In this dissertation, I examine the work of an important yet insufficiently studied Iranian novelist and short-story writer, Ahmad Mahmud. Because of his early affiliation with leftist socialist groups, Mahmud's work has been subject to various, sometimes contradictory, interpretations by critics. Such readings of Mahmud's work have resulted in making him a controversial literary figure. Hence, this project aims to re-examine the critics' current viewpoint of Mahmud's works, which they regard as "ideologically driven" and "Marxist and/or political writing." Although Mahmud's ideology played a significant role in creating his stories, particularly in his early works, I argue that storytelling is the predominant concern for Mahmud. In fact, a large portion of his writing depicts his own life and his own development as a person and a writer. Mahmud's portrayal of the main protagonist of his stories, Khaled, who goes through various stages of transformation, indeed reflects his own evolution and development. In other words, I contend that Mahmud's literary output is essentially "autobiographical." In addition, I argue that Mahmud's autobiographical fiction helps to shape and articulate his emerging role as a novelist as he strives to record decades of turbulent social and political upheaval and change in the post-1950s era, as the Iranian nation undergoes various stages of transformation and growth in search of a new identity and political autonomy. With an analysis of a select number of Mahmud's novels, furthermore, I discuss the social and historical nature of this transformation of the author/protagonist/nation and argue that from early on Mahmud was determined to depict the linear socio-political movement that took place in the modern history of Iran in the character of his memorable hero, Khaled, who appears in various guises and matures both as a person and a social entity from one novel to the next. / text

This dissertation explores the ways in which religious knowledge was produced and transmitted in Safavid madrasas, particularly in Isfahan, during the later Safavid period—from the reign of Shāh Abbās II (1642–66) to the end of Shāh Sulṭān Ḥusayn’s reign (1694–1722). It argues that Safavid madrasas functioned as multifaceted cultural centres that disseminated religious knowledge, preserved the Shi‘ite intellectual heritage, and played an important role in reconstructing, re-articulating, and contextualizing or contemporizing the past. Safavid madrasas, which were established thanks largely to the largesse and piety of the Safavid shahs, very often acted on behalf of the established political power. However, due to the flexible, inclusive, and personal character of Islamic pedagogy, Shi‘ite learning, like that of the wider Muslim community, could occur in a wide variety of places, from the houses of scholars to any mosque or shrine. After surveying Shi‘ite scholarship and its institutions from the early decades of Islamic history until the mid-seventeenth century, this study contextualizes the Madrasa-yi Sulṭānī, or Royal Madrasa, of late Safavid Isfahan within its political, social, and religious setting. This particular madrasa exemplifies the ways in which religious knowledge was transmitted in early modern Iran. By analyzing the deeds of endowment (waqfiyyas) of the Madrasa-yi Sulṭānī and other madrasa-mosque institutions built by Shāh Sulṭān Ḥusayn and members of the Safavid elite, this study sheds light on the organizing mechanisms and structures for such educational and charitable foundations. Based on the large number of extant ijāzas that were issued by Safavid scholars, and other primary sources, including waqfiyyas and autobiographies, this study reconstructs the curriculum of the Safavid madrasa and describes the pedagogical methods that Safavid scholars employed to transmit religious knowledge to their students. It also discusses the major problems facing Shi‘ite higher learning by examining the critiques of such scholars as Mullā Ṣadrā (d. 1635 or 1640), the Safavid philosopher, Muḥsin-i Fayḍ Kāshānī (d. 1679), a renowned traditionalist, and Muḥammad Bāqir Khurāsānī, known as Muḥaqqiq-i Sabzawārī (d. 1679), the Shaykh al-Islam of Isfahan and a prominent mujtahid. Finally it examines the life and career of Sayyid Mīr Muḥammad Bāqir Khātūnābādī (d. 1715), the first Safavid mullā-bāshī (head of religious scholars) and the first rector and professor of the Madrasa-yi Sulṭānī.

