Persian Nationalism and the Campaign for Language Purification

Persian Nationalism and the Campaign for Language Purification Author(s): Mehrdad Kia Source: Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2 (Apr., 1998), pp. 9-36 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4283935 Accessed: 30/10/2010 22:03 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Middle Eastern Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

Persian Nationalismand the Campaignfor LanguagePurification MEHRDAD KIA

Decadesbeforeit beganits politicalstruggleagainstEuropeandomination, modemnationalismin Iranhadcreatedits own 'domainof sovereignty'.In withEurope,Persiannationalismdividedthe its firststageof confrontation world of ideas and institutionsinto two domains,'the materialand the spiritual'.'The domainof the materialwas the domainof the 'outside',of modemsciences,technology,andpoliticalinstitutions.In this area,Europe its superiorityoverIranandthe restof the Islamicworld. haddemonstrated Thus, in this domain,Europeansuperiorityhad to be acceptedand its Thespiritual,on the otherhand,was achievements'studiedandreplicated'.2 an 'innerdomain',the domainof culturalidentitywhereEuropecouldnot be allowed to interveneand dominate.3In fact, the greatera country's successin emulatingEuropeanideasandinstitutionsin thematerialdomain, 'the greaterthe need to preservethe distinctivenessof one's spiritual culture'andnationalidentity.4 But Persiannationalismcould not declare the spiritualdomain its sovereignterritoryunlessit challengedthe hegemonyof Islam.And in Iran the spiritualrealmwasthedomainof the Shiiteclergywho actedas the sole interpreter andprincipalguardianof the Islamicheritage,andhadmadethis synonymouswith the Iranianheritageand identity.The dominanceof the Shiite clergy led some nationalistintellectualsto believe thatthe cultural hegemonyof ShiiteIslammustbe challengedandreplacedonly by a new formof identitywhichemphasizedIran'spre-Islamichistoryandcultureas well as the Persianlanguageandits richliteraryheritage.5Inthe battlethey wagedagainstIslamandthe Shiitereligioushierarchyfor dominationover the spiritualdomain,these Persiannationaliststransformed history,culture and languageinto ideologicaltools for buildinga modem homogenized nationalidentitywhichwas PersianratherthanIslamic,secularratherthan religious.In the process,they ignoredthe multi-ethnic,multi-linguistic, multi-cultural,and multi-religiousreality of the Iranian state. They overlookedthe fundamentalfact that Iranwas not Persiaor Persianbut rathera mosaic of diverse ethnic, linguisticand religious groups.Each grouppossessed its own history,culture,language,religiousvalues and traditions.Only by denyingthe existenceof non-Persianidentitiescould Middle EasternStudies, Vol.34, No.2, April 1998, pp.9-36 PUBLISHED

BY FRANK CASS, LONDON

10

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

this nationalistdiscoursepresentIranas an ancientandunifiednationwith one history,one cultureandone literarylanguage. In particular,Persiannationalismattemptedto transformtwo areas withinthe spiritualdomain:historyand language.In the field of history, Persiannationalismdividedthe historyof Iranintotwo separateanddistinct periods.The firstwas the pre-Islamicera,a timewhenIranwas not only a world superpowerbut also a unified nation with one government,one cultureandone language.Tothesenationalists,the pre-Islamicerawas the source of the true Iranianspiritualdomainbecauseit was untaintedby foreigninfluence.Theseconderawas the Islamicperiod,whichbeganwith the Arabinvasionof Iranandthe fall of the Sassanidempirein the seventh centuryAD. Withthe occupationof the countryby MuslimArabs,asserted the new nationalists,Iraniansbegan to lose their nationalidentity.This process continuedundersuccessive dominationsfirst of Arabs,then of Turksand Mongols,then againof Turks,and finallyof Russiansandthe British. As some nationalistssaw it, the pre-Islamicgoldenage of the Iranian civilizationpresenteda markedcontrastwith the Islamicperiod,an era of foreigndomination,loss of politicalindependence, andtheArabizationand laterthe Turkification of Iraniancultureandthe Persianlanguage.In order to recoverIran'sauthenticnationalidentity,therefore,thepeopleof Iranhad firstto discardthe Arabandthe Islamicdominationin the spiritualdomain. Thus,the battlefor independencein the spiritualdomaincouldbe led only by nationalistintellectualswho actedas the voice of thepre-Islamiceraand not the Shiite clergy, which representedan alien religion imposed on Iraniansby Arabinvaders. The spiritualdomaincontainednot only Iranianhistorybut also the Persian language.Accordingto the nationalistdiscourse,the Persian languagehadpreservedtheculturalindependence andtheauthenticnational identityof the Iranianpeople. Throughoutthe 'darkcenturies'of foreign domination,despite a religion forced on them by Arabsand prolonged politicalrulein foreignlanguagessuchas ArabicandTurkish,Iranianshad preserved'their' cultureand nationalconsciousnessby keeping 'their' literarylanguagealive. However, Persianwas losing its independence becauseof the largenumberof borrowedArabicwords.Compounding that, new scientificandtechnologicalwordswerebeingimportedfromEuropean languages.Inorderto preservetheirnationalidentity,thepeopleof Iranhad to purgePersianof foreignwordsandterminologies. Some Persian nationalistsfurther argued that, as the process of modernization intensifiedin the materialdomain,therewas a greaterneed to preservethe purityandthe distinctnessof Persian.This meantnot only keeping out foreign words but manufacturingnew Persian words as

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

11

equivalentsfor Arabic words and Westernscientific and technological terms. This would guaranteethe integrityand the independenceof an essentialcomponentof the spiritualdomain.Persianbelongedto the inner orthe spiritualdomainof culturalidentityfromwhichforeigninfluencehad to be purged;'languagethereforebecamea zone overwhichthe nationfirst hadto declareits sovereigntyandthenhadto transformin orderto makeit adequatefor the modemworld'.6 The crucialmomentin the rise of the languagepurificationmovement came in the nineteenthcentury,when a small groupof educatedIranians triedto wrestcontrolof the spiritualspherefromthe Shiiteulama.Their strategywas not to wage a direct attackon Islam and its fundamental and 'corruption'of the Shiite teachingsor to criticizethe 'backwardness' clergy.Giventhe weaknessandthe isolationof the nationalistintellectuals andthe powerandpopularityof the Shiiteclergyamongthe masses,such open attackscould backfire.Instead,the nationalistdiscourseintendedto createa new sovereignspiritualdomainforitselfby emphasizingthe purely non-Islamicand Iranianelementsof history,cultureand languagewhich were,forthemostpart,inheritedfrompre-Islamictimes.Thus,thebattlefor a trueIranian,thatis Persianhistoricalperspectivebecameaboveall a battle for a purifiedandvigorousPersianlanguage. One early Iranianwriterwho glorifiedIran'spre-Islamichistoryand called for a completepurificationof Persianfrom all Arabicwords and terminologieswas the Qajarprince,Jalalod-Din Mirza(1832-71).7 The prince denouncedthe influence of the Arabic languageand called on Iraniansto read and study their historyas an independentand ancient the abilityof the Persianlanguageto purge people.In orderto demonstrate itself fromArabicwords,Jalalod-DinMirzawrotein a simplePersianfree fromArabicwords(i.e. Farsi-yeSare). The princeheld anti-Qajarsentimentsand despisedboth Arabs and Islam.Influencedby thesebeliefsandgreatlyimpressedby the writingsof a small groupof poets and writerswho had alreadytried to write in a purified Persian during the reign of MohammadShah (1834-48), he embarkedon an ambitiousprojectto writeName-yeKhosrawan(TheBook of Kings), a history of Iran from the pre-Islamicera to the nineteenth centuryin pure Persianuntaintedby Arabicwords.8Jalal od-Din Mirza wroteName-yeKhosrawan,in a simplifiedPersianthatcouldbe understood by all thosewho knewhow to readandcomprehendthe language.Equally to demonstratethe abilityof the Persian importantwas his determination languageto free itself from importedArabicwords and still maintainits beautyandvitality. In creatinghis purifiedPersian,Jalal od-Din Mirza replacedmany Arabicwordswith old Persianwordswhichhadbeen forgottenand fallen

12

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

out of use. At times,however,he substitutedsomeArabicwordswithwords borrowedfromDasatir,a bookwrittenin Indiaby AzarKeyvanduringthe reign of the Moghul ruler,Akbar. Dasatir presented a historical account of Iran's pre-Islamic prophets and kings which was fabricated by Azar Keyvan. The book also contained words that according to its authorexisted in Iran'spre-Islamic languages. In reality, however, Azar Keyvan had made up these so-called ancient words.'?By replacing some Arabic words with words borrowed from Dasatir, Jalal od-Din Mirza provided his critics with

a convenienttool to ridiculehis purifiedPersianas an 'imaginary'and 'artificial'language. Name-yeKhosrawanwas dividedintothreesections.Thefirstdealtwith and the pre-Islamichistoryof IranbeginningwiththemythicalMahabadian Pishdadiandynastiesandendingwiththe Arabinvasionof Iranandthe fall of the Sassanidstatein seventhcenturyAD. The secondsectionfocusedon the periodextendingfromthe rise of the firstindependent Iraniandynasties of the Islamicerasuchas the Taheridsin the ninthcenturyAD to the fall of andthe Mongolinvasionof Iranin the thirteenthcentury. Khwarazmshahis Finally,the thirdsection dealt with the Iranianhistoryfrom the Mongol invasionto the fall of the Zanddynastyin the eighteenthcentury.JalalodDin Mirzawas planningto adda fourthsectionto his book whichfocused exclusivelyon his own family,the Qajardynasty(1797-1925),butbecause of his extreme anti-Qajarsentiments,he plannedto leave Iran before completingandpublishingthis last section. In a letterto theplaywrightandsocialcritic,MirzaFathAli Akhundzade (1812-78) in Tiflis,Jalalod-DinMirzaexplainedthathe hadwrittenNameye Khosrawanbecausethe Persianlanguagewas facingvirtualextinctionin the handsof Arabs:'I haveused the languageof our ancestorswhichlike everythingelse has been violatedand plunderedby the Arabs."'He also statedthathe hadfoundno worthiertopicthanthe storyof the Persiankings which had been falsifiedand destroyedby the Arabs.Finally,he claimed that the book was modelledafterthe worksof Europeans,who were the most 'learnedpeopleon earth'.'2 Name-yeKhosrawanprovokeddifferentreactionsfromthe expatriate Iranianintellectualsin the secondhalfof the nineteenthcenturywho shared Jalal od-Din Mirza's hatredfor monarchicaldespotismand the Shiite religioushierarchy.In Tiflis,MirzaFathAli AkhundzadepraisedJalalodDin Mirza'sharshattackon Arabicand his call for purgingArabicwords from Persian.However,MirzaAqa KhanKermani(1851-96) in Istanbul and Talebof-eTabrizi(1838-1909) in TemirKhan Shurain Daghestan condemnedit. who hadadvocatedfirsta reformof Arabicscriptandthen Akhundzade, a totalsubstitutionof Arabicalphabetwith Latinscript,congratulated Jalal

