was published by Āṣaf Fekrat in 1990. In 1331/1913, a history of the Moḥammadzay dynasty was produced in Samarkand by Mirzā Yaʿqub-ʿAli b. Aḥmad-ʿAli Ḵᵛāfi (b. 1267/1850-51). Originally from Kabul, both the author and his father were closely linked to the early Moḥammadzay administration and personally witnessed the power struggle unfolding during Amir Šēr-ʿAli Khan’s reign. Later on, Yaʿqub-ʿAli Ḵᵛāfi joined the service of Sardār Moḥammad-Esḥāq Khan (governor of Turkestān 1880-88) and fled to Samarkand after his employer’s unsuccessful rebellion. Entitled Pādšāhān-e motaʾaḵḵer-e Afḡānestān, Ḵᵛāfi’s his-tory covers the period from Amir Dōst-Moḥammad to ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Khan.
Fayż-Moḥammad’s (q.v.) Serāj al-tawāriḵ, the most comprehensive work concerning 18th and 19th century Afghanistan, by contrast, was written in Kabul under close supervision by Amir Ḥabib-Allāh Khan (q.v.; r. 1901-19). Printed in 1331/1912, the first two volumes of this work are devoted to the history of Afghanistan from 1747 to the Second Anglo-Afghan War of 1878-80 and make up one third of the entire work. The publication of the third volume was stopped abruptly by Amir Amān-Allāh Khan (q.v.; r. 1919-29) in the early 1920s, and 416 pages of the original manuscript were not included. Even so, the remaining 860 pages represent one of the most valuable sources concerning the reign of Amir ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Khan (McChesney, p. 19). For the first two volumes, Fayż-Moḥammad relied on Astarābādi’s Jahāngošā-ye nāderi as well as Iranian chronicles from the middle of the 19th century, such as Rawẓat al-ṣafā-ye nāṣeri by Rez-µāqoli Khan Hedāyat (q.v.), Tāriḵ-e waqāyeʿ wa sawāneḥ-e Afḡānestān by Eʿteżād al-Salṭana (q.v.), Nāseḵ al-tawāriḵ by Lesān al-Molk, and Jām-e Jam by Farhād Mirzā. Among the Afghan sources Fayż-Moḥammad lists the works of Shah Šojāʿ, Ḥamid Kašmiri, Solṭān Moḥammad-Ḵāleṣ, and Sayyed Jamāl-al-Din Afḡāni (q.v.) as well as a number of informants. The second volume reproduces portions of Amir ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān’s Pand-nāma (Fayż-Moḥammad, Serāj al-tawārikò, pp. 3, 656). In keeping with these sources, the first two volumes of Serāj al-tawāriḵ display a continuity of older conventions of historiography. While adopting a simpler language than the chronicles of the 18th century, this part of Fayż-Moḥammad’s work reflects a similar preoccupation with shifts of power rather than routine aspects of government. Though arranged according to lunar years, the narrative remains vague in terms of time and space, the various battlefields merely serving as a backdrop for the unfolding drama of the ongoing struggles among various elite factions (Noelle-Karimi, 2001). The third volume, by contrast, provides a fine grid of data on the basis of government documents, decrees, and letters (Tarzi, “Note on the sources”). Another important work of Fayż-Moḥammad is his diary covering the first seven months of the interregnum by Bačča-ye Saqqā in Kabul from January to October 1929 (ed. McChesney and Shkirando).
