>> From the Library of
Congress in Washington, DC.
>> A wonderful welcome
to what appears to be,
or going to be a wonderful program.
I'm Chris Murphy, I'm the head
of the Near East section here
in the Library of Congress.
That section is in the
African Middle Eastern Division
and our division has partnered with
the Roshan Institute and Center
at the University of Maryland
and with Mr. Kevin Schwartz
who is associated with
University of Maryland
and has been working a great
deal in our reading room
on Persian materials and brought
us together to have this programs.
This morning's portion
will take part here,
and then tomorrow there
will be more sessions
at the University of Maryland.
So with that, again, I
want to say welcome to you.
I hope you enjoy what
you're going to hear today.
And now I'd ask Fatemeh Keshavarz
to please come up and say something.
[ Applause ]
>> Fatemeh Keshavarz:
Thank you very much.
I would like to join Chris to
welcome you all here this morning.
I'm sure we are all
looking forward to two days
of invigorating discussion
and lovely presentations.
Again I think that it will be a
tour for you to see the exhibit as,
you know, in the program.
So hopefully you will all
get to go there and I would
like to also thank Hirad
and Chris and Mary Jane,
our partners in the library,
that made the exhibit possible,
and the lecture series,
which is also funded
by the Roshan Cultural Heritage
Institute and Dr. Mir-Djalali
in particular made a personal
gift to make that happen.
And we do have really a
wonderful group of speakers.
Last week we had an amazing
presentation, very elegant,
by Dr. Hadcock, on the Shahnameh.
It was really a wonderful
combination of scholarship,
and thought, and elegance,
and we really enjoyed it,
and looking forward to more.
We have also tried there to
keep our discussions of Persian
and Persian books open to not only
what is today within the borders
of the nationally defined Iran, but
to the constellation of cultures
that have been speaking Persian
and carrying these cultures
within themselves and
nurturing them.
And we can learn about them and from
them all, and I very often think
that we now have reached a point
with great scholars, you know,
Lazanski, [foreign name],
people who have done work
on the literature [inaudible] that I
know more about and to really learn
about these different, wonderful
constellations of cultures.
When we sometimes just
dismiss as, you know,
satellites of another
culture and I don't think
that is any longer viable
position for any of us.
So with that I would really like
to thank Kevin, our SSRC fellow,
who partnered with us with the
Roshan Institute since last year
when he was applying
for the grant and while
at the same time working
on personal scholarship.
And has been fearlessly
organizing this conference
and bringing all of you together.
And again, I wish you
a wonderful conference,
and thank you so much Kevin.
He has more things to say I'm sure.
[ Applause ]
>> Kevin Schwartz: Well, thank
you, Dr. Keshavarz and Chris.
I'll be really brief here.
I am a Social Science Research
Council post-doctoral fellow
for transregional research
-- bit of a mouthful.
And I'm hosted by the
Roshan Institute
for Persian Studies in Maryland.
And it's in that capacity
as a post-doctoral fellow
and through their generous financial
contributions that I've been able
to bring you here together.
So I just wanted to speak briefly
about that innovative fellowship
of which I'm a part, and to give
you a sense of the background
of this conference and
where it came a part.
So the purpose of the SSRC
transregional fellowship is
to support transregional
research under the rubric
of inter-Asian context
and connections.
Its purpose is to strengthen
the understanding of issues
and geography that do not fit neatly
into existing divisions of academia
or the world and to develop
to approaches, practices,
and opportunities in
international, regional,
and area studies in
the United States.
The intellectual thrust of the
project is the reconceptualization
of Asia as an interlinked historical
and geographic formation stretching
from the Middle East,
through Eurasia, Central Asia
and South Asia, to
Southeast Asia, and East Asia.
So it's with that kind of
background and framing in mind
that I've decided to convene
this conference, "The Wide World
of Persian: Connections
and Contestations,"
that I thought could
explore the diverse features
of Persian literary,
cultural, political, social,
and religious norms, both
historically and today.
Features that connect
various peoples and places
across this wide geography we
call the Persianate sphere,
the Persianate world, or the
Persianate speaking world.
So that's all I really
wanted to say,
just give due deference
to the sponsors.
And with that I just want
to thank Dr. Keshavarz
and the Roshan Institute,
Ahmet Karamustafa,
Ahmad Karimi-Hakkak [inaudible]
who are instrumental from that end
in making this event happen.
And at the Library of
Congress the African
and Middle Eastern Reading Room,
Chris Murphy, Mary Jane Deeb,
who couldn't be here,
and the tireless efforts,
as always of [foreign name].
Who, again, instrumental
in making this happen.
And then finally thank
you for the speakers
for coming, from near and far.
So I think we have a great program
for the next two days and with
that I'll ask our speakers of
the first panel, Muriel Atkin,
Amin Tarzi, Wazhmah Osman, if they
could join Chris Murphy up here,
and he will introduce
our first panel.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> The first panel today is
focusing on identity and politics,
and it will consist of three
presentations by Amin Tarzi,
Muriel Atkin, and Wazhmah Osman.
Before each of the individuals makes
their presentation I will give a
very brief introduction for them.
We have approximately
an hour and a half,
so each of the presenters
will have 25 minutes
and we should then hopefully have
10 or 15 minutes for questions.
And let me remind you
that this panel,
and the other panels are being
videotaped for later broadcast
and if -- and we want you to
ask questions, but if you choose
to ask a question that
gives an implied consent
that not only may we use
your image and your voice,
but that we may use it
to put up on the web.
So that's just a piece of
bureaucratic wording that needs
to be said and so that, you
know, six months when this is up
and you see yourself you
will have been forewarned.
Okay, our first panelist is
Dr. Amin Tarzi who teaches
at the Marine Corps
University at Quantico.
His presentation is entitled "Status
and Politics of Persian Language
in Afghanistan, a Brief Review."
Professor Tarzi earned his PhD
and MA degrees at the Department
of Middle Eastern Studies
at New York University.
He is the Director of
Middle East Studies Program
at the Marine Corps University.
His latest works are about
the Taliban and the crisis
in Afghanistan, a co-edited volume
with Professor Robert
D. Crews of Stanford.
And I might mention that young
Professor Crews did a post-doc
at the Kluge Center here
at the Library of Congress,
which I will also put in a plug.
If any of you have finished
your PhD in the last seven years
and you think that there's
collections here that can help you,
apply for a Kluge fellowship.
If you're a senior scholar, like
the three here in the front,
and you're interested, let us know
and we will send your
name up to the librarian.
But the librarian of Congress
has sole responsibility
and keeps it solely within
his purview to select.
But he has selected some
very interesting people.
So, it's been a very nice thing.
Anyway, so Professor Tarzi has
this book with Professor Crews
and also a piece called
The Iranian Puzzle Piece:
Understanding Iran in
the Global Context .
Without further ado, I'd ask
Professor Tarzi to [inaudible].
>> Amin Tarzi: Good morning.
I also like to thank
the Roshan Institute
and specifically I want
to thank Kevin Schwartz.
I'm here because of him.
He found me, I'm very
glad to have been found
and before I say anything else,
whatever I say, whatever you record,
these are words of Amin Tarzi and
not of the Defense Department,
nor of any other government agency
of the United States of America.
I do work for the Defense
Department, I have to say that.
I work on security
issues, mainly Iranian
and the Arab Gulf security issues.
I look forward not backwards,
meaning I work on things
are strategic.
So it's very much a
pleasure for me to work
on something I actually studied and
something I have a lot of passion in
but I don't get a chance to work on.
So Kevin, thank you
very much for that.
I'll read you a little
statement from the newsletter
of the Association for the Study
of the Persianate Societies.
Number Eight, April, 2002,
I have it right here.
This is a quote.
"Our projects for institutional
development continued with projects
for opening offices in Poland
and Armenia, with Georgia
and [foreign word] to follow.
With the end of civil
war and change of regime
in Afghanistan we can
finally extent our activities
to that very Persianate society.
Dr. Amin Tarzi," that's me,
"of the Modern Institute
of National Studies has agreed
to chair an ad hoc committee
for opening an office in Kabul,
and Dr. Jo-Ann Gross has
agreed to serve on it."
I'll end right there.
That's from 2002.
We still do not have
an office in Kabul.
I tried, that was not possible.
Jo-Ann Gross has been trying
ever since, not possible.
I was -- I don't know how
many of you were there,
but I was in Sarajevo last year
and there was not a single,
not one scholar from Afghanistan.
And there -- well, there's money
actually so it wasn't an issue
of financial, there's actually
within ASPS there is financial
incentives for scholars
from countries of, developing
countries that need the funds.
Not one. Let's start with that.
Due to time constraints I'll focus
on five different pairs of history
of Afghanistan and we'll
focus on the status
of Persian language therein.
I'm planning on spending more
time on the earlier periods
and will only outline main
points and the more recent times
with anticipation of discussing
the issues missed in the Q
and A. I will give you a
little bit of a structure
if I may on the historical side.
The new side, as I
say, we can discuss it
and what is really happening, or at
least what I believe is happening.
Formation of the Afghan
state, 1747-1893.
The formation of Afghanistan is a
distinct political entity beginning
in 1747, effectively
separating from each other some
of the more important Persian
speaking heartlands that form parts
of civil empires beginning with
the [foreign word] in the eighth
to fourth centuries before Christ
to Nadir Shah Afshar's
reign which ended in 1747.
While splitting other areas such as,
Khurasan and Sistan, situating them
under two distinct and
contesting national entities
of Afghanistan and Iran.
In conventional Afghan
historiography Ahmad Shah Abdali,
later known Admad Shah Durrani
established the modern state
of Afghanistan in 1747 in Kandahar.
This historiography began
through short references
and publications during the
reign of Amir Abdurrahman,
who was king from 1880 to
1901, and was formalized
in the early 20th Century
with publication
of the monumental Straj al-tawarikh
written by [foreign name].
By the way, those who do not
read Persian, Robert McChesney,
the person who I learned
most everything I know
from actually has translated
and annotated it and has come
out in seven volumes
from [inaudible]
and next seven volumes
are coming out.
Both the person of the
Ahmad Shah and his exploits
as a [inaudible] mainly in
India have formed the basis
of both written and oral
histories of Afghanistan
and have shaped the very essence
of that country as a domain
in which the Pashtuns, especially
of Dari Duranni's have been regarded
as the national ruling class.
What is absent in the historiography
is the reference and the recognition
of a manuscript called
Tarihk-I Ahmad Shahi.
The first official history of the
political entity that became known
as Afghanistan was written
in Persian by [speaking
in foreign language]
between 1754 and 1776.
According to [speaking in
foreign language] an official
from Nadir Shah's administration
in Kandahar, then in the service
of Ahmad Shah to find
him an historian
with qualities matching
those of the late [speaking
in foreign language] the author
of the Tarikh-i Ahmad Shahi ,
better known as [foreign word] who
composed a similar history for him.
During Ahmad Shah's siege and
occupation of [foreign word]
in 1753, 1754, Shirazi [assumed
spelling] discovered an old
acquaintance in the person of
[foreign word] and introduces him
as a potential court historian
for the Durrani Monarch.
[Foreign name]himself
recalls that he had
for some time chosen a
reclusive live devoted to God
and that he personally
knew [foreign name].
We have no indication whether
he worked Tarikh-i Ahmad Shahi,
but they knew each other.
[Foreign name] most likely was born
in [foreign word] east of Herat,
and the only information we have
of [foreign word] affiliation is
that he was a Sayed, we don't know
whether he was a Shiite or a Sunni.
The history he wrote was not
that of a geographical area,
rather his work is centered
and chronicles the life
and activities of [foreign word].
With most of the manuscript
dedicated to the events after 1747.
[Foreign name] provides that
the main reason for his work is
to memorialize Ahmad Shah's
activities in the Iran, Turkistan,
India, and other territories
within his domain
and his battles and conquests.
In the entire manuscripts
[foreign name] never mentions the
term Afghanistan.
The debate as to when and how the
term Afghanistan came to be applied
to the domain carved out of the
collapse Safavid empire feuding
centers of powers in India and
the fragile Turkic [inaudible]
by Ahmad Shah Durrani
remains unresolved.
Both Afghan and non-Afghan writers
of conventional Afghan
historiography agree
that Ahmad Shah established
a distinct political entity
called Afghanistan.
[Foreign name] I'll
come to him later,
perhaps best reflects the gradual,
if not unintentional naming
of the new political entity
that began to take form in 1747.
He described it as
including the regions,
which after the introduction
of Islam were known
as [foreign name] extended from
Herat, to Kandahar and Kabul,
and the land of [inaudible], namely
the mountainous regions to the east
of the Indus River, extending
as far as [foreign word],
which is now in modern-day Pakistan.
He writes that in 1747
the area, and I quote,
"Came to be more often
designated Afghanistan.
The simplest way to explain this is
that in the view of the large number
of Afghans who lived in this
territory the suffix -stan is added
to the word Afghan, hence
the name Afghanistan."
One thing I want to point
here, most of you know here,
when I say Afghan here, until the
end of this paper I mean Pashtun.
They are absolutely synonymous.
Afghan here does not
mean everybody else.
It only means the Pashtuns.
And until, basically, until
1964, the term Afghan or Afghani,
the language of Pashtun was
actually known as Afghani until 1964
and written -- and
the people are Afghan,
when you say Afghan it's
only designated the Pashtuns
and not the rest of them.
For al-Sayid and the dominion
of Ahmad Shah did not
have a specific name,
rather it included the
territories of Iran represented
by eastern [foreign word], the
Indian territories represented
by what [foreign name]
refers to [inaudible],
and Turkistan territories south
of the [foreign word] river,
represented by the mainly [foreign
word] incorporated into his domain.
While modern Afghan historiography
tends to designate a specific date
for the formation of the entity with
the label of Afghanistan the word
of Josh Goman's, such labels should
be considered a fluid category
liable to fluctuations
of historical process.
The first historiography
of what evolved
into Afghanistan certainly
attests to a fluid process.
According to [inaudible] concluded
in 1756 between Admad Shah
and the Mughal Emperor Alamgir II,
the Durrani king expanded
[inaudible] claims
and established his sovereignty over
all former [inaudible] holdings west
of the Indus River and over
Lahore, Multan, Kashmir,
[foreign name] and [foreign word].
One of the justifications
for Ahmad Shah,
including the aforementioned
territory into his God-given state,
[foreign word], was that they were
part of Nadir Shah Afshar's domain
and as a result of the
[inaudible] of India.
Another justification
for the Durrani takeover
of these territories, as mentioned
by [foreign name] was the weakening
of the [foreign name] or Mughal
state from the infidel encroachments
and internal political dissent.
While Afghanistan's first history
is written entirely in Persian,
based on Nadir Shah
Afshar's history,
the purpose of [foreign name]
was to emulate his former master,
but not to rule over a province
of what was formerly
constituted of [inaudible] empire.
I want to make this point clear.
It isn't Persian, it is
written as a continuation
of Nadir Shah Afshar's history, but
Ahmad Shah Durrani is not looking
to become a part of a
collapsed and [inaudible] state.
Rather, he was keen on
laying down the foundations
of a future Afghan/Pashtun
dominant and political entity.
However, neither Ahmad Shah or his
successors almost for two centuries
on regarded the prominence
of the Persian language
and their domain as problematic.
So this is my first postulate.
While Ahmad Shah created a
country specifically for Afghan,
i.e. Pashtuns, he did
not have a problem
with Persian being its language.
He wrote poems, actually as
poem books are available,
beautiful poems in Pashtun.
So he was very fluent, [inaudible]
Kandahari, he's a Durrani.
However, he chose, he actually
went after finding a historian
that was similar to [foreign
name] who had by that time died,
to have a history, and in Persian.
He had no problems.
He did all his communications,
even with foreign countries,
which right now in the African
archives are all in Persian.
There's not a single on in Pashtun.
Even though he was fluent.
All correspondence within
the Persian/Afghan state both
internal/external was conducted
exclusively in Persian.
Publication began to [inaudible]
in Afghanistan in the 1860's
with the first, albeit short,
newspaper [foreign name],
which was entirely in Persian.
[Foreign name] he reigned from 1869
to '79, tried to promote Pashtun,
especially of the language of
the newly organized military,
but the state administration
and the few pamphlets
that were published during
his reign were all in Persian.
Books and pamphlets
published in the 1860's
to the late 1880's were
predominately in Persian.
[Foreign name] had a number,
less than 10 I would say,
of his treatises published
in both Persian and Afghani,
the term commonly used
for [foreign word].
I have designated 1893 as the date
when Afghan nations date as precede
by the countries [foreign
word] was formed
within a defined international
boundary
and when one central government
within full control
of the provinces.
After crushing all of the opposition
to his rule or to centralization
of power and forcefully converting
the last non-Muslim areas
within his domain, [foreign
name] assumed the new title
of [foreign word] and
announced [foreign word]
and published a treatise
recounting his accomplishment
in both Persian and
Afghani languages.
Second phase.
The budding of Afghan
nationalism, 1893-1929.
Ironically the beginning of the
Afghan/Pashtun nationalism coincided
with [inaudible] signing of
an agreement [inaudible],
foreign secretary of the
British [inaudible] in 1893.