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

13

od-DinMirza.'3He wroteto the Qajarprincethat:'Yourhighnessis freeing ourlanguagefromthe dominationof the Arabictongue.I am also tryingto free ournationfromthe Arabicscript.Whatif a thirdpersonappearedand freed our nationfrom the yoke of the base customsof these Arabswho broughtto an end ourthousand-year-old monarchyof justice andrenown, anddestroyedourmotherland whichis the paradiseof the earth."'4 In the sameletter,AkhundzadesuggestedthatJalalod-DinMirzaadda fifth section to his book which dealt exclusivelywith the historyof the Zoroastrians of Yazdwho 'arethe descendantsof our ancestors',for 'our informationwithregardto the conditionsof this peoplein the ancienttime and theirgovernmentand the laws of their kings is extremelylimited'.'5 Akhundzadesupportedthe idea of languagepurification.He sharedwith Jalalod-DinMirzaa deephatredforArabsandtheirinvasionof Iran.'6 Both the Qajarprinceandthe Azerbaijaniplaywrightbelievedthatwith the fall of thePersianempire,aneraof power,prosperityandprogresshadsuddenly been broughtto an end by the 'savage' and 'blood thirsty'Arabs who imposedtheir'basecustomsandbeliefs' on the peopleof Iranwhile at the same time pollutingthe beautifulPersianlanguagewith their'coarse'and 'incomprehensible'Arabic words. Akhundzadeand Jalal od-Din Mirza believedthatwith the Arabconquestof Iran,Iranianslost not only their independenceand politicalpower,but Iran'suniqueidentitybecamelost within the Islamic melting pot dominatedby Arab cultureand Arabic language.Only the heroismof a small groupof Iranianpoets and writers (themostprominentbeingthe poet,Abol QasemFerdowsi(955-1010), the authorof the epic poem,Shahnameh,who used a very limitednumberof Arabicwordsin the 60,000 coupletsof his epic) hadpreservedthe Iranian nationalidentity.Thus,the nationalistmythologyof Jalalod-DinMirzaand AkhundzadeidentifiedIslam with a devastatingand humiliatingforeign invasionorganizedandled by an inferiorandsavagepeople.Forthem,the Arabinvasionof Iranin the seventhcenturyAD hadmarkedthe beginning of a new eraof foreigndomination,culturalbarbarism, politicaldespotism, andreligiousfanaticism. In sharpcontrastto Akhundzade, MirzaAqa KhanKermaniandTalebof were criticalof Jalalod-DinMirza'sefforts.Kermanisharedin common withJalalod-DinMirzaandAkhundzade a deephatredforArabs,Islam,the Shiite religious hierarchyand the Qajarmonarchy.In his Se Maktoub, Kermaniwageda harshattackon Arabsfor destroyingthe Persianempire and imposingIslam on the people of Iran.'7Kermanialso expressedan intensehatredforthepresenceandinfluenceof Arabicwordsin Persian.In fact,at times in his writings,Kermanishowedan even moreintensehatred fordominationof Arabiclanguageon PersianthaneitherJalalod-DinMirza or Akhundzade.For example,in his Se Maktoub,he wrotethatif Iranians

14

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

knewthe damagesthatthe dominationof the Arabiclanguagehadbrought, thenthey wouldnothaveuseda singleArabicwordin Persian.In the same text, he also contendedthatthe Arabshad invadednot only Iran'sreligion and government but also the Persian language."8 Se Maktoubwent one step

furtherandclaimedthatthe dominationof Arabsandthe Arabiclanguage was ten times moredestructivefor Iranthanthe massacresandoppression of GenghisKhanandhis Mongolarmies. Despitehis hatredfor Arabsandthe influenceof the Arabiclanguage, however,Kermaniwas not preparedto follow Jalalod-DinMirza'smodel andreplacethe existingPersianlanguageof the latenineteenthcenturywith a 'pure'Persianfree fromArabicwords.In Ai'ine-yeSekandari,Kermani attackedJalalod-Din Mirzaand otheradvocatesof languagepurification (such as Esmail Khan Touyserkani,GowharYazdi, and Manakji)for creatinga 'deadandtasteless'languageandat the sametimeclaimingthat thisartificialcreationwas in reality'thesimplelanguageof ourancestors'.9 For Kermani,nothingcould be morefalse thanthis claim,for no one had ever writtenor spokenin this artificiallanguage,and it couldnot be used for teachingandlearningvarioussciences.Kermanisuggestedthatinstead of creating an artificial language, they could collect the languages, literaturesandvocabulariesof variousIraniandialectsfromthe tribesand the villagesof the country.20 LikeKermani,who opposedJalalod-DinMirza's'purified'Persian,the nationalistandconstitutionalist writerTalebofalso condemnedthe idea of language purificationand particularlyJalal od-Din Mirza's made up language. Talebof shared with Jalal od-Din Mirza, Akhundzadeand Kermanithe belief in a constitutional government,buthis nationalismwas devoidof theiranti-Araband anti-Islamsentiments.2' In sharpcontrastto these intellectuals,Talebofdid not attackthe Arabs for invadingIran, destroyingthe Sassanid empire and imposing an alien and backward religionon the country.Moreover,he expresseda strongoppositionto the idea of purifying the Persian language from foreign words. Talebof maintainedthatJalalod-DinMirza'sadvocacyof languagepurificationhad the boundariesof a simplepatrioticdesireandbecameinstead transcended an extremistandfanaticalobsession. TalebofcondemnedJalalod-DinMirza'spurificationcampaignin one of his most importantbooks, Masalek ul-Mohsenin.In a fictional conversationbetweenthe authorand Jalalod-DinMirza,the Qajarprince statedthatnothingwas moreessentialandnecessaryin Iranthanpreserving andpurifyingthe Persianlanguage.22 Accordingto the fictionalJalalod-Din Mirza,every nationhad first to know its languageand purifyits tongue from foreign words, for a nation's languagewas as necessaryas the preservationof the motherland,the religion, and the dignity and the

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

15

independenceof the country.Talebofagreedwith the Qajarprincethatthe languageof every nationwas a naturaland inseparablecomponentof its identity,andIranianshadto respectandpreservethe Persianlanguage.The Azerbaijaniauthorargued,however,that Persianhad gainedmuch of its strength,vitality and 'sweetness' from intermixingwith and borrowing fromArabic.Moreover,since Persianhad a very limitedvocabularyit did not have the abilityto manufacture modem scientificwords which were being introducedfrom Europeanlanguagesand it could not therefore becomecompletelyindependent fromArabicandotherforeignborrowings. In addition,Talebofpointedout that in a countrywhere one out of a thousanddid not knowhow to readandwrite,the campaignto purifythe languagewas a meaninglessand absurdcrusade.Talebofarguedthat far more importantwas the reformof the Arabicscript,which presenteda seriousobstacleto the progressof IranandeveryotherMuslimsociety.He furtherheldthatthosewho stoodforthe progressandthe unityof humanity intendedto createone single universallanguageso thatthe people of the earthcouldcommunicatein one commontongue. Based on these arguments,Talebof concludedthat Iranianshad to preserveArabicwords while at the same time using and adoptingnew Europeanwords and terminologiesin their original forms: 'We must pronounceand write Diplomatas Diplomatand Politiqueas Politique.'23 RidiculingJalalod-DinMirza,Talebofwrotethatin the time of the Persian epic poet, Ferdowsi,Europeansdid not fly in the sky; words such as locomotive,automobile,telegraph,telephone,photograph,cableandmany others were not in use. The best Iranianscould do was to compile a dictionarythatexplainedthe meaningof the new Europeanwordsandteach the Persianspeakershowto pronouncethe new borrowedwordscorrectly.24 Despite their differencesover languagepurification,the nineteenthcenturynationalistintellectualssuch as Jalalod-DinMirza,Akhundzade, KermaniandTalebof(as well as reformerssuchas MirzaMalkamKhanand Mirza Yousef Khan Mostasharod-Dowle) contributedto a literary revolutionin Persianby usinga new style of writingas well as a simplified whichresembledthe languageof thepeopleandthe street.Intheir grammar books,essays,articlesandplaysthey not only attackedpoliticaldespotism andreligiousfanaticism,butthey also abandonedlong, tediousandhighly ornamented sentencesas well as complicatedrhetoricaldevices,traditional metaphorsand numeroussynonymsoverladenwith Arabicelementsand borrowedwords. The debateabout the futureof the Persianlanguage, however,dividedthe westernizingintelligentsiaintotwo camps.Onegroup wishedto rid the Iraniannationalidentityandthe Persianlanguageof all IslamicandArabicinfluences.The otherbelievedthatthe spiritof the new Iran could be an amalgamof the pre-Islamicand Islamic culturesbut

16

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

significantlyindependent of eitherof them.Thissecondgroupbelievedthat the Persianlanguagecouldbenefitfromintermixingwith bothArabicand Europeanlanguages.Therefore,therewas no need to rid the languageof borrowedforeignwords. The debateoverwhetherPersianhadto be purifiedwas not confinedto the expatriateIranianintellectuals.Startingin the second half of the nineteenthcentury,there was a growing awareness among educated governmentofficials that Persian faced a serious challenge from the importationof foreign words and terminologies.Besides the numerous ArabicandTurkishwordswhichthe Persianlanguagehadadoptedover a periodof centuries,new European,Arabicand Turkishwordswere being importedas a result of increasedcontactwith Europeand the Ottoman empire.In general,therewere threeoptions;first,to adoptnew European words in theiroriginalformand pronunciation, second,to adoptthe new Arabicor the OttomanTurkishequivalentsand,third,to createa Persian equivalent.Throughoutthe nineteenthcentury,the firsttwo choices were used most frequentlyand the thirdoption the least often.25On few rare occasions,however,Iranianofficialsdidcreatenew Persianequivalentsfor new Europeanwords. In a letter writtenby Napoleon III to the Qajar monarch,Naserod-DinShahin 1857,the Frenchemperorwrote;'IIest un projetdonton a parlesouventc'est de construireun cheminde fer.' The Iraniantranslator,FarrokhKhan GhaffariAmin od-Dowle, the special ambassadorof the shahin Paristranslated'cheminde fer' (railway)into a new Persianword,'Rah-eAhan',whichsince becamean establishedword in Persianvocabulary.26 Duringthe second half of the nineteenthcentury,some government officials who were involvedin writingbooks and articlesandtranslating fromEuropeanlanguagesintoPersianbecameincreasinglysensitiveto the 'threat'posedby new ArabicandEuropeanwordsto the Persianlanguage. E'atemad us-Saltane (1840-96), Naser od-Din Shah's minister of of new foreignwords publications,expressedhis oppositionto importation and lamentedthat Persianhad borrowedso many words from foreign languages.He was also the firstIranianwriterto suggest,albeitindirectly, the ideaof creatingan academyas a meansof savingthe Persianlanguage: 'I lament that our present Persian language has mixed with foreign languages.Thereis no academyin Asian countriesthatcould rectifythis problemso thatwe couldhavethirtyto fortythousand[new]Persianwords in ourhandsandthenwe didnothavethe needto use non-Persianwordsin speakingandwriting.'27 Duringthe secondhalfof the nineteenthcentury,increasedcontactwith Europe,a growingawarenessof the needfor changeandmodernization and new Persiannewspaperspublishedabroadcontributedto the political