This dissertation explores the ways in which religious knowledge was produced and transmitted in Safavid madrasas, particularly in Isfahan, during the later Safavid period—from the reign of Shāh Abbās II (1642–66) to the end of Shāh Sulṭān Ḥusayn’s reign (1694–1722). It argues that Safavid madrasas functioned as multifaceted cultural centres that disseminated religious knowledge, preserved the Shi‘ite intellectual heritage, and played an important role in reconstructing, re-articulating, and contextualizing or contemporizing the past. Safavid madrasas, which were established thanks largely to the largesse and piety of the Safavid shahs, very often acted on behalf of the established political power. However, due to the flexible, inclusive, and personal character of Islamic pedagogy, Shi‘ite learning, like that of the wider Muslim community, could occur in a wide variety of places, from the houses of scholars to any mosque or shrine. After surveying Shi‘ite scholarship and its institutions from the early decades of Islamic history until the mid-seventeenth century, this study contextualizes the Madrasa-yi Sulṭānī, or Royal Madrasa, of late Safavid Isfahan within its political, social, and religious setting. This particular madrasa exemplifies the ways in which religious knowledge was transmitted in early modern Iran. By analyzing the deeds of endowment (waqfiyyas) of the Madrasa-yi Sulṭānī and other madrasa-mosque institutions built by Shāh Sulṭān Ḥusayn and members of the Safavid elite, this study sheds light on the organizing mechanisms and structures for such educational and charitable foundations. Based on the large number of extant ijāzas that were issued by Safavid scholars, and other primary sources, including waqfiyyas and autobiographies, this study reconstructs the curriculum of the Safavid madrasa and describes the pedagogical methods that Safavid scholars employed to transmit religious knowledge to their students. It also discusses the major problems facing Shi‘ite higher learning by examining the critiques of such scholars as Mullā Ṣadrā (d. 1635 or 1640), the Safavid philosopher, Muḥsin-i Fayḍ Kāshānī (d. 1679), a renowned traditionalist, and Muḥammad Bāqir Khurāsānī, known as Muḥaqqiq-i Sabzawārī (d. 1679), the Shaykh al-Islam of Isfahan and a prominent mujtahid. Finally it examines the life and career of Sayyid Mīr Muḥammad Bāqir Khātūnābādī (d. 1715), the first Safavid mullā-bāshī (head of religious scholars) and the first rector and professor of the Madrasa-yi Sulṭānī.

Russia and Iran have been subject to mutual influence since the reign of Shah Abbas I (1588-1629). For most of the time this relationship was not one of equals: since the early nineteenth century and lasting at least until 1946, Russia and then the USSR, in strong competition with Britain, had been gradually, and for the most part steadily, increasing its political, cultural and economic influence within Iran up to very high levels. Nevertheless, the history of Russian/Soviet-Iranian relations still remains understudied, particularly in English-language scholarship. One of the main reasons for this gap must be sought in the hampered access of Western researchers to Russian archives during the Soviet time, which made them draw on Russian-language literature, traditionally pre-occupied with the history of social movements, and with the mechanical retelling of political and economic processes. Thus the cultural and political ties of the two countries on institutional and individual levels (especially during the period surrounding 1917), the influence of Russia, and then of the USSR, on Iran and vice versa, in political, economic and cultural spheres through the activities of individuals, as well as the methods and tools used by the “Big Northern neighbour” during the execution of its foreign policy towards Iran did not receive proper attention, and thus lack detailed analysis. This research addresses the lack of detailed analysis of the power/knowledge nexus in relation to Russia’s Persian/Iranian Studies – the largest and most influential sub-domain within Russia’s Oriental Studies during the late Imperial and the early Soviet periods. The specific focus of this study is the involvement of Russian ‘civilian’ (academic) and ‘practical’ (military officers, diplomats, and missionaries) Persian Studies scholarship in Russian foreign policy towards Persia/Iran from the end of the nineteenth century up to 1941 – a period witnessing some of the most crucial events in the history of both countries. It is during this period that Persia/Iran was the pivot of Russia’s Eastern foreign policy but at the same time almost every significant development inside Russia as well as in her Western policies also had an immediate impact on this country – the state of affairs that ultimately culminated in the second Soviet invasion of Iran in 1941. My thesis is based on extensive research in eleven important political, military and academic archives of Russia and Georgia, which allowed me to consult a significant amount of hitherto unpublished, often still unprocessed and only recently declassified, primary sources. While engaging with notions such as Orientalism, my analysis aims at transcending Edward Said’s concept of a mere complicity of knowledge with imperial power. My theoretical approach builds on Michel Foucault’s conceptualisation of the interplay of power/knowledge relations, his notion of discourse, and his writings on the role of the intellectual. While demonstrating the full applicability of the Foucauldian model to the Russian case through the study of the power/knowledge nexus in late Imperial and early Soviet Russia’s Persian Studies, or Iranology, I focus on the activities of scholars and experts within their own professional domains and analyse what motivated them and how their own views, beliefs and intentions correlated with their work, how their activities were influenced by the hegemonic discourses within Russian society. I analyse the interaction of these intellectuals with state structures and their participation in the process of shaping and conducting foreign policy towards Iran, both as part of the Russian scholarly community as a whole and as individuals on the personal level. For the first time my work explores at such level of detail the specific institutional practices of Russia’s Oriental Studies, including the organisation of scholarly intelligence networks, the taking advantage of state power for the promotion of institutional interests, the profound engagement with Russia’s domestic and foreign policy discourses of the time, etc. In addition, the thesis presents a detailed assessment of the organisation of Iranology as a leading sub-domain within the broader scholarly field of Oriental Studies in the period from the end of the nineteenth century to 1941 and analyses the principles and mechanisms of its involvement in Russia’s foreign policy towards Persia/Iran.