What do you think?
Rate this book
Iran: A Modern History
This history of modern Iran is not a survey in the conventional sense, but an ambitious exploration of the nation that offers a revealing look at how events, people, and institutions are shaped by trends and currents that sometimes reach back hundreds of years. Abbas Amanat covers the dynasties, revolutions, civil wars, foreign occupation, and new Islamic regime of this complex period in history.
Amanat combines chronological and thematic approaches, exploring events with lasting implications for modern Iran and the world. Drawing on the latest historical scholarship and emphasizing the twentieth century in its coverage, the book addresses debates about Iran’s culture and politics. Political history is the driving focus of this narrative based on decades of research and study, which is layered with discussions of literature, music, and the arts; ideology and religion; economy and society; and cultural identity and heritage.
Amanat combines chronological and thematic approaches, exploring events with lasting implications for modern Iran and the world. Drawing on the latest historical scholarship and emphasizing the twentieth century in its coverage, the book addresses debates about Iran’s culture and politics. Political history is the driving focus of this narrative based on decades of research and study, which is layered with discussions of literature, music, and the arts; ideology and religion; economy and society; and cultural identity and heritage.
1085 pages, Hardcover
First published October 24, 2017
340 people are currently reading
3,946 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 126 reviews
August 23, 2023
این کتاب می‌تون� یه عنوان فرعی هم داشته باشه: چرا و چگونه روحانیت برنده شد؟
تلاش روحانیت که البته نویسنده با عنوان آخوندها ازشون نام می‌بر� از دوره صفوی شروع می‌ش� و کم‌ک� تا انقلاب ۵٧ به ثمر می‌رس�. شکل اثرگذاری اون‌ه� در حکومت‌دار� و حضورشون در عرصه سیاسی و جایگاه‌ها� قدرت آهسته و تدریجی بوده، یه دوره‌های� خیلی موفق و یه دوره‌های� خیلی ناکام بودن ولی بالاخره تونستن به رأس قدرت برسن. توی هر دوره با سیاست‌ها� خاصی این اتفاق افتاده که شرحش طولانیه.
کتاب پر از جزئیات مهم وقایع تاریخیه واسه همین فکر نمی‌کن� یه بار خوندنش کافی باشه و امید دارم که بتونم در آینده باز هم بخونمش. نمی‌دون� کتاب مشابهی با این حجم وجود داره که یه تاریخ پونصد ساله رو شرح داده باشه یا نه. از طرفی موضع نویسنده هم تا حد زیادی مشخصه و با هیچ گروهی هم تعارف نداره. شاید چون عباس امانت نه ایران زندگی می‌کن� و نه از وضع امروز ایران رضایت داره و در دوره‌ا� که ایران بوده هم جز اقلیتی بوده که بسیار مورد آزار قرار گرفته�.
نویسنده سعی کرده توی هر دوره به غیر از شرح اتفاقات تاریخی به وضع فرهنگ و هنر هم بپردازه. از ادبیات و موسیقی و شعر تا سینما و تئاتر در دهه‌ها� اخیر. مثلاً به‌طو� خاص درباره فیلم جدایی نادر از سیمین صحبت می‌کن� یا از شجریان و موسیقی� می‌گ� و به مضمون انتقادی‌شو� اشاره می‌کن�. یه جا هم از معمار برج آزادی تهران حرف می‌زن� که برادرش، حسین امانته. نمی‌دون� به‌خاط� مسائلیه که سال‌ها� اخیر اتفاق افتاده یا دلیل دیگه‌ا� داره که نویسنده توی مقدمه کتاب ابراز ناراحتی می‌کن� که به اندازه کافی به مسائل زنان نپرداخته. ولی یه کتاب سوپرپرفکت می‌ش� اگه توی کل این تاریخ پونصد ساله، فعالیت‌ها� زنان (به هر میزان و شدتی که بود) هم شرح داده می‌ش�.
تلاش روحانیت که البته نویسنده با عنوان آخوندها ازشون نام می‌بر� از دوره صفوی شروع می‌ش� و کم‌ک� تا انقلاب ۵٧ به ثمر می‌رس�. شکل اثرگذاری اون‌ه� در حکومت‌دار� و حضورشون در عرصه سیاسی و جایگاه‌ها� قدرت آهسته و تدریجی بوده، یه دوره‌های� خیلی موفق و یه دوره‌های� خیلی ناکام بودن ولی بالاخره تونستن به رأس قدرت برسن. توی هر دوره با سیاست‌ها� خاصی این اتفاق افتاده که شرحش طولانیه.
کتاب پر از جزئیات مهم وقایع تاریخیه واسه همین فکر نمی‌کن� یه بار خوندنش کافی باشه و امید دارم که بتونم در آینده باز هم بخونمش. نمی‌دون� کتاب مشابهی با این حجم وجود داره که یه تاریخ پونصد ساله رو شرح داده باشه یا نه. از طرفی موضع نویسنده هم تا حد زیادی مشخصه و با هیچ گروهی هم تعارف نداره. شاید چون عباس امانت نه ایران زندگی می‌کن� و نه از وضع امروز ایران رضایت داره و در دوره‌ا� که ایران بوده هم جز اقلیتی بوده که بسیار مورد آزار قرار گرفته�.
نویسنده سعی کرده توی هر دوره به غیر از شرح اتفاقات تاریخی به وضع فرهنگ و هنر هم بپردازه. از ادبیات و موسیقی و شعر تا سینما و تئاتر در دهه‌ها� اخیر. مثلاً به‌طو� خاص درباره فیلم جدایی نادر از سیمین صحبت می‌کن� یا از شجریان و موسیقی� می‌گ� و به مضمون انتقادی‌شو� اشاره می‌کن�. یه جا هم از معمار برج آزادی تهران حرف می‌زن� که برادرش، حسین امانته. نمی‌دون� به‌خاط� مسائلیه که سال‌ها� اخیر اتفاق افتاده یا دلیل دیگه‌ا� داره که نویسنده توی مقدمه کتاب ابراز ناراحتی می‌کن� که به اندازه کافی به مسائل زنان نپرداخته. ولی یه کتاب سوپرپرفکت می‌ش� اگه توی کل این تاریخ پونصد ساله، فعالیت‌ها� زنان (به هر میزان و شدتی که بود) هم شرح داده می‌ش�.
September 7, 2018
This book is so detailed and thorough and it was really hard to get through the pre-19th century half (and then it sped up a lot after the Constitutional revolution). Still, it was so good that I wished he had started even earlier--with the Persian empire.
I know Iranians are prone to tragic thinking, but how can anyone read this history and NOT think of it as a total tragedy? Every time the Iranian people tried to reform from within some external power would swoop in and stop us from governing ourselves. And then when Iranians finally did revolt, the most toxic thread of the Iranian psyche (a messianic shiism) takes over. These mullahs should have eventually died off or become an out of touch minority. Instead, they rule the country. Such a tragedy. It's not a book with a happy ending.
I know Iranians are prone to tragic thinking, but how can anyone read this history and NOT think of it as a total tragedy? Every time the Iranian people tried to reform from within some external power would swoop in and stop us from governing ourselves. And then when Iranians finally did revolt, the most toxic thread of the Iranian psyche (a messianic shiism) takes over. These mullahs should have eventually died off or become an out of touch minority. Instead, they rule the country. Such a tragedy. It's not a book with a happy ending.
October 8, 2024
کتاب تاریخ ایران مدرن، راوی یه بازه پونصد ساله� تاریخ ایرانه و از قدرت گرفتن صفوی ها شروع میشه و تا دوره اول ریاست جمهوری روحانی جلو میاد. شیوه روایت کتاب به این شکل هست که نویسنده اول یه دوره تاریخی ایران (صفوی، قجر، افشاریه،...) رو معرفی میکنه و بعد از زاویه های مختلف هنری، سیاسی، اقتصادی، معماری و ادبیات به بررسی اون دوره می‌پرداز�. یکسری از دوره ها جزییات تاریخی خیلی زیادی دارن ولی نویسنده از روی یکسری دیگه با عجله رد شده. خصوصاً این شتابزدگی نویسنده تو تاریخ بعد از انقلاب اسلامی و بخصوص بعد از جنگ خیلی تو ذوق من زد. از خیلی از اطلاعات تاریخی مهم رد شد، لحن بی‌طرفان� رو تا حد زیادی از دست داد و بیشتر شبیه رشتوهای توییتر شد تا یه کتاب درباره تاریخ مدرن ایران.
بنظرم اگه قبل خوندن کتاب یه اطلاعات کلی درباره تاریخ ایران داشته باشید یه خوانش راحت تری هم خواهید داشت و اگه دنبال یه کتاب درباره تاریخ انقلاب اسلامی به بعد هستید خیلی این کتاب رو پیشنهاد نمیکنم چون نویسنده تو تاریخ پنجاه سال اخیر خیلی به کلی گویی اکتفا کرده.
در کل بعنوان نقطه شروع صفر درباره تاریخ معاصر ایران گزینه نسبتاً خوبیه.