Establishing the boundary of
Afghanistan and British India
and thus separating the Pashtun
and [inaudible] population in half
between the two political entities.
The boundary settlements
did allow the [foreign name]
to have a defined geographical space
over which he could establish his
direct rule with Sunni Islam rather
than ethnicity as the
main justification
for unification and statehood.
It was during the [foreign name]
and successor [foreign name],
1901-1919 that Afghanistan's
historical narrative began
to be formalized.
Habiba [inaudible] historian finds
[foreign name] and the first page
of [foreign word] writes that
the [foreign name] own rationale
for commissioning for this
work as such, and I quote.
"For the long time I have had
in mind and deemed it necessary
to write down the events
and circumstances
of Afghan rulers beginning with
His Highness Ahmad Shah Durrani,
and proceeding down
to our own date."
Afghanistan's constitutional
movement --
and I'm going very fast because
of time, but we can discuss this.
Afghanistan's constitutional
movement [foreign name] also
established Habibia the first
public college of Afghanistan.
This school was inaugurated in Kabul
in 1904, and soon became the magnet
of the few, but increasingly
impatient Afghan intellectual
and political activists.
[Foreign word] employed the services
of both local teachers as well
as a number of visiting Indian,
Muslim, and Ottoman teachers.
The birth of the Afghan
constitutional movement can be
traced to this school and
to the influence of some
of these foreign teachers.
And available Afghan sources there's
no information of the presence
of Iranian teachers in
Habibia, and that would suggest
that while the movement
was developing in Iran
at the same time there was no
established conduit of information
between the Iranian
scholars and the school.
What is known is that in 1906 a
group of Habibia teachers sought
and received the Habibia's
permission
to publish a newspaper,
[foreign name].
For unknown reasons the
paper ceded publication
after its first issue was printed.
Thereafter, between 1907 and 1909
a secret group [foreign word] was
formed to promote the
idea of establishment
of a constitutional
monarchy in Afghanistan.
Despite crushing the idea of a
constitutional monarchy as well
as a number of the
members of the movement,
[foreign name] allowed room
and perhaps even encouraged
the formation
of a unique Afghan national
identity through rebirth
of [foreign word] published
in Persian
under editor [foreign
name] from 1911 to 1918.
While the issue of
language was not central
to [foreign word] national
agenda and the early issues
of the newspaper he
referred to Persian
as the official [foreign
word] language of Afghanistan
and ranked it only second to Arabic
in importance and third after Arabic
and Ottoman in usage
within the Islamic world.
He lamented that Persian, which was
once spoken from the Ganges River
to the East Syr River to the North
and the Constantinople to the west,
has now been reduced only to the
countries of Iran and Afghanistan.
A team that is the title
of Professor Minuchehr's
paper this afternoon.
However, while [foreign name]
wrote in Persian and recognized
that language as the official
language of his country,
in his naturalistic quest he
referred to [foreign name] Pashto
as Afghanistan's tribal and
national [foreign word],
and the official language
of the Aryans whose
original homeland according
to him was the Hindu Kush Mountains.
Whereas a team of the first Afghan
constitutional movement is debated
among historians, the main message
of the young Afghan movement,
a groups that was around Tarzi,
was promotion of Afghan nationals
and progress towards creation of
a modern unified Islamic state
and Afghanistan with
a secular government.
Despite almost a total disconnect
between concurrent Afghan
and Iranian constitutional
movements the language
of both remained Persian.
However, while in Iran an attempt
was made to incorporate Persian
as the exclusive language of Iran.
In Afghanistan there was
a slow but steady policy
of introducing [foreign word] as
Afghanistan's exclusive or national,
if not formal, official language.
The dilemma of the Afghan
of the [inaudible] is what manifold
including the dominance of Persian
as Afghanistan's [foreign
word]and the only language
that was understood by the
majority of his diverse population.
This association of the ruling elite
with Pashto despite
their Pashtun origins.
Of the [foreign name], few of
them spoke Pashto, those who did,
they did it as a second
language, very, very hard.
When they spoke you knew that
it was not their first language.
Then, overall, [inaudible] education
system with very low literacy rates.
And as [foreign name] has
pointed out about what I --
anyway, Afghan elites
fear that non-Pashtuns,
or non-Afghans would fear and feel
alienated by a unified Afghanistan
where Pashtun was the main language
because then they would feel
that the Pashtuns are taken over.
I'm kind of skipping the paper.
Throughout [foreign word] reign most
of the publications
were in Persian only.
As noted above, the country's
first master history was written
in Persian by Hazara [assumed
spelling], which is interesting.
The first history was written
by a Herati [assumed spelling],
the second by a Hazara,
and the third by a
Tarjik [assumed spelling].
All of the massive judicial texts
of the [foreign word]were
only in Persian.
The first book published in
[foreign name] Pashto was in 1916
of the obedience to the ruler.
In 1917, [foreign name] the Pashto,
first Pashto book was written
by [foreign name] as a
guide for a schoolteacher
to teach Afghani to students.
Both introduction and instructions
in this book are in Persian
as a manner of teaching a
foreign language to students.
Kandahari is an introduction
praising the advancements achieved
in Afghanistan and teaching of
sciences and Arabic, Persian,
Turkish, Urdu, and English,
and other languages,
laments that if these subjects
were taught in Afghani,
the original [inaudible]
language of Afghans,
then students would be
learning them much faster
and there would be no reason to
learn a foreign language prior
to engaging in scientific subjects.
As if Persian was a
foreign language.
This is important here.
Additionally he decries that
if the original language
of nation is forgotten then the very
identity of such a nation is wiped
from the list of living nations.
Therefore, according to
Kandahari [foreign name] in 1915,
ordered the teaching of
Afghani, [foreign word] language
of the Afghans in Habibia School.
Since Afghanistan there exists no
teaching material or grammar books
in Afghani, and his teaching
has been completely nonexistent,
therefore this volume, the
book I'm talking about,
and subsequent numbers
would be published.
Kandahari adds -- at the end
of this introduction
Kandahari lets [inaudible] know
that of all the Afghani dialects the
dialect of Kandahar has been chosen
and selected as the one to
teach all over Afghanistan
because it is simpler, the sweetest
[foreign word] and also used
by the royal Durrani clan.
And that was the reason.
The introduction of Afghani
Pashto into the curriculum
of Habibia during [foreign word]
cannot be recorded as an attempt
to discount Persian and
savor Pashto, nor did it seem
to have been a sound educational
framework for teaching the language,
as evidenced from the very limited
using of Pashto in the cities
where Pashtuns were not the majority
and in formal governmental
functions throughout the country.
Afghanistan's independence.
After the assassination
of [inaudible] in 1919,
one of his son's [foreign name]
became [foreign word] and embarked
on a more radical, faster paced
and pronounced progressive program,
which included a brief border
conflict with British resulting
in total independence
of Afghanistan.
[Foreign name] was an Afghan
nationalist in a wider application
of the term Afghan, which
included all citizens
of the country, not just Pashtuns.
His nationalism, which
was partly fueled
by [foreign name] the former editor
of [foreign word], father-in-law
and his foreign minister was
generally in the form of opposition
to British colonialism
and seek in closer ties
with neighboring countries,
including Iran
and in newly formed Soviet Russia.
[Foreign name] provided Afghanistan
with its first constitution
which was adopted in 1923.
The Constitution caused much
discord among the large land owners
and conservative clergy.
It had to be amended and reissued.
However, there was no noteworthy
controversy over the absence
of designation of an official
language for the country.
A Pashto version of the constitution
was printed but the debates,
some of which were
printed for public release
and the original version of
document were all in Persian.
[Foreign name] tried
to bring Pashto,
albeit successfully,
to a level of Persian.
But the political fortunes
of Pashto were to get a boost
from the [inaudible] Afghanistan
[inaudible] and beyond its borders.
Emergence of Pashto based
nationalism 1930-1946.
After [inaudible] 1929 and
the short-lived [speaking
in foreign language] became
the king mainly through support
of conservative [foreign
name] mostly
from the Pashtun majority
eastern Afghanistan.
Mindful of [inaudible] liberal
policies and his social reform
which had brought about the fall,
his fall true rebellion fermented
by mostly Pashtun, tribal,
and religious leaders,
the new king revised
the constitution in 1931
and adopted [foreign
name] word a policy
of [foreign word] towards
the eastern Pashtun tribes.
While the new constitution did
not explicitly recognize Pashto
as the official language of
Afghanistan, the ascendants
of individuals in Nadir
Shah's government
who regarded Afghanistan the
homeland of true Afghans,
i.e. Pashtuns, and the
king's accommodation
of the Pashtun nationalism,
and elevated the debate
of the country's language
policies to the highest levels
of the state establishment.
With [foreign word] assassination
in 1933, his young son,
Mohammad [foreign word] became
king while effective power rested
with Nadir's brother
Mohammad Hashim,
who served as prime
minister's nephew.
I'll just give you a few
points because of time.
Under Hashim, 1933-46.
One, rise of National
Socialism in Germany.
Hitler actually became
chancellor the same year, 1933.
With Afghan sympathizers with
Nazis and their propaganda
about the supremacy of
the Aryan race and quest
for Afghan nationhood
and national language.
Two, Afghan government's
desire to provide the country
with its own language in order to
consolidate ties with Pashtun's
across the Indian/Afghan frontier.
There's also this nationalism
to reach back
to what was cut off
from 1893 onwards.
Three, in the 1930's [foreign
word] and [foreign word]
who established an overall aim
to project Afghanistan's history
from pre-history to modern times,
to create a national
history for Afghanistan.
Four, in March 1937,
royal proclamation
to strengthen the Pashtun language.
All government workers
were obligated
to learn Pashto within three years.
Five, according to [foreign word]
in 1938, Pashto was to become,
and I quote, "The language of our
officials, doing away with Persian.
Our legends and our [inaudible]
will then be understood by everyone.
We shall draw from that
a pride in our culture
of the past which will unite us."
End of quote.
I don't think it's fully clear who
[foreign word] was referring to by
"us" but it seems to suggest
that "us" were the Pashtuns only,
not only in Afghanistan but also
across the boundary in Pakistan --
well, India at that time.
There was also a suggestion to
change the script of Pashto,
and even Persian in
Afghanistan, to Latin,
to differentiate it from Iran.
So this was actually proposed
not once but three times.
And six, establish with a Pashto
[foreign word] or Pashto academy
in 1937, which was basically trying
to promote Pashto into a level
of Afghanistan's main language
but also it coincided
with two other things.
One, the inception of the
Turkish linguistic society in 1932
with the aim of creating
a [inaudible] national
Turkish language.
And establishment in 1935
of the Iranian Academy,
which own nationalistic
agenda of standardizing
and purifying the [inaudible]
Persian.
So in these two they were
trying to push for that.
I'm going to move away
from the Pashtun this time
and just briefly tell you
without reading anything,
in 1964 Afghanistan
had a constitution.
For the first time this constitution
actually mentioned languages
and mentioned that among languages
of Afghanistan, Pashto and Dari --
and the name Dari came here, were
the languages of Afghanistan.
And also this constitution was the
most liberal that Afghanistan had
until the new one, allowed
for political parties.
Some of these political parties
were basically on language basis.
You had got such as, [foreign word]
which was the Nationalist
Socialist Party of Afghanistan.
And that paper was
called [foreign word]
which was espousing Pashtunism.
On the other side you had a
party the Young Democrats.
Their newspaper weekly
was called [foreign name]
which was pushing the
fallacy or Persian.
And you had this new fighting,
if you want, on language.
And also there was a whole policy
of anti-Pakistan and trying
to incorporate Pashtunistan,
which was --
for the Afghans Pashtunistan is
east of -- west of Indus River,
all the Pakistani territory
west of Indus River.
[Inaudible] support initially but
they dropped that support after
and unfortunately still
continue that.
And two parties that came out there
that were actually more powerful
were the Islamists and the Marxists.
And the Islamists and
Marxists are the ones
who really basically shape
Afghan's history until 2001.
These two parties represented by the
PDPA, the People's Democratic Party
of Afghanistan, and then the
Islamists, which [inaudible]
if you would, they were
not linguistically --
they had more, different agendas.
So language was not
central to their aims.
Actually, the communists, if I
would, they became more liberal
on languages, and the Islamists were
speaking both Pashto and Persian,
they were promoting Arabic but they
were not anti- one or the other.
In conclusion I say that since the
[inaudible] of the Taliban regime,
which was ostensibly
based on a merger
of localized Islamic folklore,
international [inaudible] Islamism
and Pashtun nationalism, what
you have today is a renewal
of both understanding that
Afghanistan is multilingual.
The new constitution recognizes
all languages of Afghanistan,
Pashto and [inaudible]
official languages.
The only privilege Pashto
gets in the constitution
that the national anthem
should be in Pashto.
However, what is happening
today also is
that there is a new fight going on.
I call it the [inaudible] fight.
In Afghanistan if you
go and actually if --
how you describe an
institution of learning,
a university in Afghanistan,
is very, very, very sensitive.
So, when I go to Afghanistan I
say university, I don't use either
because I don't want to
fall in any of those fights.
And there's actually
suggestions today by some people
and I'll discuss that
more [inaudible]
as to make English
the official language.
I believe that the land where
[foreign name] flourished
and [foreign name] and
[foreign name] came in
and if you take Persian out of that,
for me as an individual
that's a sad moment.
And the fact that you don't have
anybody from Afghanistan coming
to these organizations, and I was
unable, and Jo-Ann Gross was unable
to even open an office tells you
that there's a potential right now
that is -- under the surface it
is very, very, very destructive.
It's unfortunately making
Afghanistan go backwards
not forward.
I thank you, and sorry to take
more time and thank you very much.
[ Applause ]
>> Thank you, Professor Tarzi.
Our next presentation
will be by Muriel Atkin
of George Washington University.
It's entitled, "Tajiks
and the Persianate World."
Professor Atkin is at George
Washington University,
she earned her doctorate at Yale.
She's now a professor of
history at the Elliott School
of International Affairs
at George Washington.
>> Muriel Atkin: In
the History Department.
>> In the History Department.
Okay. So, that's --
>> Muriel Atkin: I guess
someone got that offline and --
>> Evidently, because
I was thinking,
wasn't she in the History
Department?
You are in the History Department.
>> Muriel Atkin: Yes.
>>Okay.
>> Muriel Atkin: Right.
>> Thank you for correcting that.
Ms. Atkin is, you know, has
a huge number of publications
and she has worked
on many, many areas.
Her research interests
include, among other things,
Russian policy towards
Muslims at home,
meaning both in the former Soviet
Union and now Muslims in Russia,
as well Soviet Muslim
relations as in Soviet Muslims,
Russian Muslim relations,
meaning foreign relations,
and many other topics.
So without any further ado I would
Professor Atkin to come up and --
>> Muriel Atkin: If you don't
mind I'd rather sit while I --
>> Okay.
>> Muriel Atkin: Do my [inaudible].
Okay, well thank you for
the kind introduction.
I'm going to be talking
about what has happened
over approximately the past
century among the Persian-speakers
in central Asia north of the Amu
Darya, in the area that became
in the late 19th Century,
the Russian Empire
and then the Soviet Union.
You've already heard about issues
of Persian language
south of the Amu Darya.
If you look back to the early
20th Century at the Tajiks living
in the Russian Empire there was
no such thing as what we recognize
as modern nationalism among the --
or even the precursors of
modern nationalism among them.
Sure people knew what
their mother tongue was
but it wasn't a key
defining element.
And even among people who
were Persian speakers,
identifying as a Persian speaker
didn't necessarily mean what you
might expect it to mean.
You know, as you've heard,
I'm a historian and my job
as historian is always to say it is
more complicated than it appears.
And this is a prime example of much
more complicated than it appears.
If you wouldn't asked someone, a
Persian speaker in Russian rural,
Central Asia in the early 20th
Century how they identified
themselves, one of the things
they would surely have said was
that they were Muslims.
But this was in many ways a
very vague and generic concept,
and even though they would identify
as Muslims they were perfectly
capable of saying that other groups
of people who were Muslims,
but they're not good Muslims,
so we don't really feel all
that much in common with them.
And also, among this group
of Persian speakers they
were overwhelmingly Sunni,
rather than Shiite and of
the [foreign name] school
which was true -- pardon me -- of
most of the major ethnic groups
of Russian or Central
Asia, not only the Tajiks.
They would also identify as
members of an extended family.
Ideally one should know
one's family genealogy back
at least seven generations,
so that explains what sort
of group of people you belong to.
People would also identify in terms
of the locale where they lived.
A quarter of a city, a village,
or a cluster of villages
in a mountain valley.
Now in subsequent years, for reasons
that I will get to in moment,
national and other kinds of
identities were added on top
of that, but the pre-existing kinds
of identities never went away.
So you've got layer upon layer of
how people identify themselves,
and often it depends on which
particular context you're talking
about that will determine which
kind of identity comes to the fore.
And being true to my historical
vocation the situation is even more
complicated than that.
For many of the sedentary
inhabitants of Central Asia,
including the Tajiks, and the people
who would nowadays
be called Uzbeks --
they wouldn't have been
called Uzbeks back then,
but that's another story -- they
would've identified themselves
as part of the settled
population of Central Asia.