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

17

awakeningof the Iranianpeople (Akhtarin Istanbul,Habl ul-Matinin Calcutta,Qanunin London,and SorrayaandParvareshin Cairo).At the same time, these papersgave a majorboost to the simplificationand Persianization of the language. With the constitutionalrevolutionof 1906-11 the Persianlanguage underwenta major transformation.Thanks to the establishmentof a constitutionalgovernmentthat guaranteedthe right to free speech, the Iraniansocietyexperienced'anextraordinary boominjournalism'.In 1907, the year after the victory of the constitutionalrevolution,at least 84 newspaperswerepublishedin Iran.28 Forthe mostpart,thesepapersused a simplePersian.Buildingon the politicalandliteraryheritageleft behindby Jalal od-Din Mirza,Malkam,Akhundzade,Mostasharod-Dowle, Mirza Aqa KhanKermaniand Talebof,constitutionalist writersand intellectuals usednewspapersandjournalsin orderto propagatemodernWesternideas of democracyandconstitutionalism. Theyspokeof the experiencesandthe strugglesof ordinarypeople while at the same time freeingthe Persian languagefromthe controlof courtsecretaries,poetsandchroniclers.Thus, writtenlanguagewas no longerthe monopolyof a smallandisolatedelite who often used bombasticand incomprehensible Arabicwordsto impress theirreaderswith theirknowledge.Moreover,by simplifyingthe language thesewritersgave a boostto Persianization of the language. In their articles,some of the constitutionalist writersreferredto the povertyof Persianvocabularyand the need for new wordswhich would conveythe meaningof new ideas,conceptsandinstitutions.MirzaJahangir Khan, the constitutionalistproprietorand editor of the influential newspaper,the Sur-eEsrafil,wrotein one of his articlesthateveryfield of knowledgerequiredits own highlyspecializedvocabulary:'you couldnot call a trainconductor"a camel driver",and you could not call telegraph "butterfly"'. Accordingto MirzaJahangirKhan,if Iranianswishedto live undera constitutionalmonarchythen they had to have new constitutional wordsandterminologies.29 The end of the First WorldWarwitnesseda resurgenceof intense nationalisticfeelings in Iran. During the war Iran was occupied and devastatedby foreignforces,particularly the Russian,the Britishand the Ottomantroops.Many Iraniansperishedas a resultof foreigninvasion, disease, famine and starvation(which was caused primarilyby the confiscation of food and harvests by invading armies). Despite its declarationof neutrality, the centralgovernmentin Tehrandid not havethe powerto defendthe country'sborders.Not surprisingly, therefore,Iranians welcomedthe news of the Bolshevikrevolutionof 1917 in Russiawith a great deal of relief, joy, and celebration.The colonial power that had defeatedand humiliatedIran twice in the nineteenthcenturyand was

18

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

consideredthe principalbackerof the Qajarmonarchyand the country's reactionaryforceshadfinallycollapsed.30 As Iraniannationalistand leftist partiesbegan to reorganize,intense nationalisticfeelingsreacheda new heightin the popularoppositionto the 1919 Anglo-PersianAgreement.3'The nationalistleaders viewed the over agreementas a pretextfor the establishmentof a Britishprotectorate Irananddenouncedit. Massivedemonstrations eruptedin Tehranandother cities againstthe agreement. In the midst of this anti-Britishnationalistfever, the purificationof as the religionof Persianfromforeignwords,the revivalof Zoroastrianism the countryand the re-establishment of a strongstateon the modelof the pre-IslamicSassanidempirewereofferedas solutionsto the backwardness of Iranandits dominationandhumiliationby the Britishempire.32 Thenew activiststhatcame out of this experiencewas generationof revolutionary anddetermined to turnIranintoa unified intenselyanti-British, nationalistic statewith one language,one historyandone culture. Oneof the most interestingrepresentatives of this generationof Iranian intellectualswas TaqiArani,the essayist and professorwho emergedin 1930s as the founding father of the Communist(Tudeh) Party. An Azerbaijaniby birth, Arani had attendedschool in Tehranduringthe nationalistcampaignagainstthe 1919Anglo-Persian Agreement.Underthe influenceof nationalisticideasexpressedat the time in Tehran,Aranihad become an ardentsupporterof the purificationof Persianfrom foreign words.He also believedin the need to eradicateAzerbaijaniTurkishand replaceit with Persian.As the Tudehpartystatedmanyyearslater:'Arani hadbeen carriedawayby chauvinismwhile studyingin Tehranduringthe nationalistcampaignagainstthe Anglo-Iranian Agreement.He, like many of his contemporaries,believed that the countrywould be saved from backwardness andimperialismby cleansingthe languageof foreignwords, by reviving the ancient religion of Zoroaster,and by rebuildingthe centralizedstateof the Sassanids.'33 Inresponseto suchintensenationalistic feelings,severalprominentscholarsbothinsideand outsideIranbeganto wage an attackon the idea of purifyingthe PersianlanguagefromArabic words. Writing from Paris in 1924, the scholar MohammadQazvini dismissedthe movementfor languagepurificationas an irrationaland unrealisticproject.34 Qazviniarguedthatafterusing Arabicwordsin their everydaylanguage'forthirteenhundredyears',Iranianshadadoptedthese wordsas an inseparablecomponentof theirlanguage.Indeed,theseArabic wordshadbecomeso Persianized thattheyhadlosttheiroriginalmeanings. if IraniansreplacedthesecommonlyusedArabicwordswith Furthermore, pre-Islamicones, then Persiancould lose its beauty,strengthand vitality. The beautifullanguageof the poets Sa'adi and Hafez could not intermix

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

19

with ancientpre-Islamicwords which had alreadydisappearedfrom the Persian language. Qazvini arguedthat Persian was losing its unique notbecauseof loanArabicwordsbutbecauseIranianwriters characteristics and intellectualsused too many borrowed Europeanwords in their language. The nationalisticideasof the post-1919periodas well as the dreamof purifyingPersianof foreignwordsfinallycameto fruitionduringthe reign of Reza Shah Pahlavi (1925-41). Reza Shah (originallyReza Khan, 1878-1944), was an officerwho seizedpowerin February1921 andmade himselfthe shahof Iranin 1925.RezaShah'sreignwas characterized by the fierce determination of the monarchto modernizethe countryandprovide Iranwith the infrastructure of a modernnation-state.Relyingprimarilyon his army,police andbureaucracy, Reza Shahimposedhis reformswithout tolerating any criticism or opposition. Reza Shah's modernization proceededhand in hand with secularizationand Persianization,which glorifiedthe pre-Islamicelementsof the Iraniancultureandcalledfor the eliminationof all ArabicwordsfromPersian. Fromthe dayhe marchedto Tehranin 1921,RezaKhanhadrecognized thatthe formationof a unifiedstateand the consolidationof his personal power requiredthe creationof a modernarmy which could be used to suppress the provincial power centres such as tribal leaders, large landowners,andpowerfulmembersof the Shiiteclergy.Thus,RezaKhan's modernizationprogrammebeganwith the Europeanization of the Iranian armyandpolice. It becameimmediatelyevident,however,thatPersiandid not have the words and terminologiesthat could be used for European militaryranks,rulesand concepts.Thus,one of the firsttasksof the new armywas to producenew Persianwordsforthe militaryconceptsandterms borrowed from European languages. Iranian soldiers, officers and commanderseitherhadto adoptthousandsof new Europeanwordsin their everydaylanguageor theyhadto manufacture new Persianequivalentsfor the foreignwordsand terminologies.The modernization of the armyhad forcedthe Persianization of the language. Thus, in 1924, a year beforehe seized the throneof Iran,Reza Khan orderedthe ministryof warto forma committeewhichwouldcreatenew Persianequivalentsfor Europeanwords.Theministryof warenteredintoa dialoguewiththe ministryof education,andthe two ministriesestablished a joint committeecomprisingseven armyofficersandfourcivilians.35 The Iranianarmysent a list of Frenchmilitarywordsto the membersof the committee.Aftera briefperiodof studyandcontemplation, the membersof the committeesuggestedPersianequivalentsfor the Frenchwords and terminologies.Although the membersof the committee were neither linguistsnor specialistsin Iranianlanguages,theiraccomplishments were