بنظرم اگه قبل خوندن کتاب یه اطلاعات کلی درباره تاریخ ایران داشته باشید یه خوانش راحت تری هم خواهید داشت و اگه دنبال یه کتاب درباره تاریخ انقلاب اسلامی به بعد هستید خیلی این کتاب رو پیشنهاد نمیکنم چون نویسنده تو تاریخ پنجاه سال اخیر خیلی به کلی گویی اکتفا کرده.
در کل بعنوان نقطه شروع صفر درباره تاریخ معاصر ایران گزینه نسبتاً خوبیه.
May 21, 2022
Iran: A Modern History by Abbas Amanat, is a magisterial history of modern Iran, starting in the Safavid era, and moving up to the present. This book examines the history of Iran in various stages of its modern history, examining at whole how the idea of Iran as a nation-state emerged, and its history of both imperialism and colonial threat it experienced during this era. The literary figures, philosophies and everyday situations of its people are examined, with spurts of longue durée history as its foundations, and with an eye for telling the story from a non-Western perspective. This book is a welcome addition to a growing collection of national histories written by people from their own country, with excellent accompanying details, refutations of past historical tropes offered in Western history, and a more neutral political stance toward modernity.
The Safavid era was fascinating to read with, and begins the book. This was an empire forged by Shia Turkic peoples from Ardabil, who were fleeing persecution from the Sunni Ottomans. Zealous warriors, they looked east to build their domains, and eventually found success invading and consolidating their rule across modern Iran, Iraq, the Caucasus Mountains, and into Afghanistan. They would centre their empire first in Tabriz, in modern day Western Azerbaijan, and eventually moving it to Isfahan. Tabriz was the cultural, political and economic hub of northern Iran. It served as the Safavid capital for many years, but was also vulnerable to continued Ottoman advances into the region. The Safavid's, much like their sister empires in Istanbul and Delhi, were bound by a tripartite competition and cooperation over centuries. Trade and cultural exchange flourished, and Iranian literature, political thought and splendor were legendary. Even so, the Safavids were bound by the peripheral areas of their neighbouring empires, and little expansion past their original boundaries took place. Areas outside of the central domains of Iran included parts of the Caspian and Aral steppes, the areas around Herat in Afghanistan, and light control over modern Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia in the Caucasus', as parts of the Arabian Coast, most notably Bahrain. Control of these areas was light, and would be ripe for colonial exploitation by the growing Russian and British entities.
This book also contains in depth examinations of the development of political and philosophical ideologies in Iran. State control in Iran was closely tied to the approval of Shia Ulama, who had their own political objectives. Although doctrinally, these scholars of Shia Islam were quite conservative in nature, their allegiances would vary, whether it be to the Ottoman state in Karbala and Najaf - two of Shia Islam's holiest cities, to the people of a particular city, or tow the Safavids' themselves - or for personal gain, for that matter. The interaction between the Ulama and political class in the area was cooperative at the same time as being in opposition, as those in power sought to compete for resources, influence and control of the organs of the Safavid state. This situation would change in the early nineteenth and twentieth centuries, as Iran looked to defend itself from the encroachments of British and Russian imperialism, and the political philosophy of the region changed. This would come about with the collapse of Safavid rule, and a fracturing of Iran's political domains. Civil conflict over the late 18th century and into the 19th century was the norm, with a short lived restoration of sorts under the Qajar's. This was a time of strife in Iran, but also a time of development both in terms of nationalist identity for an Iranian sphere, and in terms of politics. The lower classes of Iran began to agitate for more power under the yoke of both imperialist expansion externally, and long strife and civil conflict internally. This would lead to a constitutionalist movement into the early 20th century, which was short lived and struggled to maintain the balance between encroaching British interests along the Arabian coast and from India, as well as Russian expansion into Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. The state itself struggled to implement reforms that would be palatable to the lower class', the clergy, and the competing elite. Spheres of power arose around Tabriz, in Isfahan, in the south, and in Tehran, and peripheral territories in the steppes, in Afghanistan and in the West were lost for good, with Iran's national borders largely emerging and remaining intact to this day.
The book then examines the modern history of Iran, from the struggles of the constitutionalist era, and American and British imperialism in the early 20th century, the emergence of oil as a key factor in Iranian politics, the struggles of Iran in the World War eras, and during the Cold War. The emergence of the Pahlavi dynasty was interesting, and its struggles and adherence to American foreign policy. The complex social issues emerging in Iran during this era, revolving around the suppression of the religious elite, the emergence of new identities and voices in politics, and the struggle between rigid neo-liberal autocracy on one hand, and socialist influences on the other, culminating in the collapse of the Pahlavi state, and the emergence of modern Iran as a theocratic nation. The complex factors and allegiances of this revolution were interesting, and the results rigid opposition by the United States, leading to further entrenchment and isolation of the Iranian state. Even so, economic progress in the nation has been rather large, considering the hostility of Western trading interests. Much like modern Russia, which seems to have built some capacity to withstand Western sanctions, Iran has long been under the yoke of such economic isolation, leading to the inevitable retrenchment of conservative elite as they seek to stamp out opposition and direct the economy with limited resources, while maintaining power.
A fascinating book, well written and researched, and refreshing for its perspective. The historical perspective here is one of neutrality, with an attempt to not coopt history to suit modern historical narratives. Instead, a long look at Iran leads to the thought that many factors have not changed much - a similar issue that arises in most societies and nations globally. It also places Iran firmly in its geographic and historical sphere, while examining the effects of growing global interactions that began to take place at the beginning of this chronicle, and accelerate as time moved on. A great read through and through, and easily recommended to anyone looking for a good one volume history of modern Iran, that focuses on Iran itself, and not only the global actors that surround it.
The Safavid era was fascinating to read with, and begins the book. This was an empire forged by Shia Turkic peoples from Ardabil, who were fleeing persecution from the Sunni Ottomans. Zealous warriors, they looked east to build their domains, and eventually found success invading and consolidating their rule across modern Iran, Iraq, the Caucasus Mountains, and into Afghanistan. They would centre their empire first in Tabriz, in modern day Western Azerbaijan, and eventually moving it to Isfahan. Tabriz was the cultural, political and economic hub of northern Iran. It served as the Safavid capital for many years, but was also vulnerable to continued Ottoman advances into the region. The Safavid's, much like their sister empires in Istanbul and Delhi, were bound by a tripartite competition and cooperation over centuries. Trade and cultural exchange flourished, and Iranian literature, political thought and splendor were legendary. Even so, the Safavids were bound by the peripheral areas of their neighbouring empires, and little expansion past their original boundaries took place. Areas outside of the central domains of Iran included parts of the Caspian and Aral steppes, the areas around Herat in Afghanistan, and light control over modern Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia in the Caucasus', as parts of the Arabian Coast, most notably Bahrain. Control of these areas was light, and would be ripe for colonial exploitation by the growing Russian and British entities.
This book also contains in depth examinations of the development of political and philosophical ideologies in Iran. State control in Iran was closely tied to the approval of Shia Ulama, who had their own political objectives. Although doctrinally, these scholars of Shia Islam were quite conservative in nature, their allegiances would vary, whether it be to the Ottoman state in Karbala and Najaf - two of Shia Islam's holiest cities, to the people of a particular city, or tow the Safavids' themselves - or for personal gain, for that matter. The interaction between the Ulama and political class in the area was cooperative at the same time as being in opposition, as those in power sought to compete for resources, influence and control of the organs of the Safavid state. This situation would change in the early nineteenth and twentieth centuries, as Iran looked to defend itself from the encroachments of British and Russian imperialism, and the political philosophy of the region changed. This would come about with the collapse of Safavid rule, and a fracturing of Iran's political domains. Civil conflict over the late 18th century and into the 19th century was the norm, with a short lived restoration of sorts under the Qajar's. This was a time of strife in Iran, but also a time of development both in terms of nationalist identity for an Iranian sphere, and in terms of politics. The lower classes of Iran began to agitate for more power under the yoke of both imperialist expansion externally, and long strife and civil conflict internally. This would lead to a constitutionalist movement into the early 20th century, which was short lived and struggled to maintain the balance between encroaching British interests along the Arabian coast and from India, as well as Russian expansion into Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. The state itself struggled to implement reforms that would be palatable to the lower class', the clergy, and the competing elite. Spheres of power arose around Tabriz, in Isfahan, in the south, and in Tehran, and peripheral territories in the steppes, in Afghanistan and in the West were lost for good, with Iran's national borders largely emerging and remaining intact to this day.
The book then examines the modern history of Iran, from the struggles of the constitutionalist era, and American and British imperialism in the early 20th century, the emergence of oil as a key factor in Iranian politics, the struggles of Iran in the World War eras, and during the Cold War. The emergence of the Pahlavi dynasty was interesting, and its struggles and adherence to American foreign policy. The complex social issues emerging in Iran during this era, revolving around the suppression of the religious elite, the emergence of new identities and voices in politics, and the struggle between rigid neo-liberal autocracy on one hand, and socialist influences on the other, culminating in the collapse of the Pahlavi state, and the emergence of modern Iran as a theocratic nation. The complex factors and allegiances of this revolution were interesting, and the results rigid opposition by the United States, leading to further entrenchment and isolation of the Iranian state. Even so, economic progress in the nation has been rather large, considering the hostility of Western trading interests. Much like modern Russia, which seems to have built some capacity to withstand Western sanctions, Iran has long been under the yoke of such economic isolation, leading to the inevitable retrenchment of conservative elite as they seek to stamp out opposition and direct the economy with limited resources, while maintaining power.