3. The Moṣāḥebān period, 1930-78. The beginnings of modern historiography of Afghanistan can be traced to the early 1930s, when Nāder Shah founded the Literary Society (Anjoman-e adabi) in Kabul and the Pashto Society (Paṧtō anjoman) in Qandahār on the model of the scientific institutes of France. The Anjoman-e adabi, which also included a historical department,made its first public appearance with the publication of the monthly journal Kābol in 1931, the language of which was switched to Paṧtō with the creation of the Pashto Academy (Paṧtō ṭolana; See ANJOMAN-E TĀRIḴ-E AFGĀNESTĀN) in Kabul in 1937. The Kabul Yearbook compiled by the Anjoman-e adabi appeared from 1932 until 1981 under a variety of names: Sāl-nāma-ye majalla-ye Kā-bol (1932-34), Sāl-nāma-yeKābol (1935-39), Da Kābol kālanay (1940-50), Da Afḡānestān kālanay (1951-81). In 1942 the Historical Society of Afghanistan (see ANJOMAN-E TĀRIḴ-E AFḠĀNESTĀN) developed into a full-fledged research and translation institute, first within the framework of the Department of Press and later the Ministry of Information and Culture. Under its first president Aḥmad-ʿAli Kohzād the Anjoman-e tāriḵ made a name for itself by editing manuscript sources and government documents and publishing the monthly Persian journal Āryānā (see ĀRYĀNĀ BULLETIN) from 1942 and the quarterly Afghanistan in French and English from 1946 (Adamec, pp. 14, 23, 35-36, 111; Ḥabibi, 1968, pp. 10-19; Reštiā, 1997, p. 25). The production of numerous secondary works concerning the history of Afghanistan followed. Kohzād (1907-83) developed an interest in archeology during the first French explorations in Afghanistan from 1922 on and published numerous works on the pre-Islamic dynasties and the history of early settlements, such as Laškargāh, Bagrām, and Kabul (Grevemeyer, 1981, pp. 31-33). He served as curator of the Museum of Kabul and headed the Historical Society from its inception under the auspices of the Anjoman-e adabi until 1961. Punctuated by a prison term in 1933-36, exile in Farāh until 1938, and another prison term in 1952-60, the varied career of Mir Ḡolām Ḡobār (1897-1978) included the publication of two journals (Setāra-ye afḡān, 1919-29, Waṭan from 1951) and two major historical works, Aḥ-mad Šah Bābā (1939) and Afḡānestān dar masir-e tāriḵ (1967; Ḥabibi, 1984, pp. 136-39).
A native of Qandahār, ʿAbd-al-Ḥayy Ḥabibi (1910-84) served as president of the Pashto Academy in 1940 and dean of the faculty of letters from 1941-42. After exile in Pakistan from 1951-62 he was appointed president of the Anjoman-e tāriḵ in 1966. In keeping with his Pashtun nationalist leanings, ʿAbd-al-Ḥayy Ḥabibi devoted his research to the role of Pashtun elites and traced their existence in the territory of present-day Afghanistan to 1400 B.C.E. His account of Afghanistan’s history after the Timurid period relied on a purported early record of Paṧtō poetry, the Pəṭaḵazāna (Ḥabibi, 1970, Adamec, p. 98, Ḵpel, pp. 13-40). Despite their different specializations the historians active in the Anjoman-e tāriḵ arrived at strikingly similar conclusions concerning the historical roots of present-day Afghanistan, tracing its origin to the pre-Islamic period and affixing the Oxus, the Indus, and the Arabian Sea as its natural boundaries. Given the fact that this region was divided up between the Uzbek, Safavid, and Mughal spheres of influence in the early 18th century, Mir Ways Hotak’s rebellion in 1709 and Aḥmad Shah’s quest for power in 1747 are cast as an emancipation from the yoke of foreign oppression. In the accounts of the 19th century, the successful defenses of Afghanistan’s sovereignty against colonial encroachments form central themes. Another common characteristic is the focus on “great men” epitomizing national virtues of independence and integrity that enabled them to unify their country and to transcend ethnic divisions for a common good, thus essentially tackling challenges confronting the 20th century agenda of nation building (Greve-meyer, 1990, pp. 140-57). The idea of the splendor of the Dorrāni empire as a reflection of Aḥmad Shah “Bābā’s” flawless personality engenders the conclusion that times of political instability necessarily attest to some personal weakness on the part of the rulers. With the exception of ʿAziz-al-Din Wakili Fofalzay’s view of continuing Dor-rāni grandness in the late 18th century, most historians attribute the decline of the Dorrāni empire to personal shortcomings of Aḥmad Shah’s successors. The 19th century is likewise depicted as a dark age of fratricidal wars, in the course of which the Moḥammadzay elite put selfish interests above the unity of the Afghan nation. Both Ḡobār and Reštiā assign a vital role to the Afghan “masses” as the driving force towards sovereignty and national progress, which is thwarted because the leadership fails to appreciate and tap its potential (Noelle, pp. 45-47).
