'Persia and the Persian Question by the Hon. George Nathaniel Curzon, M.P.' [‎435] (494/714)

me Mb
'Dtatireiic
KllKfe 4 '
r^oftW-
Wllllf t'
THE GO\ ERXMENT
sanctity • and both the scope and limitations of his prerogative
must be sought on purely secular grounds.
Although ostensibly supreme, the practical restraints upon the
sovereign's power are many. Eespect for the religious teachers and
Effective ^ aw might have been predicated with greater truth of
lestramts^ predecessors than of the reigning Shah, who, without
either insulting or alienating the ecclesiastical element, has yet
contrived its subordination to the civil authority to a decree un
equalled in any previous reign, except that of a man of blood and
iron, such as Nadir Shah. Eegard for established usage has been
found a stronger deterrent in the present reign. So long as the
revenue is collected and robbery is suppressed, the complete asser
tion of the royal power is not, in hazardous cases, too rigorously
pressed. In other words, political expediency acts as a farther
deterrent. But, strongest of all, in the case of the reigning
monarch, and of great interest as proving the extent to which
Persia has been drawn into the vortex of civilised states, is the
deterrent of foreign opinion, which, in the absence of any indige
nous public opinion worthy of the name, has taken its place, and
las operated as a safeguard for which the Persian people are
probably quite without gratitude, and of which they are. it may
be suspected, wholly unaware. It may safely be predicted that
any extravagant or savage exercise of the royal prerogative
such as has been a familiar incident in the Persian history of the
past, will rarely occur, if at all, in the future, and that in any
case it will prove an exceptional, instead of a normal, feature of
government. This remarkable change is to be attributed to the
permanent presence of foreign, Ministers and to the electric
telegraph.
. riie administrative regime of Persia is in essence the same at
this day as under the Achfflmenian kings. The empire is divided
Adminis- 11 1 ^ 0 sa tiapies or provinces, ruled by governor-generals
Sichj "' ho al ' e appointed by, and are directly responsible to, the
^ Crown, and these are further subdivided into heluh, or
districts, cities and their dependencies, and towns, the lieutenant-
governors of which are either nominated directly by the sovereign
or y the governor-general of the larger province to which they
e ong. Until the present century four of these satraps, of pecu-
iar distinction and almost independent power, bore the title of
a i, viz., the rulers of Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kurdistan, and
F F 2
■
iill
I 11 * |
' !