The term for that was
[foreign word].
And that was used more as
a designation than any kind
of [inaudible] designation
that we might expect nowadays.
What is more, these
Sunni Persian speakers
of Central Asia did not feel,
in general, a strong affinity
for the Shiite Persian
speakers of Iran,
and in places like
[foreign word] both
of which have large
Persian-speaking populations,
there was strong opposition
to attempts either
by the Safavid dynasty or
[foreign word] to take control
of these parts of Central Asia.
The Sunni/Shiite difference was
more important than the linguistic
and border cultural similarities.
And in fact, it was a separate
term in use for Persian speakers
in Central Asian Shiite
and they're term was Irani.
You can tell where that comes from.
Some of those people were merchants
but most of the people designated
as Irani were the folks
who had been enslaved,
mostly by Turkmen slave
raiders and then sold
in the slave markets
of Central Asia.
So obviously there was a
strong negative connotation
to being perceived as either a
slave or the descendent of slaves.
And, as a further complication, the
Persian language was also important
to many of the speakers
of Turkic languages
of Central Asia, especially
the Uzbeks.
Parts of the government
of the [foreign word],
hich survived as a
Russian [inaudible] state
after the Russian acquisition
of the region.
But parts of that government
continued to use Persian
as the language of administration.
In the [foreign word], in addition
to using Arabic as the language
of instruction, also Persian,
and no Turkic language,
it was Persian and
Arabic exclusively.
And as a literary language, again,
that continued to predominate,
even though there was some writing
in Central Asian Turkic languages
but widespread use of Persian
as a literary language.
In some of the densely populated
river valleys of the region
and especially in certain
of the major cities there
was extensive interaction
between the Persian speakers and the
speakers of Turkic languages, again,
especially those who would
now be called Uzbeks.
There was intermarriage.
There was a high degree
of bilingualism.
In those areas the dialects
of Persian speakers picked
up Turkic influences while
what is now called Uzbek picked
up significant Persian influences,
especially the loss
of vowel harmony.
Which you find in most
Turkic languages.
Each group of Persian
speakers and speakers
of what would now be called
Uzbeks; Uzbek had their own version
of various epic poems that
existed in oral tradition.
And it was fairly common
for educated people to write
in both their languages,
Persian and [foreign word].
If educated Persian speakers
and what we would now call Uzbek
speakers thought of in terms
of belonging to a state
that was larger
than existing borders they
would have defined the territory
that was their homeland as
Turkistan, not as [foreign word] not
as the Russian empire, not
as greater [foreign word]
or whatever, but Turkistan.
What changed all
of this dramatically was Soviet
policy towards the region,
particularly from the
mid-1920's forward.
Beginning in 1924,
which was what known
by the cumbersome Soviet
bureaucratic term
as the National Territorial
Limitation of Central Asia.
Try saying that three times quickly.
The underlying premise of this
really was not about Central Asia,
this was about general
Soviet nationalities policy,
reflecting the fact
that [inaudible],
looking at Eastern Europe discovered
that national identity
was a more powerful factor
than he had expected it
to be and lasted longer
than he'd expected it to be.
And so he decided he needed a policy
for the Soviet Union as a whole
that was going to try to
diffuse nationalism by giving it
at least token recognition
in these ethnically defined
territorial units.
Of course, real power was
[inaudible] in the communist party
which was highly centralized.
But at least the form of ethnically
defined republics was created.
And so, unlike many
parts of the world
where people debate how nationalism
evolved, was it imagined communities
or some other theory, this
clearly was a matter of something
that was imposed from outside and
then people living in the region,
whether they were Persian
speakers or anybody else,
had to figure out how would they
navigate in that system in a way
that could be advantageous to them?
And also cope with the constraints
that were being imposed on them.
Because you were allowed to have
a national identity but only
within the limits that the regime
in Moscow permitted you to have,
which was a significant constraint.
And one of the things that
happened for Persian speakers,
when this delimitation occurred,
since especially, first of all,
the two largest Persian-speaking
populations in urban areas
in [foreign word] were assigned to
Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan began
as an autonomous Soviet
socialist republic,
not a full-fledged union republic,
and it was part of Uzbekistan.
So suddenly Tajiks found out
that you can't think of Turkistan
as your [inaudible],
it doesn't exist.
And being in Uzbekistan there were
penalties for not being an Uzbek,
employment opportunities,
educational opportunities,
being required to list your
nationality in official documents.
If you don't list your nationality
as Uzbek you pay a price
for indiscrimination.
The -- that began to evolve over
subsequent years in the Soviet era,
so let me now talk about
how the Tajik language
and culture evolved
in the Soviet period.
There was this central
concept of national
and foreign socialist content.
Meaning at least the
outward structure
of cultural institutions existed,
but with careful regulation
of the content to make sure
it was politically acceptable
to the Moscow government.
So there would be libraries,
universities,
some schools that taught in Tajik,
publications, newspapers, magazines,
publishing house, eventually
radio, television, film studio.
But there was also deliberate
policy of manipulating the language.
What would the written
language look like?
It was deliberately based on both
the dialect spoken in [foreign word]
with subsequent additions
from other languages
in more remote [inaudible] parts
[inaudible] northern Tajikistan.
And that's significant because
among others, first of all,
because it reflects manipulation
in the content of the language.
Secondly because there's a
major difference of dialect
between northern and
southern Tajikistan,
which is divided by
a mountain range.
And the northern dialects
have much more influence
of what is now called Uzbek, as
well as other linguistic influences,
so there's a major divide
between the north and the south.
People in the south tend to say
we are much purer than the people
in the north, but make
of that what you wish.
Also, a deliberate policy of
making the language different
from what would be standard
written Persian in Iran.
Also, the inclusion
of Russian lone words.
Not only for neologisms,
but also to use --
to replace perfectly good words
that were Persian sometimes.
Persian [inaudible] Arabic -- from
Arabic but had come to the region
as part of the Persian language.
So, in a predominately
agricultural country the word
for agriculture is a literal
translation from the Russian word,
even though there's a
perfectly good Persian word
for it, that gets replaced.
Again, my favorite example of these
inclusions from Russian, though,
reflect that even Russians picked
up a lot of external influence.
So in Tajik and the Soviet era, if
you were an athlete who competed in,
you know, major athletic competition
were sportsmen [foreign speaker]
and if you won you were
champion [foreign word].
If Persian, that is, the
standard language of Iran,
were taught in Soviet schools, it
was taught as a foreign language.
And it [inaudible] it
just wasn't taught much
in Soviet schools in any case.
Another significant development is
two successive language changes --
alphabet changes that
affected the Persian language.
The first one was introduction
of the Latin alphabet,
which began in 1928, and
implemented over several years.
And in the wake of that, private
teaching of the Arabic alphabet,
if you were caught doing
it, could be categorized
as religious instruction
and that was a crime.
And then in 1940, there was a
switch from the Latin alphabet
to the Cyrillic alphabet
officially as a way of aiding people
to learn Russian because the Russian
language was also being promoted.
But another consequence of these
two successive alphabet switches is
that this made literature written
before the changes inaccessible
to the vast majority of people
who then studied Tajik in school.
So even though you went from a
region with a very low literacy rate
in the pre-Soviet era, to
one which developed something
like a 98% adult literacy rate
by later on in the Soviet period,
they couldn't read unless
they came from a few families
which all read old books and still
secretly taught the Arabic language.
They couldn't read the literature
that had been written in the Arabic
from before Soviet times.
There was not much access even to
literature in the Cyrillic alphabet
in Tajik in the late
-- in the Soviet era.
For one thing Tajiks
didn't buy many books
in Tajik, literary or otherwise.
Even in the late Soviet era
when they were lots more
educated Tajik speakers
in Soviet Central Asia it's
estimated that maybe two to 3%
of the books on sale in
bookstores in the Tajikistan SSR,
in the late soviet
period were in Tajik.
The rest were in Russian.
And also, even though Tajikistan
had near universal literacy
by the late soviet period,
Tajikistan had the lowest rate
of book readership of any
of the 15 Soviet republics.
At the same time all
of this was going
on there was intensive promotion
of the Russian language.
Not only because a large
multi-ethnic state needed something
to be a lingua franca, but
this went even further.
We've looked already at the example
of the intrusion in the sense
of Russian vocabulary and idiomatic
expressions in [foreign word] Tajik.
But also the way Russian was
taught there was an attempt
to communicate the idea of how
glorious the Russian language is
in a way that there was no
message about the richness
of the Tajik literary heritage.
Then people who learned Russian had
better job prospects in any number
of kinds of jobs, and there was
schools they taught entirely
in Russian in Tajikistan
as in any Soviet republic.
And many parents who wanted
good job opportunities
for their children would
send their children
to these Russian language schools.
By the late Soviet era at
Tajikistan State University,
the faculty members and students who
do things related to Tajik language
or Persian were paid less than the
people who did Russian language
and literature, which
also sends a message.
Now most of the Tajik speakers
lived in rural areas in Tajikistan,
roughly three-quarters
of the total population.
And schools in rural areas, even
though they were likely to teach
in Tajik, in areas where
Tajiks predominated,
they were routinely
underfunded in all sorts of ways.
And my favorite example being
that by the end of the Soviet era
when people were realizing
computers were important,
people in Tajik language schools,
especially in the countryside,
and even in some of the towns,
were taught theoretical computing,
which means someone held
up a picture of a computer
and said, "This is a computer."
There was a general scarcity
of textbooks in Tajik
and for certain kinds of
skill trades, let alone things
that required higher education there
were only textbooks in Russian,
they didn't exist in Tajik.
So if you wanted to learn how
to do skill jobs in factories,
for example, you couldn't
study that in Tajik.
The Soviet version of the Tajik,
cultural heritage, literature,
and otherwise, as of the heritage
of other Central Asian peoples,
was that they had very
little of note.
The message was that they were
all formerly backward people.
That's a little translation
of the term.
They didn't begin to make
progress until they were brought
into the [inaudible] empire and
then they really made progress
when they were brought
under Soviet rule.
And over the course of the
Soviet era there was the concept
of the Russian elder brother who was
leading the former backward people,
Tajiks, others, towards progress.
There was also the constraint of
internationalism that was required
of literature, which
meant you couldn't focus
on your own ethnic
group if you were Tajik,
writing in Tajik or in Russian.
You had to include
positive representations
of members of other nationalities.
And of course, the
most important of all
of these other nationalities
was Russians.
And in fact, there was a big
controversy in the 1920's
when someone who played -- who was
a Tajik, who became a communist
and played a crucial
role both in the shaping
of what became literary Tajik and
defining what is Tajik literature.
A man by the name of [foreign
name] who got in trouble for trying
to argue that various people
who centuries before had
written major works in Persian,
whether they were [speaking
in foreign language] sort
of in the neighborhood, but
you know, [foreign word]
or somebody else, who,
not from the neighborhood,
that all of these people
should be called part
of the Tajik literary heritage.
And this was denounced as being
reactionary and monarchist,
and that Persian was
the language of Iran,
not the language of the Tajiks.
And the book ended up being
mostly pulped by 1930.
There was a return to this tactic
is the post-World War II era
when there was propaganda about
the danger of Pan-Iranism,
which nobody else seems
to have noticed existed
but the Soviet [inaudible] did
and it became an argument, again,
for trying to maximize
the differentiation
between what's the
Persian cultural heritage
and the Tajik cultural heritage.
For the sake of fleeting time I
will leap ahead to some developments
at the end of the Soviet era,
very end, and the post-Soviet era.
There was more of an interest,
finally, in teaching some
of the classics of Persian
literature in the schools.
There was even talk of a return
to using the Arabic alphabet.
But this became, for
practical reasons, impossible.
I might add, in reaction to
demonstrations mostly by students
in the capital in 1989 and similar
kinds of demonstrations taking place
in some of the other Soviet,
non-Russian republics in favor
of higher status for the language
of the eponymous nationality
of the republic.
There was a Tajik language
law that was written.
The Tajik version is in rather
awkward Tajik, reflecting the fact
that it was written first in Russian
and then, translated into Tajik,
which reflected the fact
that many of the people
in the Tajik ruling elite, by the
end of the Soviet era and beginning
of the independence period were
really much more comfortable
functioning in Russian
than they were in Tajik.
The attitude towards
Iran has been an odd sort
of mixture depending
on who's doing it.
A number of the intellectuals
who were interested
in the broader Persianate cultural
heritage and of rehabilitating
that were also people who were
interested in political reforms
at the end of the soviet period
and early independence period,
and they didn't win
the power struggle,
and their [inaudible]
therefore was undermined.
The ruling elite discovered by
the end of the Soviet period
that they better adopt some sort
of ideology to legitimize them
because no one believed in
Marxism Leninism anymore.
And the main way people in most
of the formerly Soviet republics did
this was to emphasize nationalism.
So you could have Russian speaking
veteran communist officials
in Tajikistan who had recently
been denouncing Tajik writers
for being national chauvinists.
Not enough positive depictions of
Russians, the translation of that.
Suddenly discovering Tajik
nationalism and pushing it
for all its worth in
the hope of somebody,
please support us for some reason.
You also had the regime, again,
veteran communists talking
to the officials in the
Islamic Republic of Iran saying,
"We have so much in common
in terms of our religion
and our language and our history."
And our this and our that.
And the interesting play
from veteran communists
who have recycled themselves
as the Tajik leadership.
So, if you can provide
aid, we love you.
But against members of the
political opposition in Tajikistan,
the same political figures who say,
"We love Iran if you send us aid."
But opposition figures are agents
of the Islamic Republic of Iran,
trying to create an Islamic
Republic in Tajikistan,
which the political opposition
has no interest of doing,
but any smear will work in politics.
Do I need to explain that when
we're sitting here in Washington?
So, if you have further
questions I'll be glad
to take them afterwards.
[ Applause ]
>> Again, thank you, Muriel.
And now for our third presenter,
Professor Wazhmah Osman
of Temple University.
She will present a
paper, or a presentation
with a wonderful title,
"Silencing the Unruly."
As a section head here this is --
will pass the illustrative
and informative to me.
Anyway, "Silencing the Unruly.
The Lives, Legends, and Verses
of Early Persian Women Poets."
Professor Osman, as I said, is at
Temple University at the Department
of Media Studies and Production.
She received her Masters and
PhD from New York University
in the Departments of Media,
Culture, and Communication.
That's where you did your doctorate?
Yes, and then in Near
Eastern Studies,
that's where she received
her Master's.
Her research focuses on global
and trans-national media,
media development, media development
in conflict and post-conflict areas,
democracy, the public sphere
formation through the lenses
of gender, sexuality,
race, ethnicity, and class.
Her critically acclaimed
documentary,
"Postcards from Tora Bora," has
been screened both nationally
and internationally at quite
a number of film festivals.
So without further
ado, Professor Osman.
[ Applause ]
>> Wazhmah Osman: I think
I'm probably the only one
that has a PowerPoint, probably
because I'm in Media Studies
and we have to put together
some kind of visuals.
So let me just -- that's
an image of Rabi'ah Balkhi,
one of the people I'll
be speaking about.
So I just want to have that up while
I give a little bit of a background.
I wanted to thank everyone
for organizing this,
and particularly Kevin
for inviting me.
Kevin had asked me
initially to speak
about my dissertation research,
and particular he wanted me to talk
about -- which is about
media in Afghanistan.
And he wanted me to talk about the
cultural exchanges between Iran
and Afghanistan, but I wanted to
take advantage of the opportunity
to be in this space with so
many scholars and experts
and Persian historical
and literary texts.
So, I decided to present
a little bit more
of a historical project that's
been a side project for me.
And, as I said, my Master's is in
History and Middle Eastern studies,
and my PhD is in Media Studies, so
I really hope to get some feedback
and further contextualization
about some of the historical themes
that I'm working through.
And I'll also, because
I promised Kevin
that I would tie the historical
things and present them
of my current research on the
media situation in Afghanistan,
so I will present some of
my current research as well,
but I'm going to go through it fast
just because of the time constraint,
but I'm happy to take any
questions people have at the end
about my current research, as well.
While the canon of classical Persian
poets has long been established
by the like of Ferdowski,
Rumi, Sa'di, and Hafiz,
the historical role of women
Persian poets in the pre-modern
and early modern Persianate
world has been defined.
In this essay I will explore
the role and influence
of three lesser known -- well,
actually what I'm going to do two,
lesser-known women poets and
their connective experience
across time and space.
One of the poets was Bi Dili, who,
not to be confused with Bi Dil,
but there just wasn't enough
information on her so I'm not going
to get into it as much here.
So the two poets under
consideration are Rabi'ah Balkhi
from the 10th Century,
and the daughter
of Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb,
Zib al-Nissa, from the 1700's.
While their male contemporaries
have been ubiquitously translated
and have garnered a
global following,
why have these females poets not
yet to receive their equal due?
I argue that this is not mere
oversight but a systematic silencing
by powerful institutions
that span centuries.
These poetesses rocked the
bedrock of their own societies
with their fierce verses
and unabashedly
and heroically challenged
cultural, religious,
and political norms and codes.