4. Developments after 1978. The advent of the communists occasioned a new approach towards the multiethnic composition of Afghanistan. The previous government endeavor to promote a national Afghan identity under the umbrella of Pashtun dominance was substituted by a nationalities policy on the model of the Soviet Union. In 1980 the range of official languages was expanded to include Baluči, Ōzbēki/Torkmani, Pašai, and Nurestāni in addition to Paṧtō and Dari (see AFGHANISTAN V. LANGUAGE). The constitution of 1987 declared Afghanistan a multinational state guaranteeing the equality and welfare of all constituent groups. As part of this policy, the bi-monthly journal Ḡarjestān with a specific focus on topics concerning Hazāra history, culture, and economy began to appear in 1988. Simultaneously, there was a sustained endeavor by exiled Hazāra intellectuals based in Pakistan and Iran to reclaim the past, noteworthy among them Moḥammad-ʿIsā Ḡarjestāni and Ḥaydar-ʿAli Jāḡori in Pakistan and Ḥosayn-ʿAli Yazdāni in Iran. While written from different perspectives, the works of the pro- and anti-government activists revolve around a set of common themes concerning the Hazāras’ deep roots within the country, their heroic contributions to its integrity, and the oppressions suffered in the course of history. This effort at redefining Hazāra identity resorts to similar means as the earlier nationalist discourse, linking notions of ethnicity with concepts of historical depth and a territorially defined space, in this case the historic region of Ḡarjestān (Bindemann, pp. 77-85; Schetter, p. 89). The process of redefining the historical past from a local perspective coincided with attempts at finding a more inclusive frame of reference and a new denomination for the Afghan state (Mousavi, pp. 1-18). During the final phase of communist authority Moḥammad-Ṣeddiq Farhang (1915-90), a former member of the Moṣāḥebān government, reintroduced the concept of “Khorasan” as basis of historical analysis (Farhang, pp. 17-26). Departing from Ḡobār’s concept of the inherent unity of the Afghan nation, his Afḡānestān dar panj qarn-e aḵir depicts a number of ethnic and territorial lines of conflict. The discussion this work sparked among the other Afghan intellectuals in exile bears witness to the deep cleavages brought about by the political conflict in Afghanistan and shows that the “proper” role of historiography, the assessment of the position of various political protagonists as well as the relationship between the state and the different segments of its society, still is a highly contentious issue. The fall of the communist regime in 1992 encouraged a number of Afghans in exile to analyze the constitutional movements under Amirs Ḥabib-Allāh and Amān-Allāh Khan as well as the oppressive nature of the early Moṣāḥebān period without exposing themselves to the accusation of being pro-communist (e.g., Mobārez, Pohanyār, Zamāni). Due to the unsettled situation in Afghanistan, the work of many contemporary historians has largely remained untapped so far, Reštiā’s memoirs and Kākar’s account of the communist period only forming the tip of an iceberg (see also COMMUNISM iv. IN AFGHANISTAN).
1. The Sadōzay period. Moḥammad-Mahdi Kawkabi Astarābādi, Tāriḵ-e jahāngošā-ye nā-deri, Tehran, 1932, 1989.
Moḥammad-Reżā Barnābādi, Taḏkera (Pamyatnye zapiski), Facsimile ed., tr. N. N. Tumanovich. Moscow, 1984.
Mir Abdoul Kerim Boukhary, Histoire de l’Asie Centrale: Afghanistan, Boukhara, Khiva, Khoqand depuis le dernières années du règne de Nadir Chah, 1153 jusqu’en 1233 de l’hégire, 1740-1818 A.D., tr. and ed. Charles Schefer, Paris, 1876, repr. Amsterdam, 1970.
