Despite extant, though often indirect references to women in manuscript and archival sources, modern historians of Safavid Iran have paid little attention to the active role of women in the formative period of its history.

It is Very Difficult, in Fact Impossible, to Review Properly What is in fact an incomplete work, one in which many years separate the writing and publication of the first entries from the last ones and in which so much remains to be done. My purpose, in the remarks which follow, is to identify the main policy decisions that seem to have been made in presenting the architecture of the Iranian world, to comment at some length about the success or failure of entries dealing with various categories of presentation, and, all along, to make suggestions about ways of improving access to the information that has been provided. In most cases I did not identify the names of authors, because all of them made choices as to how to interpret their assignments, and the discussion of such choices is not useful in a review at this stage. Competence in the knowledge of their field is clear for all writers, and there are only a few cases of scholars who had not kept up with information or interpretation and whose articles are lacking in substance.

Encyclopedias, with their Pretensions to Comprehensive or Universal knowledge, are by their very nature audacious undertakings. That such exercises in intellectual hubris sometimes fail is not surprising; it is more astonishing how well some of them accomplish their goal. As evidenced by the volumes published to date, the Encyclopaedia Iranica is clearly another such success in the making. One way to appreciate its achievement is to take stock of its place within the encyclopedic tradition by examining the story of its inception and preparation, its vision and purpose, and its general features and strengths as an encyclopedia.

A Multi-Volume, Multi-Author Encyclopaedia Such as this is a Desktop library; but, more than any library, it represents a set of conscious editorial decisions. The basis of these decisions (if, as is common, the editors do not make it explicit to the reader) may be inferred not just from the choice of topics, but from the balance between them, and from the length and nature of entries. In every case, choice and balance must be largely determined by the availability of previous research: if someone is known to be the world expert on X, then it makes sense to invite them to give a reasonable summary of their findings, even if in the grander political and cultural scheme it might be hard to justify. Bizarre—but delightful—anomalies are bound to result: among many in this encyclopedia, I would single out Willem Floor's two-page entry on DUNG; it is shorter, more approachable, and more inviting to the casual reader than, for example, the anomalous chapter on lizards that occupies a full 70 pages of the first volume of The Cambridge History of Iran.

The Principal Users of the Encyclopaedia are Likely to be Students and scholars of Iranian culture, history, literature, geography, and area studies. Most of these will not be looking so much for technical articles in their own specialties as for general introductory entries in ancillary areas. I hope that another category of user of the fauna and other natural history entries, for which some forty articles have now been published, will be the student or scholar beginning studies of Iranian natural history looking for summary and review articles and bibliographic sources. For such users, the EIr can perform an invaluable service, as there is no other existing source in any language attempting to pull together the knowledge of Iranian natural history as a whole.

To serve the needs of this diverse audience, entries about individual species of native animals ought to include some description or definition of the creature, a brief summary of its natural history, viz., its habits and behavior, its habitat, its status in the biotic community (as prey, predator, relative abundance, etc.), its general distribution, and its range within Iran (and the other areas covered by the EIr); cultural information that applies, such as conservation, economic importance, history of use or human interactions, appearance in literature, folklore, and mythology, should be discussed.

By Definition, an Encyclopaedia is “A Work that Aims at Giving a comprehensive summary of all branches of knowledge… Encyclopaedias usually consist of articles on separate subjects arranged in dictionary or alphabetical order to facilitate use… .” A more differentiated view is given by the New Encyclopaedia Britannica, which describes encyclopaedias as follows: “Today most people think of an encyclopaedia as a multivolume compendium of all available knowledge, complete with maps and a detailed index, as well as numerous adjuncts such as bibliographies, illustrations, list of abbreviations and foreign expressions, gazetteers, and so on…”

Unlike the Encyclopaedia Americana or the Encyclopaedia Britannica, whose primary goals have been and still are to serve as comprehensive and always up-to-date works of reference of general knowledge, the Encyclopaedia Iranica would fall under the category of specialized encyclopaedias “that have deliberately been planned for a special purpose” or even better: encyclopaedias of countries and regions “dealing with a single country and region.”

Some Fifteen Years Ago, The First Fascicle of What Seemed to be an almost megalomaniacal undertaking was published; since 1982 the Encyclopaedia Iranica (EIr) has not stopped growing slowly but steadily, and one can not imagine Iranian studies anymore without it. In the course of a decade and a half, in which eight impressive volumes have left the editorial rooms of the Center for Iranian Studies at Columbia University in New York, its wealth of learned information has made it an indispensable multidisciplinary tool for non-specialists and specialists alike interested in just about any aspect of Iranian civilization. Meanwhile it can easily bear comparison to that other major enterprise called Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft (RE), which is all the more astonishing in view of the fact that even fewer scholars are working in the field of Iranian studies than in that of Classical studies. Were it not for the exemplary international cooperation between scholars of four continents, this monumental encyclopaedia would probably have remained just a concept.