Of the aristocracy, these women
were subjected to imprisonment
and even death for challenging
the rule of their brothers
and fathers with their verses.
Their life stories, marked
by defiance to tradition,
including the fact that they met
tragic consequences has furthered
elevated their mythic stature
and have made them
beloved figures of legend.
So, how I came about studying these
poets is I did my dissertation
research in academic year 2009/2010
in Afghanistan and while I was
in the bazaar of the [foreign word]
which is the old city of Kabul,
I found all these books that
were in almost every bookstore.
And I have a list of these
books but for, you know,
the sake of time I
won't mention them.
But I, you know, bought and
brought back as many as I could,
and they're mostly published between
2000 -- after the post-9/11 period.
So 2005 to 2009.
And they're published mostly in
Kabul, for the exception of one,
which is called Women's
Poetry of Afghanistan ,
by Dr. Masood Ahmad Shahi, which
was published in Iran in 2007.
And one of the ones that
I found really useful,
it was called The Glimpse of
Women at the [inaudible] Reign ,
by Dr. [inaudible] which
was published in Kabul.
So this is how I became more
interested in these women poets.
But first what I'm going to do is
talk a little bit about my Master's
and dissertation research just so I
can connect these early female poets
to the contemporary situation.
My Master's thesis was called
Contentious Births, Maternity
and Gender Rights in Afghanistan .
From the time of [foreign word]
to the War of Terror I wanted
to draw correlations in
how Afghanistan's attempts
with maternity have been described
in western literature
and academic accounts.
In development circles
and in political science terminology
Afghanistan is frequently described
as failed, broken,
fragmented, or collapsed nation.
Terms that have replaced
earlier classifications
of late state formation,
the [inaudible] state,
and third world despotism.
The language of failure
is ubiquitous
with its problematic colonial and
neocolonial epistemological roots.
And it's usually used as
a theological framework.
Social change and progressive reform
is almost always solely the domain
of the West.
Wherein the East we try
to inadequately mimic it.
The common perception
among Western historians
for the failure is the
ignorance of the majority
of the Afghan population.
And I quote, this is from an early
document from British Viceroy
of Afghanistan, or at the time he
was stationed in British India,
he says quote, this is referring
to him on a hunts time period,
"I'm on a lost attempt to
modernize so backwards a country.
Made it inevitable that the foreign
press should take an unusual amount
of interest in the revolt."
So this word, constant
use of the word backwards
to describe the population.
And another historian writes quote,
"Whereas they're Pan-Islamists
and nationals teaching in
clamor for complete independence
of Afghanistan appeal to the masses
and political and religious leaders,
their modernist views,
however, in the absence
of cohesive social force
lacked similar support."
As scholars have shown, it's
usually through gender contestation
that attempts at setting and
defining national, cultural,
social identity often
occur and in the singular.
So women bear the burden of
national identity politics, often.
It's through women's
bodies that these types
of things are delineated.
So I compare the rhetoric about --
I compared this rhetoric to
the rhetoric about Afghanistan
and Afghan women that proliferated
in the post-9/11 period,
tapping into the vast lexicon of
imagery from the era of colonialism,
claims about saving
Afghan women were used
to justify a military operations
against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
In keeping with the rhetoric
of what's often referred
to in gender studies as
masculine protectionism,
the pretext of saving Afghan
women added further ammunition
to avenge the attacks on the World
Trade Center and the Pentagon.
[Inaudible] the proliferation
of media such as fiction films,
television programs, documentaries,
books, and news that focused
on the plights of women under
repressive Islamic regimes.
And so, I don't know if people
remember, but after 9/11,
this was part of my Master's
research, there was a proliferation
of films and also programs
on CNN with titles such as,
"Behind the Veil,"
"Beneath the Veil."
So it was this -- yeah --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
-- yeah. A lot of this.
So scholars from a variety
of disciplines have criticized
the overwhelming portrayal
of [foreign word] women and eastern
women more generally as victims.
A portrayal that failed to
account for their actual
or potential energy - agency.
And these are people like [foreign
word], Lila [foreign word],
all of them have written about this.
And this has also been described as
the classic rape and rescue fantasy,
which Robert Stamm and
[foreign word] describe
in their book I'm
Thanking Eurocentracism .
And they say it's -- that the west
imagined quote "The colonized land
and its inhabitants both as virginal
and as [inaudible] desiring".
Unquote. So what I noticed
in the post 9/11 period is
that [foreign word] culture is
once again interpolated as static,
unchanging, and bound by
archaic problematic traditions.
So my goal with my
dissertation research was
to redirect the global dialog
through the media about Afghanistan
to local Afghanistan themselves.
So I spent about two years
there studying the media.
And the title of my
dissertation which I finished
in 2012 was called
Thinking Outside the Box:
Television in the
Afghan Culture Wars .
So I don't really have time
to go through it in detail
but I'm just going to
flip through some slides.
But what I wanted to do is consider
local cultural contestations
and social movements.
And thereby complicate the false
binaries between religiosity
and secularism and simplistic
discourses of progress, development,
and humanitarian and
human rights intervention.
Things that [foreign word] among
other people have talked about.
So this is - this is a
quick glimpse of some
of my research from Afghanistan.
So this is a U.S. soldier
protecting a telecom tower
that broadcasts radio, television,
and mobile phone signals.
These are different types of genres.
Afghanistan has more free broadcast
television stations than any
of its bordering countries.
Some produced in collaboration with
the west as well as other countries,
and some locally produced.
So I look at dramatic serials;
and these include soap operas
from India, Iran, Turkey,
other places.
This is a shopping bazar in Cabool.
This is Prena, who is a
famous TV and movie actress.
I look at reality TV.
This is Afghan Star which is --
this is the poster for the film
which a British filmmaker made
and was -- won numerous
awards and was aired on HBO,
and it's funded primarily by USAID.
So these are some images from that.
And I also look at PSAs, public
service announcement and the news.
So this is me with some
television reporters
on a U.S. diplomatic mission after
there was some civilian casualties.
This is the exterior of the
Ministry of Information and Culture,
which has been -- at this point the
road is completely closed because it
so many times came under attack.
And these are some people
who have been killed.
These are telecommunication
engineers who were killed
by the Taliban in the south
trying to setup these towers.
This is [foreign name]
who was also killed.
She was a host of a
music video show.
She was killed as well.
And some people identify
these as honor killings.
She was a news broadcaster.
This is [foreign word] who wrote
a piece - wrote a book on Iran
and he said -- according
to him he was attacked
by Iranian government agents.
This is [foreign name]
who was killed by ISAF,
the International Security
Armed Forces.
He was a journalist
and at the time working
with the The New York
Times reporter as a fixer.
Okay, so I'll leave that
there and we'll continue.
So that's a very brief glimpse
and we can talk more about that
if you'd like to know more.
So tying this into the
early female poets,
when I came back my sister is a
print maker and she's an artist.
So we decided to make a short
artist book that's all handmade
and designed.
This is the website for it.
So it's only about -- I mean,
you know, this is something
that I'm sure most people
have experience with.
For me it's new.
Translating took a very long time
and we did it collaboratively
and we only were able to do
about 12 in the final edition.
But we're going to
continue to do more.
So we have about 12 poems
that you can see online.
But so for me people like [foreign
word] and [foreign word] were names
that I grew up hearing
about and knowing
about because my parents have
memorized versus of their
and they recite it frequently.
It's just something they do.
And somebody like [foreign word]
in Afghanistan is really well known
and there's been movies
made about her.
This is a still from a movie
that was made in the 1960s
about [foreign word] life
and it was one of the films
that the Taliban tried to
destroy during their time period,
but people were able to
hide some of the archives
from the National Film Archives.
This is one of the films
that were actually saved.
So there's hospitals
named after her, schools,
radio stations, you name it.
She's a very popular figure.
As I said, her exact dates
are unknown but she's
from the 10th Century, and she
wrote both in Arabic and in Persian,
you know, and one of the sites
that I was looking information
about there was this huge
argument in the comments section
about whether she's a
Muslim poetess or not.
So the idea that at that time
based on her versus this was one
of the arguments people were having.
So this is her tomb in the
[foreign word] Province.
Hence her pen name.
Oh this is [foreign word].
We'll get to her in a second.
She's -- so [inaudible]
is the daughter
of [foreign word] who
is a [foreign word].
And she was also the
brother of [foreign word]
who inherited his father's position.
And then the last cast of
character I will call it
in this drama is [foreign
word] who is a Turket slave,
her brother [foreign word] is.
So according to legend -- you
know, these types of things,
there hasn't been any evidence for
and that's something we
can talk further about.
But [foreign word] and [foreign
word] had a secret love affair.
[foreign word] finds out,
imprisons [foreign word] in a well
and cuts [foreign word]
veins in a bathhouse
where she writes her final poem
with her blood on the walls.
[foreign word] escapes,
discovers what has happened
and kills [foreign word]
and then commits suicide.
So that's one version.
Another version is that when
[foreign word] finds out,
he exiles [foreign word].
In another version he kills [foreign
word] and then [foreign word] falls
into a depression and kills
herself in the bathhouse.
But it always ends with
her in this bathhouse
with blood writing her last poem.
And I didn't include those images
but there's plenty of
those images online.
So I was just trying to pull
out some visuals for you here
where these dramatic
images of her dying
in a bathhouse with
blood everywhere.
So [foreign word] who's a [foreign
word] court poet wrote [foreign
word] in honor of their love affair.
So this is something that's been
written about in history before.
So the next and final
poetess I will talk
about is [foreign word] who's known
by her pen name [foreign word].
My parents always called
her [foreign word].
They don't refer to her as [foreign
word] which means the hidden one
or the secret one, after her
largest collection of poems
in the book [foreign word].
And in original sources it said that
there's supposed to be 15,000 versus
but it was published
posthumously and has less than 5000
that people managed
to collect after.
Some people say, you know,
there's more that were destroyed.
So she was the eldest child
of the notorious Mogul empire
who's already been referenced here,
[foreign word] or some
people call [foreign word].
By his title and [foreign word] --
sorry, disposed his father
[foreign word] as emperor
and in the process killed several
of his brothers including
the eldest [foreign word]
who was the heir apparent.
Then [foreign word] herself
was educated in the court
by at the time the greatest thinkers
and philosophers, and she was fluent
in Persian, Arabic,
and [foreign word].
So similar with the
legend of [foreign word].
There's a different - different
speculations about her life story.
So some things that
people have written is
that she was her father's favorite
child, however, historical evidence
or fact says that she was
imprisoned by him for 20 years,
the last 20 years of her life
and she died in the red fort,
which [foreign word] had
turned into a prison in Delhi.
So there's no evidence as
to why she was imprisoned,
but plenty of speculation and
I'll run through a few of these.
One is that -- well [foreign
word] was cast in history
as an austere ruler who
was not in favor of music
and poetry unlike her daughter
and her proclivities for the arts.
He is cast as a pious Muslim, and
sometimes more than a pious Muslim,
as a brutal and enforcer
of Sharia Law.
While his older brother
[foreign word]
and [foreign word] are often
cast in history as more secular
with a pluralistic and
inclusive view of society,
and the religions of the region.
So this is one reason is that
they had this disagreements
about the way society should be.
Another reason people gave about
why she was imprisoned and died
in prison for the last
20 years of her life is
that she supported her brother
[foreign word] rebellion
to become an emperor
and another reason is
that he didn't approve
of her love life.
Which leads us to another
big mystery similar
to the [foreign word]
legends around her love life.
Is that -- so a subject that's
been equally source of bafflement
and speculation and also equal lack
of historical evidence is why
she remained single all her life?
So I'll run into -- run
through a few different accounts
that I've heard.
Nothing really corroborated.
So one interpretation I read is that
people pull out some of her verses
from the [foreign word] and
they say that her versus suggest
that she was devoted to a pious
life of literary work and poetry.
So the [foreign word]
concept of love and God
and the beloved being always --
God alone that she devoted her life
to just that type of pursuits,
and so hence remaining single.
Another one -- oh, okay.
Only four minutes.
Another is that she was in
love with various dignitaries
from different places in the region,
including her cousin, a prince,
but that her father
didn't approve of it.
So another is that she had multiple
lovers and debaucherous affairs,
which some people say was the custom
of the Moghul court of the time.
Then the final reason that I've
heard is that she was in love
with a female slave of
hers, a [foreign word].
Her name was [foreign word]
and she has built her garden --
which I think -- these are
some other images of her.
There's multiple drawings.
So this is the garden known locally
as [foreign word] garden
in [foreign word].
The inscription over the main
archway entrance reads in Persian,
"This garden in the
pattern of the Garden
of Paradise has been founded",
and then there's a missing line
and then it says, "The garden has
been bestowed on [foreign word]
by the bounty of [foreign
word], the lady of the age."
So this is the fourth
type of speculation
as to why she never married.
Okay, so I'm just going
to quickly read two poems
by [foreign word] just as examples.
And these aren't ones
that I've translated.
These are ones that are available
and other people have translated.
So this is [foreign word] #44.
You with the dark burly haired
and the breathtaking eyes,
your inquiring glance
that leaves me undone.
Eyes that pierce and then withdraw
like a blood stained sword.
Eyes with dagger lashes.
Zealots you are mistaken,
this is Heaven.
Never mind those making
promises of the afterlife.
Join us now righteous
friends in this intoxication.
Never mind the path to the Kaaba.
Sanctity resides in the hearts.
Squander your life, suffer.
God is right here.
So and then a final short one is -
I bow before the image of my love.
No Muslim eye, but an adulterer.
I bow before the image of my
love and worship her or him.
No Brahman eye, my sacred threat I
cast away round my neck I wear her
pleated hair instead."
So in conclusion -- and I think
this is it -- is that there --
these were just two brief
examples, but their versus as well
as their life stories
challenge the orthodox and were
against the prescribed
norms promoting all types
of different ways of
being and conduct,
and the way they imagined society.
And not -- not in keeping
necessarily --
in some versus they're keeping in
the [foreign word] order and other
versus they were more
carnal and promoted a type
of worldly pleasures, as
opposed to otherworldly desires.
So in the post 9/11 world where
classic stereotypes of women
under Islam have gained
new currency and women
from the Persian region have become
synonymous with the depression,
repression and victimhood,
the versus of these women poets
provide a counternarrative
to the mainstream media
misrepresentations.
Their poetry and life experiences
offer a more accurate glimpse
into the contestations and
sociopolitical movements that shaped
and continue to shape the
Persianite world and beyond.
In other words, media producers in
Afghanistan are challenging same
of the same cultural issues as these
early Persian poets of the past.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Just want to say thank
you to Professor Osman.
And we have as it were a coffee
break time that we have run
over into slightly, but I
will presume upon the audience
to allow a couple of questions, but
not more than that, because we want
to have some time to mix and speak.
So yes, at the very back.
And address -- please address to
whichever one of the professors.
>> [Inaudible] and my question
goes to Professor [inaudible].
Thank you for your
excellent presentation.
[Inaudible] education
[inaudible] career.
[Inaudible], but my question
is regarding [foreign word].
In recent years there have been
multiple discussion in society
about switching to [inaudible]
and there are more people
who say we should do
this, we must do this,
because we have a huge
heritage in our history,
in Persian [inaudible] and some
other people say no, it's impossible
because in this case [inaudible].
What do you think?
[Inaudible]?
>> Muriel Atkin: Well I certainly
don't know what will happen.
The luxury of being
a historian is I get
to postdict the past [laughter]
rather than predict the future.
When this issue was also being
raised in the early 1990s,
one of the practical problems was
that there weren't the type fonts.
There wasn't the physical
need to print a lot
of things in the Arabic alphabet.
There was also the consideration
that you just made that in a country
when there is near universal adult
literacy you would instantly make
people illiterate and they'd have
to learn a whole new language.
And also, we've all the
different kinds of concerns
that Tajikistan has nowadays about
making its way internationally.
In diplomatic and economic
terms especially.
Devotement terms.
Is it more useful to be using
the Arabic alphabet or stick
with the familiar alphabet and
maybe learn some western language?
So that's part of the
debate as well.
Knowledge of - knowledge of
Russian has not lost all usefulness
and then there's the question if
you learn some other language other
than [foreign word], what
is the most useful one
for the country's currently
pressing needs to use?
As for what the government
will decide I have no clue.
>> [Inaudible] can you just continue
on where you stopped in terms
of [inaudible] media [inaudible]
and what is kind of challenging work
that is being done [inaudible].
Just a little more
about the [inaudible].
>> Wazhmah Osman: Okay, I'll try
to summarize seven chapters
in like two seconds.
I'm working on my manuscript now.
But basically, my argument --
so about 67% of Afghanistan's
gross national income comes
from the national community, and
most of that is from the U.S.
And a good percentage of
that goes to the media.
And part of, you know,
media diplomacy
or [inaudible] various things
which has been critiqued
extensively from the left.
However, my argument is
that it's created such a -
such a vibrant public
sphere because, you know,
we have over three dozen --
and most people are illiterate,
so over 3000 broadcast TV stations
and countless radio stations
that it's allowed all
different groups,
including different ethnic groups
to be able to generate this dialog.
Right?
So it's creating a
certain amount of --
I mean of course there's
plenty of conversations.
