The Iranian Constitutional Revolution was inspired by and took place among several other democratic movements, including the 1905 Revolution in Russia, the Egyptian struggle for independence from Britain (from 1906 onward), Finland's struggle for autonomy from Russia, Indian nationalist campaigns, the Young Turk Revolution of 1908, the Mexican Revolution of 1910–11, and the Chinese Republican Revolution of 1911–12 (Bonakdarian Reference Bonakdarian, Chehabi and Martin2010, p. 291). One main objective shaped the Iranian Revolution of 1906–1911: “Iran for all Iranians.” The period immediately after Mozaffar al-Din Shah's order of the Constitution in 1906 began with promise. The new shah, Mohammad ‘Ali Shah, however, soon began to undermine the Constitution. In addition, the Russian brigade bombarded the first national parliament (majles) in 1908. The period between the bombardment of the first majles and the cessation of the second majles, this time by the Russian Ultimatum (1908–1911), was one of turmoil, consolidation, and reconsideration. The Russo-British entente of 1907 had redefined their diplomatic aims in Iran, while the civil war between the royalists/loyalists and the constitutionalists continued. The second parliament was established during this tumultuous period. Internally, the parliament suffered from friction between the two political parties, the democrats and the socialists. Against these adverse conditions, the country was engaging in “Parliamentary Governance.” And, despite everything, a discourse of democracy emerged during the first five years of the Revolution. The Iranian nation was being shaped as a whole. The debates in the first two parliaments, even if ostensibly chaotic and immature, opened up many dialogues on the nation's, and its citizens’, rights and responsibilities; these discourses continue to be influential. This history is addressed in Bayat's first book, Iran's First Revolution: Shi'ism and the Constitutional Revolution of 1905–1909 (Bayat Reference Bayat1991), from where the chronology of the present work begins.

In her new book, Bayat discusses the period to the closure of the second majles through the lens of the parliament, the roles of the representatives, legislation, and the performance of the political parties. The chapters, although organized chronologically, also reflect the complex internal and external elements of the period. While the parliament is the central topic of the volume, the emphasis is on the intelligentsia, Bayat's interest in most of her works on the Constitutional Revolution. She defines the intelligentsia (rowshanfekr) in its secular liberal meaning, an Iranian equivalent of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, as one that “included modernist reformers, bureaucrats, and politicians as well as publicists, journalists, and writers in general” (p. 4). Therefore, the “ulema” and religious clerics, even the pro-constitutionalist ones, do not fit in this category. Throughout the chapters, Bayat demonstrates the transitions from the first to the second parliament. At first, the constitutionalists, coming from different religious or secular backgrounds, all agreed on freedom and equality for all Iranians regardless of their “sectarian affiliation” (p. ix). In the second majles, however, the “ulema” began to turn the constitution into a more religious concept, opposing the secular leaders. At the same time, the revolution and its modern institutions alienated the “traditional religious and political elite as well as the European powers” with interests in Iran (p. x). The reforms toward the “new Iran” (Iran-e now) now faced opposition from the European powers, who saw the developments in Iran as against their interests.

Bayat suggests that the concept of “new Iran” (Iran-e now) – which was also the title of Rasulzadeh's influential newspaper – developed within the discourse of the Constitutional Revolution. Aligning with modernity and nationalism, the “new Iran” included freedom and equal rights for all Iranians, regardless of their beliefs and affiliations. Reforms would be required in educational institutions and within the judiciary. In this “new Iran,” the religious leaders would lose power and have a limited role. However, according to Bayat, all the constitutionalist political parties agreed on this idea, regardless of their differences. The second parliament attempted to empower Iranian national identity by passing such laws as making Persian the official language, replacing the lunar calendar with the solar calendar, as well as recognizing and protecting ancient Iranian heritage and ancient artifacts. Bayat shares with the writer of this review the view that democracy was practiced in a new Iran at the moment of the Constitutional Revolution, although it was interrupted several times by internal and external turmoil.

Bayat discusses the role of the Great Game in the aftermath of the Constitutional Revolution. The Russo-British agreement on Iran in 1907 demanded the exclusion of other Western countries from Iran's affairs. The two countries closely monitored the Revolutions and their outcomes. It is worth remembering that the initial sanctuary (bast) of the revolutionaries was held in the British legation in Tehran, while the first and second parliaments were both closed by Russian interference. Both Russia and Britain recognized Germany as a threat and feared American interference. Thus, they demanded that the American Morgan Shuster resign. Shuster, a financial advisor, was employed by the second parliament as the government's treasurer. This appointment would give more power to the Americans, disregarding the Russians and the British. The Russian Ultimatum made it clear that Shuster had to go and the second parliament to be dissolved. The author asserts that the attempt for financial reforms brought the “destruction” of the second parliament (p. xii).