A fascinating book, well written and researched, and refreshing for its perspective. The historical perspective here is one of neutrality, with an attempt to not coopt history to suit modern historical narratives. Instead, a long look at Iran leads to the thought that many factors have not changed much - a similar issue that arises in most societies and nations globally. It also places Iran firmly in its geographic and historical sphere, while examining the effects of growing global interactions that began to take place at the beginning of this chronicle, and accelerate as time moved on. A great read through and through, and easily recommended to anyone looking for a good one volume history of modern Iran, that focuses on Iran itself, and not only the global actors that surround it.
November 15, 2020
اثر شگفت عباس امانت در تحلیل تاریخ معاصر ایران، مانند آثار "یرواند آبراهامیان" و "عباس میلانی" و تنی چند دیگر، خواندنی ست. اگرچه ترجمه ی کتاب به فارسی، بدون سانسور بخش های مهم، آرزویی بیش نیست اما، اثر عباس امانت، به ویژه برای آنها که با گزارش های شخصی و گزافه گویی های متورم ملی، ذهنشان نسبت به تاریخ ایران، منحرف شده، مجموعه ای ست که تنها دیدن سرفصل هایش شعف ایستادن کودکی در یک مغازه ی شیرینی فروشی را زنده می کند؛ 500 سال تاریخ تحلیلی، با عبور از 5 سلسله یا دوره، از صفویه تا جمهوری اسلامی، 3 انقلاب، سه جنگ داخلی، 4 اشغال خارجی، و.. از دست رفتن بخش هایی از سرزمین، و... به اعتبار نویسنده و به راستی کاری ست سترگ شبیه فرش پر نقش و نگار ایرانی. نتیجه ی بیست سال پژوهش مولف، کتابی ست نزدیک به هزار صفحه، که بخش بزرگش در بر گیرنده ی تلاش های ملتی ست برای آزادی، در درازای قرن بیستم، و این که چگونه وضعیت جغرافیای سرزمین سبب شد تا بسیاری از این تلاش ها به گل بنشیند(شخصن معتقدم فرهنگ ملی مسبب اصلی ست، نه جفرافیا). از ستیز تاج و خدا در عهد صفوی تا ستیز میان سنت و مدرنیته، تراژدی اشغال ایران در طی دو جنگ، وصف تراژیک نفت از بامداد کشف تا ملی شدن و کودتا. اثری که از سوی جامعه ی دانشگاهی بسیار ستایش شده. یک خواننده ی آمریکایی می نویسد؛ حالا می توانم ناباوری ایرانی ها را درک کنم. مهم این نیست که ما راست می گوییم یا نه�� مهم این است که ایرانیان پشت هر پشتیبانی، شاهد دروغ و خدعه و نیرنگ بوده اند. با تصویب قانونی در 1941 در کنگره ی آمریکا، متفقین با اشغال ایران، کنترل جاده و راه آهن و هرچه ی دیگر را به دست می گیرند، و ایرانیان در سرزمین خود به بهانه ی "جنگ برای آزادی"، آزادی را از دست می دهند. سپاه بی شمار متفقین از منابع کشوری تامین می شود که باشندگانش، خود دچار قحطی و وبا هستند؛ دشمنانی در لباس دوست که پس از جنگ نیز به غارت ثروت ملتی ادامه می دهند؛ تنها 16 درصد از کل عواید نفت، نصیب ایرانیان می شد و چون آن را ملی کردند، انگلیسی ها و آمریکایی ها تا سرنگونی نخست وزیر قانونی سرزمین، خود را صاحب حق می دانستند. تاریخ درس بزرگی ست اگرچه معلم بدی ست. خوانندگان غیر ایرانی توصه می کنند که کتاب را آهسته و آرام بخوانید تا همسایه های ایرانی تان را بهتر بشناسید. شخصن معتقدم ایرانیان به آموزش فرهنگی بیشتر نیاز دارند تا جنگ و انقلاب!
February 8, 2020
This is the best book on history of modern Iran that I have come across to. Although, I wouldn't recommend it for a first read. It's a shame that this has no chance of being translated and published inside Iran, at least legally.
June 16, 2020
Big and detailed modern history of Iran. I learned a lot in the two months I spent reading this.
December 25, 2023
من از کودکی تاریخ ایران را چند بار ختم کرده ام تا جایی که حساب دفعاتش از دستم در رفته ، شاید اصلا همین عشق به تاریخ من را به سمت تحصیلات اکادمیک مورد علاقه ام سوق داد به هر روی این را میدانم که هر بار با کتاب های متعدد و البته متفاوت همچنین با نگرش های مختلف آن را بررسی کرده ام و البته باید بگویم به اقتضای رشته تحصیلی نیز چندین بار ان را با متون اکادمیک به اتمام رسانده ام . برای همین کمتر برایم پیش امده که کتابی بخوانم و بگویم وای چقدر متفاوت چه زاویه نگاه جدیدی ، این را نخوانده بودم و .. گرچه که هرکتاب به سهم خود به اموخته ها می افزاید ولی حقیقتا از یک جایی به بعد دیگر دنبال یافتن نکته جدیدی نبودم بیشتر با برداشت حل معما از زاویه افراد مختلف ان را بررسی کرده و همچنان خواهم کرد.
اما این کتاب �.
شاید شروع خواندن این کتاب را زیادی به تاخیر انداختم ،از حدود دوسال پیش این کتاب را نگه داشتم تا اینکه دیدن نسخه انگلیسی ان در کتابفروشی هاروارد تلنگر خوبی برای خواندن ان به من زد .
باید بگویم زاویه نگاه نویسنده به تاریخ ایران مدرن حقیقتا برایم مهیج بود . نویسنده از دریچه دوگانه ای به همه چیز نگاه میکند . هرجا حس میکردم نگاه نویسنده جانبدارانه است به خصوص بعد از انقلاب یا در ارتباط با تشیع یک چرخش مجدد در برداشت اش میزد و باعث میشد که تا حدی ان را تعدیل کند ، برخی صرفا باتوجه به عقاید شخصی نویسنده پیش داوری کرده و تصور نگاهی جانبدارانه دارند اما من با توجه به اینکه تاریخ را جدای از عباس امانت خوانده ام حقیقتا چنین برداشتی ان حداقل برای بیشتر مطالب کتاب نداشتم . البته من هنوز هم باور دارم نویسنده تاریخ نباید از انتخاب برخی القاب کنایه امیز برای افراد استفاده کند و دید قضاوت گرایانه ای به مخاطب بدهد از سوی دیگر شاید برخی مطالب نیاز به بررسی بیشتر داشته باشند چراکه هیچ اثری کاملا بی نقص نیست . در مجموع باید بگویم بسیار از خواندنش لذت بردم و ابعاد تازه ای از تاریخ ایران مدرن را دریافتم ، برای من فصول مرتبط با صفویه و دوران بعد از انقلاب اسلامی از همان فصولی بود که نکاتی تازه،متفاوت و خواندنی داشت از این رو ان را به دوستانی که میخواهند از جنبه های غیر اشناتر بررسی کنند به شدت پیشنهاد میکنم.
اما این کتاب �.
شاید شروع خواندن این کتاب را زیادی به تاخیر انداختم ،از حدود دوسال پیش این کتاب را نگه داشتم تا اینکه دیدن نسخه انگلیسی ان در کتابفروشی هاروارد تلنگر خوبی برای خواندن ان به من زد .
باید بگویم زاویه نگاه نویسنده به تاریخ ایران مدرن حقیقتا برایم مهیج بود . نویسنده از دریچه دوگانه ای به همه چیز نگاه میکند . هرجا حس میکردم نگاه نویسنده جانبدارانه است به خصوص بعد از انقلاب یا در ارتباط با تشیع یک چرخش مجدد در برداشت اش میزد و باعث میشد که تا حدی ان را تعدیل کند ، برخی صرفا باتوجه به عقاید شخصی نویسنده پیش داوری کرده و تصور نگاهی جانبدارانه دارند اما من با توجه به اینکه تاریخ را جدای از عباس امانت خوانده ام حقیقتا چنین برداشتی ان حداقل برای بیشتر مطالب کتاب نداشتم . البته من هنوز هم باور دارم نویسنده تاریخ نباید از انتخاب برخی القاب کنایه امیز برای افراد استفاده کند و دید قضاوت گرایانه ای به مخاطب بدهد از سوی دیگر شاید برخی مطالب نیاز به بررسی بیشتر داشته باشند چراکه هیچ اثری کاملا بی نقص نیست . در مجموع باید بگویم بسیار از خواندنش لذت بردم و ابعاد تازه ای از تاریخ ایران مدرن را دریافتم ، برای من فصول مرتبط با صفویه و دوران بعد از انقلاب اسلامی از همان فصولی بود که نکاتی تازه،متفاوت و خواندنی داشت از این رو ان را به دوستانی که میخواهند از جنبه های غیر اشناتر بررسی کنند به شدت پیشنهاد میکنم.