There's fights between -- you
know, it's continuing some
of the earlier ethnic
violence and gender violence.
But at the same time overall I
think the effect is very positive
because it's creating
an amount of healing
by talking about these things.
And I notice that the stations that
are the most successful are the ones
that downgrade their
ethnic identity entirely.
So they have a nationalist,
plural, you know, unity message.
And they were the ones that
by far are the most popular.
So in addition to the
[inaudible] local programming
with international money,
the international community
is also [inaudible] programs
into local languages.
From, you know, all the neighboring
countries as well as from the west.
So in my conclusion
I say that, you know,
people have very high expectations
of the media there whether,
it's to avenge ethnic
murders and all kinds
of other cultural traditions,
particularly gender
and other things.
But that overall it's
meeting its mission and --
through this - this very neat
type of media economy that's --
that doesn't really
exist in other places.
>> Okay, [inaudible].
>> Thank you for being very
[inaudible] presentations.
My question was for [inaudible].
Among the adjectives used for
the designation [inaudible]
in Afghanistan and the
[inaudible] to a national language,
it seems to me as though that kind
of process itself, like [inaudible]
in Afghanistan could be [inaudible]
the history of the empowerment
of [inaudible] and its
rivalry [inaudible] as well.
One of the adjectives that was
very interesting to me [inaudible].
But when it was used in 19th
Century it did not mean [inaudible]
as we call it today.
It meant that which
[inaudible] has [inaudible].
For example in the case
of [inaudible] was used
when people paid their tuitions.
[Inaudible] today are
all private today.
So, I think -- I wonder if that
which I think you translate
as [inaudible], if that is accurate
or whether it means something closer
to national and where in the
spectrum [inaudible], you know,
where - where this
language was during the time
of for example [foreign word].
So I think that the use of that
adjective can be very important
and [inaudible] follow
the history [inaudible].
You do not always have time
to use the original word
that was used [inaudible].
So that's kind of [inaudible]
really go back to the world itself
and see the position [inaudible].
>> Amin Tarzi: Thank
you first of all.
That's one reason I'm
glad to be here.
I tried to look at this aspect
of languages [inaudible].
There's this [inaudible] education.
There's still a holding back
because there has been riots
over whether [inaudible].
While I think the government
in Afghanistan is being pushed
under the rug if you will
in terms of [inaudible].
It's one of those things
that nobody wants to look at.
All the history of
the last 20 years.
[Inaudible] small piece
about the fact
that the Afghanistan government
officially says we should not
discuss the last 25 years of the
country because most of the people
who are involved right
now did some [inaudible].
Pushing out 25 years does not
help [foreign word] first one
to use [foreign word] and
thank you for pointing it.
I show initially, briefly
[inaudible] of what can bring it
out as a useful language,
not to replace Persian -
the replacement issue comes in
in 1930s with [foreign word]
and he says [inaudible] to do
away with Persian and has allowed.
[Inaudible] paper,
[inaudible] there was a lot
of this issue of National Socialism.
There was a lot of issue of
chauvinistic [inaudible] mainly
in order to reincorporate what
[inaudible] the other side
of [inaudible].
Which I also believe unless we
solve that nothing in Afghanistan,
nothing piece of security, no
[inaudible] cannot [inaudible].
This is one thing that
transgresses the [foreign word].
All of them think that's their
country, which is a foreign country
on the other side of the water.
All of these have to do
with linguistic dilemma.
So my motion about language is a
little bit beyond this [inaudible].
But I would be very, very
grateful to people [inaudible]
who see [inaudible] and
bring in [foreign word].
Of course the other issue is
that Persian language [inaudible]
is a way for this modern Republic
of Iran to influence
it from Afghanistan.
That is something that unfortunately
is not bringing these two languages
together because a -- almost a --
this is why [inaudible]
highest positions are that good
about even having an office
of the Persians society.
[Inaudible] said,
"Look, I'll lose my job," and
he was a [inaudible] cabinet.
He said, "That's impossible."
So [inaudible] aspect from that.
Thank you very much.
>> With that we're going
to close this panel.
[ Applause ]
>> Harid Dinavari: Okay everyone,
let's not take any more time.
Thank you very much for
joining us again and thank you
for being here for the second panel.
I'm Hirad Dinavari, the Arian
World Reference Librarian,
and I would also like to suggest
that after the lunch you have today
if you want to stop by and look
at the exhibition upstairs
it'll be worth your time.
We have three more
panelists in the second round.
I start with Miss Pardis
Minuchehr and give you brief bio.
And she will then start with
her program, her lecture.
Pardis Minuchehr received a
PhD from Columbia University,
and MA from University
of Massachusetts Amherst.
She completed her BA in [foreign
word] University in Iran.
She is currently a
Director of Persian Program
and Assistant Professor of Persian
at George Washington University.
Her research focuses on studies on
Modern Persian the Intellectual,
Discourses of Constitutional
Revolution, The Iranian Press,
Gender Discourses, Iranian Cinema
and Arts, Language and Literature,
Medieval Literature,
Islamic, Missisium,
and Persian Language
teaching and learning.
Without taking any further
time Pardis [inaudible],
thank you very much.
[ Silence ]
[ Applause ]
>> Pardis Minuchehr: Thank you.
Thank you [inaudible] for the
introduction, and thank --
I want to first thank
the Library of Congress
for organizing this event the Roshan
Institute, [inaudible] and all
of the audience here, and Kevin, of
course, for organizing this event.
Thank you so much.
Since the title of the conference
is the "Wide World of Persian:
Connections and Contestations,
1500-Today,
I thought maybe I'll start
first with the 1500s.
So in the 1500's what happened
to the Persian culture?
The Persian culture,
literature, arts, architecture,
and painting reached its cultural
and political zenith in the 1500's.
There was a colorful and
rich landscape of this period
that can be attributed to the
rivalry of three emerging empires.
These three empires the
Ottoman's, the Safavid's,
and the Mughal's extended geography
from the straits of [inaudible] --
I think does this map show --
oh maybe -- yes, a little bit.
>> Kind of.
>> Pardis Minuchehr: Kind of -- no.
Not really?
>> [Inaudible], no it doesn't.
[Inaudible].
>> Pardis Minuchehr: Okay.
The straits of [inaudible] crossing
Asia Minor, it shows Asia Minor,
the Iranian Plato and
Central Asia, [inaudible]
and into the South Continent,
all the way to the Bay of Bengal.
This vast geographical area
populated over one-fourth
of the world at the time.
So the population of the world was
concentrated in this area mainly.
And this situation contributed
to what Bert Fragner has called
"The polycentric sense of
nature of the Persian language."
Meaning that there were multiples
centers of language and literature,
there wasn't like today you
have [foreign word] couple
and [foreign word], but
it was more than that.
There were cities and urban centers
such as [speaking in
foreign language].
So how did this all start?
In 1501, you all know as [foreign
word] started a series of conquests
from [foreign word] that
marked the beginning
of this [foreign word] empire.
He soon conquered [inaudible],
and within 10 years he took
over so many major areas
to the north, east, west,
and south of [inaudible].
Ismial [assumed spelling] soon
called himself the [inaudible]
and established what we know
today as the Safavid Empire.
It is known that while the
court language was Persian
but [Foreign name] himself had a
DeVaan, a collection of poetry,
called DeVaan [inaudible]
inTurkish language.
In spite of the Safavid's became
patrons of Persian culture
and literature, even though they
themselves were not Persian speakers
at home.
And there are lot of magnificent
works of art and architecture
that can be attributed -- that are
attributed to the Safavid period.
During the Safavid's Persian poetry
gained social and political prestige
with notable achievements --
and I know that's in
the book exhibit here,
the Persian book exhibit,
you have representatives
of the Safavid period, yes.
Like his Persian counterpart
in 1504,
Barbora [assumed spelling]
conquered [foreign word]
in the beginning series
of conquest expandtions
of what established
the Moguls in India.
Barbora was a decendent of both
[Foreign name] and Chingese --
or [Foreign name] and Chingese
Hun, and his mother tongue, again,
was not Persian but of
Turkimongul [foreign word] language.
But his court -- administrative
language continued
in Persian especially, under
the successor [Foreign name]
who had fled to Persia and returned
to become one of most Arden patrons
of Persian poetry and [inaudible].
However, it wasn't
until [Foreign name],
who was the first among the
Indo-Islamic kings of northern India
to formally declare
Persian to be the language
of administration at all levels.
[Foreign name] article and his
research called the "Pursuit
of Persian Language and Mogul
Politics," states that the,
"Mogul literary culture has been
noted for its notable achievements
in poetry and a wide range
of prose writings in Persian.
In terms of perfusion and variety
of themes this literally output
was also perhaps incomparable."
He attributes the rights of Persian
in northern India as a direct result
of court patronage, a
court whose language
in the beginning was a
[foreign word] Turkish language
and gradually excelled and surpassed
in Persian in a phenomenal way.
What was more interesting
was that the Mogul's looked
up to the Persian's, to the
Safavid's as [foreign word],
one of the last Mogul's
great [foreign word] claims.
This is [Foreign name]
talking about the Persians,
"No other nation is better than
the Persians for acting as clerks."
And I think this is [foreign
word], meaning writers here not
like desk clerks, but, you
know, writers and literati.
"And in [inaudible] from the
age of Emperor [Foreign name]
to the present time, none of this
nation has turned his face away
from the field, and they're firm
feet have never been shaken."
This learning knowledge and
high culture was associated
with the Mogul Indian
Society after the 1500's.
In fact the process
of Persianization [assumed
spelling] was so internalized
that the Mogul's became very
concerned with the process
of purification of Persian and
they called it [foreign word],
so they were very much involved.
Around the same time as the Mogul --
this was happening in the Mogul
Empire, and Safavid Empire.
The Ottoman's also who had
started they're court --
they're court language is Persian.
They also tried to -- established
the language that is full
of flowery Persian words, and
vocabulary, and Persians constructs.
And was to such an extent that it
was not understood after a while
by the Ottoman and by the
Turks, the Turks themselves.
And you may remember
that [Foreign name],
remember that [Foreign name]
wrote in Turkic language,
[Foreign name] wrote in
Persian, a Persian DeVann.
So in order to understand
what happened in the 1500's
and why I think we need to take
one step back and question namely,
how could a language
like Persian emerge
as a widely used [inaudible]
1500's, covering more than a quarter
of the world's population.
How did modern Persian --
and when we say modern here,
modern Persian is probably the
oldest modern language in the world,
because it's older than modern
German, older than modern French,
or modern English and it's
almost a thousand years old.
How did this modern Persian emerge
from urgent originally
Indo-Iranian variety
of middle Persian [foreign
word] and involve
into a wide linguistic medium of
communication and administration.
Now, linguistically speaking
those of you who know Persian
and the crowd here, this is
the overwhelming of number
of participants here,
that you all know
that Persian was a user
friendly language compared
to the existing languages of
Arabic, Softey, or Sansrkits.
Had no distinction of grammatical
gender, had a simplified morphology,
simplified verbal system,
and nominal inflections,
and used basic Arabic vocabulary
to serve its own purposes.
But there are actually two main
theories that are contradictory
in nature, that examining
the evolution of Persian
as a lingual [inaudible], in the
region from a cultural perspective.
So what is the first theory?
The first theory claims that
Persian is a language of Islam,
the language that embraced
the new religion
after the 7th century
conquest, and a language
that became a vehicle
for its expansion.
This theory treats the
Persian language to be one
of the main languages of Islam,
if not its first language.
The second theory inherently
contradicts the first one.
And believes -- and Persian
being a nationalists agenda
for the Persian language, it claims
that the survival of Persians
after the conquest
represents a legacy of those
who resisted the Arabization of the
Persian Empire, those who managed
to preserve the language of their
forefathers' in the face of calamity
and distress, which was
resulted by the Arab conquest.
Now, I mentioned Bert
Fragner the author of the
"German Handbook Persephone"
actually sides with the first group.
Now, if you say the -- you
know the Islamic Republic sides
with the first group,
it's understandable.
But this a German scholar
who strongly believes
that Persian should be considered
as a first language of the Muslim-
Arab conquerors in the
process of its [inaudible].
He says, "The Persian
language was not the language
of cultural resistance
to [inaudible],
it was more the language of
the process of [inaudible].
And by adopting the Arabic script
[foreign word] Arabic vocabulary the
early Muslim's created, the language
that they could take from land
to land as a court and
administrative language,"
this is still Fragner talking, "thus
language that early Muslims adopted
and expanded was not really Arabic,
but the modern Persian language."
And this is, if you go to
the websites in Iran and look
up [foreign word], they don't
say Persian as a first language
of Islam, they call it
the second language.
So he is more Catholic than the
Pope in this case [laughter].
In fact -- okay -- so -- okay,
so where does he get that?
What happens in the
beginning of Islam
that Persian becomes so prominent?
According to an early degree --
decree by [foreign word] 699 to 767,
who is one of the main four [foreign
word] school leaders, the recitation
of prayer in both Persian and
Arabic was considered legitimate
for prayer.
Considering both languages to
belong to the residents of heavens,
and you know that up to this day,
you know, in Iran or in a Persian --
Persian countries you don't --
you're not allowed
to pray in Persian.
But this is back then and all the
reading in the seventh, eighth,
early 8th century that
they were allowing --
[Foreign name] was allowing the
recitation of the [foreign word],
the [foreign word] in Persian.
Now, this was not taken easily, it
was a very controversial ruling,
it created a lot of rift,
especially, some who --
some came out and claimed
that Persian was the language
of hell dwellers, in contrast
to what he had said, you know,
[Foreign name] had called
it the language of heaven,
"Residents of heaven," he said.
They said, "No, it's the
language of hell dwellers."
But at the time it's interesting
because it was intended
to consolidate power, convert
non-Arabs, and elevate tensions
between the Persian and Arabs and
it shows how Persian came to be seen
as language of Muslim conquerors.
Now what's -- on the other hand the
nationalist theory that I mentioned
as a second theory they use
the Persian language to be one
of the distinguishing factors
between Arabs and Iranians
and it was based on the
linguist factors upon
which Iranians proceeded to
build they're Iranian identity.
In [speaking in foreign language],
of course not the only
nationalist Iranian who claims this,
but this is wide spread among
-- especially among Iranians.
I don't know if it is that
wide spread among Afghans.
Maybe we can talk about that later.
But [inaudible] says,
"Language was a foundation floor
and refuge for the sole.
A strong hold in which we stood,
in the face of the Arab atrocities
commented after the conquest."
And this in a book called
Iranian National Identity
and the Persian Language
900 to 1900:
The Roles of [inaudible]
Religion and [inaudible]
in Persian Prose Writing .
However, there are other Persian
language specialists who believe
that one should not theorize the
rise of Persian language in relation
to religious consideration.
One measures a scholar in
this topic [inaudible] claims
that the evolution of modern
Persian occurred mainly as a result
of frequent trades between
[inaudible] who brought the language
from the [inaudible] area
into north [foreign word]
who happened to be Muslims.
Now I am quoting [Foreign
name] because I think the --
[Foreign name] book on The
Evolution of Persian ,
among [foreign word]
and for [foreign word] is
a seminal reference book.
And it examines the transformation
of the Persian language
from being a language of the
multi-lingual society for centuries,
the leading language of religion,
science, literature, administration,
correspondence, and trade,
to a language whose
function has been reduced
to the primary language
defined according
to national criteria
of a speaker community.
In the course of this transformation
the Persian language emerged
as a decisive element for
national identity which I believe
in your paper you'll
address that in more detail.
In conclusion, in 1500's the Persian
language had already established
itself as the language of
learning, culture, and literature,
but the court patronage of three
major Empires expanded its reach
and status.
The modern Persian
languages religious
and nationalists functions
changed from region
to region whether it was among the
[foreign word] Ottoman's, Safavid's,
or the [foreign word]
under [foreign word],
but it it remained an administrative
lingual [foreign word]
up until the 19th Century
in the region,
extending throughout a large
geographical area from the straits
of [foreign word] to
the Bay of Bengal.
As well as north to [foreign
word] and all throughout
and beyond the Iranian Plateau,
which you see here in this map.
The major efforts to standards
of Persian language, however,
occurred mainly in the
20th Century when the title
of official language [foreign word],
and I saw there was some discussion
on that topic, was given to language
that underwent state policies
in Iran, Afghanistan and [foreign
word] in the age of nation states
within a national context.
I think I'll leave it
there and then quit.
If you have any questions,
I could answer it.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
[ Silence ]
>> Thank you Professor
Minuchehr for that.
I'm going to introduce
Professor Willem Floor,
who is a well-known
independent scholar.
And he has studies -- he has
studied Development, Economics,
and Non-Western Sociology,
as well as Persian, Arabic,
Islamology from 1963 to
'67 at the University
of [inaudible], the Netherlands.
He received his Doctorate Degree
from the University
of Langdon in 1971.
He has published widely on a variety
of topics related to
[foreign word] Iran.
His latest book The
Persian Gulf: The Hula Arabs
of the Sheb Koff Coast of
Iran , is the latest item
that Madge Publishing
has just put out.
Without taking any further time,
Professor Floor thank you very much.
