In the late 18^th and early 19^th centuries, modern historiography witnessed a significant shift towards the kinship/homogeneity approach, largely driven by orientalists in nonWestern regions. Within this paradigm, the geographical significance of Iran gained prominence. This study scrutinizes the intersection of Aryanist historiography with the construction field during the Qajar and First Pahlavi periods in Iran. It assesses the tangible outcomes of this historical perspective as the emergence of Persian Nationalism in the construction field. It draws upon primary sources and an extensive literature review, employing a critical methodology to scrutinize architectural historiography during the late Qajar and First Pahlavi periods. The study identifies that, from the second half of the 19^th century, Persian Nationalism rose under the leadership of nonMuslim capitalists and foreign and local Orientalists, subsequently gaining political power after the First Pahlavi period and becoming a determining factor in shaping the field of construction development. In this way, the archaic mindset that glorified preIslamic Iranian civilizations and opposed the centuries-long presence of Turkic and Arab cultures as local elements after Islam became the main ideology of the modern Iranian nation-state. This main ideology became a dominant element in the early architectural culture of the Iranian nation-state, bringing significant outcomes in the field of urban development. In this context, the outcomes in the urban field can be summarized as follows: the glorification of Persian historical figures, the demolition of public buildings and urban morphology from the Turkic Qajar period, and the proliferation of the Achaemenid/Sassanid revivalist style.

This study largely drawing upon the established conceptual framework of Orientalism in Saidian terms shall analyse the British perceptions and representations of the Bulgarian Crisis of 1876, a salient feature of the Eastern Question, as they appeared in British parliamentary debates. It will also make occasional yet instructive references to the coverage of the Crisis as well as the image of the Ottoman Empire and the Balkans which were organic parts of the Crisis, in some influential periodicals of the era such as the Times and the Contemporary Review in order to better contextualize the debates in the parliament. The main point this article shall make is that the Bulgarian Crisis worked as a catalyst in reinforcing the hegemony of the Orientalist discourse in the political construction of the Ottoman Empire as an absolute external Other in Britain at the time. It shall also delve into the construction of the Balkans as an "intimate other" whose Oriental and European features were alternately accentuated during the Crisis with a view to enlist the British public in either supporting or denouncing the Bulgarian uprising. All in all, it will suggest that the Orientalist rhetoric was embedded at the very core of the Victorian British elites' cognitive map, and was also unsparingly employed in negating the domestic political opponents swamping them with negative Orientalist stereotypes.

Bu çalışma Temmuz-Eylül 1875 arası İstanbul'a gelerek İbn Yaiş'in Şerh-i Mufassal-ı Zemahşeri adlı eseri ile ilgili bazı vakıf kütüphanelerinde çalışmalar yapan Gustav Jahn'ın kendisine burs veren kuruluş olan Sosyal-Eğitim ve Sağlık İşleri Bakanlığına (Minister der Geistlichen, Unterrichts und Medizinalangelegenheiten) gönderdiği raporun çevirisi yer almaktadır. Bir doğu bilimci olan Gustav Jahn raporunda araştırma yaptığı İstanbul Kütüphaneleri ile ilgili dikkat çekici bilgiler verirken çalışma ve kütüphanelere giriş izni alma sürecini anlatmaktadır. Rapor, XIX. yüzyılda İstanbul kütüphanelerinin hizmetleri ve genel durumları ile ilgili önemli bilgiler vermektedir.