The author follows several influential characters inside and outside of Iran, giving details about the constitutionalists' lives in exile, their publications and correspondence, and their later lives. Although the author studies several of the constitutional leaders and members of the intelligentsia, Hasan Taqizadeh is in the spotlight. Bayat consulted many sources to write about Taqizadeh's life, including his memoirs and his correspondence with the great Iran scholar E. G. Browne. Taqizadeh's life is worthy of this focus. He was a powerful symbol of the Constitutional Revolution, metaphorically, of what Iran went through during that period. He exerted an influence on Iranian culture through his roles in education and newspaper publication; he was a representative of the merchants and guildsmen of Tabriz in the first parliament, and one of the six deputies who drafted the Supplement of the Constitution (Afshar Reference Afshar2016). One can parallel Iran's shift toward secularization with Taqizadeh's decision as a cleric to take off his religious garb. He appeared in the second parliament, thus, as a member of the intelligentsia. He was also exiled in the two phases of the Constitutional Revolution. Taqizadeh's life was long enough to see both Pahlavi kings' reigns. According to Bayat's definition of the intelligentsia, one can claim that Taqizadeh became a member of the intelligentsia when he gave up his religious position. While Taqizadeh is a central character of the book, the author also gives details about other constitutional leaders, including Dehkhoda, Sattar Khan, and Baqer Khan. An interesting part of the manuscript recounts what the forerunners of the Revolution had become later in their lives; once again, symbolically similar to what the country went through during the later phases of the Revolution. For example, it describes that “Sattar Khan and Baqer Khan …cowardly fled the battle, lost glorious aura …Sattar Khan began to drink heavily, and Baqer Khan, living up to his reputation for opportunism, was widely believed to be ready to sell himself to the highest bidder” (p. 73).

For this work, the author employs a vast array of sources in English, French, and Persian. Bayat has consulted many archives, including the diplomatic archives in Nantes and Paris, and the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, London's Foreign Office Papers, and Cambridge's E.G. Browne Correspondence. As for Persian primary sources, Bayat employs published memoirs and letters and several series of newspapers. Like many scholars outside of Iran, Bayat could not consult the archives in Iran. The National Archives (Sazman-e Asnad-e Melli-ye Keshvar) and Foreign Affairs Archives (Markaz-e Asnad-e Vezarat-e Omur-e Kharejeh) are two valuable collections that could well have served this research. Missing, too, are Russian sources. Bayat also benefits from a wide range of secondary sources, the literature from the scholars in the field and the primary sources they cite in their texts. Bayat's comprehensive studies on the Mozakerat-e Majles-e Showra-ye Melli-ye Dovvom (second parliamentary debates) are significant and serve as the core source of the book. The participants in the parliamentary discussions envisage Iranian society's interests and concerns about politics, religion, and the economy. The discussions are also about the “normal” people of Iranian society – a missing topic in Bayat's book, perhaps because of her focus on the intelligentsia. In each session of the parliament, the process and conversations around a subject are often more telling than the decisions made. Bayat delves into the sessions of the parliament and discusses some of these processes. One good example is the debates on military reforms in 1911 (pp. 271–73).

This book is not a textbook for undergraduates. Those with little to average knowledge about the events of the Constitution may not much benefit from the book. Each chapter introduces voluminous details about numerous characters and events. The chapters are more like encyclopedia entries with a compilation of information about each topic from different sources. Bayat makes her points clear in the preface and the conclusion but does not necessarily connect the rest of the book to all of this material. Even the conclusion introduces more information than analysis. The reader has to remember and remind themselves about the argument in the preface to make the sheer volume of information relevant. Likewise, the subtitles of the chapters do not always have a clear connection. Although the author could not avoid overlapping titles, she could have merged or modified some of them to reduce confusion. For example, in Chapter 7, one subtitle is “The Great Game and the ‘German Threat’” (p. 188) another one – some pages later – is “The ‘German Threat’” (p. 200). In a book on this scale, with such a rich bibliography, minor errors such as the ones in literal translations can be overlooked. Examples include the word Sorush, which the author translated as “Glad Tidings” (p.52). Although this is one of the meanings of Sorush, in the context of Dehkhoda's newspaper, this word is more of a synonym of Gabriel or Hatef as the angel who brings messages. Al-Hoseini mentions Sorush-e Qayb in his note in the first issue of the journal entitled Sorush (Al-Hoseini Reference Al-Hoseini1909), meaning a messenger or angel from the concealed or unseen world.

Bayat is among the scholars who cover less studied aspects of the Revolution such as non-Muslims, the nomadic tribes, and women. The author discusses the non-Muslim representatives, the way they were elected, and some debates about the religious minorities in the parliament. Discussing Shuster's reports, Bayat also addresses the role of women in the Constitutional Movement. She also details how the Bakhtiyaris and Qashqa'is were involved in the Revolution and how the larger tribes received rights to send their representatives to the majles. The author elaborates, as well, on Iran's neighbors' connections with the constitutionalists and their contribution to the movement. She explains the role of the Armenians and studies the connections between the constitutionalists in exile with the Young Turks, an under-researched subject.

In sum, Bayat's latest contribution to Iranian Studies is groundbreaking. Her work is a must-read for those who study the period of the Constitutional Revolution. With this volume, she has completed her trilogy on Iranian history, thought, and reforms (Bayat Reference Bayat2021).