[ Applause ]
[ Silence ]
>> Willem Floor: I'm not a
professor by the way, never been.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Oh, well yes.
Well it's at leastbetter
than when they say --
you know, when I say that,
[inaudible], Willham.
I say, no.
I mean, what is easier than Willem?
Anyway, [foreign word] just
means to extinguishing candles.
And so why is it [inaudible]
from me?
Why? You know, I think I was
18 when I read [inaudible],
and in the footnote it explains
what [foreign word] was.
I thought that was odd.
By the way they didn't -- that did
not lead to my interest in Iran
by the way, it was another book.
But okay. In fact I forgot
about Iran after that.
I had to pass.
Okay, that's another story.
Anyway, and so now after
more than many years,
I come back to this [foreign word].
Well, as I said, you know,
it means [inaudible].
So why, you know, bother about
extinguishing the candles?
I mean -- I mean, you got real
wide-awake about that one.
Well, the point is, I see
it became used as of 1500.
It was very nice of the
Persians to start using it,
[inaudible] having in
mind this conference.
As a [inaudible] to label
[foreign word] groups.
And what actually means
[foreign word] --
what did they want to say
when they used this term?
And I quote now from [foreign word]
who around 1810 wrote the following,
"I have been informed that the
nocturnal festivals which the people
of [foreign word],"
which is [foreign word]
or [foreign word] nowadays,
"the garments of the fair sex
of the expiration of a
certain period are thrown
into a heap and jumbled together.
This being accomplished,
the lights are extinguished,
and the [inaudible] being
regularly distributed among the men,
the candles are re-lighted and it
is settled by the rules of society
that the lady must patiently submit
to the embraces of the person
who has become [inaudible] dress by
the father, son, husband or brother.
The lights are then once more
extinguished and the whole
of this [inaudible] passed
the remainder of the night
in the diligence of the
most [inaudible] lust."
Well, I mean, that's
a nice advertisement
to join the club, isn't it?
I mean, if you like lust, that is,
especially when it's
promiscuous [laughter].
Now, this term was used
for the first time, I said,
in early [foreign word] period.
But let's say the [inaudible]
to refer, let's say,
to people who extinguish candles
to hold [inaudible] and have,
let's say, [inaudible],
it was a pre-dated period.
We had already, let's say,
[inaudible] accusations,
the [foreign word] period against
the [inaudible] who held women.
And the early Christians,
for example, had a ritual,
it was called [foreign word], which
in Latin means [inaudible] darkness.
And we're -- let's say they --
and I come back to that later.
They had lots of women and
men and women were together
and they extinguished
them slowly as is part
of the ritual, seven candles.
And then men and women kissed
each other, it's called in Greek,
[foreign word], which means,
basically [inaudible] lover,
it's a spiritual love.
And, of course, because of that,
given that the early Christians
were also in the Middle East
and where people were rather not
so [inaudible] in mixing the sexes,
this of course was shocking.
[Inaudible] indeed it is.
Then of course you got -- when Iran
became Islamic, well, you know,
there was plenty of
opportunity to brand other people
with the same sort of
label, the [foreign word]
as also known for, you
know, sharing women.
The [foreign word], the
[foreign word], etcetera.
So that when the [foreign
word] they had this sort
of thing to fall back on.
Now, what made it more, let's
say, interesting at the time,
a lot of Turks were Incorporated in
the Iranian society at that time.
And the Turks, before they
become Muslim had a custom
where for religious ceremonies
men and women were together.
And they came together in a circle,
which was called [foreign
word] or [foreign word].
And -- which is still practiced
amongst several groups.
And they continued that practice
after they had become Muslim.
And, of course, it was shocking
to Muslims because, you know,
religious experience
or devotions have
to be done separately
by men and women.
And so that raised at least
eyebrows and later even more things
because the -- this kind of
behavior, of course, was suspicious.
The first time that
the term is used is --
may have been in a [inaudible] work.
[Foreign name], one of the
servants of [Foreign name],
when he came to Iran explains that
one of the [inaudible] who was
under the advanced party of [Foreign
name] came to [foreign word]
who wanted him to become a
[foreign word], and the guy refused.
And then he said, well, then,
you know, if you don't obey me,
who is the lord of the universe,
then you have to be killed.
And so he ordered to get some
[foreign word] from the prison,
because they were [inaudible]
and they had to kill him.
Now, at the same time
was an other source
that [Foreign name] was
[foreign word], and he uses --
and that's interesting, he
uses basically [inaudible]
which was the traditional
term before --
mainly before 1500 as it
was a widely used term
to refer particularly to [foreign
word], but in general to anybody,
you know, whom you disagreed with.
And then [speaking in foreign
language] also refers to not only,
let's say, to necessarily
to [inaudible] but probably
to [foreign word] when
[foreign word] --
you may, those of you
who are not familiar
with [foreign word] history, that
was one of the chiefs who went
over to the [inaudible]
side in 1531.
And there was a group of his
followers, the [foreign word],
whom [Foreign name] accused
of [foreign word], adultery,
[foreign word], shamelessness,
and [foreign word], rudeness.
And they do not withhold
their wives from each other.
Now we found them out.
Now -- and what we see, then,
after that period we find a
regular reference to this rude
and promiscuous behavior
by Iranians.
And, you know, we the Iranians
are already rude and lustful.
So [inaudible] that
in the [foreign word],
and are in the [foreign word]
even wiped out an entire village
because of such lude behavior.
Others mentioned the [foreign word],
who were involved in
this [foreign word].
Accused the [inaudible], you know.
[Foreign name] had the lifeguard
of [foreign word] and he says that,
"They were held in great
[inaudible] but at present,"
this was about [inaudible],
"are in great disgrace
for they are [inaudible] of
keeping nocturnal assemblies,
which modesty does not
permit me to explain."
And, indeed, you know,
when you look, let's say,
at a few of the surviving [foreign
word], pointing [foreign word]
for the tribe -- the
[foreign word] Movement,
which was organized by a tribe.
Then you see, indeed, at that time
that in those [foreign word] the
[foreign word] instructed [Foreign
name] forbid the [inaudible]
with strange women beyond
the permitted degrees
and other such matters.
Very interesting is
the [foreign word],
the 17th century [foreign word]
who came in Iran twice in the end
of 1640 and beginning of 1650.
But before he came to
Iran he even writes,
"[Inaudible] did it as
well [foreign word]."
And they -- he called them
the [inaudible] extinguishers.
He uses [speaking in foreign
language], which is the same thing
in Turkish and the Turks actually
used the term [foreign word].
Anyway, [Foreign name] is
a very interesting source
because he really went out of
his way to find [Foreign name].
And he said, you know, look, I
have been all over the place, from,
let's say, Iran, [foreign word].
I visited [speaking in
foreign language], etcetera.
I have been at the
Province of [foreign word]
and the [foreign word],
which is in Turkey.
And I also [speaking in
foreign language] people
of the [foreign word]
and the districts
of [foreign word],
which is in Bulgaria.
Say that there are husbands
and wives who are lovers
of [foreign word], who
are candle extinguishers
and wear the [foreign word] hat.
You see, there's proof.
However, the same [inaudible]
of [Foreign name] is made
for the [foreign word] in Syria.
It's interesting, [Foreign
name] also says, look, you know,
I have been looking for this
thing in all these places,
from Bulgaria to Iran, and I've
never actually seen any proof of it.
[Inaudible] for a [foreign
word] like he was,
it was rather an interesting
acknowledgement.
However, he didn't
give up that easy.
He also said, you know, well,
where does it come from?
Of course, from the bloody Iranians
because [foreign word], you know,
who started the [foreign
word] Movement,
well he was a Holy man,
he acknowledged that.
He started the whole thing.
He -- men and women were together
and at the certain moment he says,
you know, the lights go out,
take off your clothes and then
when the lights have come,
find your own family.
And lo and behold it was a miracle,
everybody was with his own family.
Nothing -- however, what
happened after the [foreign word],
his [foreign word] said, hey, we
have to emulate [Foreign name],
we do the same thing, and that's
where it went wrong [laughter],
because they didn't
have his holiness
and didn't know the difference
between the family members
and that's where everything started.
The -- it [inaudible] Turkey had
a 19th century Turkish author
as [speaking in foreign language].
He wrote about [foreign word].
He was really, really, let's say --
okay, [foreign word]
were acceptable.
And they were not bad guys,
but [inaudible] whom we called
[foreign word], and in fact he --
he talks about the [foreign
word] of -- what was it again --
well, I think it was [foreign word].
And there he gives a very
nice, this long description
of how bad these people
behaved with their own women.
And, "Those who are
married bring their wives
and daughters to the meeting too.
They drink and dance and if
one of them likes another wife
or daughter he goes to the
man and asks his permission
to pick a rose from his garden.
The man calls his wife
and says to her,
meet the demand of
this beloved friend.
Then he kisses her.
If the [foreign word] is
mutual, the two men go
to the father and ask
his permission.
If the father gives his permission
they use each other's wives
and daughters all through
their lives.
True [foreign word] do
not commit these vices."
It's true, they don't.
Anyway, similar accusations
were also made
to other [foreign word] in Iran.
And, you know, strange it
was not only [foreign word]
who initially believed that
[Foreign name] was the real thing.
Europeans who reported on it, like
[foreign word] and [foreign word]
and [foreign word] seemed
to have believed as well.
Because they, for example,
[foreign word] wrote that,
"These orgies were
certainly held unto
within the last half
century, but not anymore."
However, 20 years later he
wrote that he had a vision
and they said no, actually,
it's all make believe.
These things actually never happened
and it is just -- it
is just slander.
The -- you know, it also -- the --
in Iraq the same thing happened
because the various
[inaudible] groups in Iraq,
like the [foreign word] or the
[foreign word] had [inaudible]
where all the lights were
extinguished in the entire town
or village, and slippers are
taken off and the entire night --
I'm almost done --
[inaudible] morning.
And they also were therefore
accused of [foreign word].
The [inaudible] were also
accused of the same thing.
Then of course, if you go to
the East, because you know,
we've heard already about Bulgaria.
In Kabul there were -- it was
a sect called Ali [speaking
in foreign language] and
they are called [speaking
in foreign language], and
there various other groups
that are called that way.
Also, it's a very interesting group
in the -- yeah, North West province,
the [speaking in foreign language].
They were originally Ali
[speaking in foreign language],
who fled Iran because
of persecution,
and everybody called
them [foreign name].
Interesting thing at that
time they had become Sunnis,
but never the less the label stuck.
The [foreign name] when they made
their appearance were also accused
of [foreign name] because,
you know, they were in favor
of holding everything
in common property,
and practicing [foreign
name], and what have you.
Even let's say, in Iran the term
basically dies out at the end
of the century, you
don't find any --
at least I didn't find
any mention of it.
However, in Afghanistan for
example, in the 1970s reported
when Afghans drove
through [foreign name],
they yelled out of the car
[speaking in foreign language].
And even right now, if you go on the
websites, you find [foreign name]
on the website of Afghans
who, for example here,
"In May 2009 Kabul urged
the [foreign name] to return
from where they came, because you
introduced the [foreign name],
and nomadic unknown tribes."
This is a citation, "From the
other site of the [foreign name].
You presented the family
culture, and family education
of Raheem [foreign
name] all families,
and tribes" -- I mean,
all bad things.
Anyway, what it shows, let's say, is
that mankind needs labels in order
to understand the world,
and especially
when there are groups whom you
don't like for whatever reason.
Especially when you are
religious, because that's instils
in people the urge to find
fault with other people.
And labels -- especially when they
are very slanderism bad very much
appeal to our base of nature.
Thank you very much.
[ Applause ]
>> Taking pictures?
>> Willem Floor: Yeah.
Pictures?
>> Hirad Dinavari: Thank you for
that very interesting presentation.
>> Willem Floor: Well, you know I
took pictures, but then I forgot
that it was dark so
nothing could see.
>> Hirad Dinavari: Okay, thank you
for that interesting presentation.
I learned a lot, and now I am going
to introduce the last speaker.
Cory Miller attended Harvard College
where he majored in Linguists,
and Romance Languages and
completed his PHD in linguistics
at the University of
Pennsylvania, writing a dissertation
on Pronunciation, Modeling
and Speech Snythesis..
In 2009, he came to the
University of Marilyn Centers
for advanced study of language,
where he has been developing
a Persian research program --
including lexical and dialect
studies of Afghanistan and Iran.
We look forward to
your presentation.
Thank you.
>> Corey Miller: Thank you
Hirad for the introduction,
and Kevin for the invitation, and
my colleagues at the University
of Marilyn for providing
a very rich environment,
in which to think about
these things.
>> You want me to do that.
>> Corey Miller: I can open
it, then I can be in business.
Actually, I just wanted to
say before I get started,
some of the themes
that I am learning
from the other papers include
"The Cosmopolitan Nature
of the Persian Language."
And I think that [foreign name]
intimated that it has to do
with the linguistic element to that.
And that would be the flexibility
of the Persian language,
to absorb the vocabulary
from Arabic, from Turkish,
from other languages,
from French and English.
And if you think about
it, the verbal system,
and what we call light verb
construction something [foreign
name] it's very easy to
incorporate new vocabulary that way.
In contrast, a language like
Arabic or Hebrew is very difficult,
you know, if you have telephone,
you have got to make a new
quadrilateral route out of it,
and it's a little more
acrobatics is required.
So I think sematic languages tend
to be a little less inviting.
And I think -- in addition
to all the cultural factors,
there's something linguistic
there, perhaps.
This paper is about standard,
national, and colloquial varieties
of Persian -- and I
wanted to thank several
of the research assistants
working at Castle.
Evelyn, Jase, Tommy, Rachel, and
Mark, and also Alex Smiley --
a former research assistant at
Castle, who collaborated with me
on some work I will tell
you about in a few minutes.
So what I'd first like to think
about is how to look at Persian,
you know, there's a
chronological dimension,
and there is a geographical
dimension,
and then in any given place there
is going to be a vertical dimension
of all the different social classes.
So language is always a moving
target and is not uniformed.
So one-way to look at this,
we can think of Persian --
three kinds of Persian, there
is a literally language,
and as Pardis mentioned this
is a 1000 years old, and it's,
you know, largely the same.
We can pick up [foreign
name] and read it
with a little help primarily
in terms of vocabulary.
And that is shared, you know,
among the different countries
where Persian is spoken today
in Iran, and Afghanistan,
and also Tajikistan, despite
the alphabet problems.
But I did speak to some of my
colleagues, who have been there,
and apparently, you know,
you can buy [foreign name],
and [foreign name] transliterated.
And they also told me that some
of these BBC Persian, BBC topic --
a lot of those just transliterate.
So it really is the same on that
level except for the alphabet.
But then of course each nation state
has what we might call a standard
language, a standard literary,
or maybe national language.
And so these tend to get labels,
you know, [foreign word] is a word
that is shared among
all the cultures.
But just for simplicities sake, we
can refer to the Iranian variety
of Farsi, and the Afghan
variety is Dari,
even though people there may say
Farsi, and it was only since 1964
that that became an official term.
And then the notion of Tajik of
course, has different meanings,
you know, it could mean a
Persian speaker in Afghanistan,
or it could be, you know, a
resident of Tajikistan, but anyway,
we can refer to that
variety as Tajik.
And as I show each of these
varieties has particular
differences, you know,
at the written level.
Now we can talk about a Colloquial
language that each country
and each city of course
has its own variety.
And one thing that is
important to note about Persian,
is that there is potentially a
wider gulf between the written
and the spoken language than
you might find in, say English.
And of course it depends
on social class,
and environment, and
things like that.
One term that has been offered
is the terms [foreign word],
which people use to
describe Arabic for example.
Where there is a modern
standard Arabic based
on the language of the core arm.
And then each Country
from Morocco, you know,
all the way to Iraq
has its own variety,
and these varieties are not
necessarily mutually intelligible.
There has been some debate whether
Persian is also [foreign word]
as some people say it is, and
other people say it isn't,
or it's not quite as
extreme as the Arabic case.
In any case, it's a continuum
that we should be aware of.
And one of the reasons that
has been a given for the fact
that Persian is not [foreign word]
is the pleather of terminologies.
So for example in Arabic, there is
one term [foreign word] to refer
to the standard, whether
it is modern standard,
or a classical Arabic variety
[foreign word], and everything else,
you know, some kind
of Colloquial variety.
In person there are several terms,
so the standard variety we
could call [foreign word],
or [foreign word],
or [foreign word].
And the spoken, or Colloquial
variety we could call [foreign
word], or [foreign word],
and things like that.
One thing, it's difficult to talk
about spoken and written today,
because for at least
50, or maybe 100 years,
written Persian can also
include in dialogue, you know,
forms of the spoken speech.
And also today, of course, we
have blogs, and things like that
where people most often write
in the Colloquial language,
so speaking about written and spoken
is a little bit of a misnomer.
And also you could deliver a
lecture or a poetry reading,
and speak in the standard language.
And so I will talk about
standard versus colloquial just
to have a slightly more anchor way
of speaking about those notions.
So one of the things
I wanted to talk
about in this Cosmopolitan
Nature of Iran,
and the fact that we have
three nation states today
where it has an official role.