Abu’l-Ḥasan b. Mo-ḥammad-Amin Golestāna, Mojmal al-tawāriḵ pas az Nāder, ed. M.-T. Modarres Rażawi, Tehran, 1965.
ʿAbd-al-Ḥayy Ḥabibi “Čand ṣafḥa az tāriḵ-e ḥosaynšāhi,” Āryānā 25/4, 1967, pp. 26-33.
Māyel Heravi, Mirzāyān-e Barnā-bād, Herat, 1969.
Maḥmud b. Ebrāhim al-Ḥosayni, Tāriḵ-e aḥmadšāhi, ca. 1772, ed. D. Saidmuradov, 2 vols., Moscow, 1974; ed. Sarwar Homāyun, Peshawar, 1990 (based on the edition by D. Saidmuradov).
Emām-al-Din Ḥosayni, Tāriḵ-e ḥosaynšāhi, 1213/1798, Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, D 144; Royal Asiatic Society, London, Ms No. 61; British Library, OIOC, Or. 1662.
Mo-ḥammad Ḥayāt Khan, Ḥayāt-e afḡāni, Lahore, 1283/1867; repr., Kabul, 1991; Eng. tr. Henry Priestly, La-hore, 1874.
Ḵošḥāl Khan Ḵaṭak, Kolliyāt-e Ḵošḥāl Ḵān Ḵaṭak, ed. Dōst-Moḥammad Khan Kāmel Mohmand, Peshawar, 1920.
Idem, Swāt-nāma, Kabul, 1979.
Ahmad Ali Kohzad, Men and Events Through 18th and 19th Century-Afghanistan, Kabul, n.d.
V. V. Kushev, Afganskaya rukopisnaya kniga, Moscow, 1980.
Laurence Lockhart, The Fall of the Safavi Dynasty, Cambridge, 1958, pp. 497-544.
Oskar Mann, Das Mujmil et-tārīkh-i baʿdnāderīje des Ibn Muḥammed Emīn Abu’l-Ḥasan aus Gulistāne, Fasc. I: Geschichte Persiens in den Jahren 1747-1750, Fasc. II: Geschichte des Aḥ-med Šāh Durrānī, Leiden, 1891, 1896.
Idem, “Quellenstudien zur Geschichte des Ahmed Šāh Durrānī,” ZDMG 52, 1898, pp. 97-186, 323-57.
Moḥammad-Ḵalil Marʿaši, Majmaʿ al-tawāriḵ dar tāriḵ-e enqeraż-e ṣafawiya wa waqāyeʿ-e baʿd tā sāl-e 1207 hejri qamari, 1207/1792, edited by ʿAbbās Eqbāl, Tehran 1949, 1983.
William H. Morley, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Historical Manuscripts in the Arabic and Persian Languages Preserved in the Library of the Royal Asiatic Society, London, 1854; repr., Osnabrück, 1978.
Michael O’Rourke Patterson, “A Partial Translation of ʿAyn al-Vaqayiʿ (Wellspring of Events) of Mohammad Yusuf,” Master’s Thesis, Department of Near Eastern Languages and Literatures, New York University, 1988.
Wilhelm Pertsch, Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin: Verzeichnis der Persischen Handschriften, Berlin, 1888.
Charles Rieu, Catalogue of the Persian Manuscripts in the British Museum, 3 vols., London, 1879-95.
Ganda Singh, Ahmad Shah Durrani, 1959; repr., Lahore, 1981, pp. 415-24.
2. The Moḥammadzay rulers. Bernhard Dorn, History of the Afghans Translated from the Persian of Neamet Ullah, 1829-36; repr., Karachi, 1976.
ʿAliqoli Eʿteżād-al-Salṭana, Tāriḵ-e waqāyeʿ wa sawāneḥ-e Afḡānestān, ed. Mir Hāšem Moḥaddeṯ, Tehran, 1986.
Mir Moḥammad-Ṣeddiq Farhang, Afḡānestān dar panj qarn-e aḵir, 2 vols., repr., Qom, 1991.