Want to read
October 8, 2018 دکترکریمی حکاک دراشاره به کتاب "ایران : تاریخ مدرن " دکترعباس امانت میگوید : آنچه انکاپذیرنیست این است که درخلال پانصدسال ایران نقش ها ونگاره هایی ساخته ، بناها وباغ وبوستان هایی وشعروحکمتی آفریده است که میتوان درآن نگریست و دراندیشه فرورفت یادرآن ارام گرفت وازهیاهو و ستم ، ازنابردباری ، وازغل وزنجیر هم رنگی باچماعت فاصله گرفت ، یاحتی ازاین همه گریخت .
درفرهنگ ایران ، هرچه ازتاریخ سیاسی بیشترفاصله بگیریم ، احساس یاس وناتوانی حاصل ازسازوکارگذشتگان ، جای خودرابه احساسی حقیقی تر ، زیبنده تروشادترمی بخشدتابدان جاکه فردبه جای حس روایتی اززوال کشوری دیرین ، خودرادربرابرمردمانی می بیند فرهنگ آفرین وهنرپرورکه میتوان گفت درنهایت روبه تعالی دارندوآرمان های انسانی شان فراسوی زیروبم های سیاسی ، همچنان به پیش میرود و جامعه بشری راغنا میبخشد.
گردش حزن آلودی درباغ خاطره ها ! دراین گردش حزن آلودمیتوان شاه اسماعیل رادیدکه پس ازشکست درجنگ چالدران ، افسرده ودرهم شکسته ، حتی دست شسته از شوق شیعه کردن ایرانیان وخسته ازنبردبا ازبکان وعثمانیان ، مجذوب هنر"بهزاد" ودیگرهنرمندانی که خوددرتبریز گردآورده میشود.به شاگردی ایشان روی می آوردورنگ زدن پس زمینه های مینیاتورهای کتابی رابرعهده میگیردکه بعدها باعنوان "شاهنامه شاه طهماسبی " درمقام یکی ازوالاترین نمونه های هنرکتاب آرایی ایرانیان به بازارهای جهان راه می یابد.
درفرهنگ ایران ، هرچه ازتاریخ سیاسی بیشترفاصله بگیریم ، احساس یاس وناتوانی حاصل ازسازوکارگذشتگان ، جای خودرابه احساسی حقیقی تر ، زیبنده تروشادترمی بخشدتابدان جاکه فردبه جای حس روایتی اززوال کشوری دیرین ، خودرادربرابرمردمانی می بیند فرهنگ آفرین وهنرپرورکه میتوان گفت درنهایت روبه تعالی دارندوآرمان های انسانی شان فراسوی زیروبم های سیاسی ، همچنان به پیش میرود و جامعه بشری راغنا میبخشد.
گردش حزن آلودی درباغ خاطره ها ! دراین گردش حزن آلودمیتوان شاه اسماعیل رادیدکه پس ازشکست درجنگ چالدران ، افسرده ودرهم شکسته ، حتی دست شسته از شوق شیعه کردن ایرانیان وخسته ازنبردبا ازبکان وعثمانیان ، مجذوب هنر"بهزاد" ودیگرهنرمندانی که خوددرتبریز گردآورده میشود.به شاگردی ایشان روی می آوردورنگ زدن پس زمینه های مینیاتورهای کتابی رابرعهده میگیردکه بعدها باعنوان "شاهنامه شاه طهماسبی " درمقام یکی ازوالاترین نمونه های هنرکتاب آرایی ایرانیان به بازارهای جهان راه می یابد.
July 12, 2022
This book is massive. It took me about 6 weeks to listen on Audible at an increased speed. I was hoping to walk away from this book with a firm grasp on Iranian/Persian culture. Instead I've walked away with the following:
*Iran is an outlier, by design; through the centuries, the population has almost always been led by a tendency toward cultural, political, and religious isolationism--even among its neighboring Muslim countries.
*Even "the left" in Iran is super far right.
*Iranian and American politics actually have a great deal in common, especially currently. Both are usurped and undermined by a hard-line religious right that would like to codify the dominant religion into law and who seek to place religious representatives as leaders of their governments. The far-right of today's Republican party is pushing for what amounts to a Christian version of Sharia Law, with highly public punitive measures for nonconformists. An intentional shunning of facts and evidence in preference to fundamentalist ideals. Everything that was in place in Iran before the late 1970s revolution is happening now in America.
*Must familiarize myself with more Iranian/Persian art forms.
*You can't talk about Iranian history without also talking about Indian history (and vice-versa); the geography forbids it.
*Need to better understand the Sunni-Shia divide, and how these perspectives on Islam inform the region's politics and culture.
*There are religious and ethnic minorities in Iran I was previously unaware of; previous to reading this, I didn't think any religious except Islam were permitted there.
*Pluralism is hard. Even for countries who have been able to achieve it more successfully than others, making space for everyone in the political process is an incredibly difficult task for societies.
*Iran is an outlier, by design; through the centuries, the population has almost always been led by a tendency toward cultural, political, and religious isolationism--even among its neighboring Muslim countries.
*Even "the left" in Iran is super far right.
*Iranian and American politics actually have a great deal in common, especially currently. Both are usurped and undermined by a hard-line religious right that would like to codify the dominant religion into law and who seek to place religious representatives as leaders of their governments. The far-right of today's Republican party is pushing for what amounts to a Christian version of Sharia Law, with highly public punitive measures for nonconformists. An intentional shunning of facts and evidence in preference to fundamentalist ideals. Everything that was in place in Iran before the late 1970s revolution is happening now in America.
*Must familiarize myself with more Iranian/Persian art forms.
*You can't talk about Iranian history without also talking about Indian history (and vice-versa); the geography forbids it.
*Need to better understand the Sunni-Shia divide, and how these perspectives on Islam inform the region's politics and culture.
*There are religious and ethnic minorities in Iran I was previously unaware of; previous to reading this, I didn't think any religious except Islam were permitted there.
*Pluralism is hard. Even for countries who have been able to achieve it more successfully than others, making space for everyone in the political process is an incredibly difficult task for societies.
April 1, 2024
Not the kind of book you'd want to drop on your toes, but a good one to listen to when you're doing housework or some other mundane chore and you feel like diving deeply into the tumultuous history of one of the Middle East's more curious nations.
Amanat has written a definitive, highly scholarly history of Iran which, despite its length and depth, rarely fails to keep one engaged. An extremely solid effort, and a beautiful, beautiful cover to boot, if only I had a physical copy rather than just the Audible version, which I'm sure would be even more wonderful to read.
Amanat has written a definitive, highly scholarly history of Iran which, despite its length and depth, rarely fails to keep one engaged. An extremely solid effort, and a beautiful, beautiful cover to boot, if only I had a physical copy rather than just the Audible version, which I'm sure would be even more wonderful to read.
May 3, 2019
This is an incredibly encompassing work. It goes into rich detail about every aspect of the various kings, elite people, social movements, culture, and just life in general that has transpired throughout the past 5 centuries of Iranian history.
The book is a literal typhoon of information just blasting you with so much knowledge that you become dazed and mesmerized.
Despite having read a few works on Iranian history previously, I still learned so much from this book, as there can obviously be put a lot of information into a 1000 densely written pages. It is almost futile to try to summarize it here. All that I can say is that Irans history is a very lively one, full of intrigue, drama, revolutions, murders, social movements, enigmatic and ruthless leaders, cunning warriors, smart and stunning queens, political and religious cabals, suffocating social control both towards the islamic and secular direction.
It is in other words, a very interesting history, that at times almost reads like a fictional story rather than actual history.
But unavoidably, there's a lot of fluff and perhaps unnecessary details interspersed into the chapters. It can get a fair bit slow at times.
Another thing I do like about this work, is the way that Abbas also focuses on cultural icons, be it poets, singers, movie directors or sport stars of the time, and gives time and room to include them and their works (where applicable), which is important as this is as big a part of understanding a culture as the history of its people.
I do however find it slightly unfortunate that Abbas doesn't cover the recent decades in the post islamic revolution era very deeply. There's very brief and superficial mentions of Rafsanjani, Khatami, Ahmadinejad and barely a mention of Hassan Rouhani. While I understand that the scope of this book is probably to cover the more distant centuries more, and the recent history still being so fresh in memory as to not warrant being included in this work. Especially Rouhani makes sense, as he's still the president as of right now (and the writing of the book). But Rafsanjani and Khatamis tenures, and to some degree Ahmadinejads could've used a slightly more in-depth coverage.
Especially, the Green Movement of 2009 deserves a lot more coverage than the barely 2 pages vague description it was granted at the end of the book.
