By Haidar Sohaili Esfahani
You may have come across social media posts titled “Anniversary of Iran’s Naming.” Surprisingly, these claims are not only circulated by adversaries of Iran but are sometimes shared by well-educated individuals with academic credentials. Even reputable outlets such as ISNA and major newspapers like Hamshahri have echoed this narrative, revealing a deeper crisis in Iranian journalism. Upon reading these articles, one is left bewildered by their contradictions.
According to these so-called posts and reports, on December 27, 1934, during the reign of Reza Shah Pahlavi, the Iranian government issued a statement declaring that the country’s name had officially changed from Persia or Pars to Iran.
Any educated person knows that no government—no matter how authoritarian—can unilaterally change the name of a country through a mere statement or circular from its foreign ministry. Even if figures like Hitler or Saddam Hussein had sought to rename their nations, the process would have required legislative approval, parliamentary ratification, and typically a public referendum—even if these steps were purely symbolic. Legal ratification is essential. It’s akin to someone attempting to seize a house: the deed must first be transferred. Otherwise, a verbal declaration holds no legal weight.
So What Happened?
In 1934, Professor Saeed Nafisi published an article criticizing how foreign governments and Europeans arbitrarily referred to Iran as Pars, Persia, Persia, or the Land of the Persians. He argued that such naming conventions were unbefitting of a country like Iran. He proposed that the Iranian government issue a formal declaration requesting all nations to refer to the country solely by its official name—Iran—as stated in the 1906 Constitutional Law (ratified on August 5, 1906). From that point forward, Iran would no longer accept correspondence using fabricated or unofficial names.
Before this, foreign embassies and governments addressed Iran in official communications using whatever name or pronunciation they preferred. This problematic habit, especially among Western nations, stems from their tendency to use geographic names as recorded in their historical—often Latin—texts. For instance, Tripoli (capital of Libya and a city in Lebanon) is called Tripoli, and the city of Tyre is referred to as Tyre, echoing Roman usage. Numerous other examples exist.
Professor Nafisi’s proposal was accepted, and the Imperial Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued an official communiqué to all embassies. From then on, fabricated names were rejected, and countries were compelled to adopt the official name. Any correspondence using unofficial names was returned.
This initiative by Nafisi deserves praise. Today, we see countries like Turkey and Morocco struggling to implement similar changes, albeit belatedly and with limited success. In English, Turkey is homonymous with the bird turkey, and this linguistic coincidence has been exploited for mockery. Amusingly, one of the trending Google queries reads: “Is Turkey now Turkiye?”—a reflection of Turkey’s recent diplomatic push to have its name written and pronounced as Türkiye internationally.
Morocco, too, has made efforts to promote its historical name among Europeans and others. Yet even in Iran, despite receiving multiple circulars from the Moroccan embassy in Tehran, the request is largely ignored, and the country continues to be referred to as Morocco (Marakesh in Persian).
When Did “Iran” Become the Official Name?
The land we inhabit has been known as Iran since at least the Sasanian era. This name has always existed. References can be found in Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, Ibn Khordadbeh’s Book of Routes and Kingdoms, and Dinawari’s Akhbār al-Ṭiwāl (written in the 9th century), which states: “The Persians call their land from the Euphrates to beyond the Oxus ‘Iran.’”
However, the issue is not when the land was first called Iran, but rather that before European influence, geographic names held little significance in political nomenclature. Political entities were named after ruling tribes, not the lands they governed. Often, multiple tribes ruled over a single territory and avoided naming it in a way that might provoke neighboring tribes or imply dominion over the entire region.
Even today, the land known as the Arabian Peninsula is politically referred to as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, named after the ruling Al Saud family. Until a few decades ago, a vast empire was known as the Ottoman Empire, named after its ruling dynasty.
It was the Europeans, under the nation-state model, who began naming political entities after geographic territories—a practice that gradually spread. Before this, lands were governed by multiple independent tribes who insisted on preserving their sovereignty. Thus, while the land was called Iran, its political units bore names like Samanids, Buyids, or Ghaznavids.
It was during the Safavid era that Iranians began to formally associate their political identity with the name of the land. This shift was necessitated by treaties with Russia, Britain, France, and others, which required a clear national designation.
