Iran: Empire of the Mind: A History from Zoroaster to the Present Day

Empire of the Mind has ratings and reviews. The book also seems to go from Zoroastrian history to present day with barely a mention of anything in.
Table of contents

A couple of questions Axworthy failed to answer which I found disappointing: That would explain who is in power at any given time or what sub-population group, if they exist, gain advantages over the other sup-pops. The other thing I found disappointing is I felt Axworthy fell back onto white guilt syndrome. While claiming otherwise, he defaults to the tired old saw that Iran's problems are largely constructs of Europe and the United States and if western countries would just be nicer to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who was in power at the time of his writing, now it is Hassan Rouhani then Ahmadinejad would want to be our friend.

I think this is naive. Aside from that bias, I found History of Iran to be a well-written, informative book, however, I would like to read other sources and am open to recommendations. Jul 15, Patricia rated it liked it Shelves: Axworthy introduced the book by calling it "an introduction to the history of Iran for a general readership, assuming little or no prior knowledge.


  • New Earth: Project O.N.E..
  • Kama Sutra (en español ) [Translated] (Spanish Edition).
  • Pack Up the Moon: A Novel.
  • Iran: Empire of the Mind.
  • Iran, Empire of the Mind!
  • Hot Cheating Wife: A Sexual Excursion;
  • Subscribe to read | Financial Times.

The first one-third is a very good overview of ancient central Asian history through Cyrus the Great; the middle third was overwhelming for its wealth of unknown names and specialised terms that demanded one's Axworthy introduced the book by calling it "an introduction to the history of Iran for a general readership, assuming little or no prior knowledge. The first one-third is a very good overview of ancient central Asian history through Cyrus the Great; the middle third was overwhelming for its wealth of unknown names and specialised terms that demanded one's full attention or repeated readings; the final third was surprisingly fascinating and a painless read given its coverage of the last 50 years of Iran's history--a period I can recall events from for example: Compartmentalising these sections is the only way I really could come to grips with this book, plucked from a library shelf because of a desire to fill in my knowledge of this much-maligned but historically rich country.

I heartily recommend this history to anyone especially interested in Iran's rich literary past for it includes a very good introduction to Persian poetry and aesthetics. Its coverage of early history is also very good--concise and easy to read. But from , I confess I couldn't keep my focus and didn't re-connect until the final or so pages, which caught me by surprise and completely held my attention This is a good a history of Iran but it is by no means a masterpiece and I don't think it will make it through the test of time.

Axeworthy did an excellent job with the medieval mystical poets and included many beautiful verses throughout the text. Unfortunately there was less emphasis on intellectual and literary history in modern times and absolutely no mention of music and the arts.

As people have already mentioned, the author is very biased in matters of religion. He has a shallow understandin This is a good a history of Iran but it is by no means a masterpiece and I don't think it will make it through the test of time. He has a shallow understanding of shi'a Islam and its philosophy of governance, which must be key to understanding Iran today.

Also I thought some of his comments about Jews we're out of place considering he dedicated no time to exploring their practice and heritage. Ultimately this is an accessible history of one of the oldest and more complicated regions in the world in less than pages. You get your time's worth They say "Esfahan is half the world", and a history of Iran is most definitely a history of humanity itself. From Darius of Persepolis to Alexander the Great, from the Romans to the Mongol Invasions, passing by the birth of Islam and Shi'ism and ending with Western meddling and the revolution, this is a great book to understand not only Iran but also much of the current world order.


  • Knights;
  • le régime atkins 25 grands articles (French Edition).
  • Iran: Empire of the Mind, A History from Zoroaster to the Present Day by Michael Axworthy!
  • Empire of the Mind: A History of Iran by Michael Axworthy.
  • Choose the subscription that is right for you;

And the most disgraceful thing for kings is to disdain learning and be ashamed of exploring the sciences. He who does not learn is not wise. Sep 12, Fahad rated it really liked it. Prior to reading, my knowledge on Persian history was less than basic. Still, I found the language and subject-matter to be enjoyable, and definitely recommend it as an introductory book. This book quite simply does a disservice to Iran and its rich, fascinating history. Notwithstanding the numerous printing errors in the book Penguin's fault the thesis of the book is simply poor.