Beyond this, I have a hard time finding any faults with this work!
The book is a literal typhoon of information just blasting you with so much knowledge that you become dazed and mesmerized.
Despite having read a few works on Iranian history previously, I still learned so much from this book, as there can obviously be put a lot of information into a 1000 densely written pages. It is almost futile to try to summarize it here. All that I can say is that Irans history is a very lively one, full of intrigue, drama, revolutions, murders, social movements, enigmatic and ruthless leaders, cunning warriors, smart and stunning queens, political and religious cabals, suffocating social control both towards the islamic and secular direction.
It is in other words, a very interesting history, that at times almost reads like a fictional story rather than actual history.
But unavoidably, there's a lot of fluff and perhaps unnecessary details interspersed into the chapters. It can get a fair bit slow at times.
Another thing I do like about this work, is the way that Abbas also focuses on cultural icons, be it poets, singers, movie directors or sport stars of the time, and gives time and room to include them and their works (where applicable), which is important as this is as big a part of understanding a culture as the history of its people.
I do however find it slightly unfortunate that Abbas doesn't cover the recent decades in the post islamic revolution era very deeply. There's very brief and superficial mentions of Rafsanjani, Khatami, Ahmadinejad and barely a mention of Hassan Rouhani. While I understand that the scope of this book is probably to cover the more distant centuries more, and the recent history still being so fresh in memory as to not warrant being included in this work. Especially Rouhani makes sense, as he's still the president as of right now (and the writing of the book). But Rafsanjani and Khatamis tenures, and to some degree Ahmadinejads could've used a slightly more in-depth coverage.
Especially, the Green Movement of 2009 deserves a lot more coverage than the barely 2 pages vague description it was granted at the end of the book.
Beyond this, I have a hard time finding any faults with this work!
April 1, 2018
Amanat's book is a magisterial history of Iran, and with some additional editing and more elegantly flowing prose, could have earned more stars from this reviewer. Amanat's strength lies in tracing the vast political, economic, social, and religious history of Iran from the beginnings of the Safavid Empire in the 1500s through the consolidation of Khomeini's Islamic Revolution in 1989. Amidst dueling dynastic heirs, countless invasions, and the tensions between the monarchy, the bureaucracy, and the Shi'i religion, Amanat provides a portrait of a country in the thorough and detailed way of a Norman Davies or Richard J. Evans.
Unfortunately, the book is pock-marked with grammatical and spelling mistakes that mar the flow of the history being told. Particularly troublesome is the lack of the word "the" before capitalized terms, as well as numerous other grammatical mistakes that leaves one scratching their head as far as the editor's role in releasing this book (note that I read the Kindle, and so I cannot comment on whether such errors are in the print version).
Amanat leaves the reader with the sense that the Islamic Republic of Iran that we encounter today bears striking resemblance to the Pahlavi and past imperial predecessors, though suffused with the Qom-ified veneer of Shi'i Islam. The best way to understand Iran, in the context of its place in the world, its nuclear ambitions, and its posture towards the West, may not be Islam, but the country's long and troubled history with those beyond its borders of the Zagros Mountains.
Unfortunately, the book is pock-marked with grammatical and spelling mistakes that mar the flow of the history being told. Particularly troublesome is the lack of the word "the" before capitalized terms, as well as numerous other grammatical mistakes that leaves one scratching their head as far as the editor's role in releasing this book (note that I read the Kindle, and so I cannot comment on whether such errors are in the print version).
Amanat leaves the reader with the sense that the Islamic Republic of Iran that we encounter today bears striking resemblance to the Pahlavi and past imperial predecessors, though suffused with the Qom-ified veneer of Shi'i Islam. The best way to understand Iran, in the context of its place in the world, its nuclear ambitions, and its posture towards the West, may not be Islam, but the country's long and troubled history with those beyond its borders of the Zagros Mountains.
October 26, 2017
I have always loved history and Persia holds a special place in my heart, so I was very excited to see this book offered on NetGalley. When I initially requested this book, I did not realize that it was some 1000 pages long. I was momentarily intimidated and thought it would take me months to get through it. Most history books tend to be somewhat and tedious to read and I was unsure of what to expect. I needn't have worried, however. Mr. Amanat writes in an engaging style and I was pulled in quite easily.
The book cover 500 hundred years of Persian and modern Iranian history and the author’s knowledge and authority on the subject is apparent throughout. The Persian empire’s history is among the most fascinating in the world. This book does not disappoint. It is detailed and the reader is fortunate to get a comprehensive picture of a complex and intriguing country with rich traditions and a unique culture.
I would definitely recommend this book to readers interested in history and expanding their knowledge on the region. I will also be buying a copy for my personal library so that I can go back to certain periods and reread them at a slower pace. My 13-year old son is also a history buff and while he may not be ready for this book yet, he will be one day.
Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for providing a free copy of the book.
The book cover 500 hundred years of Persian and modern Iranian history and the author’s knowledge and authority on the subject is apparent throughout. The Persian empire’s history is among the most fascinating in the world. This book does not disappoint. It is detailed and the reader is fortunate to get a comprehensive picture of a complex and intriguing country with rich traditions and a unique culture.
I would definitely recommend this book to readers interested in history and expanding their knowledge on the region. I will also be buying a copy for my personal library so that I can go back to certain periods and reread them at a slower pace. My 13-year old son is also a history buff and while he may not be ready for this book yet, he will be one day.
Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for providing a free copy of the book.
July 21, 2020
The author Abbas Amanat was born in Iran and is currently a William Graham Sumner Professor of History at Yale University and the Director of the Yale Program in Iranian Studies. Carl Sagan is known for saying "You have to know the past to understand the present." and in exploring the modern history of Iran Amanat starts with the Safavid Empire at the beginning of the 16th century in this extensive study of Iran's evolution as a nation to the present day. Granted this book is not a fast read but one packed with dates and names of those who had an impact on the intricate development of Iran. I came away after reading this book with a much better understanding of the makings of the Islamic Republic of Iran and a better understanding of the makeup of the Iranian people and what differentiates them from the Arab world.
I also found the following 60 minute video very informative where Professor Amanat discusses modern Iran from the Constitutional Revolution of 1905 to the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
I also found the following 60 minute video very informative where Professor Amanat discusses modern Iran from the Constitutional Revolution of 1905 to the Islamic Revolution in 1979.
May 1, 2020
Stendhal's refers to the colours of the radicals and the clergy, as his protagonist attempts to pass as a conservative cleric while hiding his radical credentials. In that vein did Mohammad Reza Shah (deposed in 1979) once describe the ayatollahs who replaced him as “the coalition of the red and black reactionaries�. While the Ayatollah Khomeini preached his own new and extreme religious doctrine, the revolution absorbed the thought of cutting-edge leftist and postcolonial thinkers (among them Fanon, Sartre, and Massignon), primarily via the ideologue Ali Shariati. As Julian Sorel discovered, the combination was never really viable.
(Above: the Azadi Tower in Iran, one of the Shah's last great extravagances.)
This book, written by the director of Yale's program in Iranian Studies, covers the modern state of Iran from its founding with the Safavid Empire in 1501, through the Qajar and Pahlavi dynasties, and to the present day. However roughly the second half of the book is about 20th-century developments, and it goes deep on the current republic: the regime's crimes, economic and demographic changes, the Iran-Iraq war, and the cultural production both inside the country and in exile.
Iran's founding made it the first Shi'i state, in some ways mirroring the cleavage in Christendom (Martin Luther nailed his theses to the door in 1517). During that time and the subsequent Qajar reign, the country was fairly closed off and underdeveloped, with bloody succession battles following the death of each shah. During the 19th century, the rise of European empires to its south (Britain) and north (Russia) resulted in Iran being torn between the two powers and losing much of its territory. When oil was discovered in 1901, things again took a turn for the worse. Reza Khan, a military dictator, became shah after a brief and chaotic interregnum, something akin to Germany's pre-Weimar period, when liberal, socialist and atheist ideas were briefly in vogue.
Modern Iran has a tendency toward victimhood, and one upshot of this book is that is is fairly justified. From the , the extortionate shenanigans of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, the Western overthrow of Reza Khan in place of his son, the "temporary invasion" during World War II, and of course the CIA's 1953 coup against Mosadegh. Even without going into the root causes of each event, one can understand why the country has a sense of grievance, a national childhood trauma compelling distrust of outsiders.
The "Persiosphere" of time immemorial spans from India (via Babur and the Moguls) through the plains of central Asia (Tajik and the Afghan language Dari are Persian dialects) to Mesopotamia to the Caucasus. The modern state is far smaller, and its rogue government, which has tortured and executed without trial thousands of its citizens, has attempted to erase much of its past culture and beauty. Hopefully the next chapter of its history - whenever it comes - will be a more tolerant one which allows expression of this ancient people's vibrancy, creativity and romantic soul.
(Above: the Azadi Tower in Iran, one of the Shah's last great extravagances.)