20

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

impressive.In the firstyearof its existence,the committeeproducedthree to fourhundrednew wordswhich are still used in the everydaylanguage: 'foroudgah'for 'aerodrome'(airport),'havapeyma'for 'avion' (airplane), 'gordan'for 'bataillon'(battalionor an armydivision),andso on.36 In 1925,a yearafterthe formationof the firstcommittee,the ministryof war organizeda second 'committee'to translatemilitaryrulesand ranks. This secondcommitteeconsistedof one armyofficerand five civilians.37 This committeechangednot only Europeanterminologiesbut also Arabic and Turkishwordswhich had been used by ordinarypeople in everyday languageas well as the Iranianmilitary.Thus, the Arabicword 'vatan' was changedto the Persianword'mihan',andtheArabicword (fatherland) 'mamlekat'(country)was changedto the Persianword'keshvar'.38 Between1921 and 1925the Iranianarmybecamethe firstinstitutionto modernize.It was also the first institutionto embarkon the campaignto purify Persian from foreign words and terminologies.However, the Persianizationcampaign was not confined to the army. Indeed, as modernization programmes expanded,boththe Majlisanda smallgroupof nationalistarmy officers and intellectualsbegan to show an interestin Persianizingthe languageand producingnew Persianwords in different fields. The fifth Majlis,which abolishedthe Qajarmonarchyand granted the title of shahto Reza KhanSardarSepah,also replacedthe Arabicand Turkishnames of the monthswith pre-IslamicPersianones. Reza Khan himselfassumedthe surnamePahlavi,whichclearlyindicatednot only his love and admirationfor the Persianempireand the Persianlanguagebut also his decisionto use the imperialgloryof the pastas the foundationfor a new secular ideology celebratingauthoritarian monarchyratherthan ShiiteIslam. Reza Khan'sglorificationof pre-Islamicpastandthe Persianlanguage, which was motivatedprimarilyby ideologicalexpediency,reinforcedthe growinginterestof the newly emergingofficercorpsandeducatedelite in purifyingthe languageand manufacturing new Persianwords. With the emergenceof new state-sponsored schoolsandcolleges it becameevident that Persianlackeda scientificvocabularythatcould be used in teaching modernEuropeansciences. The teachersand the studentsat these new institutionsof higher learning recognizedthe poverty of the Persian vocabularyin scientificfields, andthey saw a need for new Persianwords which could replacethe Europeanwordsthey had borrowed.In 1932 the Teachers'TrainingCollege of Tehranorganizeda society to createnew scientificwordsandterminologies.Forthe nexteightyearsthe societymet weekly to producenew Persianwords.39 Duringits eight-and-a-half-year existencethe societyformedclose to 3,000 new words,400 of whichwere adopted and used in school texts. Such new words as 'tapesh' for

PERSIAN NATIONALISM AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

21

'pulsation', 'geravesh' for 'gravitation' and 'peyvaste' for 'continuous'

were createdby the society.40 By 1932 the purificationcampaignhad gained momentum.The awarenessthat other Islamic countriessuch as Turkeyand Egypt had already embarked on a policy of language simplification and purification

addedto the nationalistfire andzeal. In 1932, on a directivefromMustafa KemalAtatuirk, the TurkishLinguisticSocietyhadbeen foundedwith the purposeof simplifyingandpurifyingTurkishof ArabicandPersianwords.4' In the same yearthe Egyptianshad establishedthe 'Majma'al-lughatal'arabiyya al-malaki'. Nationalist intellectuals and army officers, those workingin the ministryof war,thoughtit was hightime particularly thatIranfollowedthe modelset by TurkeyandEgyptby creatingits own academythatwouldridPersianof Arabicandotherforeignwords. The Persianizationcampaignalso receiveda majorboost in October 1934 from the ceremoniessurrounding the millennialanniversaryof the Iranianepic poet, Ferdowsi,the authorof the Shahnameh.42 The Iranian governmentorganizedthe so-called Congressof Ferdowsiand invited severalprominentEuropeanorientaliststo Iranto deliverlectureson the significance of Ferdowsi and his epic poetry. Copies of Ferdowsi's Shahnamehwere also printedfor the first time by the governmentfor public consumption.43The preparationsfor the Congress of Ferdowsi took place at

the time when Hitler,who had alreadybecomethe GermanChancellorin January 1933, proclaimed himself the Fiihrer following the death of

PresidentHindenburgon 2 August1934. Greatlyaffectedby the eventsin Germany and the Nazi ideology which emphasized the superiority of the 'Aryan race', the Iranianlegation in Berlin suggested to the Persian foreign ministry in Tehranthat since Iran was considered to be the birthplace and

the originalhomelandof the Aryan race, the name of the countrybe changed from Persia to Iran. Reza Shah accepted the suggestion, and the Iraniangovernment announced to the world community on the last day of 1934 that startingon 1 January1935 the official name of the country would be changed from Persia to Iran.44Then, the creation of language academies in Turkey and Egypt in 1932, the celebration of Ferdowsi's millennial anniversaryin 1934, and growing pressure from nationalist army officers, bureaucratsand intellectuals who were Persianizingthe language combined to force the prime minister, Foroughi, to approachReza Shah and express the need to establish an academy. Foroughi's primaryobjective was to put an end to the activities of the committee of the army and other groups, societies and individuals who were manufacturingnew Persian words on their own. Already in 1934 the ministry of education had formed the 'Medical Academy' (Akademi-ye Tebbi) to produce new medical terms.45This

22

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

academy created the new word 'farhangestan'as an equivalent for 'academy'.'TheMedicalAcademy,whichcompriseda groupof prominent physiciansand scholars, intendedamong other things to translateand publishscientifictexts, producea dictionaryof scientificwords, and to studythe plantsthatcould be used for scientificpurposesin Iran.After a few meetings,however,the academywas dissolved becauseReza Shah decided to centralizeall activitiesrelatingto the Persianizationof the languagein a newly created'Academyof Iran'or 'Farhangestan-e Iran'.47 In the springof 1935RezaShahfinallyorderedprimeministerForoughi to formthe firstIranianacademy.TheroyaldecreecommandedForoughito create an academyof scholarsand professorsthat would put an end to wordcreation.The shahalso appointedForoughito headthe first arbitrary academy."As in the caseof Egypt,theIraniansdrafteda constitutionforthe academywhichwas borrowedfromtheAcademieFrancaise.Themembers of the academyweredividedintothreegroups;the full members(peyvaste), the associatemembers(vabaste)andthosewho workedas membersof the academy'scommittees.The 24 full membersconstitutedthe high council andthe principalword-producing bodyof the academy,whilethe associate memberscomprisedprimarilyforeignscholarssuch as Muhammad Hasan Haykalfrom Egypt,the Dane ArthurChristensenand HenriMasse from France.49 The formationof the Academyof Irandid not end the heateddebate betweenthe supportersandthe opponentsof languagepurification. On one side stood those who completelyandwholeheartedlyopposedthe idea of language purification.50 The opponents,who were for the most part membersof the traditionalpolitical and culturalelite duringthe Qajar period,believedthatArabicwordsandterminologieshadstrengthened the Persianlanguage.They also claimedthatthe interminglingof Arabicand Persianwas responsiblefor the beautyandvitalityof the Persianlanguage. Finally, they arguedthat languagepurificationwould weaken Persian vocabularyand cut off Iranians'culturalties to theirliteraryheritageand theirIslamicandArabneighbours.5' On the other side stood those who felt a deep hatredfor Arabs and Arabicwordsandadvocateda radicalpurificationof the Persianlanguage. The existence of Arabic words served only to remindthem of foreign dominationover Iranianculture.Thesenationalists,a groupof nationalist armyofficersand anti-Islamand anti-Arabintellectuals,believedthatthe purificationof Persianwas the firststeptowardrestoringIranians'pridein theircultureandcivilization.52 Accordingto these individuals,Persianwas an Indo-European languagewhichhadbeen pollutedby Arabic,a Semitic languageimposedon Iraniansby theArabMuslimswho hadconqueredthe Sassanidempire.For these individuals,the purificationof Persianwas a

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

23

matterof nationalprideandwas directlyrelatedto the campaignto glorify the country'spre-Islamicera.Theybelievedin purifyingPersianby using pre-Islamicwordsandroots.Afterall, theyreasoned,Englishspeakersused Greekand Latinwordsand used rootsof these languagesto manufacture new wordsin scientificandtechnologicalfields. In betweenthesetwo tendenciesstoodthosewho opposedthe presence to the of so manyArabicwordsin Persianbutwho also felt an attachment classical Persianwhich had borrowedfrom Arabic. Yet they viewed a radicalpurificationof Persiannotonlyas a utopiandreambutalso as a blow to the vitality,strengthandbeautyof Persian.They also believedthatthe influenceof Arabic languageon Persianwas a historical,linguisticand literaryfact which could not be denied or reversed.They supported reducingthe numberof Arabicwords but they wantedthe academyto manufacturenew wordsby using some Arabicwordsand roots, because Arabichad become an inseparablecomponentof Persianlanguageand literature. Prime minister Foroughi,whom Reza Shah appointedas the first presidentof the IranianAcademy,was a memberof thisthirdgroup.He was an accomplishedwriterwho was sympatheticto the idea of reducingthe numberof Arabic words in Persian, but he opposed the purification campaignandthe creationof new Persianwordswhichwerebasedon preIslamic roots. Indeed, his views on language purification 'were considerablymoreconservative'thanthoseof RezaShahwho alignedwith theardentsupporters of languagepurification.53 Foroughitriedto outlinethe functionsof the academywhile at the sametime moderatingthe activities of individualsandgroupsthatweretryingto purgethe languageof foreign words.In a speechentitled'Farhangestan Chist?'(Whatis the Academy?), Foroughirejectedthe notionthatthe academywas a 'word-manufacturing factory'or a society dedicatedto the completeeradicationof all existing Arabicwordsin Persian.54 He insistedthatthe academyintendedto explore the meansthroughwhichPersiancouldbe 'reformedandperfected'so that it could contributeto the 'Iranianizition' of the country'scivilizationand educationalsystemwhile at the sametime highlightthe uniquenessof the Iranianculture. Foroughielaboratedhis ideas on the academyin an article entitled 'Peyam-eManbe Farhangestan' (My Messageto the Academy),whichhe wrote after he was dismissedfrom his posts as prime ministerand the presidentof academyin December1935.55In this article,he advocateda cautiousapproachto languagepurification.Foroughimaintainedthatthere werethreemajorthreatsto the futureof the Persianlanguage.First,Persian had absorbedtoo manyArabicwords.In the earlyIslamicperiod,Iranian scholars and scientists had frequentlyused Arabic as the languageof

