Syntactic and semantic analysis of modal verbs, particularly “bāyestan”, has been a challenging topic in Persian language studies due to its special inflectional, syntactic, and semantic states. These studies are mainly focused on the uses of this verb in contemporary Persian, ignoring the historical texts. The current study, relying on data derived from Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī (1,114 cases), aims to review the challenging semantic and syntactic aspects of this verb. First, by referring to some of the morphosyntactic features of this verb, we have identified its status in terms of tense, time implications, and differentiation between different forms of past and present tenses. Next, we have shown that in the valency of this verb there is either a noun phrase (subject) or a complement clause. Subsequently, we have introduced and discussed two assumptions about the verb bāyestan: either considering the complement clause as the subject and the expletive pro. We have thus shown that the impersonality of this verb is due to the syntactic and semantic nature of the subject and has nothing to do with the changes of the verb during the grammaticalization. Afterward, it was found that non-finite clauses have no syntactic subject, and what has been suggested in some research as the 'subject' of “Ra” is in fact a noun phrase whose syntactic role is the optional complement of the verb bāyestan and its semantic role is the beneficiary. This noun phrase is essentially independent of the complement clause. In this regard, it was found that unlike Davari's analysis (1394), modality in non-finite clauses may also be agent-oriented, and at least based on Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī data, it is not possible to consider moving from action-oriented modality to agent-oriented modality as a grammaticalization process. Finally, the semantic examination of the verb bāyestan supported the previous analyses in this field and revealed that all uses of the verb in the Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī are non-epistemic modality.

The Mihna (ordeal) of Ashʿarites was a historical event in the city of Nishapur during the Seljuk era by the year 1053 AD. As a result, all the Ash'ari religious authorities were banned from preaching and teaching, and they were kept under strict surveillance. At the first step, Al-Ash'ari elites were adopting political actions to deal with the accusations, then they wrote defense statements by scholars like Abū Bakr Al-Bayhaqī and Abū al-Qāsim al-Qushayrī. This article studies the reasons and circumstances of this event and analyses the structure of the defense statements. The result shows that in this situation, Ashʿarites managed to establish the Ashʿari theology as the principal theological school of Sunnism, introducing the Mihna responsible as Sunnism enemies to redeem from political pressures and prosecution.

This article examines the meanings of the words “ʿarūs” and “ḥāǰeb” in the contexts of “kaštī-ye ʿarūs” and “ḥāǰeb-e xoršīd” in Farhang-e Bozorg-e Sokhan. These compounds are attested in Tārīx-e Bayhaqī and Dīvān-e Šams. By presenting additional evidence and providing reasons and observations, this study reveals another meaning of these two words.

These notes address various words, expressions, and themes in some Persian and Arabic texts, which were previously published on social media. Here, they are presented with some revisions. In this instance, the notes focus on short discussions about Shahnameh, Vis o Ramin, Daneshnameh Meisari, Qābūsnāmeh, Makhzan al-Asrār, Iskandernāmeh, Būstān, Nurūznāmeh,  Kalīla wa-Dimna ,  Saydanah, Al-Tafhīm, Al-Jamāhīr, Tārīkh-i Bayhaq, Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī , and Al-Fihrist. Some of these notes are based on the research of Western scholars.

This article argues that despite differences in language, setting, and cultural context, the three narratives—Siavash (from the Shahnameh), Hasanak Vazir (from the Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī), and The Lion and the Cow (from Kelileh and Demneh)—each serve as a literary criterion of their respective time and culture. Structurally, however, they revolve around the same core motif: the destructive cycle of jealousy and conspiracy orchestrated by their negative heroes (Garsīvaz, Būshal, and Demneh), who manipulate the protagonists into downfall. These villains incite the antagonistic figures (Afrasiab, Mas‘ud, and the Lion) to provoke and ultimately execute the tragic killings of the virtuous heroes—Siavash, Hasanak, and the Cow. Through this shared framework, the narratives reveal a universal archetype of betrayal and power dynamics.

Aḥmad ibn Abī al-Asba’/Al-Asbagh was a secretary and envoy to several Abbasid caliphs, including Al-Mu'taḍid, Al-Mu'ayyad, and his son Al-Mu'tazz. His name appears in several Persian texts, including Tārīkh-i Beyhaqī, Tārīkh-i Sīstān, and Tārīkh-i Herāt, but upon examining these works, only limited information is available. Although he was a well-known envoy of the Abbasid caliphs who frequently visited Iran, historians have not given him the attention he deserves. Due to the silence of the editors of Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī in their annotations, as well as the oversight by Malik al-Shu'ara Bahār in Tārīkh-i Sīstān, the author believes that it is necessary to explore this figure further. Although Ahmad was famous in his time and wrote books and works, little is known about him, and no works by him have survived. The scarcity of sources on this matter has led scholars to rely on the writings of Ibn al-Nadim in Al-Fihrist. Although Al-Fihrist is an important bibliographic work written a century after Aḥmad ibn Abī al-Asba's death, Ibn al-Nadim did not seem to know much about this figure or perhaps intentionally avoided providing a detailed biography. This article attempts to gather all available information on this person from Arabic sources and reconstruct his biography based on historical records. His name is mentioned in three categories of sources: local histories, general histories, and biographical dictionaries of secretaries and scholars. Sometimes his story is confused with that of Abul-Abbas Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Thawabah (d. 277), and his name has been subject to distortion and corruption in historical records.

The present study aimed to investigate diachronic changes in the frequency and function of marked syntactic structures, namely passive constructions, preposing, and cleft sentences that manifest information structural elements in Persian. The study examined these structures across three periods of Persian, i.e., Middle Persian, Dari, and Modern Persian. The data for Middle Persian is sourced from The Mēnōg-ī Khrad and Oshnar-I Dana, while for Dari, Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī and Safarnāma by Nasir Khusraw are used. For Modern Persian, written resources from various genres, such as short stories and scientific articles, are analyzed. The samples from each period are analyzed to determine the function and frequency of marked syntactic structures, which are then compared to identify any potential changes in their usage over time. The findings indicated that the frequency and function of these syntactic structures have changed over time. The findings suggested that passive constructions were commonly used across all three periods to present the patient as the pragmatic topic and maintain the topic-focus order. However, in modern Persian, passive construction was also used to emphasize the patient as the focus. Cleft constructions were not found in Middle Persian, but the increase in frequency of cleft constructions in Dari can be attributed to the fact that in this period, cleft sentences were used similarly to preposing, in order to observe the principle of separation of role and reference, rather than focusing on specific elements. Nonetheless, in modern Persian, cleft constructions were used to exclude other possibilities and emphasize the selected element as the focus. Preposing structures were used to present an element as the topic and provide new information about it. This study contributes to our understanding of language change and provides insights into the evolution of Persian syntax over time.