This book, written by the director of Yale's program in Iranian Studies, covers the modern state of Iran from its founding with the Safavid Empire in 1501, through the Qajar and Pahlavi dynasties, and to the present day. However roughly the second half of the book is about 20th-century developments, and it goes deep on the current republic: the regime's crimes, economic and demographic changes, the Iran-Iraq war, and the cultural production both inside the country and in exile.
Iran's founding made it the first Shi'i state, in some ways mirroring the cleavage in Christendom (Martin Luther nailed his theses to the door in 1517). During that time and the subsequent Qajar reign, the country was fairly closed off and underdeveloped, with bloody succession battles following the death of each shah. During the 19th century, the rise of European empires to its south (Britain) and north (Russia) resulted in Iran being torn between the two powers and losing much of its territory. When oil was discovered in 1901, things again took a turn for the worse. Reza Khan, a military dictator, became shah after a brief and chaotic interregnum, something akin to Germany's pre-Weimar period, when liberal, socialist and atheist ideas were briefly in vogue.
Modern Iran has a tendency toward victimhood, and one upshot of this book is that is is fairly justified. From the , the extortionate shenanigans of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, the Western overthrow of Reza Khan in place of his son, the "temporary invasion" during World War II, and of course the CIA's 1953 coup against Mosadegh. Even without going into the root causes of each event, one can understand why the country has a sense of grievance, a national childhood trauma compelling distrust of outsiders.
The "Persiosphere" of time immemorial spans from India (via Babur and the Moguls) through the plains of central Asia (Tajik and the Afghan language Dari are Persian dialects) to Mesopotamia to the Caucasus. The modern state is far smaller, and its rogue government, which has tortured and executed without trial thousands of its citizens, has attempted to erase much of its past culture and beauty. Hopefully the next chapter of its history - whenever it comes - will be a more tolerant one which allows expression of this ancient people's vibrancy, creativity and romantic soul.
May 12, 2023
This book is overloaded with information, which is admirable but it’s also its downfall. The author feels compelled to cover everything from the economical situation to politics to poetry and what not, across multiple eventful centuries in Iran, and inevitably fails in delivering an account of any depth. My sense is that for those already familiar with the history of Iran, this is a nice refresher and could fill in some knowledge gaps. But this is not a book that gives a naïve reader a clear sense of the political evolution of Iran in any coherent and meaningful way.
June 17, 2023
یک روایت تاریخ نسبتا منسجم از ایران صفویه تا امروز که بیشتر اطلاعات آن در درس‌نامه‌ها� پراکنده اینجا و آنجا موجود است. آنجا که روایتش بیان وقایع تاریخی است، نسبتا خوش‌خوا� است، اما آنجا که می‌خواه� شرح تفسیری خودش را ارائه دهد، به کلی‌گویی‌ه� و بازگویی نظرهای کوچه‌وبازار� عموما ایدئولوژیک گرفتار شده. از انقلاب مشروطه به این‌س� لحن و بیانش عوض شده و انگار که متن را روی دور تند گذاشته‌ان�. تاریخ پس از انقلابش هم عملا تاریخ نیست، بلکه ذکر کلی‌گویی‌ها� موجود در شبکه‌ها� اجتماعی و معرفی چند هنرمند و اثر پساانقلاب است. با گذشت نزدیک به چهار دهه، به قدری سند تاریخی هست که بتوان روایت تاریخی ریزبینانه‌تر� از وقایع پس از انقلاب تا امروز به دست داد (دستکم تا ۲۰۱۷ که سال انتشار آن است).
فصل آخر کتاب به عنوان مؤخره هم ناامیدکننده است. کتابی که از دوره� صفوی شروع می‌شو� باید چیزی بیش از تقابل خمینی-پهلوی برای جمع‌بند� داشته باشد. انتظار ترسیم یک الگوی تاریخی چهارصد ساله را نداشتم، اما دستکم می‌ش� یک روایت عام کلاسیک تفسیری از محتوای وزین کتاب در اختیار گذاشت!
فصل آخر کتاب به عنوان مؤخره هم ناامیدکننده است. کتابی که از دوره� صفوی شروع می‌شو� باید چیزی بیش از تقابل خمینی-پهلوی برای جمع‌بند� داشته باشد. انتظار ترسیم یک الگوی تاریخی چهارصد ساله را نداشتم، اما دستکم می‌ش� یک روایت عام کلاسیک تفسیری از محتوای وزین کتاب در اختیار گذاشت!
April 25, 2018
This book is amazing I personally love it 🌷🌷🌷🌷
February 12, 2019
امیدوارم این کتاب بتونه جای مراجع فعلی تاریخ معاصر ایران رو بگیره و پایه ای باشه برای کتب و تحقیقات بعدی در این زمینه
November 9, 2019
I need to add Abbas Amanat’s other books to my reading list! (Read again, maybe)
February 16, 2024
عباس امانت تاریخی بدون قهرمان و ضدقهرمان، بدون هواداری از یک طرف هر دوگانه و بدون تکرار کلیشه‌ها� نهادینه‌شد� در روشنفکران ایرانی نوشته است. البته که او در روایتش نگاه تحلیلی خاص خود را دارد، اما در هر قسمت از تاریخ دوران مدرن ایران می‌کوش� تمام جوانب را بسنجد و بازگو کند. هر چه «تاریخ ایران مدرن» آبراهامیان مطابق آن کلیشه‌ه� و حتی بعضاً مطابق روح حاکم بر برخی بخش‌ها� کتب درسی تاریخ در دوران ج.ا است، کتاب امانت رهاکننده ذهن از قیدهای ایدئولوژی است. حتی این که امانت کتاب را از پیدایش صفویه آغاز کرده به تنهایی ارزش کتاب را برای فهم بافتار عصر مشروطه و گفتمان تجدد ایرانی چند برابر می‌کن�.
با این حال، جادادن پنج قرن تاریخ حتی در حجمی هزارصفحه‌ا� هم آسان نیست. در واقع در مطالعه کتاب نمی‌توا� انتظار داشت تک‌ت� رخدادهای تاریخی مرور شوند اما اگر کسی بخواهد کل این قرن‌ه� را پشت هم و با یک تحلیل منسجم و پیوسته دنبال کند، این کتاب فوق‌العاد� مناسب است. تحلیل‌ها� آقای امانت در دوره شکل‌گیر� انقلاب ۵۷ و به ویژه دوران استقرار و مستحکم‌شد� ج.ا هم برای من جالب توجه و مفید بودند.
با این حال، جادادن پنج قرن تاریخ حتی در حجمی هزارصفحه‌ا� هم آسان نیست. در واقع در مطالعه کتاب نمی‌توا� انتظار داشت تک‌ت� رخدادهای تاریخی مرور شوند اما اگر کسی بخواهد کل این قرن‌ه� را پشت هم و با یک تحلیل منسجم و پیوسته دنبال کند، این کتاب فوق‌العاد� مناسب است. تحلیل‌ها� آقای امانت در دوره شکل‌گیر� انقلاب ۵۷ و به ویژه دوران استقرار و مستحکم‌شد� ج.ا هم برای من جالب توجه و مفید بودند.
September 26, 2020
I should be revising for the examinations but I cannot bring myself to do it. Dear Diary,
This book is so comprehensive it felt like a world in itself. I took about a month or more to finish this book and even though I skimmed parts of it, I never thought of giving up -- that's when you know there is a perfect balance between readability and scholarship.
Although I know I've probably already forgotten more than 50% of what I've read, I really appreciated this book as my first foray into Iranian history, especially since the presentation of the material and the authorial opinions were pretty unbiased. Amanat certainly succeeded in delivering an authentic portrayal of Iranian history, one that is adequately detached but also simultaneously immersed in the intricacies of the Iranian identity -- one that dates back to the Sasanian Empire to the Age of Islam, from the ambiguous Qajar period to the modern Pahlavi era, and finally to the present-day under the Islamic Republic.
Like most people around me, and dare I venture, most people who consume Western news, I could not understand the vile anti-American rhetoric that seems to come out of the Islamic Republic every other day. I also could not really fathom how millions of people could possibly choose to subject themselves to despotic theocratic rule in the latter half of the 20th century.
This book certainly illuminated otherwise forgotten incidents in history which are deeply engrained in the Iranian consciousness -- the Western-sponsored coups in 1911 and 1953, the Western-sponsored rise to power of Reza Khan in 1927(?), his subsequent exile during WWII. No wonder the Iranians seem to harbour so much animosity towards the Americans especially. On a side-note, this book also informed my opinion on the egregiously and abominably exploitative nature of Western colonialism. Despicable gosh, especially the coup in 1953.
