During the special session, Nader Entekhabi, writer of “Nationalism and Modernity in Iran and Turkey” stated that rewriting of hsitory in Iran has faced less diversions than in Turkey.

IBNA: The session was held with the presence of Nader Entekhabi, researcher and author of 'Nationalism and Modernity in Iran and Turkey" and Mahdi Firoozan managing director of Book City Center. 

Entekhabi said: "During the 18th and 19th centuries there were no concepts of nationalism or iranism known in the country and these terms had no meaning in their modern senses. That was the same in Turkey although more complex. Because the Turks had dominated over a vast area and there were diversities in different parts of the Ottoman Empire."

The main subject of this book, according to him, is the conception of 'nationalism' in Iran and Turkey and how the peoples on these lands put religious and linguistic differences apart to form a 'nation'.

He added: "There are two views by social researchers concerning the formation of nations: one group concerns the nation as an eternal phenomenon, whereas another group regards it as the offspring of the new era, insisting that nations were fabricated by rewriting history and inventing traditions.

"According to the first group, the name of Iran has appeared in ancient petrography and it is stated in Avesta that the Aryans live in a land known as Iran – with the best climate on the earth. They ignore the fact that what is meant by Iran in Avesta differs from what is known today as geographical Iran. Despite this opinion, the second group believes that the concept of 'Iranian nation' was invented by force of Pahlavi dynasty and the creation is but a hundred years old. However, both groups are involved with certain clichés and their comments cannot be scientifically assessed."

Entekhabi added: "Yet there is a third opinion advocated by Ahmad Ashraf. He believes in distinction between the historical identity of Iran in the past and the new Iranian identity. The consistence of the concept of Iran in history paved the way for the formation of new concepts of Iran and Iranian in the 19th century when rewriting the history of Iran. These rewritings, however, have been less fabricated or diverted than what has happened in Turkey."

Entekhabi went on to explain that the two decade span from the Constitutional Revolution to the reign of Reza Khan was the most prolific periods of intellectual history of Iran; the intellectuals in this period in fact theorized the nation-state of Iran. They formed the political and cultural elite of the country; however, they were not successful or well-famed in history as they had fastened their fate with Reza Khan's dictatorship.

He then mentioned four intellectual cycles of Iran in the period that affected the new Iranian nation-state: "The first generation of intellectuals believed that a powerful government is necessary for social order and security. The second generation that had witnessed the failure of the Constitutional Revolution believed that the elite should provide the security of the nation."

Yet in Turkey the concept of nationality was unknown until the 19th century when the Ottoman students became familiar with the works of western historians on the culture and civilization of Turks.

He added: "The first World War led to the downfall of the Ottoman Empire and formation of Turkish Republic. The first measure of Ataturk was to subvert the monarchy and announce the conception of 'nation' as a unifying element. Then under the supervision of Ataturk a new history of the Turks was written and acknowledged as the official history of Turkey."

The modern nationalist intellectuals in Iran and Turkey mean to form a 'nation-state' in the European sense of the term. But differences in the historical, social, cultural and religious features of the countries, despite their similarities, led to different paths in the future.

"Nationalism and Modernity in Iran" was published in 1250 copies and 292 pages by Negahe Aftab.

Id : 145684