24

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

science,whichcausedPersianto lose its abilityto functionas the language of sciences.Second,becauseof its limitedvocabulary,Persianwas forced to borrowfromotherlanguages,therebylosing its uniquecharacteristics. But, third and more dangerousthan the first two, were the haphazard new words in orderto save activitiesof those who were manufacturing For Foroughi,these Persianfrombeing pollutedby foreignloan words.56 would-besavioursweredestroyingthe Persianlanguage. Accordingto Foroughi,thereweretwo extremistcampswhenit cameto a discussionon the Persianlanguage;the firstarguedthattherewas nothing wrongwiththe overwhelmingpresenceof Arabicwordsin Persianandthe intermixingof the two languages.The second campmaintainedthat the only solutionwas to purgePersiancompletelyof all Arabicwords and The first groupcomprisedthose createa simple and purifiedlanguage.57 to it or identified who hadeitherstudiedArabicandfelt a strongattachment Arabicwith Islamand becauseof theirreligiosityfavouredand supported the intermixingof Arabic and Persian.The second group consisted of nationalistswho identifiedthe Arabiclanguagewith the Arabinvasionof Iranin the seventhcenturyAD. These nationalistsbelievedthat since the ArabshadinvadedIranthentheIraniansshouldopposeArabismandArabic influences.Therewerealsothosein thissecondcampwho foundtheArabic languagedifficultand wishedto free Persianspeakersfrom learningand studyingit. Finally,therewerethose in the secondcampwho hatedArabic becausetheyhadnot studiedit andfelt inferiorto thosewho had. Foroughistatedthathe opposedbothcampsbecausetheiropinionswere based on irrationaland emotionalarguments.The futureof the Persian languagehadto be discussedin a rationalandscientificway.In responding to the opponentsof languagepurification,Foroughistatedthathe praised thoseIranianswho lovedArabicbecausetheycouldreadandstudyIslamic theologyandsciences.He remindedthem,however,thatlovinga language did not mean introducingits words and terminologiesinto Persian. Moreover,the intermixingof ArabicandPersiandidnot promotethe cause of Islam.Faithin Islamhadnothingto do withthe numberof Arabicwords whichone usedin his dailylanguage.Afterall, manywho spokeArabicas theirmothertonguewerenot Muslims. In his responseto the supportersof a purifiedPersian,Foroughiwrote that in rationaland scientificfields therewas no room for emotionand fanaticism.The Arabinvasionof Irancouldnot be usedto justify purging Persian of all Arabic words. In keeping out Arabic words or in new Persianwords,the criterionwas not hatredfor Arabs manufacturing butpreservingthe beauty,vitalityandstrengthof Persian.58 In his attemptto addressthe concernsof thosewho supportedas well as thosewho opposedthe purificationcampaign,Foroughioffereda six-point

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

25

proposal.First,avoidusingan Arabicwordwhenevertherewas a familiar Persianequivalentfor it. Second,whenevertherewas a commonArabic wordwhichwas usedin thepopularlanguagebutalso a Persianwordwhich was not familiar,everythingshould be done in orderto familiarizethe publicwiththePersianword.Third,if therewas nota Persianequivalentfor an Arabic word which was used in a particularprofession, trade or thena new Persianwordhadto be manufactured governmental department, whichcouldbe understood andacceptedby themembersof thatprofession. Fourth,if therewas a familiarandpopularlyused Arabicwordwhichhad no Persianequivalent,the Arabicword could be left untouchedunless a betterand moreacceptablePersianequivalentcould be proposed.Fifth,if therewere 'foreign'words(presumablywordsfroma Europeanlanguage) for which therewere no Persianor Arabicequivalentsand if these words wereinternational wordswhichbelongedto the 'materialdomain'thenthey could be acceptedandused in Persian.Sixth,if therewas a foreignword which belonged to the spiritualdomain then a Persian or an Arabic equivalenthadto be manufactured.59 Foroughi'sproposalswereunpopularamongthe supportersof language purification,becausehe advocatedthe preservationof manyArabicwords in Persian.More important,he rejectedthe idea of manufacturing new Persianwords by using pre-IslamicIranianlanguages.For the ardent supportersof language purification,the only way to expand Persian vocabularywas to use pre-Islamicwords and roots to manufacturenew Persianwords.Justas Englishused Greekand Latinrootsto createnew words,they maintained, so too, in modernPersian,AncientPersian,Middle PersianandAvestanrootscouldbe usedto expandthe vocabulary. On2 December1935RezaShahforcedForoughito resignfromhis post as primeministerandfirstpresidentof theacademy.Foroughi'sresignation was causedprimarilyby his intercedingfor MohammadVali Asadi, who had been falsely accused of involvementin anti-governmentriots in Mashad.Thereis no doubt,however,that anotherreasonfor Foroughi's resignationwas RezaShah'simpatienceat the slow pace of the purification campaignandthepassiveresistanceof someof the scholarsin the academy who 'deliberatelysuggestedawkwardandclumsyPersianrootsin orderto underlinethe fallacyof makingtoo rapidandtoo sweepingchanges'.60 The shah'simpatienceturnedinto intenseangerwhenhe was informed thatboththe primeministerandthe ministerof educationhadapprovedthe publicationof an articleentitled'The NationalisticLiteraryMovement', written by Hasan Taqizade, one of the principal opponents of the purificationmovement.In his article,Taqizadehad criticizedthe activities of the academy and had 'urged caution and careful considerationin promotingthe movement'.6When Taqizade'sarticlewas reprintedin a

26

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

Tehrannewspaper,the shah,who toleratedno criticismof his nationalist campaign,dismissedForoughiandhis educationministerand orderedthe arrestof the owner and the editor of the newspaper.The owner was interrogated for five days;the editorremainedimprisonedforthreemonths anduponhis releasewas told neverto returnto the publishingbusiness.62 RezaShahthenappointedHasanVosuq(Vosuqod-Dowle)as the second presidentof the academy.Vosuqwas an old andexperiencedpoliticianand In his two-yeartenureas the president an accomplishedpoet andscholar.63 of theacademy,Vosuqtriedto increasethe numberof newwordsandnames producedby the academy.Like his ill-fated predecessor,Vosuq also attemptedto elaboratehis views on the functionsof the academy.In a Iran'(The Academyof Iran),deliveredat speechentitled'Farhangestan-e the college of theology at TehranUniversity,Vosuq emphasizedthe importanceof languageandits preservationin shapingthe uniqueidentity of nations.'If the Iranians,the Japanese,the GermansortheEnglishdidnot preserveand respecttheir uniquelanguages,'he maintained,'then they '" Accordingto could not be Iranians,Japanese,Germansand, English. Vosuq, respectingPersianmeant reformingand correctingthe existing deficienciesand mistakesas well as protectingthe languagefrom the 'invasionanddomination'by foreignwords.65 However,whileVosuqagreedthatpurgingPersianof foreignwordswas a necessity,he also insistedthatit was impossibleandirrationalto prevent completelythe intermixingof languagesin an era of rapidscientificand technologicalprogress.No languagein the world could remainimmune fromthe impactof foreignwordsand terminologies.Using Englishas an example,Vosuqarguedthatthe numberof originalEnglishwordswhich had 'Anglo-Saxonroots'were smallerthanthatwhichhadbeen borrowed fromotherlanguages.The British,however,hadusedthis infusionof their languagewithotherlanguagesto enrichandstrengthen theirlanguagewhile at thesametimepreservingthe independenceof theirmothertongue.Vosuq knew that many new scientific and technologicalwords in Englishhad GreekandLatinroots. He was also well awarethatmanyadvocatesof languagepurificationin Iranarguedthatjust as in Englishnew wordswerecreatedfromGreekand Latinroots, so the same could be achievedin Persianby using the preIslamic languagesof ancientIran. In fact, there existed a serious split betweenthemoreradicaladvocatesof languagepurification, whowishedto expandthe Persianvocabularyby manufacturing new Persianwordsfrom pre-Islamicroots, and those who rejectedthe idea on the groundthat AncientPersian,MiddlePersianandAvestanwere 'deadlanguages'.Like Foroughi,who had rejectedthe idea of using Ancient Persian,Middle Persianand Avestanas sourcesfor manufacturing new words in modern

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

27

Persian,Vosuqalso triedto dismissthe idea as a non-scientificguessing game.He remindedthe radicaladvocatesof languagepurificationthatthere was a fundamentaldifferencebetweenusing Greekand Latinin creating new Englishwords and utilizingIran'spre-Islamiclanguagesin making new Persianwords. There were numerousGreekand Latintexts which allowed scholarsto understandthe grammarand the syntaxof these two ancientlanguages.Thus, when 'a Frenchmanor an Italianmanufactured wordsfromGreekandLatinrootstherewereno seriousproblems'.66 InIran, however,therewerevery few survivingtexts in the pre-Islamiclanguages. Some of the grammarandthe syntaxof these Iranianlanguageshad been discoveredby 'Europeanorientalists'.Seriousquestionswith regardto the grammarandthe structureof pre-Islamiclanguagesstill puzzledEuropean scholarsand linguists.Vosuqagreedthatif therewere linguisticallyvalid new Persian pre-Islamicroots,then they could be used in manufacturing words.Otherwise,usingpre-Islamicrootswhichhadnotbeenscientifically validatedcouldresultonly in moreconfusionandanarchy. Like Foroughi,Vosuq also recognizedthe problemscreatedby the intenseArabizationof Persian.Duringthe firstsix centuriesof Islamicrule, Iranianscientists and scholarshad adoptedArabic as the languageof science. The influenceof Arabicgraduallymoved from science to nonscientificfields throughscholarswho wishedto use Arabicwordsin their works as a sign of their erudition.Beginningin the nineteenthcentury, Persianbecame increasinglysimplified.Even as Persianunderwentthis change,the adventof modemideas,sciences,industriesandtechnological innovationsin Europebroughtnew wordsfrom Europeanlanguagesinto Persian.Since Egypt and Asia minorwere closer to Europe,Arabs and Turksbecame acquaintedwith new Europeanwords and manufactured some equivalentsin Arabicand Turkishlong beforeIranians.Becauseof their distance from Europe, Iraniansbecame acquaintedwith Europe throughthe mediumof Turkishand Arabic,and in the processborrowed newly manufactured ArabicandTurkishwordsas equivalentsfor modem Europeanwords,terminologiesandconcepts. His besteffortsto respondto RezaShah'simpatiencewiththe slow pace of word manufacturingdid not propitiatethe monarch,who dismissed Vosuqin 1938.Theshahwas so dissatisfiedwiththe slow progressmadeby the academythathe orderedits dissolutionand reconstitutionundernew bylaws. Vosuq's successor was the ministerof education,Ali Asghar Hekmat,who was also removedfromthe presidencyof the academyafter threeshortmonths.Hekmatwas replacedby the new ministerof education, EsmailMera't,who remainedthe head of the academyuntil September 1941whenthe BritishandSovietforcesinvadedIranandforcedRezaShah to abdicate.