Axworthy mentions the notion of 'Empire of the Mind' twice in the book - three times if you count the fact it is a subtitle - and never bothers to elaborate on it in any meaningful way.

Review: Iran, Empire of the Mind by Michael Axworthy | Books | The Guardian

The book also seems to go from Zoroastrian history to present day with barely a mention of anything in between. The This book quite simply does a disservice to Iran and its rich, fascinating history. The explanations of many situations left me more confused than when I started, as Axworthy does not appear to have the ability to concisely clarify important historical detail. For significant passages the author veers off from weak historical analysis to ostensibly give his own opinion, which adds nothing to the reader's understanding. All in all, were I Iranian or Persian I would be worries that books like this were attempting to portray my heritage on a wider platform.

It is a prime example of lazy, ill-thought-out academia. Sep 02, Pedy rated it it was ok. Aug 07, Jessica rated it liked it. Not really knowing anything about Iran, I think I would have preferred it spent a little MORE time on the more recent stuff for example, the Iran-Contra affair and the American hostage situation each only had one page of mention, and the Iran-Iraq war had only about 2 pages total.

In contrast, there were about 18 pages on olden-day Persian poetry. Anyway, it was an interesting book and I learned a lot. I've started another book, The Soul of Iran, not a chronological history , and I have a great reference point for the events, religious ideas, Shas, etc. I thought this is going to be another typical book on history of Iran when I picked it up but I admit I was wrong.

This book is fair, evenhanded and factual in dealing with the history of Iran. It's very brief and concise and in that context, Mr. Axworthy has done a good job explaining in simple language the history of a very complicated nation. It has little or no political agenda. I'd recommend this book to the students of middle-eastern history and those interested in knowing more about Iran. A History of Iran gives readers a broad overview of Iranian history from the earliest times to the present day. Military and dynastic matters are covered in detail, but it also emphasizes the cultural and intellectual contributions of Iran that have shaped much of region that includes modern Turkey, the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Indian Subcontinent.

It does so concisely in only about three hundred pages, but nevertheless the material provided is engaging and thoroughly interesting. As someone who had lived in Iran, this was not the first book I had read on Iran. But even so, I still learned much that was surprisingly new from the material presented. Mar 19, Monty Milne rated it really liked it.

Like many of us, before I read this I knew a reasonable amount about ancient Iran and a little about modern Iran, but almost nothing about everything in between. This book did fill some of the gaps, and seemed pretty fair minded, but inevitably there are a lot of constraints imposed by trying to fit such a big subject into only pages. I have a number of Iranian friends - all of them exiles, Anglophiles, and supporters of the Shah. I'm glad that having read this I can talk to them with a litt Like many of us, before I read this I knew a reasonable amount about ancient Iran and a little about modern Iran, but almost nothing about everything in between.

I'm glad that having read this I can talk to them with a little more pretence at intelligence about Iran's spectacular cultural achievements. However, some of my opinions are now a bit different since reading this: I am ashamed of the rapacity of the British government in relation to unfair oil treaties years ago, and I have a more positive opinion of Mossadegh and a less positive opinion of the Pahlavis and their predecessor dynasty than I did.

It's an impressive achievement of the author's to get me to change or even modify my opinions. The sheer scope of the book is extremely impressive - the author covers the entire history of the Persian Empire, Iran and Iranian cultural identity in pages. It's definitely a fascinating introduction to one of the oldest and most interesting cultures in the world.

The sections I found most engaging were the first and final third of the book, in which Axworthy writes of the origins of the Persian Empire and 20th century Iran, respectively. In the middl 3. In the middle, he tended to get lost in details, however interesting they were, they were presented in a way that made the long passages quite difficult to read or memorise. Axworthy is not a historian, but a diplomat. Not to detract from the quality of his writing, his familiarity with Iran or his knowledge of historical facts, but it does show.

The book suffers from a slight lack of coherence thematically and structurally. I found it hard at times to remember the people he was discussing, and the book is not written in the most intuitive way. Also, the most disappointing thing to me was that the author only mentioned his thought-provoking thesis in the first and last 10 pages of the book - that Iran has survived as a nation despite millennia of border change and ethnic diversity because of its strong cultural identity.

