CONSTITUTIONALISTS

Letters From Tabriz: The Russian Suppression of the Iranian Constitutional Movement By E. G. Browne (Mage Publishers, 2008). Edited and Introduced by Hasan Javadi. Extract from the Foreword by Hasan Javadi.

... Another phase of Browne’s activities, which is directly related to the subject of the present work, is his involvement with the cause of the Persian Constitutional movement. As it was mentioned earlier, it was the Turco-Russian war of 1877-8 which made him interested in the East, and until the end of his life, academic activities did not keep him away from politics. During his travels Browne witnessed the growing spirit of democracy and longing for freedom among the Persians and hoped that one day it might bear fruit. In his numerous works on the subject, he tried to publicize the imperial policies of Russia and Great Britain towards Iran, and to voice the rights of the Persians for independence. The dedication of his The Persian Revolution, 1905-1909 (Cambridge, 1910) displays his sentiments:

To all who by their thought, or word, or deed

Have aided Persia in her hour of need,

Whether by tongue, or pen, or sword they wrought,

Whether they strove or suffered, spoke or fought,

Whether their services were small or great,

This book of mine I humbly dedicate,

May these approve my poor attempt to trace

This final effort of an ancient race

To burst its bondage, cast aside its chain,

And rise to life, a Nation once again.

Browne believed in the genuineness of the cause of the Persian Constitutional movement and opposed some superficial observers in Europe “who were apt to treat the idea of a Persian Parliament as a mere whim of Muzaffar ud-Din Sháh, a novelty imported from Europe along with motor-cars, gramophones, and other Western innovations”. He says, “To take this view is entirely to misjudge the importance and misunderstand the nature of a movement which, whether it be approved or deplored, had behind it the whole-hearted support of all the best elements of the Persian nation, including even so essentially conservative a class as the mullás, or so-called ‘clergy.”

According to him, the support of some of the religious leaders was an interesting feature of this movement. Regarding the reasons for the Persian revolution, Browne says, “My own conviction is that the mere tyranny of an autocrat would hardly have driven the patient and tractable people of Persia into revolt had tyranny at home been combined with any maintenance of prestige abroad or any moderately efficient guardianship of Persian independence. It was the combination of inefficiency, extravagance, and lack of patriotic feeling with tyranny which proved insupportable; and a constitutional form of Government was sought not so much for its own sake as for the urgent necessity of creating a more honest, efficient, and patriotic Government than the existing one.”

Browne believed that the policies of Russia and Great Britain had never given the Persian Constitution a fair chance of success, and in a lecture given to the British Academy in 1918 he made a passionate plea not only for Persia, but other non-European nations, saying, “And if the reign of Peace and Righteousness for which a tortured world prays is to come, it must be based on a recognition of the rights of all nations, and not merely of the nations of Europe.” In the same lecture he reminds his audience of the lack of Western support displayed in the lonely and hard struggle of the Persian people. He draws an analogy between Iran and Greece and Italy: “Politically both Greece and Italy profited much from a sympathy largely based on recognition of what human civilization owed them for their contributions to art and literature. It is my contention that Persia stands in the same category, and that her disappearance from the society of independent states would be a misfortune not only to herself, but to the whole human race. Unhappily there are a hundred scholars to plead the claims of Greece and Italy for one who can plead the not less cogent cause of Persia.”

The Persian Revolution is an important and contemporary record of the constitutional movement from 1905-09. It not only gives a detailed analysis of the events of these years, but also discusses the circumstances from which they resulted. The book is mainly based on the reports sent by W. A. Smart, a former student of Browne working at the British Legation in Tehran, and the accounts given by Hasan Taqí-záda and other Persian Constitutionalists who had escaped to England after the bombardment of the Parliament by Muhammad ‘Alí Sháh. There was going to be a sequel to the book to continue the history of the events up to the outbreak of the First World War and to concentrate on the sufferings and despair of the Persians, but this project was never fulfilled. The publication of The Persian Revolution was meant to produce some sounder effects on British foreign policy in Persia. C. B. Stokes, a sympathetic friend from the British Legation in Tehran, wrote to Browne on October 8, 1910, “I think it most important that your book should be in the hands of the public by November 1, and if you could make sure of any M.P.’s interested in Persia having it by that date, they might find material for questioning Grey and, if possible, demanding a debate on our present policy in Persia. All this is, of course, strictly private.”