Also reading about the Islamic Revolution and the cult of personality around the detestable Khomeini has reinforced my belief that religion, when organised and institutionalised, is really just an arcane means to control the population. Sure, religion can strengthen national identity and perhaps bolster social cohesiveness but religion is just 1) never fully benevolent and 2) never fully depoliticised! Almost all religions establish a moral code of sorts and hierarchise society based on believes vs non-believers -- the positive social cohesiveness that comes from religion rests on the collective rejection of another segment of society, leading to entrenched discrimination and possible persecution. This is compounded when religion is invariably brought into politics by opportunists or pure radical clerics -- state-sponsored persecution happens, and worse still, brainwashing on a national level proceeds; those in power will just use religion to remain in power (case in point: the coterie of male clerics in Iran!) What's the point of having a prime minister and a popularly-elected president if the Supreme Leader still has supreme power? Make it make sense. Anyways I don't think the Islamic Republic will last... the autocratic nature of the theocracy and their regressive reading/application of Islamic law are just not compatible with the desires of a modern citizenry. yeah
But anyways you can learn to admire a nation and its culture/heritage/history without being a fan of its government.
This book is so comprehensive it felt like a world in itself. I took about a month or more to finish this book and even though I skimmed parts of it, I never thought of giving up -- that's when you know there is a perfect balance between readability and scholarship.
Although I know I've probably already forgotten more than 50% of what I've read, I really appreciated this book as my first foray into Iranian history, especially since the presentation of the material and the authorial opinions were pretty unbiased. Amanat certainly succeeded in delivering an authentic portrayal of Iranian history, one that is adequately detached but also simultaneously immersed in the intricacies of the Iranian identity -- one that dates back to the Sasanian Empire to the Age of Islam, from the ambiguous Qajar period to the modern Pahlavi era, and finally to the present-day under the Islamic Republic.
Like most people around me, and dare I venture, most people who consume Western news, I could not understand the vile anti-American rhetoric that seems to come out of the Islamic Republic every other day. I also could not really fathom how millions of people could possibly choose to subject themselves to despotic theocratic rule in the latter half of the 20th century.
This book certainly illuminated otherwise forgotten incidents in history which are deeply engrained in the Iranian consciousness -- the Western-sponsored coups in 1911 and 1953, the Western-sponsored rise to power of Reza Khan in 1927(?), his subsequent exile during WWII. No wonder the Iranians seem to harbour so much animosity towards the Americans especially. On a side-note, this book also informed my opinion on the egregiously and abominably exploitative nature of Western colonialism. Despicable gosh, especially the coup in 1953.
Also reading about the Islamic Revolution and the cult of personality around the detestable Khomeini has reinforced my belief that religion, when organised and institutionalised, is really just an arcane means to control the population. Sure, religion can strengthen national identity and perhaps bolster social cohesiveness but religion is just 1) never fully benevolent and 2) never fully depoliticised! Almost all religions establish a moral code of sorts and hierarchise society based on believes vs non-believers -- the positive social cohesiveness that comes from religion rests on the collective rejection of another segment of society, leading to entrenched discrimination and possible persecution. This is compounded when religion is invariably brought into politics by opportunists or pure radical clerics -- state-sponsored persecution happens, and worse still, brainwashing on a national level proceeds; those in power will just use religion to remain in power (case in point: the coterie of male clerics in Iran!) What's the point of having a prime minister and a popularly-elected president if the Supreme Leader still has supreme power? Make it make sense. Anyways I don't think the Islamic Republic will last... the autocratic nature of the theocracy and their regressive reading/application of Islamic law are just not compatible with the desires of a modern citizenry. yeah
But anyways you can learn to admire a nation and its culture/heritage/history without being a fan of its government.
May 25, 2021
I listened to the unabridged audio version of this title (read by Derek Perkins, Tantor Audio, 2018).
This isn’t a history book in the usual sense of the term. Amanat augments historical facts and chronology with cultural and sociological observations to tell us the complex story of a nation that has survived for millennia, despite multiple invasions, occupations, revolutions, civil wars, coups, and inept rulers. The book covers the last 500 years of Iran’s history, with emphasis on the 20th century, in four parts, sandwiched between an introduction and an epilogue.
Part 1. Early modern era, Safavid Empire to the end of the 18th century (1501-1797)
Part 2. Qajar Dynasty, encounters with the European powers, to the Constitutional Revolution (1797-1911)
Part 3. World War I to the end of the Pahlavi era (1914-1977)
Part 4. Shaping of the Islamic Revolution during its first phase (1977-1989)
In fact, the second half of the book perhaps contains too much in way of details of events that may be deemed less important from a historical perspective, even when literature, arts, and culture are blended in. This is an all-too-common occurrence in contemporary historical accounts, given that there are a lot more documents and testimonials describing recent events: Sort of like the drunk looking for his lost keys under a lamp-post, because the lighting is better there!
The book isn’t for the faint-hearted. About 42 hours long in its audio version, it is roughly four times as long as the average 11-hour (100,000-word) audiobook. The narrator, Derek Perkins, is a seasoned, award-winning performer, but he fails in his attempts to pronounce names of Persian individuals and geographic locations. This is a minor nuisance, however. I recommend the (audio)book highly.
This isn’t a history book in the usual sense of the term. Amanat augments historical facts and chronology with cultural and sociological observations to tell us the complex story of a nation that has survived for millennia, despite multiple invasions, occupations, revolutions, civil wars, coups, and inept rulers. The book covers the last 500 years of Iran’s history, with emphasis on the 20th century, in four parts, sandwiched between an introduction and an epilogue.
Part 1. Early modern era, Safavid Empire to the end of the 18th century (1501-1797)
Part 2. Qajar Dynasty, encounters with the European powers, to the Constitutional Revolution (1797-1911)
Part 3. World War I to the end of the Pahlavi era (1914-1977)
Part 4. Shaping of the Islamic Revolution during its first phase (1977-1989)
In fact, the second half of the book perhaps contains too much in way of details of events that may be deemed less important from a historical perspective, even when literature, arts, and culture are blended in. This is an all-too-common occurrence in contemporary historical accounts, given that there are a lot more documents and testimonials describing recent events: Sort of like the drunk looking for his lost keys under a lamp-post, because the lighting is better there!
The book isn’t for the faint-hearted. About 42 hours long in its audio version, it is roughly four times as long as the average 11-hour (100,000-word) audiobook. The narrator, Derek Perkins, is a seasoned, award-winning performer, but he fails in his attempts to pronounce names of Persian individuals and geographic locations. This is a minor nuisance, however. I recommend the (audio)book highly.
February 17, 2019
Save this one for when you have lots of patient reading time. It is a dense history that covers 500 plus years, with a chronological organization that doubles back on itself frequently to cover major themes. I wish I could say that I understand Iran better for having read it, but Iranian/Persian culture and history remains somewhat confusing, overwhelming, and complex to the point of "the more I read, the less I feel I understand." Nevertheless, my overwhelmed sense of the complexity of this geographical area and its people has been enhanced (some of the details from this history will surface at times, I'm sure, and remind me to not be superficial or stereotypical in my judgements and reactions), and I will be following the developments in Iran with an new compassion that comes from the realization that nations, cultures, and peoples are never as easy to define as we'd like to believe.
May 1, 2020
A very interesting book about Iran's history. The book describes Iran since the beginning of the Ottoman Empire. It also describes important cities as Isfahan and Tehran. Isfahan was an important trade site, especially for silk that was brought from China, and then transported to Europe. The history of the shahs is very interesting, as well as the role Islam played during the shaping of this wonderful country. Abbas Amanat details the information about the important historic Iranian figures that are remembered today.
October 26, 2024
Minus one star for using the word 'emasculate' WAY too often. Otherwise fantastic, and really helpful for understanding why the Middle East is such a mess (hint: we Westerners have a lot to do with it).
December 22, 2021
I'm going to have to come back to this at least once in order to fully understand everything. Rather too much modern history for my taste really but very interesting and informative.
November 24, 2022
This took forever to read! But wow, the research. I almost wish I had read it backward to see the trends unfold in reverse.
origin of 'barbarian' = person who mumbles >> alien
"She cautioned Karim Kahn about the transitory nature of power and the egalitarian nature of death."
"It was as if these elaborations were to impress jurist counterparts and rivals in the madrasa rather than having any useful purpose even for jurist's own students and training as Mojahed. Yet despite rising rivalries and bickering among the jurists, at moments of crisis the Ulama felt it their duty to defend the survival of the sharia, what they call the Kernel of Islam."