28

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

Under Mera'tthe academyintensifiedits efforts and acceleratedthe The academydivided foreignwords in process of word manufacturing. Persianinto fourdistinctcategories.First,thoseArabicwordsthatIranians had used in their languagefor a long time. These Arabic words had infiltratedPersianthroughreligious,literaryandscientificwritingsin early Islamiccenturiesandtheyhadbecomean inseparable componentof Persian vocabularybecausetheyweresimilarto Persianwordsin bothstructureand phonetics.The academyconcludedthattherewas no needto replacethem. Second, were those 'heavy' and 'coarse'Arabicwordsthat were mostly borrowedin the past 50 to 60 years by scholarswho often used them to show off theirknowledgeof Arabic.TheseArabicwordshad no place in Persian,and they had to be replacedby newly producedPersianwords. in nature,such Third,were those wordsthatwere consideredinternational as telephone,post,democracy,automobile,andso on. Theacademysaw no need to replacethese 'international' words.Fourth,were those European wordsthatwere not international andcouldpotentiallyoverwhelmPersian vocabulary,particularly in scientificandtechnologicalfields.Theacademy hadto producePersianequivalentsfortheseEuropeanwordsaftera careful examinationof eachword.67 Withthe invasionandoccupationof Iranby allied forcesin 1941, and the abdicationof Reza Shah from the throne,the first Iranianacademy stopped creatingnew words, althoughits memberscontinuedto hold meetings until 1954. Under its last two presidents,MohammadAli Foroughi(1941-42) and Hossein Sami'i Adib us-Saltane(1942-54), the AfterSami'i'sdeaththeacademy academyabandonedwordmanufacturing. ceasedto exist altogether.The academyfounditself on the defensiveafter RezaShah'sabdication.Criticismandridiculeof someof thenew wordsby the opponentsof the academyforcedit to revisesome of the wordsit had manufactured andultimatelyresultedin the publicationof an orderby the ministry of educationinformingthe public that school books would abandonnew mathematicalwordsadoptedby the academyand returnto traditionalwords and terminologies.The opponents of the academy consistedof a heterogenousgroupof writersand scholarswho opposed word manufacturingfor a variety of reasons. Some, like Mohammad Qazviniand HasanTaqizade,believedthat purgingArabicwordswould greatlyweakenthe beautyandthe vitalityof Persianwhile at the sametime underminingthe historicalties betweenIranandotherIslamiccountries.68 Others,suchas AbbasEqbalAshtiyani,believedthata purifiedPersianwas an artificiallanguagethathadnothingto do with the real Persianthatwas spokenby people and writtenby scholarsand writers.69 Therewere also some prominent independent-mindedsocial reformers, writers and intellectualswho opposed both the supportersand the opponentsof

PERSIAN NATIONALISM AND LANGUAGE

PURIFICATION

29

languagepurification.Themostimportantandinfluentialamongthemwas AhmadKasravi(1890-1946), the distinguishedjurist and historianwho believedin reformingthe Persianlanguagebut opposedthe academyof Iran.70

In its initial six years of existence between 1935 and 1941, under constantpressurefromReza Shahandwith fourleadersin this shortspan, the firstIranianacademymanufactured a largenumberof newwords.It also produceda significantnumberof new place names,changingArabicand Turkishnamesof cities, towns and riversto Persian.7'Many of the new wordsmanufactured and approvedby the academywere adoptedby the public,buttherewere also manynew wordsandnameswhichwere never adoptedin the vernacular. Althoughit was never formallydisbanded,the firstacademyceasedto meetafter1954 andlapsedintoobscurity. Sixteenyearslater,in 1970, Reza Shah'sson, MohammadReza Shah, createda secondacademyin an attemptto resurrectthe work his father began. Several characteristicsdistinguishedthe first academyfrom the languageacademyestablishedin 1970. The second academywas to be dominatedby professionallinguistswho hada nationalisticcommitmentto languagepurification.In contrast,membersof the firstacademywere for the mostpartwritersandpoetswho helda deeprespectforArabiclanguage andliterature. Whilethe secondacademysupporteda radicalpurificationof Persian,the earlieracademybelieved- despiteRezaShah'spressure- in a slow and moderatereduction of borrowed Arabic words. Indeed, a significantnumberof the membersof the firstacademybelievedthatmany of the commonArabicwordsin Persianhadbeenusedfor sucha long time thatthey hadbecomean inseparablepartof the Persianlanguageandthat theireradicationwouldunderminethe strengthof Persianand impoverish its vocabulary.Thus,the firstacademyretainedsomeArabicwordswhich werecommonlyusedin Persian.72 Second,unlikethe secondacademywhichwas committedto the ideaof creatingnew wordsby using pre-Islamicroots,the firstacademyshowed verylittleinterestin manufacturing new wordswhichwereeitherborrowed from or constructedfrom pre-Islamicroots.73Instead,they tried, for the mostpart,to replacecommonArabicandTurkishwordsby revivingsome old Persianwords which had been forgottenor attributingnew and specializedmeaningsto forgottenPersianwords.Third,unlikethe second academy,the firstacademyacceptedsome borrowedEuropeanwordsand merelyPersianizedtheirpronunciation.74 In someinstancesit wentone step furtherand manufactured new words by attachinga Europeanword to a Persianprefixor suffix.75 Thefirstacademywas a by-productof RezaShah'snationalisticdreams and it alwaysenjoyedthe supportof the monarch,who assumedpersonal

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES

30

Indeed,for responsibilityforthe movementto purifythe Persianlanguage.76 Reza Shah,'thepurificationof the languagewas a matterof prideandwas RezaShah's relatedto glorifyingthepre-Islamicgreatnessof the country'.77 by the factthat commitmentto languagepurification was bestdemonstrated 'he himself went over the Persianwords and roots that were to replace By Arabicwordsin commonusage,approvingsomeandrejectingothers'.78 RezaShahdemonstrated creatingthe secondacademyin 1970,Mohammad his interestin revivinga culturalinstitutionwhichhadbeenfoundedby his father.He was often concerned,however,aboutthe oppositionthat the academycould generate.His fatherdealtwith the opponentsof the first andharshfashion,dismissingthem from academyin an uncompromising their posts. Reza Shah's son, however,did not wish to antagonizethe opponentsof languagepurification, especiallywhentheyincludedpowerful individualsin his government.The result was that the first academydespite the oppositionof some of its leaders to a radicalpurification campaign- hada farmoreprofoundimpacton the Persianlanguagethanits successor.

NOTES For readingthe entire manuscriptand offering mountainsof incisive criticismsand suggestions, I am grateful to Professor Linda Frey, Professor Michael Mayer, Professor Ken Lockridge, Professor Sadeq Kia and, ProfessorArdeshirKia. I regretthat I have not been able to answer all the questions they and others have raised. Here I have adopted ParthaChatterjee'stheoretical model. Although Chatterjeedeals primarilywith the emergence of nationalismin Bengal, his theoreticalapproachcan be useful in understandingthe rise of nationalismin the Muslim Middle East and North Africa. 1. Partha Chatterjee, The Nation and its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories (PrincetonUniversity Press, 1993), p.6. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid. 4. Ibid. 5. Not all modernizing intellectuals adopted the same approach. There were Iranian westernizerssuch as Mirza MalkamKhanand nationalistintellectualssuch as Mirza Yousef Khan Mostashar od-Dowle who believed that the dominance of Shiite Islam could be underminedby presenting modern ideas under the guise of Islam and reaching a tactical alliance with the Shiite ulama. They found themselves too weak and the Shiite ulama too powerful to be challengedand replaced.It is not surprising,therefore,thatthey both argued expedientlythat modernideas were not only compatiblewith Islam, but they were Islamic in origin. In other words, adopting modern ideas and institutionswas simply a returnto the original teachings of Islam. 6. Ibid., p.7. 7. The fifty-fifth or the fifty-eighth son of Fath Ali shah (1797-1834), the second Qajar monarch, Jalal od-Din Mirza was born in 1826-27. His mother, Homa Khanom, was the

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

8.

9.

10. 11.

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

31

daughterof JamshidKhan, the chief of the KurdishJahanBiglu tribe. Homa Khanomwas unique among the many wives of Fath Ali shah for insisting on the right to wear European dress in the royal harem. His mother's fascination with European customs and ideas influenced the young prince. In 1851 he began to attend Dar ul-Funun,the modem college established by the chief minister, Mirza Taqi Khan Amir Kabir (1848-51), in order to provide the sons of the Iranianrulingclass with a modem Europeaneducation.Jalal od-Din Mirza's first experienceas a studentof Dar ul-Fununwas, however, shortlived. A year after he started his education at the school, the fourth Qajar monarch, Naser od-Din shah (1848-96) appointed him deputy govemor of Lurestan. Jalal od-din Mirza's tenure as govemor of Lurestanwas short, for the shah dismissed him from his post for unknown reasons shortlyafter he arrivedin the province. Back in Tehran,Jalal od-Din Mirzaretumed to Dar ul-Funun where he studied French and established a close friendship with the Europeaninstructorsteachingat the college. According to one of his brothers,the close friendshipwith the Europeaninstructorsas well as contacts with the small Europeancommunity in Tehranleft a profoundimpact on Jalal od-Din Mirza, who 'abandonedIslam and refused to study the Quranand the Hadith'. It was also at the Dar ul-Fununthat Jalal od-Din Mirza met the Armenian born Mirza Malkam Khan, who had returnedfrom a ten-year stay in France where he had studied modernsciences as well as political science. Throughhis friendshipwith Malkam,Jalal odDin Mirza became interestedin freemasonry.When Malkamcreated a pseudo freemasonry lodge called 'Faramushkhaneh', or the 'House of Forgetfulness',in 1858, the meetingsof the lodge were held at Jalal od-Din Mirza's house at the Udlajan/Masjed-eHowz quarterof Tehran. In 1860, Naser od-Din Shah, who had become alarmed by the activities of Faramushkhaneh,issued an imperialdecree, closing down the lodge and banishingMalkam and his father,Mirza Yaqub,from Iran.Despite the banishmentof Malkam and his father, Jalal od-din Mirza continued to organize secret meetings with the members of Faramushkhaneh.In 1864, the chief minister, Mirza Mohammad Khan Qajar, who had become once again alarmedby Jalal od-Din Mirza's activities and atheistic beliefs, tried to detainthe prince.The prince,however,fled his home before the arrivalof governmentagents and sought refuge at the shrine of Shah Abdol Azim in southern Tehran.Since he was a memberof the royal family,court dignitariesintercededon his behalf and secured a pardon from the shah. For Jalal od-Din Mirza's life, see Ali Asghar Hekmat, Parsi-ye Naghz (Tehran,1951), pp.411-13 and pp.432-434. See also Azud od-Dowle Soltan Ahmad Mirza in Abdol Hossein Navai (ed.), Tarikh-eAzudi (Tehran,1977), pp.209-1 1. Reza Qoli Khan Hedayat,Majma ul-Fusaha, Vol.1, p.35. Also see Reza Qoli Khan Hedayat, Tarikh-eRozat us-Safa-yeNaseri, Vol.10, p. 102. Sayyed Ahmad Divan Beygi Shirazi,Hadiqat ush-Shoara, Vol.1, pp.37-2. MirzaTaherSheari,Ganj-e Shaygan,p.74. Mehdi Bamdad,Sharh-eRejale Iran (Tehran,1979), 7 vols, Vol.1, pp.254-5, Vol.6, pp.69-71. Jalal od-Din Mirza,Name-yeKhosrawan,3 vols. (Tehran,1871). It is importantto note that Jalal od-Din Mirza was not the first nineteenth-centuryIranianwriterto attempta total and complete purificationof Persianfrom Arabic words. During the reign of Mohammadshah (1834-48), a group of Iranianpoets and writers had tried to create a simplified formnof Persian free from Arabic loan words. Poets such as the anti-Islamicand anti-clericalpoet, Yaghma(1782-1859) triedto write in a simplified Persianfree from borrowedArabicwords. Continuingthis traditionand receiving advice and supportfrom the poet Emam Qoli Khan Zand (known by his pen name, Ghayrat), Jalal od-Din Mirza began to write Name-ye Khosrawan (The Book of Kings) in pure Persian ('Farsi-ye Sare') and completed three sections of the book before his death at the age of 47 in 1871. Dasatir was published for the first time in India by Molla Firuz a member of the Parsi community. For a more extensive discussion of Dasatir see Malek ush-Shoara Bahar, 'Sabkshenasi'. See also, EbrahimPourdavoud,'Farhang-eIran-e Bastan', and Isa Sadiq, 'Yadgar-eOmr:Khateratiaz Sargozasht-eDoktor Isa Sadiq'. It is interestingto note that some of Azar Keyvan's fabricatedwords such as 'timsar' were adoptedin Persianand are still in use. See Jalal od-Din Mirza's letter to Mirza Fath Ali Akhundzade in, Mirza Fath Ali Akhundzade (edited by Hamid Mohammadzadeand Hamid Arasli) AleJba-yeJadid va

32

12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19.