A real shame However, it is still a great introduction to Iranian history. I'd give it 4 stars for people who are more patient and have a better memory than me! Mar 02, Catherine rated it really liked it. This book is a serious document, useful for research, but written in a style that means anyone can understand what is being discussed. It didn't appear to have a bias or slant towards anything - just the facts.

Im a believer that you shouldn't have an opinion on a subject until you have done your homework. While I have a lot more to understand yet, as suspected the Iranians are just like us. The newspapers need to stop writing stories that make the uninformed believe that a government represents This book is a serious document, useful for research, but written in a style that means anyone can understand what is being discussed. The newspapers need to stop writing stories that make the uninformed believe that a government represents it's people.

Like some, my western experience couldn't quite grasp how an entire empire could have something like poetry running through all its history, religion, language and ideas. But I have since seen a speaker on Iranian design and you can see how it affects what they write and how they write it. Everything must look and feel poetic. I still don't understand really but I kind of like the idea of a nation built around poetry. It's sound so much nicer than a nation built around consumerism. Dec 25, Churin rated it did not like it Shelves: What was in the book is clearly this very unimportant details without the big picture.

It's like a scattered thoughts poured down in a book. Also if you search hard enough in blogs, you can find almost everything written in this book. No, I'm not saying the author plagiarized anything, it's just it was all common facts here. The only thing new is a ton of Persian poems. So I suggest you to save your money and time, there's nothing really interesting with this book. Anyway, if you w What was in the book is clearly this very unimportant details without the big picture.

Anyway, if you were a sunni Muslim you definitely won't like this book, and this book doesn't cover any new knowledge about shi'a anyway.

Empire of the Mind: A History of Iran

If you were a shi'a you would probably know this book soften and romanticized the facts about you. If you were a non-Muslim the possibility of you finding this interesting is as thin as tissue. So no, don't even waste your thought on this. This was super interesting, and really cleared up a lot of confusion I had about cultural clashes in middle Eastern politics.

My only big criticism is, as with a lot of overview histories, this went from narrative history to themes and back again. The period between the rise or the Abbasid caliphs and the Savafid dynasty was mostly taken up by a discussion of Iranian poetry, which while interesting, left me slightly confused as to what exactly happened in a year period that was pretty busy e This was super interesting, and really cleared up a lot of confusion I had about cultural clashes in middle Eastern politics.

The period between the rise or the Abbasid caliphs and the Savafid dynasty was mostly taken up by a discussion of Iranian poetry, which while interesting, left me slightly confused as to what exactly happened in a year period that was pretty busy events wise. Nevertheless it makes a compelling read, especially for your typical western reader who usually only hear about early Persian history from a Greco-roman point of view, and about modern Iran from sensational news reports. Iran is probably the most fascinating country in the world.

One of the oldest civilisation in the true sense of the world, a land with a history of intellectual vigour and a tradition of defiance to the western world. While the book sweeps through the four millenia of Persian existence with detail, I would have preferred a more simple and fluid output to describe this complex but extraordinary nation.

See a Problem?

To me, it appears, despite a brilliant tapestry of the poetry, mysticism and religion which Axw Iran is probably the most fascinating country in the world. To me, it appears, despite a brilliant tapestry of the poetry, mysticism and religion which Axworthy weaves to symbolise the mind's empire, the book is a discrete outpouring.

The connect with the modern Iran remains unestablished. Feb 11, D rated it liked it Shelves: Oct 15, Blake rated it it was ok Recommends it for: The author's knowledge of Iran is eclipsed by this book's poor organization of topics. My interest quickly faded everytime I picked up Empire of the Mind, simply because the narrative is so disjointed. Feb 11, Mehrsa rated it it was amazing. He goes fast through thousands of years of history, but really captures the identity of the country and its conflicts and issues with the west. If you want to understand the modern conflict, you have to at least go back to or even About as superb a history of Iran from Zoroaster to Ahmedinejad as can be crammed into pages.

