Iran is a country with ancient roots dating back to 4000 years ago. Long before it
was called Iran—literally meaning the land of Aryans—it was well populated with
numerous small villages. Physically these inhabitants were a subdivision of the
Mediterranean race. However, there were also very small populations from central Asia.
In about 2000 B.C. part of the Aryan tribe migrated from the Russian plateau into Iran.
However, henceforth Iran was governed by a monarchy system that lasted till 1979 A.D.
for about 2500 years.
Although Iran is officially governed by one entity, an obvious dualism of power is
observable throughout its long history and particularly after the start of the Qajar period.
This bilateral occupation of power officially enters the governmental structure after the
revolution of 1979. However, before 1979 the power was held formally by one entity
(e.g. the shah).
During the Qajar dynasty—that lasted from 1796 till 1925—Iran was officially
unified under a central government. Despite its unpopularity, this period’s long life is
largely due to the repeated supports of the two European powers that were involved the
most in Iran—Great Britain and Russia. The Qajar period has many features that are
unique to the Iranian history. This dynasty is the first one in the history of Iran that has
experienced a dual competition of influence from two European powers. It is also the first
period to encounter the power and influence of ulama—religious leaders— in politics and
to witness the forces and resistance of traditionalism and modernism.
Interestingly, the dual presence and influence of Russia and Great Britain in Iran,
both helped and hurt her. Ever since the strategic involvement of France, Britain, and
Russia with Iran during the Napoleonic wars, Iran became affected by the policies of
Britain and Russia. In addition to the interests of these foreign powers in trade with Iran,
and later in concessions for their economic activity, they had very strong political and
strategic interests in Iran.
Britain was concerned to keep the Persian Gulf region under its control and
safeguard the southern and eastern parts of Iran for the protection of its interests in India.
On the other hand, Russia after taking the transcaucasian territories from Iran in two
earlier wars was trying to grow its influence in the northern parts of Iran as much of as
possible. Russia was also trying to control the central government of Iran to its own
advantage and also it hoped to widen its influence enough to be able to use the Gulf and
even to reach it.
Neither Britain nor Russia wanted the other party to be able to take control over
further territories in Iran or make her a protectorate. This mutual desire was the force that
kept Iran’s independence. However, this independence was purely formal as Iran did not
dare to make a decision or take an action that would influence the interests of either party
undesirably. Even the support of one of the two would be enough to displease the other.
A review of the files that account for the discussions by Iranian leaders and the British
and Russian representatives show that is a truly independent state the issues would have
been a purely internal decision. However, the British archives are portrayed in a manner
that give the impression of these issues being significantly progressive an reformist in
nature, but an analysis of the Russian and Persian records do not support this nature.
The European governments both pushed and promoted the commercial interests
of their own nationals. The dual conflict of the Russian and British political and
economic interests pushed the two countries into 1907 Anglo-Russian Entente agreement.
The treaty divided Iran into three spheres with the Russian sphere encompassing northern
and central Iran, including Tehran and Isfahan and southeast Iran in the British sphere.
The third sphere that was the rest of Iran—ironically included the part that oil was found
in 1908—was declared the neutral zone. Interestingly, the Iranians were neither aware of
this treaty nor consulted when it was signed.
The concessions that were granted to the Russians and British representatives by
the shah had a big influence on the people of Iran and especially the bazaris (traditional
merchants) and the ulama. Most of the economic concessions were made such that it was
in the advantage of the European side. The benefits include but are not bound to big
export and import tax exemptions for the European merchants, almost no internal
competition—because of techniques of mass production the goods were made cheaper
than the available internal goods—justice courts that resolved the disputes between the
foreign and domestic nationals almost always in favor of the foreign national, and
monopolies over the production of cotton, tobacco, opium, and etc. The bad shape of the
Iranian internal economy and the poverty of the people favored the import of the foreign
goods since they were less expensive than the internally handmade corresponding
merchandises.
This affected the bazari class most of all. They were losing business to the
merchandises of foreign origins and they had to pay more import and export taxes than
their European counterparts. The overall monopoly that the concessions had provided
weakened the Iranian bazari class further. This however, also influenced the ulama who
had strong ties with the bazari class including both the bazaar elites engaged in longdistance and international trade and the larger group of bazaar artisan-shopkeepers who
were organized into guilds. Ulama and bazaris often belonged to the same family, much
of the income of the ulama was provided through levies and khums (the Islamic version
of income tax given to ulama) were mostly from the rich and able bazari class. During the
religious holidays and ceremonies held by the financially capable bazaris—who
considered piety and religious obedience as an essential character of their occupation—
the needed services were conducted by the ulama.
Although some ulama supported the Tehran government—especially the ones
appointed by the government who would cheat, hoard, extort, and accept bribes
sometimes—they mostly acted as watchdogs over the Tehran government. The ulama
were appealed to most people as well as the wealthy to represent grievances before the
government. Several times in the Qajar period, an important sector of the ulama helped
lead popular movements against a government seen as complaisant to the attacks of
foreign imperialists.
The most noteworthy of such movements are the Tobacco Rebellion of 1891-92
and the Constitutional revolution of 1905-11. Discontent over the shah’s concession
policy came to a head when the shah gave exclusive rights to Iran’s tobacco industry to a
British subject. The concession was kept a secret till a newspaper of the time named
Akhtar published a series of articles criticizing it. Al-Afghani a pan-Islamic and antiimperialist clergy started a movement against this concession.
Massive protests began in the spring of 1891 when the agents of the tobacco
company began to arrive. The tobacco concession elicited far more protests than any
other because of the nature of the tobacco which was a product widely grown in Iran, and
profited many landlords, shopkeepers, and exporters. Al-Afghani sends a letter to Mirza
Hasan Shriazi—an influential clergy in exile—asking him to denounce the shah and his
sale of the Iranian interests. However, Shirazi sends a letter to the shah and reiterating
most of the points made by Afghanis letter, and later Shirazi issues a fatwa—religious
command—boycotting and making it sinful to sell or use of tobacco and any of its
products.
The religious ban on the use of any tobacco products proved the inusefulness of
the concession and at the end, the government was forced to cancel the entire concession,
an affair that cost the Tehran government about ₤500,000 in compensation to the
company. The movement was the first of its kind that unified the ulama, modernists,
bazari class, and ordinary townspeople in coordination to move against the government.
The constitutional revolution of 1905-11 is another of such examples that shows
the influence of the ulama in uniting the different groups to drive this movement forward.
The ulama were not as interested in the constitution itself as were the reformers
themselves. However, the ulama saw this as a step forward of limiting the shah’s power
and more of a personal gain from this for themselves. So finally, the shah accepted the
constitution and the first majles (parliament) was elected.