An Analysis of Conflicting Narratives on the “Conquest of Isfahan” by Mardāvīj and ʿAlī Būya

This article examines the contradictory accounts of the conquest of Isfahan by Mardāvīj Ziyārī and ʿAlī Būya in the early 4th century BC. The main question of this study is: What historical insights can be gained from comparing the known account of ʿAlī Būya’s independent conquest of Isfahan with two other accounts preserved in early and late historical texts? The dominant narrative states that ʿAlī Būya, after rebelling against Mardāvīj and fleeing Karaj Abī Dolaf, seized Isfahan but quickly abandoned it to make further conquests. However, a review of the historical sources reveals at least two other accounts: one attributes the conquest to Mardāvīj’s forces under the command of ʿAlī Būya, and another entirely dissociating Mardāvīj from the event, presenting ʿAlī as the sole conqueror of Isfahan.Adopting a descriptive-analytical approach, this study explores these inconsistencies. The findings suggest that the widely accepted narrative of ʿAlī Būya capturing Isfahan while in revolt against Mardāvīj is not necessarily definitive or exclusive. Alternative accounts—particularly the one depicting ʿAlī Būya as acting under Mardāvīj’s command—deserve special attention. This narrative diversity may stem from the Buyid dynasty’s efforts to reconstruct their history by diminishing Mardāvīj’s role in their rise to power. The study emphasizes revisiting historical narratives and considering diverse sources when analyzing historical events.