Sistan Mapped: A History of Cartographic Representations of a Borderland Region

Abstract

In the late 19th century Qajar Dynasty, British imperialism in Iran changed the essence of the Sistan region by imposing a new border line between Iran and Afghanistan. The British redefined territorial boundaries, all influenced by a “colonial gaze”— seeing the region as a miserable space, awaiting reclamation by supposedly more civilized cultures. This paper takes a qualitative, interpretive-historical approach along with visual analysis to examine five historical maps of Sistan as primary sources. This study examines how the border imposition was artificially created through mapping and cartographic representations, how the British showed various moments of confrontation and displacement of regional identities, and how Persians resisted to save their territoriality and reverse the colonial gaze. Initially, a 10th-century world map crafted by Ibn Hawqal indicates the historical significance of Sistan in both Persian culture and the Islamic world. Then, Dhulfaqar Kirmani’s 1871-1873 map invokes the “mythical unity” of Sistan, drawing inspiration from Abu’l Qasim Firdausi’s Shahnameh (Book of Kings) to assert Iran’s claim. Frederic Goldsmid’s 1872 map, reflecting British interests, serves as an “ideological construct” to assert colonial control. Mirza Mohammad-Reza Tabrizi’s map as a “cultural construct” blends indigenous territoriality with British influence, showcasing a complex hybrid. Finally, Henry McMahon’s 1905 map highlights the interplay between meanings and power while revealing the impact of local resistance on Sistan’s cartographic representation. These interpretations demonstrate that maps are not disembodied representations or neutral constructs. Sistan is depicted on these maps as a “region interrupted” by Eurocentric perspectives, a “region united” by Persian maps, and a “region in-between” when the British maintained their political order and relied on the locals to resist the imposed border, resulting in an ongoing “place of conflict.” Overall, this paper unveils how these maps transformed Sistan into an “in-between” region, striated by delineated boundaries, disrupting its seamless territorial perception.