Ferešta. Mir Ḡolām Moḥammad Ḡobār, “Awżāʿ-e ʿelmi wa adabi-e Afḡānestān dar dawra-ye Moḥammadzay,” Āryānā 7/4, 1949, pp. 1-7.
Idem, Tāriḵ-e adabiyāt-e Afḡānestān: dawra-ye Moḥammadzayhā, Kabul, 1951; repr., Peshawar, 1999.
Moḥammad Ḡolām, Jang-nāma, Kabul, 1957.
Māyel Heravi, “Book-Making in Afghanistan during the Last Century,” Afghanistan 25/3, 1972, pp. 68-77.
Reżāqoli Khan Hedāyat, Molḥaqqāt-e tāriḵ-e raw-żat al-ṣafā-ye nāṣeri IX and X, Qom, 1960.
Hasan Kawun Kakar, Government and Society in Afghanistan, Austin and London, 1979, pp. 243-54.
Ḥamid Kaš-miri, Akbar-nāma, Kabul, 1951.
Yaʿqub-ʿAli Ḵᵛāfi, Pādšāhān-e mutaʾaḵḵer-e Afḡānestān, 2 vols., Kabul, 1955-57; repr., Peshawar, 1998.
Solṭān Moḥammad Ḵāleṣ, Tāriḵ-e solṭāni, Bombay, 1298/1881.
ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Khan, Tāj al-tawāriḵ, ed. Moḥammad-Jaʿfar Mawlā and Moḥammad-Ḥosayn Lāri, Bombay, 1904; repr. Peshawar [?], 1994.
Sultan Mahomed Khan, The Life of Abdurrahman, Amir of Afghanistan, 2 vols., London, 1900; repr., Karachi, 1980.
ʿAli-Aḥmad Koh-zād “Les manuscrits relatifs à l’histoire de l’Afghanistan au XIX siècle,” Trudi dvadtsatpyatogo mezhdurnarodnogo kongressa vostokovedov II, Moscow, 1960, pp. 207-11.
Robert D. McChesney, Kabul under Siege: Fayz Muhammad’s Account of the 1929 Uprising, Princeton, 1999.
John Malcolm, The History of Persia, 2 vols., London, 1815.
Idem, The Political History of India from 1784 to 1823, London, 1826.
Moḥammad-Taqi Lesān-al-Molk, Nāseḵ al-tawāriḵ, 3 vols., ed. Jamšid Kiānfar, Tehran, 1998.
Mirzā ʿAṭā-Moḥammad, Nawā-ye maʿārek, Kabul, 1952.
Fayż-Moḥammad, Serāj al-tawāriḵ, 3 vols., Kabul, 1912, 1920[?]; repr., vols. 1 and 2, Tehran, 1993.
Farhād Mirzā Moʿtamed-al-Dawla, Jām-e Jam, Tehran, 1856.
Fayz Mukhammad, Kniga upominaniya o myatezhe, tr. A. I. Shkirando, Moscow, 1988.
Farhād Mirzā Moʿtamed-al-Dawla, Jām-e Jam, Tehran, 1856.
Christine Noelle-Karimi, “Es ist ein weiter Weg nach Buḫārā. Raum-Zeit Koordinaten in der Sichtweise Afghanischer Chroniken,” in Narrated Space in the Literature of the Islamic World, ed. Roxane Haag-Higuchi and Christian Szyska, Wiesbaden, 2001, pp. 131-48.
Nur Moḥammad Nuri, Gol-šan-e emārat, Kabul, 1956.
Moḥammad Yusof Riāżi, Kolliyāt-e Riāżi (Baḥr al-fawāyed), Mašhad, 1906.
Idem, ʿAyn al-waqāyeʿ: Tāriḵ-e Afḡānestān dar sālhā-ye 1307-1324/1792-1906, ed. Moḥammad-Āṣaf Fekrat, Tehran, 1990.
Shah Šojāʿ, Wāqeʿāt-e Šāh Šojāʾ, Kabul, 1954.