Although the name of the land appeared in older texts—especially in royal titles—it lacked legal significance. For example, in a letter from Sultan Murad to Shah Abbas, the Safavid monarch is described as: “He who reigns over the land of Iran.”
From the Safavid period onward, treaties and royal correspondence began to consistently use Iran as the name of the political entity. In a letter from Shah Tahmasp to Sultan Suleiman of the Ottoman Empire, the latter’s ambition to conquer Iran—“the finest land on earth and a sign of paradise”—is attributed to satanic whispers that had “settled in his mind.”
In a letter addressed to Nader Shah, the term King of Iran is used. In another letter from Nader Shah to Sultan Mahmud of the Ottoman Empire, the conflict between Iran and Rum (i.e., modern-day Turkey) during Shah Ismail’s reign is described as non-religious. It also notes that Iranians had renounced allegiance to the Safavids and concludes with a request to appoint a commander to ensure the safe and unhindered passage of Iranian pilgrims to Mecca.
Full Official Recognition in the Qajar Era
The complete formalization of Iran as a political unit occurred during the Qajar dynasty. Although unfortunate events for the Iranian people accompanied this recognition, it is reflected in two infamous documents: the Treaty of Gulistan and the Treaty of Turkmenchay, both of which repeatedly use the name Iran instead of the Qajar family name, signifying the official status of Iran as a political entity.
By the late Qajar period, Iran had become the primary and official name of the country, and the use of tribal names for political units had been entirely abandoned.
Thus, in numerous treaties, Iran is cited as the contracting party. Meanwhile, in Britain and some European countries, references were still made to “the Queen’s country” or “the King’s country,” rather than the country’s name alone.
This process culminated in the 1906 Constitutional Law, which not only declared Iran as the official name of the land and political entity, but also affirmed the equal rights of all Iranian citizens before the state—an act that enraged Mohammad Ali Shah Qajar. Nevertheless, he was ultimately forced to accept it, and thus the term Iranian nation replaced the king as the sovereign reference.
Conclusion
With this context, it becomes clear how simplistic and uninformed the writings that claim December 27, 1934, as the day Iran was “named.” That date merely marks the issuance of a diplomatic statement by the Iranian Foreign Ministry, rejecting correspondence that referred to the country by any name other than Iran. It was a wise and commendable move—pioneered by the late Professor Saeed Nafisi—but it was not the naming of a nation.
Summery:
Certainly, Sohail. Here’s a polished, journalistic-style English translation of your summary—clear, authoritative, and suitable for publication or professional sharing:
📜 Did Reza Shah Name the Country “Iran”? The Truth Behind the Name
Some social media posts and articles claim that in 1935 (1313 Solar Hijri), Reza Shah changed the country’s name from Persia to Iran. However, this assertion does not align with historical facts.
🏛️ Origins of the Name
- The name Iran dates back to the Sasanian era and means “Land of the Aryans.”
- It appears in classical Persian and Arabic sources, including Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh and Dinawari’s Akhbar al-Tiwal.
📘 Official Usage Before Reza Shah
- In the 1906 Constitutional Law (1285 SH), Iran was formally recognized as the country’s political designation.
- The name was also used in international treaties such as the Treaties of Golestan and Turkmenchay during the Qajar dynasty.
🖋️ What Happened in 1934?
- Professor Saeed Nafisi proposed that the Iranian government issue a formal statement requesting foreign countries to use the official name Iran instead of Persia or other variants.
- The Foreign Ministry accepted the proposal and issued a communiqué on December 27, 1934 (6 Dey 1313 SH), which was implemented in March 1935 (Esfand 1313 SH).
❌ Did Reza Shah Rename the Country?
No. The name Iran was already official and legally recognized. Reza Shah’s move was a diplomatic effort to standardize the name internationally, not a renaming.
📌 Why Does This Matter?
Ignoring historical context leads to shallow and misleading narratives. Professor Nafisi’s initiative was a wise diplomatic measure, but it did not mark the beginning of the name Iran.
Would you like this adapted into a press release format, or perhaps tailored for a specific platform like LinkedIn or Medium?
🖋️ By Haidar Sohaili Esfahani #Iran #History #PoliticalIdentity #Persia #RezaShah #SaeedNafisi #HistoricalTruth #IranianStudies