20. 21.

22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29.

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES Makioubat(Baku, 1963), p.373. Ibid., p.373. Ibid., pp.171-3. Ibid. p.172. Ibid. p.172. For Akhundzade'sviews on pre-IslamicIran,see Mirza Fath Ali Akhundzade,Maktoubat-e Kamal od-Dowle (Tehran,n.d.). Kermaniwrote: 'O, Iran,where have all the kings who adornedyou with justice, equity,and munificence, who decoratedyou with pomp and splendourgone? From that date when the barbarian,savage, coarse Bedouin Arabs sold your king's daughterin the street and cattle market,you have not seen a bright day, and have lain in darkness ... A handful of naked, barefoot,hungry,savage Arabs have come and, for 1285 years, have plungedyou into such misery and darkness.'Se Maktoub,pp.10- 1 . See also, FreydounAdamiyyat,Andisheha-ye Mirza Aqa Khan Kermani (Tehran,1979), pp.283-284. Mangol Bayat-Philip, 'Mirza Aqa Khan Kermani:A Nineteenth-CenturyPersianNationalist', in Elie Kedourieand Sylvia G. Haim (eds.), in TowardsA ModernIran (London:FrankCass, 1980), p.81. Ibid., p.164. Ibid., p.76. Ibid., p.277. Mirza Aqa Khan Kermani,Ai'ine-ye Sekandari,pp.576-7. See also FreydounAdamiyyat, Andisheha-yeMirzaAqa Khan Kermani,p.235. Manakjiwas a Parsi (i.e. Zoroastrian)who had migratedfrom Indiato Iranin orderto explore the possibility of reviving Zoroastrianism in Iran. He established a close friendshipwith Jalal od-Din Mirza and through the Qajar prince he was introduced to Mirza Fath Ali Akhundzade with whom he maintained a correspondence.See MirzaFathAli Akhundzade,Alejba-yeJadid va Maktoubat,pp. 220-4, 249-51, 336-9, 387-8, 395-7,402-7, 423-4,429-31,432-5. Ibid., pp. 576-7. Talebof representsa differentbrandof Persiannationalismwhich was extremely critical of the shiite ulamaand their interventionin the political sphere.It did not, however,believe that Islam as a religion had to be destroyedbefore progressbecame possible for Iran.This brand of Persiannationalismwas based on an amalgamof political democracy,respectfor Islamic practicesas well as Iran'spre-Islamiccultureand history. Abdol RahimTalebof, Masalek ul-Mohsenin,pp.232-5. Ibid. p.234. Ibid. pp.234-5. See, M.A. Jazayeri, 'Madjma' Ilmi', in The Encyclopedia of Islam, Vol.V (Leiden, 1986), p. 1095. See FarrokhKhan Amin od-Dowle, Majmua-yeAsnad va Madarek-eFarrokhKhan Amin od-Dowle, 1833-1857, 2 vols, edited by Karim Esfahanian and Qodratollah Roshani (Za'afaranlu)(Tehran,1979), Vol.1, pp.434-7. Mohammad Hasan Khan E'atemad us-Saltane, Tatbiq-eLoqat-e Joghrafia-ye Qadim va Jadid-e Iran, edited by Mir Hashem Mohhades(Tehran,1985), p.1 8. H. Kamshad,ModernPersian Prose Literature(CambridgeUniversityPress, 1966), p.35. Mirza JahangirKhan did not believe thatthere was any other alternativebut, to use the nonPersian (i.e. European)constitutionalwords in everyday Persian. See Mirza JahangirKhan Sur-e Esrafil, Sur-e Esrafil, No.14 (Sept. 1907). It is importantto note that with the establishmentof a constitutionalsystem of governmentthe Persianlanguageemergedas the official language of the Iranianstate. According to article 4 of the electoral law of 9 Sept. 1906, those elected to the Iranianparliamenthad to possess the ability to speak Persian,read and write Persian, and be Iranian subjects of 'Iranian extraction'. Article 19 of the supplementaryfundamentallaws of 7 Oct. 1907 addedthatcompulsoryinstructionin Persian had to be regulatedby the ministry of sciences and arts. In the two decades following the triumphof the constitutionalrevolution,the call for the preservationof the Persianlanguage became increasinglypopularamong Iranianwriters,poets and artists.Patrioticpoets such as Aref-e Qazvini and Mirzade Eshqi popularizedthe love for the Persian language and such Persianpoets as Ferdowsi,the authorof the epic poem Shahnameh,in theirworks. Believing in the nationalist instrumentalityof language, both poets used colloquial Persian in their poems. Thus, traditionalPersian which was mixed with numerousArabic words was by-

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

30.

31.

32. 33.

34. 35.

36. 37.

38. 39.

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

33

passed because it evoked Arab influence and traditional Islamic culture whereas the colloquial emphasizedan Iraniannational identity reflecting the genuine cultureof popular classes. In an operettaentitledRastakhiz-eShahriyaran-eIran (Resurrectionof the Kings of Iran), Eshqi celebrated the ancient rulers of pre-Islamic Iran and the Persian prophet Zoroaster(i.e. Zardosht).Aref, who was also a musicianand singer,went one step further.In his concerts, attended by thousands, he called on the people of Azerbaijan to abandon Azerbaijani Turkish, which he called a shameful reminder of the Turkic and Mongol domination,and replace it with the beautifuland sweet Persian. Despite these nationalistic and chauvinisticexpressions, however, there were no serious attemptsat initiating a statesponsoredcampaignto purify the Persianlanguage or to destroythe numerousnon-Persian languagesanddialectswhich were spoken in variouspartsof the country.See MirzadeEshqi, Kolliyat-e Mosavvar-eEshqi, edited by Ali Akbar Moshir Salimi (Tehran,1960). See also Aref Qazvini, Kolliyyat-eDivan, edited by Abdol RahmanSeyf-e Azad (Tehran,1969). The enthusiasm for the Bolsheviks intensified furtherwhen Lenin and Trotsky stated in a letteraddressedto the Iranianpeople that the new Soviet governmenthad denouncedall the claims made on the Iranianterritoryby the Tsaristregime. According to the agreement,GreatBritainpromisedto loan 2,000,000 poundsto Iranwhile at the same time helpingthe Iraniangovernmentconstructrailroads,revise tariffs,andcollect war compensation from third parties. In return,Iran agreed to grant Great Britain a total monopoly over supplyingof arms,militarytrainingand administrativeadvisers. See Ervand Abrahamian,Iran Between TwoRevolutions(PrincetonUniversity Press, 1983), p.114. See also J. C. Hurewitz,Diplomacy in the Near and MiddleEast (Princeton,1956), pp.64-6. Ibid., p.156. While studying for his doctoratein chemistryin Germany,Arani wrote two articles on Iran. The first article, entitled 'The Great Heroes of Iran', named the ancient Iranianprophet Zoroaster,the scientist Ibn Sina, the poets Khayyamand Ferdowsi,and the kings Dariusand Cyrusas the greatmen of the Iranianhistory.The second article, 'Azerbaijan:A Deadly and Vital Problem for Iran', called for the complete destruction of Azerbaijani Turkish, a language which accordingto Arani had been imposed by Mongol invaderson Azerbaijan's 'Aryan' population: 'All patriotic Iranians, especially the officials in the Ministry of Education,must do their very best to replace Turkishwith Persian. We must send Persian journals, Persian newspapers, Persian textbooks, and Persian teachers to Azerbaijan-that ancient homelandof Zoroasterand of the Aryans.' Ibid., p.157. See MohammadQazvini,Bist Maqale-ye Qazvini(Tehran,1985), 2 vols, Vol.1, pp.84-134. The army officers were General Jalayer (Sardar Medhat), General Ghaffari (Sardar Moqtader),Colonel Reza Sheybani,Colonel Karim,Colonel Hajj MohammadRazmaraand Colonel Ali Qovanlu. The civilians were the constitutionalist preacher Mirza Yahya Dowlatabadi,who was one of the foundersof modernschool system in Iran,the writerand journalist GholamHossein Rahnama,the Kurdishwriter and poet Rashid Yassemi, and Isa Sadiq, who became one of the founding members of the second academy, 'The Language Academy of Iran', during the reign of MohammadReza Shah (1941-79). See Issa Sadiq, 'Yadgar-eOmr:Khateratiaz Sargozasht-eDoktor Isa Sadiq', 2 vols. (Tehran,1976), Vol.2, p.238. Also, see Freydoun Badrei, 'Gozareshi Darbare-ye Farhangestan-e Iran', The LanguageAcademy of IranPublications,No. 16 (1977), pp.9-10. Ibid., p.238. Also ibid. p.9. Ibid. pp.111-12.The armyofficer who was responsiblefor the creationof the committeewas Ali Qovanlu.The five civilians were AbdolazimQarib,Rashid Yassemi, Lavai, Qahremani, and Zabih Behruzwho became one of the founding membersof the LanguageAcademy of Iran during the reign of Mohammad Reza Shah in 1970. Despite the formation of the Academy of Iran in 1935, this committee continued its separateexistence until the end of Reza Shah's reign in 1941. However, afterthe formationof the Academy of Iran,all the new words producedby this committeewere sent to the academyfor approval.Afterthe academy ratifiedthe new words the list was sent to Reza Shah for final approval. FreydounBadrei, 'GozareshiDarbare-yeFarhangestan-eIran', pp.12-13. The professorswho actedas the supervisorsof this studentsociety were Dr RezazadeShafaq, Dr MahmoudHessabi, Dr Bijhan, Hossein Golgolab and Dr MohammadBaqer Houshyar.