Amin Tarzi, “The Judicial State: Evolution and Centralization of the Courts of Afghanistan, 1883-1896,” Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 2003, “Note on the Sources.”
3. The Moṣāḥebān period. Ludwig W. Adamec, Historical Dictionary of Afghanistan, London, 1991.
ʿAziz-al-Din Wakili Fōfalzay, Teḏkār-e divān-e homāyun-e aʿlā yā wezārat-e māliya, Kabul, 1955.
Idem, Dorrat al-zamān fī tāriḵ-e Šāh Zamān, Kabul, 1337/1958.
Idem, Timur Šāh Dorrāni, 2 vols., Kabul, 1967.
Mir Ḡolām Moḥammad Ḡobār, Aḥmad Šāh Bābā Afḡān, Kabul, 1943.
Idem, “Le rôle de l’Afghanistan dans la civilisation islamique,” Afghanistan 1, 1946, pp. 27-34.
Idem, Ḵorāsān, Kabul, 1947.
Idem, Afḡānestān dar masir-e tāriḵ I, Kabul, 1967; repr., Qom, 1980; II (written in 1973), Virginia, 1999.
Jan-Heeren Grevemeyer, “Bericht über die publizierte afghanische Historiographie,” in C. Rathjens, ed., Neue Forschungen in Afghanistan, Opladen, 1981. Idem, Afghanistan: Sozialer Wandel und Staat im 20, Jahrhundert, Berlin, 1990.
Sarwar Guyā, “Taʾlifāt wa maṭbuʿāt-e ʿaṣr-e Nāder Šāhi,” Majalla-ye Kābol 3/8, 1934, pp. 1-17.
ʿAbd-al-Ḥayy Ḥabibi, Loy Aḥmad Šāh Bābā, Kabul, 1940.
Idem, Paṧtō wa loyakān-e Ḡazna, Kabul, 1962.
Idem, Mādar-e zabān-e fārsi, Kabul, 1963.
Idem, Da Paṧtō adabīyāto tārīḵ, Kabul, 1963.
Idem, Tāriḵ-e moḵtaṣar-e Afḡānestān, 2 vols., Kabul 1967-70.
Idem, “A glance at historiography and the beginning of the Historical Society of Afghanistan,” Afghanistan 21/2, 1968, pp. 1-19.
Idem, “Afghan and Afghanistan,” Afghanistan 22/2, 1969, pp. 1-6.
Idem, Ẓāher-al-Din Moḥammad Bābor Šāh, Kabul, 1972.
Idem, Panjāh maqāla dar bāra-ye joḡrāfiā-ye tāriḵi, Kabul, 1983.
Idem, Jonbeš-e mašruṭiyat dar Afḡānestan, Kabul, 1984.
Māyel Heravi, Fehrest-e kotob-e maṭbuʿ-e Afḡānestān az sāl-e 1330 elā 1344, 15 sāl, Kabul, 1965.
Aḥmad ʿAli Kohzād, “Āryānā yā Afḡāne-stān qabl al-eslām,” Majalla-ye Kābol 9/11, 1939, pp. 44-56.
Idem, Dar zawāyā-ye tāriḵ-e moʿāṣer-e Afḡāne-stān, Kabul, 1952; repr., Peshawar, 1997.
Idem, Bālā-heṣār-e Kābol wa pišāmadhā-ye tāriḵi-e ān, Kabul 1957.
Idem, “Aḥmad Šāh wa Timur Šāh,” Āryānā 17/4, 1958, pp. 1-4.
Hārun Ḵpel, Āfaridahā-ye mahjur ʿAllāma Ḥabibi, Kabul, 1999.
ʿAbd-al-Ḥaqq Mojaddedi, Az amir-e kabir tā rahbar-e kabir, ed. Abu Masʿud Fā-ruqi, Peshawar, 1999.
Ḥosayn Nāyel, Fehrest-e kotob-e čāpi-e Afḡānestān, Kabul, 1977.
Moḥammad-Anwar Nir, “Āryānā, Ḵorāsān, Afḡānestān,” Āryānā 23/11-12, 1964, pp. 62-90.
Christine Noelle, State and Tribe in Nineteenth-Century Afghanistan, Richmond, 1997.
Wasil Noor, “Chronological Survey of the Dari Books Published in Afghanistan,” Central Asia: Journal of Area Study 1/5, Peshawar, 1980, pp. 78-156.
Angela Parvanta, “Afghanistan—Land of the Afghans? On the Genesis of a Problematic State Denomination,” in C. Noelle-Karimi, C. Schetter, and R. Schlagintweit, eds., Afghanistan—A Country without a State? Frankfurt, 2002, pp. 17-25.
Sayyed Qāsem Reštiā, Afḡānestān dar qarn-e nozdah, Kabul, 1957; Eng. tr., Peshawar, 1990.
Iqbal Ali Shah, “The Historical Society of Afghanistan,” Afghanistan 10/1, 1955, pp. 44-48.
Moḥammad Ebrāhim Setuda and Aḥmad Żiāʾ Modarresi, Ketāb-šenāsi-e melli-e Afḡānestān, Kabul, 1978.
4. Developments after 1978. Rolf Bindemann, “Hazara Research and Hazara Nationalism 1978-89,” in C. Noelle-Karimi, C. Schetter, and R. Schlagintweit, eds., Afghanistan—A Country without a State? Frankfurt, 2002, pp. 77-86.
Moḥammad-ʿIsā Ḡarjestāni, Kalla-manārhā-ye Afḡānestān, Quetta, 1984.
Ḥaydar-ʿAli Jāḡori, Hazārahā wa Hazārajāt-e bāstān dar āʾina-ye tāriḵ, n.p., 1992.
Mohammad Hasan Kakar, Afghanistan: the Soviet Invasion and the Afghan response, 1979-1982, Berkeley, 1995.
Idem, Ranòā aw defāʿ: da Afḡānestān da nofūso, tārīḵ aw rawānopeṧo pa līknē, Peshawar, 1999.
Mo ḥammad-Nāṣer Mehrin, Gušaʾi az qatlhā-ye siāsi dar tāriḵ-e Afḡānestān-e moʿāṣer, Peshawar, 1998.
Idem, Do čehra az Amir ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Ḵān, Peshawar, 1999.
Idem, Čerā Afḡānestān dar masir-e tāriḵ tawqif šod? Peshawar, 2000.
ʿAbd-al-Ḥamid Mobārez, Taḥlil-e wāqeʿāt-e siāsi 1919-1996, n.p., 1996.
Fażl-Ḡani Mojaddedi, Afḡānestān dar ʿahd-e Amān-Allāh Ḵān, Hayward, 1997.
Sayed Askar Mousavi, The Hazaras of Afghanistan, Richmond, 1998.
Masʿud Pohanyār, Zṟohur-e mašruṭiyat wa qorbāniān-e estebdād, 2 vols., Peshawar, 1379/2000.
Sayyed Qāsem Reštiā, Ḵāṭerāt-e siāsi 1311 (1932) tā 1371 (1992), Virginia, 1997.
Conrad Schetter, “Die Territorialisierung nationaler und ethnischer Vorstellungen in Afghanistan,” Orient 44/1, 2003, pp. 75-97.
Jamšid Šoʿla, Jehād-e mellat-e Boḵārā wa hawādeṯ-e Laqay dar šomāl-e Hendukoš, Tehran, 2000.
Ḥosayn-ʿAli Yazdāni, Pažu-heši dar tāriḵ-e hazārahā, Qom, 1989.
Idem, Ṣaḥnahā-ye ḵunini az tāriḵ-e tašayyoʿ dar Afḡānestān, Mašhad, 1991.
Hāšem Zamāni, Zendāni ḵāṭerāt, Peshawar, 2000.
Originally Published: December 15, 2004
Last Updated: March 22, 2012
This article is available in print.
Vol. XII, Fasc. 4, pp. 390-395