Relationships between the gendered, the erotic and the religious in discourses of politics and power were important signifiers of order and disorder, loyalty and opposition. When Nasir al-din Shah was defending his effectiveness and autonomy in the face of British and Russian pressures in the 1850s, themes of honour, religion and sexual propriety surfaced in his dealings with the British ambassador, Murray, and personal exchanges with his chief minister. In 1855 a tussle over the appointment of a former member of the Shah’s household (and husband to a sister of one of his wives) to the ambassador’s staff engaged these discursive elements and contributed to the outbreak of military conflict between Iranians and British in 1856. The Shah’s dream of the prophet Muhammad encouraging him to challenge British power, like the emphasis on the sexual reputation of Mirza Hashem Khan’s wife and his closeness to the royal household, were personal signifiers of a public struggle ending in the breach of diplomatic relations. The prospect of Murray having contact with the segregated sphere of the royal anderun, let alone the rumours about the sexual conduct of Hashem Khan’s wife with Murray and his predecessors, entwined the personal and sexual domain with public and diplomatic self-assertion. ‘They wish to take from us our power and authority, even over our own family and special wife,’ wrote the Shah, as he and Murray invoked mujtaheds’ views to legitimate their control over Parvin (Hashem’s wife) in their contest for political dominance, and ‘the preservation of the dignity of throne’. Territorial, diplomatic and strategic threats to dynastic autonomy and dominance were played out on the terrain of the monarch’s personal patriarchal authority and namus/sexual honour.
The emotive and moral impact of evocations of desire and control, corruption and purity contributed to the language of politics, whether the manoeuvring of Shah and ministers, or the responses of local notables to the dissident Babi movement. Another moral and emotive force came from the association of order, government and royal authority with symbols of Shi’a identity and solidarity which were at their most publicly potent in the annual Muharram commemora - tions. Qajar rulers and leading ‘ulama became patrons and supporters of the ta’ziyeh dramas representing the massacre/martyrdom of Husein, his family and followers by opponents. From an elite viewpoint, this provided identification with a powerful tradition separate from the legal and doctrinal authority of the ‘ulama, and hence an independent source of religiously grounded legitimacy. Patronage of ta’ziyeh gave ceremonial expression to links between religious and secular authority, the twin pillars of order mutually guaranteeing each other, and the well-being of state, faith and community.
However, ta’ziyeh and the other rituals associated with Husein and Muharram also fed another repertoire of political language and discourse. The commemoration of Husein’s martyrdom in rawzehs, processions and ta’ziyeh performances affirmed a narrative or paradigm with potent political meanings. The story of Husein’s battle against opponents of his claim to rightful succession as leader of the Muslim community was also a story of the struggle for justice and virtue against tyranny and evil. His death in pursuit of these goals provided a paradigm of resistance to oppression and wrong conduct, and suffering in a righteous cause. Accounts of the killing of Husein’s close kin, and his surviving daughter’s defiance of their conqueror, added a story of familial loyalty, suffering and devotion to the political discourse of struggle and the religious image of martyrdom. Warrior, political leader, martyr, blessed head of a ‘holy family’, the narrative of Husein and his fate was a reservoir of political images for various uses, and a powerful resource for dissidents and protesters.
Cultural Conservativism, Modern Agendas and Growing Sense of Reform