Apr 07, D. Denise rated it it was amazing. An exceptional book on the history of Iran. One of the few unbiased looks at the history of the country. A History of Iran; Empire of the Mind. Michael Axeworthy, Basic Books, The division between nomadic or semi-nomadic peoples and settled, crop-growing agriculturalists, created a tension that drives history. Nomadic wealth was in livestock, which meant it was moveable and they could escape threats or attack. In happy times trade meat and wool for grain between the two meant peace although coercion always was possible. Nomads had the upper hand.

The cyclical pattern of dynastic rise and fall and nomadic invasion provides the background story in this history. Each time the same pattern occurs. Historians note the cohesiveness of the nomads in these cycles as a kind of solidarity or group feeling that would later form into an identity — Iranian-ness.

Share this title

Another pattern emerges that is illuminating for contemporary history in the region. Each time conquest is completed it was necessary to consolidate support. This was achieved through giving patronage to the bureaucracy, city dwellers and the ulema scholars who interpreted the religious texts. Large building projects and more displays of wealth would lead to a weakened dynasty and soon a new invasion was welcomed. Each time this occurs it is the learned class of Persian scholar-bureaucrats that kept the language and culture intact. This occurred early in the Muslim era.

The Umayyad caliphs were descended from on of the ruling families of Mecca and it was precisely this power that The Prophet had opposed following The Revelation written as the Quran. Over the centuries the two communities weave in and out of power and prominence and give rise to various other sects for example Ismailia, Assassin, Fatimid and so on. By the time of the Mongol invasion in the tenth century, Sunni Muslims were ascendant, especially so under the Ottomans.

Other elements of religiosity come into the story from the earliest times, such as Mazdaism, Zoroastrianism, Sufism, Judaism and Christianity. The rise of a strong Iranian empire toward the end of the fifteenth century under the Safavids, and especially shah Abbas, marks the start of what we know as the Iran of today. Much great architecture and poetry comes from this period when the Persian language was dominant from Istanbul to Delhi and Samarkand. This is also the time when gunpowder was predominant in warfare, yet in the relatively safe heartland of the Iranian plateau the great cities remained unwalled and the traditional cavalry and archers dominated the military class.

By Persia was a soft-centered state in a world that was becoming much harsher. Revolts against Safavid rule, starting in Kandahar and spreading to other cities and territories, weakened the empire. A military leader Nader emerged successful for a time, once again extending Persian power to the east, against Moghul India and the west, against the Ottomans. This period parallels the rise of the military states in Europe that would result in the Napoleonic Empire; but the accompanying transformation of state administration and supporting economy, based on trade, did not occur in the Persian context.

The breakup of the Persian military state, in the second half of the 18th century, into smaller warrior-led territories laid the foundation for the modern day Afghanistan and gave it, the now familiar to us, tension between the nomadic tribal lifestyle and the more settled town and village lifestyle. The old debate between tradition and reason — should the ordinary Muslim read and interpret the holy text himself, following the tradition of the Emams; or should authoritative interpretation, based on reason and scholarly training guide the believers?

The latter group prevailed and a hierarchical clerical system evolved the role of the grand ayatollah. The European wars and rivalries of the 18th and 19th centuries affected Persia through shifting alliances with either France or Britain and continual struggle with Russia to the north in what was known as the Great Game. Russia and Britain particularly interfered in Persia as colonialism and industrialization expanded their reach. One result was that neither Britain nor Russia could assume control over Persia but it also kept Persia stagnant throughout this period.

The Constitutional Revolution was led by the united forces of the merchant class and the clerical class ulema , but limped along until German militarism was rising in this period, provoking a series of European alliances of which the most famous was the Triple Entente between Britain, France and Russia.

Make informed decisions with the FT.

The British navy, at this time threatened by the new German class of warship, decided to switch from coal to the more efficient and less bulky oil. Persia, like Egypt, was not represented at the Treaty of Versailles and was treated much like the protectorates set up in Palestine and Iraq.