It is an unfortunate fact that oriental scholarship has at times been associated, whether rightly or wrongly, with the imperial policies of the great powers. Edward Said’s version of Orientalism cannot be applied to every scholar of the East. But as a result, a feeling of distrust has tended to overshadow the works of sincere and dedicated scholars in the minds of the people of the East. Though some unfounded allegations of such kind have been brought against Browne, there is not a shred of evidence to support them. In fact it is ironic that the man who taught so many of the “proconsuls” and servants of British imperialism should become, in his own way, an anti-imperialist. Browne was not the only British radical to oppose the injustices of his government abroad. Another example was Wilfred Scawen Blunt whose Atrocities of Justice under British Rule in Egypt (1906), with special reference to the Denshawi incident, created quite a sensation in Britain. Browne was an active supporter of the Irish cause and stood strongly for the Irish Home Rule, and apparently it was for his involvement in this matter that the British government refused him permission to wear his Persian order.

He also had an important place as a leading anti-Tsarist propagandist in the period 1907-14. George Raffalovich, the head of the Balkan Committee, which was formed in 1914 to free the Poles and the Ukrainians from Russian oppression and of which Browne was a member, referred to him as one whose “name has never been associated with any unfair or ‘silencing treatment of any subject race.”

Browne’s extensive correspondence with his friends clearly reveals that he was a fearless supporter of the weak against the strong. In December 1908, he wrote to Denison Ross, who was at the time in India:

You are wasted in India, and I doubt if even you, the least officially minded of men by nature, can permanently withstand the demoralizing influence of Anglo-Indian environment. Your lack of sympathy with the Persian Constitution distresses me a great deal, and I ascribe it to this cause; but of course you do not know Taqí-záda and the other leaders of the popular party, and cannot therefore realize what fine and capable and honest men they are. I saw a horrible and most misguiding and misleading article on Persia in the xman (Calcutta) ... and I suppose that represents the view amongst Anglo-Indians. However, the Turks have given the lie to the old myth about Asiatics being incapable of representative government, and, please God, the Persians will emphasize what the Turks have declared, let the Englishman eat dirt as it will. Anyhow Lynch and I are doing all we can to secure the Persian Constitutionalists fair play and to enlist sympathy on their side in this country. This has been an arduous business, and things are going ahead now, but I won’t enter into details, as I do not know whether I should find in you a sympathetic listener on this subject, which, however lies very close to my heart. I cannot understand how any one who feels that the Persians are a great and talented people, capable of doing much in the future as they have in the past for the intellectual health of the world, can fail to be wholly with them in this great crisis.

In another letter (September 23rd, 1908) he writes to Mrs. Ross:

I am very miserable about Persia, and utterly disappointed with Sir E. Grey and the present government. You will see other articles by me in the Fortnightly Review for October, an answer to one by Angus Hamilton… If Russia were prevented, she would withdraw Colonel Liakhoff and the other Russian officers, and prevent their massacring the poor Persians. But I think Sir E. Grey, like Mr. Gladstone, is infatuated about Russia. I have the most miserable letters from my friends in the British Legation in Tehran, who tell acutely the humiliating position in which they have been placed, unable to do anything for those who looked to them for help.

In another letter to her, Browne further voiced his disappointment over British foreign policy, and said that he thought that the Muslims had never had greater need to be prepared to defend their liberties against the “insatiable greed and mischievous oppression of the so-called ‘civilized Christian powers’. And if the British did not stop Sir E. Grey and his evil counsellors, it would be impossible for any nation–Muslim or non-Muslim– “to contrive to regard England as in any sense friendly to Islam.”

Letters From Tabriz: The Russian Suppression of the Iranian Constitutional Movement By E. G. Browne (Mage Publishers, 2008). Edited and Introduced by Hasan Javadi.