34

40. 41.

42. 43.

44. 45. 46. 47.

48.

49. 50.

51.

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES See Isa Sadiq, Yadgar-eOmr, p.238. Also see Freydoun Badrei, 'Gozareshi Darbare-ye Farhangestan-eIran', p.14. Ibid. pp.238-9. Ibid. pp.15-16. C.E. Bosworth, 'LanguageReform and Nationalism in Modem Turkey', The Muslim World, LV (1965), pp.58-65 and pp.117-24. See also J. M. Landau, 'Madjma'Ilmi,Turkey', The Encyclopedia of Islam, Vol.V (Leiden, 1986), p.1099. For a comparative study on the Turkishand the Iranianacademiessee JohnR. Perry,'LanguageReform in Turkeyand Iran', InternationalJournal of MiddleEast Studies, 17 (1985), pp.295-3 11. Isa Sadiq, Yadgar-eOmr,pp.233-4. Despite its popularity,copies of Shahnamehwere expensive and could only be found among elite families. In 1935, however, half of Shahnamehwas published by Abbas Eqbal and MojtabaMinovi. A year later,the remaininghalf was publishedby Said Nafisi and Soleiman Haim. On the other hand,primeministerForoughialso publishedone volume of Shahnameh which contained a selection of twenty thousand lines from the epic poetry. See Isa Sadiq, Yadgar-eOmr, pp.233-4. Ibid., pp.236-7. See also Donald N. Wilber, Riza Shah Pahlavi: The Resurrection and Reconstructionof Iran (New York:Exposition Press, 1975), pp.162-3. Freydoun Badrei, Gozareshi Darbare-ye Farhangestan-e Iran, pp.16-17. See also Ali Asghar Hekmat,Parsi-ye Naghz, pp.482-3 and p.526. Ibid., p.16. Ibid. pp.16-17. On Farhangestan-eIran see Isa Sadiq, Yadgar-eOmr. See also Hossein Golgolab and Sadeq Kia, Farhangestan-e Iran va Farhangestan-e Zaban-e Iran (Tehran: The LanguageAcademy of Iran'sPublications,1977). FreydounBadrei,GozareshiDarbareye Farhangestan-eIran. Farhangestan-eIran, Vajheha-yeNow ke ta Payan-e Sal-e 1319 dar Farhangestan-e Iran Pazirofte Shode Ast (Tehran, 1941). R. Lescot, 'La Reforme du Vocabulaireen Iran',Revuedes etudesIslamiques (1939), CahierI, pp.75-96. JohnR. Perry, 'LanguageReform in Turkeyand Iran',InternationalJournal of MiddleEast Studies,Vol.17 (1985), pp.295-3 11. Mohammad Ali Jazayeri, 'Madjma' Ilmi', in The Encyclopedia of Islam, Vol.V ( 1986), pp.1094-9. The full membersof the first academywere: MohammadAli Foroughi,HasanVosuq(Vosuq od-Dowle), Hasan Esfandiyari(Mohtashamus-Saltane),Hossein Sami'i (Adib us-Saltane), Ali Asghar Hekmat, Ali PartoAazam, GeneralAhmad Nakhjavan,Hajj Sayyed Nasrollah Taqavi,Abol HasanForoughi,GholamHossein Rahnama,ValiollahNasr, Malek ush-Shoara Bahar, Badi uz-Zaman Foruzanfar,Rezazade Shafaq, Ali Akbar Dehkhoda, Mahmoud Hessabi, Sayyed Mohammad Kazim Assar, Abdolazim Qarib, Said Nafisi, Hossein Golgolab, Sayyed MohammadFatemi,RashidYassemi,GeneralGholamHossein Moqtader, Isa Sadiq. Later,as membershipof the academy changed, some full memberswere removed and replacedby new individuals.Those who joined the academy later were Qassem Ghani (in 1936), Ahmad Ashtari, Mostafa Adl (Mansourus-Saltane),Ali Akbar Siyasi, JamalodDin Akhavi, EbrahimPourdavoud,HasanAli Mostashar(Mostasharul-Molk), MatinDaftari and, Abbas Eqbal (in 1937), Amir A'alam, Mohammad Hejazi (Moti od-Dowle), MohammadQazvini (in 1938-9), Sayyed MohammadTaddayonand Masoud Keyhan (in 1940-1) and, Jalal od-Din Homai, Gholam Ali Ra'adi and, Ahmad Bahmanyarin 1941-2. See Isa Sadiq, Yadgar-eOmr,pp.242-9. The numberof full membersincreasedlater from 24 to 41. It is importantto note that not all associate members were foreign scholars. For example, the well-known Iranian writer MohammadAli Jamalzade,who lived in Europe,was also selected as an associate member. The opponentsof the academyand language purificationincludedsome of Reza Shah's top government officials such as the former prime minister Mokhberus-Saltane and Sayyed HasanTaqizade.For Mokhberus-Saltane'scriticismof the academyand the idea of language purificationsee Mokhberus-SaltaneHedayat,Khateratva Khatarat(Tehran,1983), p.411. The supportersof languagepurificationarguedthat underlying'theoppositionto purification was the fact that in Iraniansociety even a limited knowledge of Arabic or the use of a few Arabicwords in daily conversationwere regardedas a sign of knowledge, cultureand status. If the language were simplified and purifiedthen the traditionallanguageof the elite would disappear; they could no longer flaunt their elite upbringing by using difficult and

PERSIAN NATIONALISM

AND LANGUAGE PURIFICATION

35

incomprehensibleArabicwords. 52. The most ardentsupporterof purifiedPersianwas the newspaperIran-e Bastan, which was publishedby Abdol RahmanSeyf-e Azad. 53. Donald N. Wilber,Riza Shah Pahlavi: The Resurrectionand Reconstructionof Iran, p. 169. 54. Foroughi's speech was publishedunderthe title of 'Khatabe-yeAqa-ye Rais ul-Vozaradar Daneshkade-yeMa'aqul', in the journalArmagha,Vol.16, No.7 (1935), pp.503-12. 55. MohammadAli Foroughi,Peyam-e Man be Farhangestan (Tehran,1937). 56. Ibid., pp.4-5. 57. Ibid. p.10. 58. ForoughimaintainedthatPersianhad become weak in the firstthreecenturiesof Islamicrule because Iranian writers, scholars and scientists had used Arabic as the language of governmentand science, while Persian remainedthe language of people in the street. Only after the emergenceof Iraniandynastiessuch as the Samanidswas Persianreinstitutedas the language of politics and science. Indeed, the written Persian of the Samanid and the Ghaznavidperiods was a beautiful language with a very limited numberof Arabic words. Beginning with the Saljuqperiod and especially during the reign of the Mongols and the I1 Khanids, however, the simple and beautiful Persian was abandonedin favor of a new and artificial language, which was overwhelmed by Arabic words and terminologies. Persian words which could easily be used were replacedby highly ornamentedArabicwords which few Iraniansknew or understood. 59. MohammadAli Foroughi,Peyam-e Man be Farhangestan, pp.40-1. It is interestingto note that Foroughi rejectedthe idea of manufacturingnew Persian words by using pre-Islamic roots, an idea which was suggested by the ardentsupportersof languagepurification. 60. Donald Wilber,Riza Shah Pahlavi, p.169. 61. Ibid., p.169. 62. Ibid. 63. Vosuq od-Dowle was the prime minister responsible for signing the famous 1919 AngloPersianagreementwhich caused the eruptionof anti-Britishand nationalisticfeelings in Iran. He, therefore,had a reputationfor being an anglophile and an ardentsupporterof a close alliance between Iranand GreatBritain. 64. Vosuq od-Dowle, 'Farhangestan-eIran',Armaghan,Vol.18, No.5, p.356. 65. Ibid., p.356. 66. Ibid., p.360. 67. See, Farhangestan-eIran,Arayeshva Pirayesh-e Zaban (Tehran,1940), pp.8-16. 68. For Taqizade'sviews see Sayyed HasanTaqizade',Lozum-e Hefz-e Farsi-yeFasih', Yadgar, No.4 (Tehran,1948). 69. For Abbas Eqbal'sviews, see his articles, 'Farsi-ye Sakhtegi' and 'Defa'a az Zaban-eFarsi', in Abbas Eqbal Ashtiyani, 'Majmua-ye Maqalat', edited by Mohammad Dabirsiyaqi (Tehran,1972), pp.388-403 and pp.779-87. 70. For Kasravi's unique approach to the reform of Persian language, see Ahmad Kasravi, Zaban-e Pak (Tehran, 1943). See also Ahmad Kasravi, 'Zaban-e Farsi va Rah-e Rasa va Tavana Gardidan-eAn', edited by Yahya Zoka (Tehran, 1955). Hossein Yazdanian(ed.), Neveshteha-ye Kasravi dar Zamine-ye Zaban-e Farsi (Tehran, 1978). M. A. Jazayeri, 'Madjma'Ilmi', TheEncyclopediaof Islam, Vol.V. 71. For example, Qarajedaghwas changed to Arasbaran, Soltanabadto Arak, Salehabad to Andimeshkand, Mohammarehto Khorramshahr.As for rivers, Qizil Ozan was changed to Sefidrudand QaraAyni to Sia Cheshmeh.See, Farhangestan-eZaban-eIran, Vajhehay-eNo Ke TaPayan-e Sal-e 1319 dar Farhangestan-eIran Pazirofte Shode Ast (Tehran,1976). 72. For example, Dallal, Dallali, and Mofasa. 73. On rareoccasions, the first academydid create new words by using pre-Islamicwords. For example, the new words 'shahrban' (The Chief of Police) and 'shahrbani' (The Police Department)were borrowed from the pre-Islamic word 'khashacapavan'or 'xsacapavan' (Greek, Satrap).See RolandG. Kent, 'Old Persian:Grammar,Texts, Lexicon' (New Haven, Connecticut:AmericanOrientalSociety, 1950), p.181. 74. For example, 'doktor', 'football', 'qarantineh',etc. 75. For example, 'sar konsul' for General Consul, 'konsoulyar' for Vice Consul and

36 'mikrobshenas'for microbiologist. 76. Donald Wilber,Riza Shah Pahlavi, p.235. 77. Ibid. 78. Ibid.

MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES