Willem Floor's book takes the highly complicated textile trade of Qajar Iran during the 19th and early 20th centuries as an impetus to explore the economic ties between Iran and various European powers. Floor states that the trade in textiles was “the single most important group of goods with the total composition of imported goods” (p. 26). His analysis of trade in an understudied geographical region succeeds in illuminating numerous aspects of mercantile operations in Qajar Iran and the government's foreign policy regarding mercantile powers. Drawing on British mercantile records, colonial reports, and correspondence between European diplomats and merchants, he concentrates mainly on the intense and continuous rivalry between Britain and Russia during the long 19th century but notes that other countries such as Germany, France, Switzerland, and Italy were also powerful contenders in exporting textiles to Iran.

Floor's book is divided into two chapters. The first focuses on the struggle for domination of the textile market in Iran by various groups of foreign merchants, generally categorized by country of origin. The second consists entirely of an annotated version of a British consul's detailed proposal to dominate the Persian market in the 1830s that was in fact only accepted by the British government in 1841.

Floor's first chapter proves valuable as he demonstrates particular skill and panache in navigating various forms of statistical formats in British records in an attempt to trace how Russia's dominant commercial position in Iran was successfully challenged by Great Britain in the 1840s, especially after the latter concluded a commercial treaty with the Qajar government and established a consulate in Tabriz. In addition to the British surge, Persian textile merchants and manufacturers posed a challenge to Russia during the second half of the century, although attempts to protect the Persian domestic trade subsequently failed, and European imports continued to increase. In fact, the Persian domestic textile industry collapsed as the century came to a close. Russia reclaimed its position in northern and central Iran from the 1880s onward due to rapid industrial progress and its superior knowledge of Persian consumer tastes compared to that of the British. This led to a general improvement in the quality of Russia's products and infrastructure, including transportation routes to Iran. It certainly helped that the Russian domestic market had similar demands to the Persian market. Furthermore, the Persians formed a core group of consumers for the Russians, compared to their relatively marginal position in the British market. Meanwhile, trade in textiles was also affected by factors such as natural disasters that caused famines and crop diseases and not just by existing diplomatic relations and political alliances between Qajar Iran and various European powers. One of the most important developments was the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, which radically transformed trade routes coming into Iran.

Floor's extensive analysis of trade statistics is impressive not least because different and competing trade routes make the task all the more difficult (p. 30). Not only does he succeed in transcending these inherent difficulties, but he also helpfully supplements his study with a glossary of textile terminology to clear up some of the confusion that has deterred researchers from embarking on the topic of textile trade in the region thus far. As the author points out in the conclusion, his research may help open doors for scholars to explore archives of other countries involved in the textile trade in Iran, including France, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, The Netherlands, and Russia.

The flaw in Floor's account lies in his failure to define the vague geographical entity he refers to as “Iran” and “Persia.” His laxity leads us to another question: what exactly was the “Persian domestic industry”? Did the “Persian domestic industry” include all cities that lie outside of Iran as well? Throughout the book, Floor repeatedly highlights the regional nature of Iran's economy. In fact, regional markets that spilled over national boundaries often intensely competed with one another. The imports into Tabriz, for example, were made possible by trade routes that connected Istanbul to Scutari and Erzurum, while a competing trade route linked Bushrife and Isfahan, and yet another network connected Baghdad, Kermanshah, and Hamadan. Thus it is unclear what Floor means by the term “domestic.”

The study would have benefited from greater awareness on the part of the author that identity constantly reconstitutes itself in response to changing economic and political circumstances. Instead, Floor unwaveringly classifies each group of merchants according to the country from which it hailed. Even traders within Iran are simply labeled as “Persian” despite Floor's keen awareness of regional mercantile networks within Iran. Readers are left to wonder how merchants identified themselves during this period. What was responsible for merchants’ sense of group cohesion? Was it their place of origin, vocation, or place of business?

The problem of identity is especially crucial considering that national unity within Europe was either very recent or nonexistent in some cases during most of the 19th century. What did it mean exactly to be a Dutch merchant, an Italian trader, or a German merchant during the early 19th century? The nationalistic framework falters for yet another reason during this period of high empire, especially with regard to British trade, which profited from colonial possessions overseas. Floor inexplicably pits the cotton exports coming out of “India” against that of Manchester, but British hold over the textile trade was extensive in both places during the 19th century.

Finally, Floor's historical account is problematic because of his extremely limited sources, a prickly drawback that he unfortunately neglects to address. Constructed almost exclusively through British primary sources (with the exception of a few Persian secondary sources), the book is one-sided, especially for a study fundamentally about international trade. Russian and Persian economic records could have provided a richer and fuller picture not only of the various identities of merchants involved but also of the trade in textiles in general. Certainly, these records could provide rich clues as to how these itinerant traders asserted their identities abroad and at home. Persian and Russian statistics would most probably portray a more complex picture of textile trade in Iran than the one exclusively supplied by British figures in this volume. Thus, although Floor's study certainly opens doors for potential research, it is far from comprehensive or wide ranging.