There is a lot of variation,
and this would be at least
at that standard that middle level.
So you take a notion like bicycle,
which is [foreign word] in Iran,
or bicycle in Afghanistan, or
[foreign word] in Tajikistan.
And that doesn't mean that
[foreign word] don't exist.
There is a shared vocabulary
depending on your exposure
to education, and media,
and so forth.
But I think these may be the most
usual words for this concept.
And also in the phonological
or phonetically domain,
there are vast differences.
When we were talking about Dr.
Osman's talks about [foreign name]
that could be bedil, badil -- it
sounds like a different person
if you think about it in
terms of pronunciation.
But even New Year, [foreign name] in
Iran, [foreign name] in Afghanistan,
or [foreign name] in Tajikistan,
so quite a broad differences.
And also at the level of
the morphology in syntax,
in the construction like he can eat.
It could be [speaking in
foreign language] in Iran,
or [speaking in foreign
language] in Afghanistan,
or [speaking in foreign
language] in Tajikistan.
So there are differences in both the
endings on verbs, and in the order
of the elements of
these constructions.
Also some interesting things that
we can think about as reversals.
So my colleague Mark was telling
me that, as we know in Iran,
they might be a more literally
way of saying he or she,
whereas "oo" is a more normal way.
In Tajik, it's the reverse,
where "urh" is the high register,
and "vi" is the more normal
way of referring to he or she.
And then in the semantic
or meaning domain, in Iran
or [foreign word] is the maternal
uncle, whereas in Afghanistan,
it's [foreign word], and
in midwife is the reverse.
So there are a few other examples,
but I think the more blatant are
when things are -- it
reminded me a little
of you could say that's bad,
and mean good, you know.
Just far -- yeah, as I was
mentioning before about the standard
versus colloquial varieties,
and the names that are used,
and we've talked about
[foreign word]..
These are the articles, I guess
these will be preserved for eternity
so people look some of these
things up if they like.
And I wanted to think about what
it means to be a standard language,
and first we can think
about United States,
or United Kingdom, or Canada.
What is standard American
English, you know,
people might say it's something
that newscasters speak,
but it's usually not associated
with any particular place.
When I was in high school,
and we went to Spain
on the exchange program, they said,
"You're going to where they
speak the best Spanish."
And I don't where they
would send people, you know,
in America where they speak the
best English, maybe Greenwich,
Connecticut, that's
where I was thinking.
And then the same in
the United Kingdom,
there is a notion that's
called perceived pronunciation,
which is spoken throughout
the United Kingdom by people
in the upper or upper middle class,
and usually when they
go to boarding schools.
And I was thinking about
that too, the public schools
in England are private schools, so
that reminded me of a discussion
that we had about [foreign name].
The same in Canada, there is
no one place, there's just kind
of notions of what is standard.
However, when we get to the domain
of Iran or Afghanistan, well,
where's the best -- what
is standard Persian,
"Oh it's [foreign name]",
or something like that.
Or [foreign name] in
the case of Afghanistan.
In the case of Tajikistan, the
standard actually is supposed
to have come from outside of the
borders of Tajikistan as was alluded
to in the earlier talks
in both [foreign name],
which are in Uzbekistan.
So what I wanted to explore is the
relationship primarily in the case
of Iran, with Tehrani [foreign
name], and [foreign name],
what is the difference there.
So there is a grammar [foreign
name] by [foreign name].
and it is a full book
life description
of the colloquial language,
and how it is spoken.
And what is distinguishes in
its [inaudible] is differences
between Tehrani and what he calls
[speaking in foreign language].
So the notion is that there is some
kind of national colloquial variety
that is acceptable in Iran.
And I think one thing we can think
about when we talk about accent is,
it's the absence of accents
that is sort of important.
Because if somebody doesn't have an
accent then you will pay attention
to what their saying,
rather than worrying
about how they are saying it,
and trying to pigeon hole them,
and I think that's
what's important in terms
of media and things like that.
So some of the differences that
[foreign name] provides in the case,
so very commonly in Persian
of course Iranian Persian
between [foreign name] and [foreign
name], that's a classic difference,
you know, between the written
language, and the spoken language.
But in this case [foreign
name] is saying
that the formal spoken
language can say [foreign word],
and no one would raise an eyebrow.
But it's to say [foreign
word], and that kind of prefix
or suffix [foreign word], things
like that that is not quite part
of this [speaking in
foreign language]
and it might be more Tehrani.
But that's not to say
it doesn't happen
in other cities throughout Iran.
And that's the other thing that one
of the projects we had at Castle,
the University of Marilyn, is
to explore the dialects of Iran.
And one of the things we found
was that a lot of these features,
this happens in English too, so if
you ask somebody from Pittsburgh,
what's Pittsburghese, and they
say, "Oh, we say going to."
Well, everyone in America says
going to, but there's other things
like you 'uns that they
only say in Pittsburgh.
So people are not necessarily aware
of what distinguishes their variety
from the others, and might, you
know, bring forward something
that is in fact more general.
In any case [speaking in foreign
language] versus [foreign name].
And another construction that
some of my colleagues had --
and I had first heard this in a
movie, [foreign word] something
like that for something like
[speaking in foreign language],
and these things are so -- yeah,
so it's either [inaudible],
so it's not quite at this
[speaking in foreign language]
versus [speaking in foreign
language] versus [foreign word].
The use of [foreign word]
for [foreign word] I guess
that might be debatable.
And [foreign word] versus [foreign
word] I don't think I've ever heard
anyone say [foreign word] so I
don't really know to what extent --
it would require more
research to look into this.
[Foreign word] versus [speaking
in foreign language] and [speaking
in foreign language]
versus [foreign word].
There are a lot of
phonetic variations
that are probably admissible
than this more national
colloquial variety.
This was also talked about in a
series of books by Don Steeler
and others, where they
introduced Persian first
in its colloquial Iranian
form in Romanization -- -
and that could be a debate
more on a pedagogical context
of what the best way to learn.
But they also introduced
this concept
where there's these
standardized colloquial,
and that's what they're
going to teach.
And then there are some extensions
of it that are [inaudible].
And they also introduced the term
[speaking in foreign language],
and they say that it's not
quite clear what's [speaking
in foreign language] versus
[speaking in foreign language],
you know, maybe something
that you would just say
in your family context
and not further.
And a lot of these things
are similar to what we saw
with [foreign name], some of them
are a little bit contradictory
with what he was saying, but
this extended on-raising,
[speaking in foreign language].
So even though there is, you do
say [speaking in foreign language]
in the standardized colloquial, to
say [speaking in foreign language],
that's going a bit further, or
[speaking in foreign language].
And then they distinguish, you know,
[speaking in foreign language] --
maybe you could say that
about the physical term,
but maybe not necessarily
about the language.
And I read that somewhere
"Little House on the Prairie",
was [speaking in foreign
language], but you're right,
in the house where you live was
[speaking in foreign language],
because you heard it on TV, that's
how they introduced the program.
Or no -- yeah, I guess
that's the program.
And then [speaking in
foreign language] --
I guess there's some difference
with Proper names, [foreign names].
I asked a guy named [foreign name]
"Could you be [foreign name],"
and he said "Absolutely not."
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
So -- and there's also
[inaudible], and I think it is was
in the talk earlier by
Muriel, where she mentioned
that in the former [speaking
in foreign language] spoken
in a particular place, they
got rid of [inaudible],
maybe by influence from Persian.
But there is vale harmony within
Persian, in the colloquial [speaking
in foreign language] variety --
and I don't know if you would agree
with some of these, but [speaking in
foreign language] versus [speaking
in foreign language] versus
[speaking in foreign language]
versus [speaking in foreign
language].So the vowel harmony just
means you're getting
a little more rhythm,
and the [inaudible]
are copying each other,
[speaking in foreign
language] chocolate
versus chocolate, and so on.
And in addition to the, there's
harmony with ease as well,
and some of what we call final
de-voicing, so a D becomes a T,
so [foreign word] versus
[foreign word], or [foreign word]
versus [speaking in foreign
language] versus [foreign word].
And then there are some that you
couldn't really write a rule for,
syllables might drop out, you know,
[speaking in foreign
language] becomes [speaking
in foreign language].
And the [speaking in foreign
language] versus [speaking
in foreign language] -- I'm
going to show you other evidence,
perhaps [speaking in foreign
language] is not quite as marked
as it seems here, or [foreign
word] versus [foreign word].
And then things like [foreign word]
versus [foreign word]
might be just another level
of colloquial language.
This is a book that was
written by Lazar [inaudible]
in the Soviet Union in 1960
called, The Tehran Dialect .
It's actually very interesting
because it's really the
first book-length description
of the Tehran Dialect, and
it treats it like a language.
So there are verbal paradigms, you
know, [speaking in foreign language]
so on, [speaking in foreign
language] and they have, you know,
[speaking in foreign
language], so on.
Usually you would see in some of
the other grammars like [speaking
in foreign language] and
[speaking in foreign language],
some little section on
colloquial, you know, differences,
but not necessarily treat them
as a language of their own.
Alex Smiley and I have begun
translating this into English,
and I think it would be interesting,
and so part of this work
that I'm talking to you about is
from the introduction to that.
Because [inaudible]
also wonders, you know,
there's the Tehran dialect, and then
there's this colloquial variety,
and people don't know
what the difference is.
And in the introduction, because
anything can be translated in Iran,
which is actually a good thing, I
think from the creative stand-point.
Now we tried to contact the
Russian publisher, and so on
and so forth, that wasn't too easy.
Anyway, [foreign name] wrote --
is the translator of the
Peisikiv dialect into Persian,
it's called [inaudible],
that came out in 2001.
And in its introduction he
says, "Well some of this stuff
that Peisikov wrote, which is
actually based on field work
that Peisikov did in the
1940s is out of date."
And he calls that this Old Tehrani
and [foreign name] said, "Well,
I grew up in a traditional
neighborhood in Tehran,
and I did some field work
in the annoying industries."
I guess that must be metallurgy,
and things where people are
blowing torches, and stuff.
And he met some traditional speakers
of these things, and he said,
"You know, so I think what Peisikov
says is true, but we don't say it
like that," and what he offered is
that [speaking in foreign language]
versus [speaking in
foreign language],
or [speaking in foreign
language] versus [speaking
in foreign language], or
[speaking in foreign language]
versus [speaking in
foreign language].
In the late 1970s and early 1980s
there was a state of dissertations
that the sociolinguistics
variety that occurred in Iran.
And I was talking to [inaudible] the
other day and he said, "You know,
this is a time when there
were, you now, more Americans,
and this was kind of all the
rage in American sociolinguistics
with William [inaudible],
and others.
And these dissertations
are very interesting,
they're not as comprehensive
as Peisikov, they don't look
at the whole language, they
just pick certain variables.
And then they investigate
them kind of vertically,
and say the upper-class does
this, the lower-class does that,
women do this, and men do that.
And some of the dissertations
like [foreign name] he looks
at the Armenians, and the kind
of Persian that they speak,
and then he looks at the [foreign
name], and things like that.
So there's a lot of very interesting
sociolinguistics differentiation
going on.
So it's some of the same
variables we've seen, you know,
the "aww" versus the "oo,"
some of the vowel harmony,
[speaking in foreign language]
versus [speaking in
foreign language].
This is something when I first
learned Persian, you know,
we had the Thackston book
that says, "[Foreign word],"
and other places said, "[Foreign
word]" then the teacher says,
"[Foreign word]."
Where did that come from?
So it can be very disorienting
for the student to kind of feel,
figure out where these
different varieties fit in.
And a lot of these things can't
be really derived by rule.
Other things, you know,
[foreign word] versus [speaking
in foreign language] then
[speaking in foreign language]
so all of these are
sociolinguistic variables
that could be investigated.
And we do the same thing in
English, we look at /t, d/ deletion,
whether you say West
side or Wes side.
So a lot of these variables
actually cross linguistic,
and are interesting to study
in any speech community.
Another area besides phonetics,
where you can see varieties
of course the vocabulary.
So John Perry in an
article where he says,
"Persian isn't really
[inaudible] compared to Arabic."
He says, "Well, there are
some words such as slow
in the standard language, we all
had stay colloquially [speaking
in foreign language].
Head is a [foreign words]
or a [foreign word].
You know, we can say things like
noggin in English, you know,
and the French have all kinds
of things like this as well --
[foreign word] for nose
versus [foreign word].
There's three really good
[inaudible] resources,
there's the [speaking in foreign
language] by [foreign name]
and he says, you know, this is
mainly about the Tehrani vocabulary.
Except I think [foreign name]
came from somewhere else,
but we'll let him,
include him anyway.
And [foreign name] wrote the
[speaking in foreign language] --
I guess that was one of the poets
we heard about this morning.
In this case, it's kind of the
Argo spoken by the youth of Tehran.
And then [foreign name]
I just picked this book
up a couple weeks ago in Los Angeles
[speaking in foreign language].
And I'll show you a picture
that is very interesting
picture, and here we go.
This is it so you have a piece of us
turning into something [inaudible],
but it's becoming something.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Sorry, okay.
Becoming white bread,
the implication --
I think that's what that is.
But I think if you looked
at the vocabulary that's
in the book it's not really
[speaking in foreign language],
but maybe just a kind of
metaphor for youthful change.
Another source I wanted
to show you --
I guess I was inspired
by the 1000 years,
and that's why these pretty
pictures of books [laughter].
This [speaking in foreign
language] Farsi
by [foreign name] is a
very interesting book.
It was inspired by a French
pronunciation dictionary
by Andre [inaudible],
and Henriette Walter.
Where it actually tried to quantify
these differences in pronunciation,
so the word [foreign word] -- maybe
that's the minority pronunciation,
I remember hearing some
people say, "[foreign word],"
and here the [foreign name] -- her
methodology was, she said, "Well,
who are we going to
investigate to figure
out what is the pronunciation."
And she said, "Well [speaking in
foreign language] who are professors
because that's the
highest socio-class."
I wished right.
So anyway, she restricted herself
to Tehran, interviewed some people,
and then, you know, have thousands
of words where she feels, you know,
not [speaking in foreign language].
Even though that can be pronounced
hour in Afghanistan, in Iran,
or in Tehran, it's
not really a variable.
So certain words like this
one that could be [speaking
in foreign language]
perhaps an analogy [speaking
in foreign language]
or something like that.
[Speaking in foreign
language] or [speaking
in foreign language],
and things like that.
And gives a number of how
many informants said each one.
It's really an interesting
resource for its glory.
Okay. Pronunciation Variation.
You know, so that's
really all I wanted to say.
Really, I think that there
needs to be more research.
I think it'd be good to
go to a place like Tehran,
and do a proper sociolinguistic
study now in, you know, 2014 or 15,
whenever it's going to happen.
To explore different social
groups, and explore, you know,
what's on the media -- as you notice
if you listen to the BBC, you know,
over the past 10 or
20 years it's changed,
everyone is not speaking
[inaudible] pronunciation,
some of the announcers
are from Northern Ireland,
or Scotland, and that's okay.
The extent to which that's possible,
and also in Afghanistan, you know,
the [foreign name] wrote his
book about the spoken Persian
of Afghanistan in 1955,
it's a long time ago.
And the other thing I wanted to
say about Afghanistan was a lot
of the media reports relating
to this [foreign word] debate
are claiming that, you know,
a lot of Afghans went to
Iran during the, you know,
periods of upheaval, and came back.
So they've heard Tehran,
[foreign name],
or whatever you want to call it.
And, but there's a certain stigma
attached to using it in Afghanistan.
You know, they have -- this
reminds me of cherub [speaking
in foreign language], where
they have sandwich eaters,
and things like that.
>> Latte drinkers.
>> Corey Miller: Latte drinkers.
Okay, so there's all kinds of
labels for these kind of people.
But there are news
reports also where --
I think there was some Afghan
press that we were reading,
something forbade the
use of the [speaking
in foreign language], you know.
How do you forbid the
use of an accent?
But I think the term [foreign
word] is a little broader
than our term accent in English,
it might not just be pronunciation.
But I think there's probably some
influence, whether it's from media
or from [foreign name],
or returning,
that might be changing
things in Kabul as well.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Hirad Dinavari: Thank you Corey,
that was very, very fascinating.
That was very useful
for me actually.
I would like to take questions.
We have until 1 o'clock, and then
after that cabinets will show.
They'll tell us what to do.
So feel free to get up and ask
questions from any of the panelist,
and they have microphones there,
I think they can speak into it.
Go ahead. [Foreign name].
>> This is actually something
also [inaudible] dissertation
paper [inaudible].
And the other thing is that it seems
that [inaudible] language had
an influence that [inaudible],
because then there is
this [inaudible] system.
[Inaudible], and [inaudible],
and he say's [inaudible].
And the other thing is that,
it seems that [inaudible] became
almost like, a literally language --
I think [foreign name] called.
Because then for instance
[speaking in foreign language] he --
when he goes to the [foreign
word], I mean so fluent a version
that it comes out like that.
And the other point is that
you have to really [speaking
in foreign language] movement,
because after all it wasn't
[speaking in foreign language],
and simply try to [speaking
in foreign language] language.
There were quite a number of
[speaking in foreign language]
for instance, all things,
this other [inaudible],
and besides [inaudible].
