The Soviet-Iranian Treaty of 1921: History and Modernity (to the Centenary of Conclusion)

After a century since the Soviet-Iranian Treaty was signed in 1921 authors of the article consider its significance from a new viewpoint – as the backing of the sovereignty of Iran and Russia that supported development of their relations. Authors examine the way it complied with the interests of Russia and Iran, and its impact on the bilateral relations in the 20th century. The signing of the Treaty secured the sovereignty of Iran, served as the base for the development of equal relations between the two neighboring states and opened up Iran for relations with foreign states. For the Russia, this document was a step towards breaking its diplomatic isolation. The authors emphasize that Russia had granted almost all its property to Iran which contributed to the improvement of the financial situation in Iran and served as a base for the development of mutually beneficial economic relations between the two countries. The authors mention that the property transfer clause was connected with the security of the Soviet Russia. This fact was reflected in the Article 6 of the Treaty. The Treaty set up the basement for the legal status of the Caspian Sea as a closed sea in the states' joint usage. The Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea, signed in 2018, to some extent retained the special regime of the sea and reflected the spirit of the Treaty of 1921. Although in IRI there are different views about the Treaty some experts consider that it generally complied with Iran's national interests.

Non-standart position of the false door in Giza tombs - a builing mistake or a least-evil solution?

In the chapels of a number of tombs in the Giza necropolis, both rock-cut and stone (mastaba), the false door – the main place of worship of the tomb – is sometimes not located on the west wall. Given that the tradition of placing the false door precisely on the western wall had deep roots for centuries, these cases raise a legitimate question about the reasons for such an anomaly. But the paucity of examples, both in Giza and in other necropolises, made it difficult to conduct a broad analysis of this phenomenon. This question has been repeatedly raised in the literature, but it is still debatable. And after the discovery of new examples at the site of the Russian Archaeological Mission at Giza of the Institute of Oriental Studies, RAS (RAMG), it became necessary to return to this problem to analyze it, to structure and summarize the early information, to try to understand the nature of the occurrence of such cases. A total of nine such cases are known in the Giza necropolis; all of them date from the time of the V–VI dynasties, when the necropolis is drastically compacted – and the tombs are occupied by any vacant space. It was not always possible to place false doors on the western wall of the chapels for each individual burial. As a result, sometimes the builders deliberately placed a false door not on the western wall but in the immediate vicinity of the burial to emphasise the connection between them.

Conversations with the Malabar Pagans (according to the Documents of the Danish Royal Tranquebar Mission)

At the beginning of the 17th century, the Danish East India company (Dansk Østindisk Kompagni) was established in Europe. In particular, Tranquebar (Dansborg fortress) became the stronghold of the Danes in India. In another hundred years, at the very beginning of the 18th century, the first Lutheran missionaries appeared on the Coromandel coast. At this time the Danish Royal mission was established in Tranquebar, funded by king Frederick IV. It consisted mainly of Germans who graduated from the University of the Saxon city of Halle. Those missionaries not only actively preached among the local population, but also studied languages of the region, translated Gospels into local languages and then published it in the printing house they created. They also trained neophytes from among the local children. One of the first missionaries in Tranquebar was pastor Bartholomäus Ziegenbalg, who lived in India from 1706 to 1719. Information about Pastor's activities in the Royal Danish mission has been preserved in his letters and records. These letters and papers were regularly printed in Halle in the reports of the Royal Danish Mission («Ausführliche Berichte an, die von der königlichen dänischen Missionaren aus Ost-Indien»). However, besides letters and reports, this edition constantly published texts of a special kind, called «conversations» (das Gespräch). They looked like dialogues between pastor Bartholomäus Ziegenbalg and local religious authorities. Those brahmans explained the basic principles of the Hindu religion, and their opponent showed them the absurdity of their creed by comparing it with the main tenets of Christianity. The following is a translation of one of these dialogues.

Greek and Roman Pottery in the African Kingdom of Meroe: Ways of Penetration and Influence

The article analyzes the ceramic imports found on the territory of the Meroitic Kingdom – the southern neighbour of Egypt, which existed on the territory of modern Sudan since the second half of the 6th century B.C. until the middle of the 4th century A.D. The imported pottery revealed in the process of archaeological excavations of necropoleis, residential and temple complexes are mainly of Mediterranean origin and are associated with the Hellenistic world that later became a part of the Roman Empire. The finds are mostly rare and are represented by fragments of amphorae from various regions of Italy, Aegean region, Asia Minor, the Levant, northern Africa, as well as the European provinces of the Roman Empire – Baetika and Gaul. The main consumer of foreign goods, in small numbers reaching the middle and upper reaches of the Nile, was probably the Meroitic elite. It is logical to assume that the penetration of Mediterranean ceramics into Meroe was facilitated by the trade ties of its northern neighbour – Egypt:trade with the Mediterranean took place through Egyptian river and caravan routes; although hypothetically, one cannot exclude the possibility of goods entering Meroe bypassing Egypt, through the Red Sea ports. Despite a small share of imported products in the Meroitic Kingdom and regardless of the ways of their movement, they had a significant influence on the local pottery manufacturing; a reflection of this process was the appearance in the African kingdom of Hellenistic forms of vessels (kraters, askoses, lekythoi, clepsydras, etc.) and vase painting in the Greek style. As a result, a very special synthesis of artistic ideas emerged, embodied in Meroitic ceramics. Along with the local Nubian features, Egyptian and Hellenistic themes, techniques and ceramic forms are recognized there, which are characteristic for the pottery of Late and Ptolemaic Egypt, ancient Greece and Rome and allows us to see the Kingdom of Meroe as the extreme southern outpost of the Hellenistic world.

Biden Priorities and Possible Strategy for Palestinian-Israeli Conflict Settlement

Israeli-U.S. relations are an important factor in U.S. policy in the Middle East. USA maintain Israel as a strategic ally and Israel was granted American “major non-NATO ally” status. United States actively influenced the Israeli regional policy. The Palestinian-Israeli conflict settlement was always America’ the most priority area. Israelis and Americans share the view that the United States has a predominant role and responsibility in the Palestinians - Israeli dispute peace-making. The two-state outcome and critical issue over Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem was a topic of American concerns for a long time relied on bipartisanship support of Democrats and Republicans. During Osama’s presidency D. Biden held post of deputy president and supported no new ideas for restarting negotiations between the sides of the conflict but its policies have failed, from Israel’s refusal to freeze settlement. The next Trump administration however was the “most pro-Israel ever”. Trump’s White House led a radical departure from the U.S.’s traditional role as the honest broker between Israelis and Palestinians. Biden’s victory in 2021 signals restructure Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts, rehabilitating a durable two-state formula that establishes political, territorial, and demographic separation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA). But uunlike the Obama and Trump administrations, the Biden administration doesn't see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a foreign policy priority. The question is: what really a Biden presidency might mean for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?