“As much as the Shah's journals were masterful in describing novelty, they were devoid of depth, let alone critical reflection. As if meant to see but not observe.�
“One cannot rule out his wide-eyed rush for a wholesale purchase of modernity.�
“Unlike technology and industrialization, which were hard to import, material culture and luxury commodities traveled well.�
“It would still be another half century though before the western notion of the urban grid would ruin the fabric of the old city.�
“Such fanciful persionizing of Europe as a hostile yet seductive realm may be read as symptomatic of Iran’s conflicting aspirations.�
“Themes of civilization and reform, the need for constitutional recourse, the heritage of the ancient past vs decline in the present, and the critique of conservatives� obstacles to modernity all laid the foundations of the constitutional discourse. They simply had been woken from their dormancy when the economic crisis at the turn of the twentieth century needed a language of protest.�
“It is even more condescending to expect that all revolutions would have a standard interpretation of modernity.�
�...firmly believed in exporting revolution by covert or overt assistance to the indigeneous nationalist movements.�
“They saw how the neighboring Ottoman Empire in its death throes had birthed competing nationalist entities.�
“They all knew their opposition to the bill was merely symbolic. It was as if they were delivering a eulogy for the constitutional revolution just two decades after its birth.�
“The Pathavi dress code was a powerful tool to transform Iranaian society into a bland and featureless mass, amnesic of its diversity and ready to be recast in a westernized mold.�
Standard oil of CA >> chevron
NJ >> exxon
NY >> mobile
texaco >> chevron
Gulf oil >> chevron
“In effect, by returning to the Jurists� fold, Khamenei reinvented juris prudence. No longer was it a mere obsession with pollution and intricate points of ritual cleansing, the rudiments of Shi'i juris prudence. Rather it aimed at cleaning the polluting politics and morals of secular modernity.�
“For him, Iran increasingly turned into a utopian object to be desired, a mechanical contraption to be assembled, and an edifice to be embellished rather than a complex society, often in disarray, deprived of a voice and deeply skeptical of his enterprise. If the best of intentions were to be assigned to him, the Shah demanded obedience and gratitude in exchange for an imagined fairytale land that he believed was within his grasp.�
“The magic of cinema fascinated Iranians not merely as a form of entertainment but also as a point of reference to measure the realities of their own society and culture and those of the others. A world of imagination that could be admired or despised, sought-after or avoided, and many times mixed feelings of desire and rejection were intertwined. It is not without reason that from the mid-1970s movie theaters became chief targets of militant Islamic attacks.�
“The unwritten code of conduct behind erratic judgements, if there was one, consisted of the judge’s own interpretations of crane and uncodified Shi’i penal injunctions.�
“As much as they employed means of modernity, first to shape and then to convey the revolutionary message, they also utilized the constitution and other democratic trappings to give the illusion of an Islamic utopia. as if it were impossible to cast off a political culture that had long honored authority by means of control and coercion. A leap from the Shah's great civilization to the Islamic Republic could be achieved only through an even stronger State now adorned with the new veneer of sanctity.�
�...often sneered at such bourgeois values as human and civil rights unless they were in their favor.�
�...so grew western support for Saddam as a tactical ally against Iran’s export of its Islamic revolution. That was despite the Iraqi regime’s dark record of human rights abuses, expansionist drive, and near psychopathic behavior of the men at the top.�
“The humiliating end to the war added an almost psychopathic urgency for another round of purges� The systematic execution in secret of at least 4500 political prisoners through the latter part of 1988 was one manifestation of the resume’s insecurity and its unexhausted reservoirs of violence.�
�...contrary to usual practice in the Islamic Republic overturning slaughtered bodies [to families] in exchange for the price of bullets.�
“The outpouring of emotion carried an underlying message. It was as if the public were not only mourning the loss of the Imam, but also burying with Khamenei’s remains the revolutionary passions that had motivated a generation, brought people into the streets and forever transformed Iranian society. It was a subtle message from exhausted public to leave behind protest rallies and sacrifice in the battlefield and move ahead toward grace and normalcy.�
“The byproduct of Iran’s demographic revolution were, to the regime, more of a potential liability than a precious workforce necessary to build Iran’s future. It was as if the boundary lines between the self and the other in the Isalmic Republic were drawn in such a fashion as to protect an elite minority loyal to the regime but inferior in education and skills, at the expense of repelling a far larger segment of the population who was educated and skilled but ideologically uncommitted to the emerging islamic order. Commitment (taahaad) over expertise (tahasos) was a popular slogan that cost the Iranian economy dearly.�
origin of 'barbarian' = person who mumbles >> alien
"She cautioned Karim Kahn about the transitory nature of power and the egalitarian nature of death."
"It was as if these elaborations were to impress jurist counterparts and rivals in the madrasa rather than having any useful purpose even for jurist's own students and training as Mojahed. Yet despite rising rivalries and bickering among the jurists, at moments of crisis the Ulama felt it their duty to defend the survival of the sharia, what they call the Kernel of Islam."
“As much as the Shah's journals were masterful in describing novelty, they were devoid of depth, let alone critical reflection. As if meant to see but not observe.�
“One cannot rule out his wide-eyed rush for a wholesale purchase of modernity.�
“Unlike technology and industrialization, which were hard to import, material culture and luxury commodities traveled well.�
“It would still be another half century though before the western notion of the urban grid would ruin the fabric of the old city.�
“Such fanciful persionizing of Europe as a hostile yet seductive realm may be read as symptomatic of Iran’s conflicting aspirations.�
“Themes of civilization and reform, the need for constitutional recourse, the heritage of the ancient past vs decline in the present, and the critique of conservatives� obstacles to modernity all laid the foundations of the constitutional discourse. They simply had been woken from their dormancy when the economic crisis at the turn of the twentieth century needed a language of protest.�
“It is even more condescending to expect that all revolutions would have a standard interpretation of modernity.�
�...firmly believed in exporting revolution by covert or overt assistance to the indigeneous nationalist movements.�
“They saw how the neighboring Ottoman Empire in its death throes had birthed competing nationalist entities.�
“They all knew their opposition to the bill was merely symbolic. It was as if they were delivering a eulogy for the constitutional revolution just two decades after its birth.�
“The Pathavi dress code was a powerful tool to transform Iranaian society into a bland and featureless mass, amnesic of its diversity and ready to be recast in a westernized mold.�
Standard oil of CA >> chevron
NJ >> exxon
NY >> mobile
texaco >> chevron
Gulf oil >> chevron
“In effect, by returning to the Jurists� fold, Khamenei reinvented juris prudence. No longer was it a mere obsession with pollution and intricate points of ritual cleansing, the rudiments of Shi'i juris prudence. Rather it aimed at cleaning the polluting politics and morals of secular modernity.�
“For him, Iran increasingly turned into a utopian object to be desired, a mechanical contraption to be assembled, and an edifice to be embellished rather than a complex society, often in disarray, deprived of a voice and deeply skeptical of his enterprise. If the best of intentions were to be assigned to him, the Shah demanded obedience and gratitude in exchange for an imagined fairytale land that he believed was within his grasp.�
“The magic of cinema fascinated Iranians not merely as a form of entertainment but also as a point of reference to measure the realities of their own society and culture and those of the others. A world of imagination that could be admired or despised, sought-after or avoided, and many times mixed feelings of desire and rejection were intertwined. It is not without reason that from the mid-1970s movie theaters became chief targets of militant Islamic attacks.�
“The unwritten code of conduct behind erratic judgements, if there was one, consisted of the judge’s own interpretations of crane and uncodified Shi’i penal injunctions.�
“As much as they employed means of modernity, first to shape and then to convey the revolutionary message, they also utilized the constitution and other democratic trappings to give the illusion of an Islamic utopia. as if it were impossible to cast off a political culture that had long honored authority by means of control and coercion. A leap from the Shah's great civilization to the Islamic Republic could be achieved only through an even stronger State now adorned with the new veneer of sanctity.�
�...often sneered at such bourgeois values as human and civil rights unless they were in their favor.�
�...so grew western support for Saddam as a tactical ally against Iran’s export of its Islamic revolution. That was despite the Iraqi regime’s dark record of human rights abuses, expansionist drive, and near psychopathic behavior of the men at the top.�
“The humiliating end to the war added an almost psychopathic urgency for another round of purges� The systematic execution in secret of at least 4500 political prisoners through the latter part of 1988 was one manifestation of the resume’s insecurity and its unexhausted reservoirs of violence.�
�...contrary to usual practice in the Islamic Republic overturning slaughtered bodies [to families] in exchange for the price of bullets.�
“The outpouring of emotion carried an underlying message. It was as if the public were not only mourning the loss of the Imam, but also burying with Khamenei’s remains the revolutionary passions that had motivated a generation, brought people into the streets and forever transformed Iranian society. It was a subtle message from exhausted public to leave behind protest rallies and sacrifice in the battlefield and move ahead toward grace and normalcy.�
“The byproduct of Iran’s demographic revolution were, to the regime, more of a potential liability than a precious workforce necessary to build Iran’s future. It was as if the boundary lines between the self and the other in the Isalmic Republic were drawn in such a fashion as to protect an elite minority loyal to the regime but inferior in education and skills, at the expense of repelling a far larger segment of the population who was educated and skilled but ideologically uncommitted to the emerging islamic order. Commitment (taahaad) over expertise (tahasos) was a popular slogan that cost the Iranian economy dearly.�
November 17, 2017
This is a long book that covers a great deal of history, much of it either unfamiliar to me or known through the distorting lens of western propaganda. It reaches back as far as the foundation of the Safavid Empire around 1500 and proceeds logarithmically up to events as recent as the Green Revolution of 2009.
Miraculously, the author maintains a coherent narrative throughout the text. It’s readable and has just the right amount of information to hold the attention of someone ignorant of even the basics of the material covered.
Miraculously, the author maintains a coherent narrative throughout the text. It’s readable and has just the right amount of information to hold the attention of someone ignorant of even the basics of the material covered.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 126 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.