And some of the [inaudible]
330 [speaking in foreign language].
And so it gradually
becomes like that.
They think it gradually it changes
[foreign word] it wasn't all
that much.
And one of their [inaudible] --
there are quite a number of
other things I should mention.
But my [inaudible], I have a
question, I have [inaudible].
What is your thought
about the [inaudible],
for instance we have
[speaking in foreign language],
which is very easy for us.
And almost you can see
that through that [speaking
in foreign language] is [inaudible].
But their job is poetry,
which is [inaudible].
In English, we have long
time to read [speaking
in foreign language],
he's very simple.
What can you say about
this kind of development
as if it has been almost
[inaudible] for that.
>> Pardis Minuchehr: Okay, yeah,
very good points, thank you so much.
About Abu [foreign name]
and [foreign name],
I was only stating the
different theories.
So these are different theories in
relation to the Persian language,
whether this is a language
of Islam or not.
So I'm not going to go into the
debates between the Persians
and Arabs now, but
[inaudible] in 15 or 20 minutes.
We don't have time to go into that,
but [foreign name] the Conqueror,
apparently his first court language
in [speaking in foreign language]
when he took power before they
conquest of Constantinople.
The first court language was
Persian, and then he, you know,
they changed it to Ottoman.
So, and I was just reading about it
that apparently [inaudible] the
Conqueror knew eight languages,
and Persian was one of them.
So definitely, you know, in his
court he was a patron of those,
of Persian language in
literature to a great extent.
And the [foreign name] you
definitely have a point
that there is, you know, as we go
along in the 1500s, we get so closer
to [speaking in foreign
language], you know,
and the Indian style
becomes completely, you know,
complex, and difficult to read.
A very flowery language with
words that, you know, now days,
modern Persian speakers, and
even educated [inaudible] Persian
speakers are unable to
read and understand.
So there is some, you know,
some simplicity if you want
to call it simplicity, but in the
[speaking in foreign language] style
of early 9th, 10th, 11th centuries,
which gradually as we go along,
and as this region of
this literary expanse.
Really, this literary
region expanse you see
that it becomes more
and more complicated.
>> Corey Miller: I have
a comment actually.
>> Yeah, go ahead.
>> Corey Miller: About
the conservatism system
of the Persian language,
which I think you're alluding
to which is different from English.
And one thing that
occurs to me is the advent
of modern English was supposed
to have started with Shakespeare.
And I know if you could say the
things that slowed down since then,
but I think the -- having a huge
literature, in the oral tradition
of reciting poetry, I think
that must of done something
to preserve Persian
in this one form.
But at the same time, true there's
always been colloquial languages
that have been spoken, and the
writings in which we couldn't
since it's not been recorded,
we don't really have access to.
Although there are fortunately
some Europeans who went, you know,
600 years ago to the
Persian speaking regions
and transcribed things
into the roman alphabet,
so that's very helpful for us to
figure out how things were spoken
at the time, and if there were
deviations, you know, in grammar.
So I think of this
entirely of literary
and oral literary tradition
probably assisted
with that conservative nature of
Persian, it could be contrast in it.
>> Hirad Dinavari: But
I also wanted to add --
to quickly take that Richard Fryer,
the belated Richard Fryer,
also had this concept.
That he was encouraging that it
was the [inaudible] and the Arabs
who really encouraged making Persian
the [inaudible] East of Baghdad
because they realize the Eastern
areas were not Arabic speaking,
and they themselves Arabs
encouraged this new Persian
that was written in Arabic script.
So the Arabs had a role in the
which Iranians conveniently
like to forget.
So this is one thing and then the --
>> Pardis Minuchehr: In line
with the first theory
that I was mentioning.
>> Hirad Dinavari: There you go.
So, and then the other thing
I wanted to also add is,
or what he was saying that the
medieval Persian dialects I think,
some of it has been well preserved
among Persian-Jewish communities.
All the little, little Jewish
dialects that exist throughout Iran,
[speaking in foreign
language], etc.,
they have preserved some really
old medieval Persian [inaudible]
in their form.
Anyway --
>> [Inaudible] the dynamics
of how this evolves,
particularly in the
contemporary study like, you know,
[foreign name] knew that he was
trying to translate some poetry
from Spain, [inaudible], they
have a culture of bull-fighting,
and had to invent words that,
you know, fit in this context.
And then [inaudible] simply the
underground music, like [speaking
in foreign language] which I guess
it means sitting in the street,
but [inaudible], I've
never heard that.
So there is constantly evolving
and it's an interesting
[inaudible] process [inaudible].
>> Hirad Minuchehr: Dr.
[inaudible] go ahead.
>> I just [inaudible] case,
one is what would it be --
I mean, I'm really speaking
as a non-linguistic.
Isn't it that language would be
reflecting some of the social
and cultural patterns, and so it
could be confined [inaudible] Islam,
and [inaudible] Islam, depending
on where we're looking at it,
and how it's being used
rather than being [inaudible]
of either of these [inaudible].
That so, it's more,
far more [inaudible],
and so in each context
it could be seen.
>> Pardis Minuchehr: Absolutely,
I mean, actually John Perry talks
about that, and he says that
language cannot be religious,
so you cannot talk about that.
>> Right, [inaudible].
>> Pardis Minuchehr: Language
in a religious [inaudible].
>> And the other thing is -- don't
forget that I want what I wanted
to say -- yeah, the physical.
It's is a little bit hard for me
to associate difficulty
with something you need.
I think that a playfulness,
and [inaudible] language,
the [inaudible] language,
it weighs that is --
[inaudible] have its
own signature that.
So, I suppose for example language
that falls heavily from Arabic,
or some other, [inaudible].
So I'm wondering if that is also
[inaudible] match [inaudible]
to [inaudible], or is that
difficult for, and what could
of [inaudible], and how does that.
>> Pardis Minuchehr:
First author of Professor
of Persian literature
who has studied.
>> Hirad Dinavari:
[speaking in foreign language]
from the Afghan area
or from the parts of --
they're more familiar with the
groups/types of use of vocabulary.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Different ways.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Okay, go ahead Doctor.
[Inaudible].
>> -- in two-sets of complexities.
One is this [inaudible]
complexity of the poetic language.
>> Hirad Dinavari: Okay.
>> Which means [inaudible],
and what happens there.
And one is the language, of
the gradual [inaudible] more
and more Persian [inaudible].
Of course, they say more
difficult [inaudible],
that is reducing the
[inaudible] Persian,
as such [inaudible] appear easier
than [inaudible], but it's not.
Go [inaudible] it's very hard.
[Inaudible], and so forth.
[inaudible] that's
very simple of course.
>> Hirad Dinavari: Okay.
>> But you know, I don't think we
can say that [inaudible] in general.
It's simpler than [inaudible].
And we cannot say that
this is a language
of a complexity of language.
It may be a [inaudible]
complexity of language [inaudible].
If you follow the [inaudible]
you come across, time-after-time,
just [inaudible], that's it.
But by the time you [inaudible] you
have this complex [inaudible] system
that [inaudible] to a
greater great complexity,
it's not a regional
thing, [inaudible].
>> Hirad Dinavari: Okay.
>> [Inaudible].
These are [inaudible], not regional.
>> Hirad Dinavari: Okay.
>> Pardis Minuchehr: We have
to have a conference on that.
>> Hirad Dinavari: Go ahead.
He's been very patient so go ahead.
>> [Inaudible] I just wanted
to ask a question regarding
one of [inaudible].
So there is the word
[inaudible], which --
so are these the same words,
or are they different,
are they the roots of
the same [inaudible].
>> Hirad Dinavari: Means mother.
>> [Inaudible] a midwife might be --
[ Inaudible Speakers ]
>> Okay.
>> Hirad Dinavari: Okay.
But doesn't it mean mother
also 'cause [speaking
in foreign language] in
Kurdish means mother --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Okay, okay [inaudible].
All right, go ahead.
>> Yeah, thank you for [inaudible].
I just wanted to second the --
everything that was just
said about [inaudible],
because it's completely
useless [inaudible],
but I'll leave that
for another time.
But I have lots of questions,
but I'll just stick to one --
actually [inaudible] for
Professor Miller, that, you know,
that you know one doesn't
have to, you know,
scrap looking for Europeans
to, you know,
to track these earlier [inaudible].
Scores of comparable
dictionary's in, you know,
[inaudible] from the
Medieval and modern theory,
that track the very finest
[inaudible] in defense
that you're working [inaudible].
And then too those kind of texts
terminology would be slightly
different, I mean the, you
know, linguist barriers
and there's different kind
of usages [inaudible].
And there's a lot [inaudible]
tracking
of these [inaudible]
are sometimes hindering
about it, that [inaudible].
But the interesting thing is that --
or one of the many interesting
things is that, for instance,
from the very first of
the dictionary [speaking
in foreign language] which
I think is [inaudible].
The issue is poetic
intelligent ability.
So if [foreign name] is
writing a [inaudible]
and he doesn't understand some of
the poets who are writing a book,
and so when [foreign name] comes
back down, he brings it out
and he says, "Hey, can you, you
know, tell me what these [speaking
in foreign language] are
[inaudible]" And now [speaking
in foreign language] about this.
You know, he says,"[Inaudible]."
He wrote the poem but he didn't
know the person that well.
I mean, do you see this this
kind of dynamic [inaudible]
into the wide world of Persian.
[Inaudible] I mean,
a 1000 years ago.
So I guess I'm going to
have to more of a comment,
but I mean, perhaps, you know --
>> Corey Miller: No, I definitely
would like to follow up with you
and start looking at
some of those sources.
But one thing that occurs to me
that you can do with [inaudible],
things like, [speaking in
foreign language] verses [speaking
in foreign language].
You could see why people were
rhyming at different times and if
at certain times, you know,
if they start rhyming words
like in those classes
then you can maybe assume
that that's what the rest
of the people were doing.
Maybe the poets are a little
bit more conservative,
but I think maybe that's
[inaudible] the kinds of things
that are discussed in the
sources you're talking about.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
[ Silence ]
>> Any questions further?
Go ahead.
>> I just had a quick comment
about the [inaudible] and so on
and so forth, but I think we
need [inaudible] may have known
or may not have known,
and so on and so forth.
And then from that [inaudible]
Turkish as the [inaudible]
and also increasing the
[inaudible] language from early
to mid-16th century onward and
then from there on [inaudible]
as opposed to [inaudible].
So [inaudible] those kinds of larger
questions [inaudible] different
story, in the early
[inaudible] times and [inaudible]
and especially post-16th century.
And [inaudible] different, but
the larger story is the same,
which is [inaudible] as the
-- not only the [inaudible].
At which point Persian
[inaudible] to the level
of the [inaudible] language of the
[inaudible] interesting that 16,
17th century Persian [inaudible].
That's just --
>> Pardis Minuchehr:
But one question --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
No, that's a very good point.
I think that's -- that requires
really another conference
on it's own to --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
-- those topics that --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
-- very important comments.
But up to the 19th century
if a Persian, for instance,
went to the Ottoman Empire, would
they be able to communicate --
>> No. -- with the --
>> No way.
You would have to find
[inaudible] like that [inaudible].
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
>> That's a different story.
That's just [inaudible].
That's obviously a
[inaudible] and --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Yes, [inaudible].
>> And Professor Floor, I
have a question for you.
The whole concept of [foreign word]
and the whole [inaudible] number
of interesting books on sexuality
and [foreign word] periods in Iran.
How -- essentially the society,
the way the image we have
is very conservative.
Now with the archives coming
out with the [foreign
word] history project
and the women's what have
you, it seems that it was --
they were [inaudible]
and very lively bunch.
How would you sum up the
[foreign word] experience as far
as how conservative
really were they?
And were they not conservative?
Give us your opinion.
I'm just curious.
>> Willem Floor: I think the people
are not conservative or progressive.
They have conservative
aspects of certain beliefs
and certain progressive
beliefs that changes over time
and by region and by community.
I mean, let's say --
[ Laughter ]
Well, yes.
I mean, if you take, let's say --
and then you have to
make a difference, also,
between urban and non-urban.
Even in urban areas, I mean,
the quarters were really,
each were separate units.
They had even walls and
gates that closed at night.
And [inaudible] of one
[inaudible] with the others.
And, indeed, let's say the idea
that there were all faithful
Muslims is bloody nonsense.
I mean, it was a rather I
would say [inaudible] society.
I mean, every vice that you could
think of [inaudible] was engaged in.
And of course it was mostly
done behind closed doors,
but [inaudible] drunkenness is
quite common in the streets.
I mean -- as well as other things.
So I think this idea of the devout
Muslim who didn't speak evil,
didn't think evil, and didn't
act evil is bloody nonsense.
They were human, [inaudible],
like everybody else.
And so they had their urges,
and of course [inaudible]
history you also have to --
always have to ask yourselves,
now, why the hell did the guy
or girl write this at this time?
What -- whom did he
have an issue with?
Because, you know, when we write
we do so because of a reason.
And even if you want to
educate, you have a message.
And so we have to be
careful with these things.
So I would say, let's say,
no, I think that these orgies,
no, it's bloody nonsense.
I don't think -- nobody's
ever found evidence.
And it would also be, I think, not
possible that [inaudible] society
that -- but all the other things
-- I mean, you should read my books
on sex how incest occurred.
It still occurs by the way.
>> No way.
>> Willem Floor: Oh yes [laughter].
And so, let's say -- I
would say that Iranians,
or if you want [inaudible] Muslims
are as human as the rest of mankind.
>> Absolutely.
Absolutely.
>> Yes, go ahead.
D
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
>> Willem Floor: Yes.
Exactly.
>> But that's also shared amongst
a lot of Iranians [inaudible].
>> Willem Floor: I think what people
should read is a wonderful book,
actually two volumes,
[foreign word].
It was published in 1948.
It [inaudible] Iranian, I
have a bad memories for names.
I can't remember his name.
Anyway, he went around Iran.
[Inaudible] was like a
bloody European tourist,
he went through Iran and
he wrote what he saw,
and it was quite eye
opening, I must say.
Really interesting.
>> All right.
Last question.
Go ahead.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
>> He can't do it.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
>> Corey Miller: Well, I mean,
I've seen lists, you know,
that say [foreign word]
and they offer replacements
and things for words.
And I think what's interesting
to me about this question is,
which word -- I think so [foreign
word] is probably the more common
way than [speaking in foreign
language] or things like that.
The more [inaudible] word, I guess,
is a [inaudible] and less natural.
But maybe that wasn't
always the case.
When Arabic first came
into the language,
I think it would be
interesting to understand how --
and I think that was discussed in
an earlier presentation about --
and I think if the Arabs actually
promoted Persian being used
and then the absorbability of
Persian, all these factors wound
up with Persian having a huge
Arabic vocabulary component
that I [inaudible] different
reactions to it, different times.
And so you -- some people
have tried to count, you know,
the Arabic component in
the Persian vocabulary.
And I think -- but that's
going to depend on genre
and all these different things.
>> Pardis Minuchehr:
Yeah, and if I may add.
There are purist attempts.
For instance, there's a professor
in Iran, Professor [inaudible]
who tries to talk entirely
in Persian
that is without -- completely --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Yes, it's coded [laughter],
so lots of Persians do not
understand what he's talking about.
And I've listened to him
sometimes and he does use Arabic.
So there is -- it's
almost impossible --
>> Corey Miller: It's impossible.
I mean, to me it's
like taking French
out of English, can
you imagine that?
[ Speaking in Foreign Language ]
[ Laughter ]
[ Multiple Speakers ]
>> Yeah, I'm Arabic origin.
It's of Arabic origin.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Exactly. I don't have
an issue with that.
I mean, some Iranians
seem to have, but to me --
>> [Inaudible] by calling it Arabic,
you may be unknowingly
[inaudible] an issue with it.
Every Arabic word that is
coming to Persian is Persian.
>> Corey Miller: Yeah.
>> That is it.
[Inaudible] Persian
[inaudible] Persian.
>> Willem Floor: I totally agree.
I remember the first time I come
to Iraq [inaudible] to the toilet,
so I asked for the [foreign word].
They [laughter] couldn't
understand me, because [inaudible]
where you sit down, you know.
So --
>> It's [inaudible].
It's [inaudible] Arabic.
It's Persianized [assumed
spelling] Arabic.
[ Multiple Speakers ]
I know. I know.
I agree with you.
I'm not disagreeing.
But this is not a debate.
I absolutely hate these
kinds of debates,
because to me culture mixes
-- everything mixes --
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
Yeah. Yeah.
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
[ Laughter ]
[ Inaudible Speaker ]
[ Speaking in Foreign Language ]
>> No, we are selective.
We are selective.
We have not taken the
whole family, [inaudible].
We have taken them over
[inaudible] as needed.
[Inaudible].
>> Exactly.
So, anyway, thank you very
much everyone for coming.
Kevin, it's your show now.
Takeover, tell us what to do.
>> Kevin Schwartz:
[Inaudible] thank you
for attending the [inaudible]
tomorrow.
[Inaudible].
>> Okay. This is --
[ Applause ]
>> This has been a presentation
of the Library of Congress.
Visit us at loc.gov.