Under British quasi-supervision a Persian military officer, Reza Khan, gradually undertook reform of the army in the manner of Ataturk in Turkey. By , assuming the name Pahlavi, Reza Khan was crowned Shah. He expanded industry, transportation and the army and introduced education where it had been absent. His modernizing and westernizing was also secularizing. Reza Shah was not popular, provoking opposition from both the merchant class and the clerical class.

Early during the Second World War, after Britain and Russia allied against Germany, they jointly took over in Iran, saying it was to forestall any German takeover possibility. The Shah abdicated in favour of his son Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. In Teheran was the site of the first conference of Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt. In addition to agreeing to open a Second Front against the Nazis, the allied powers agreed to quit Iran six months after the end of war. At this time the Iranian government returned to an elected leadership and the National Front leader Mohammed Mossadeq was elected Premier.

Following WW2 the oil question remained as a national issue, resulting in nationalization of the industry by Mossadeq and a Western boycott led by Britain and the US. The population grew substantially at this time 12 million in ; 19 million in ; 22 million in ; Wealth distribution, however, was unequal. Prompted by liberal feelings in the US the era of the Kennedy administration the Shah announced significant reforms known as the White Revolution These included land reform, female suffrage and literacy campaigns in the countryside.

The US was, after all, anti-feudal, anti-colonial, and a benevolent world leader. But by the time Pahlavi was courting US support, the clerics and merchants distrusted its involvement. As oil money poured in the Shah spent more on the military. The presence of more and more foreigners, mostly American and British, was noticeable.

The contrast between cultures was also noticeable. This is the central teaching of the author, Michael Axeworthy. Rising dissatisfaction of the poor working class added to the discontent. By January , the Shah, ill with cancer, left Iran and Khomeini returned to lead a new revolution. But, says Axeworthy, the revolution was not a religious revolution.

Full FT.com access for your team or business

Many disparate groups came together in opposition to the Shah, united by their opposition, which Khomeini easily represented. By March , Khomeini easily won a referendum to set up a new government based on Islamic principles. By autumn a new constitution was set up creating a secular government but to be overseen by a Council of Guardians twelve clerics and jurists and all loyal to Khomeini.

In November , militant students seized the US Embassy, holding it for more than two years. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in , probably seeing an opportunity to defeat a weakened Iran. Eight years of war followed with the West supplying Iraq with arms, including chemical weapons. In a US warship, Vincennes, shot down an Iranian passenger jet killing people, further dividing the two countries. It was at this time also that a fatwa against Salmon Rushdie was issued. The population continued to grow at a rapid rate, from Iran now has a high literacy rate, including females.

Several reform movements have occurred in Iran over the years since The election of President Khatami in and a strongly reformist parliament Majles in May , resulted in seats out of This shows that there is a desire among the population for some kind of adjustment of government with respect to the relationship of religious leadership and secularism. Axeworthy points to some key missed opportunities the West mainly the US has had to readjust its relationship with Iran. Since then, the election, probably unfairly, of Ahmedinijad as President, has introduced further animosity with the West.

There is little enthusiasm, says Axeworthy, for such Iranian-style Islamic rule. The nuclear weapons issue is pertinent here, but the difference between having the capability to produce uranium is required and actual possession of nuclear weapons is also important. The only real utility of nuclear weapons is deterrence, and having the capability to produce versus possession of, is almost the same thing. The Epilogue tells the story of the almost certainly falsified election of Ahmedinijad in and the subsequent mass protests, and the story of the Jasmine Revolution.

The losing candidate in the false election was Mousavi, whose campaign colour was green. It took me too long to finish this book especially writing the review, maybe because I just wanted to be fair in my judgment. Stay informed and spot emerging risks and opportunities with independent global reporting, expert commentary and analysis you can trust.

By subscribing with Google you will be billed at a price in your local currency. Accessibility help Skip to navigation Skip to content Skip to footer. Make informed decisions with the FT. Choose the subscription that is right for you. For 4 weeks receive unlimited Premium digital access to the FT's trusted, award-winning business news. Never worry about missing out on our essential news and trusted opinion. Unlimited digital access to everything we publish — all the essentials plus deeper insights and unrivalled analysis.

All the benefits of Digital plus: Unlimited digital access plus the FT Newspaper delivered to your door.