---

In some instances of comparative literature research, it is not precisely possible to accredit a literary work to a specific nation or ethnic group. The reason, it seems, lies in the lack of a precise definitions of national literature which in turn is due to the imprecision of the standards set for national literature. Whereas one camp, mainly the disciples of the French school of comparative literature, view language the sole, or at least the strongest criterion for setting the domain of international and national literature, the other camp, mainly the proponents of the American school of comparative literature, casting doubts upon the validity and the efficacy of the linguistic criterion, go for a political identity criterion. Of course, along these two criteria, sometimes other criteria such as historical continuity, shared cultural identity, religious and theological borders, political ideologies and even geographical (co-territorial) borders are also posed.   

To investigate this problem more profoundly, the present authors, criticizing the above-mentioned standards and criteria and displaying their inadequacy and imprecision, have made an attempt to propose cultural components and the cultural discourse dominating the work as a promising standard. 

---

At some historical points, all classes and professions of a society, despite all the differences and disagreements, flow into one single stream to reach a higher goal. Iranians have had this historical experience many times throughout history: during the Constitutional Revolution (1905-1911), and also in the Islamic Revolution in 1979. In the Constitutional Revolution, all classes and professions of the society sought a higher goal that was the eradication of despotism and the establishment of the reign of law. In this Revolution, Persian literature, including poetry and prose, was at the service of the Revolution and satire became the revolutionaries’ main media. Literature of this era became so thoroughly mixed with politics that we can consider the great literati of this period as the great makers of the history of Iran. In this article, we have tried to explore and prove their importance.

---

The terms “majmūʻe”, “safīne”, and “jong” are presently used in the senses which may differ from their past meanings. Some related terms in Arabic and Persian languages, such as “bayāż”, “jarīde”, even “korrāse”, “daftar”, “mofrad”, and “jozv” have been coined for special concepts, which are hardly definable in some cases. Therefore, acquiring a relative perception of these terms, with regard to their application in the texts and documents of each period, is indispensably necessary. Some of these terms have been inserted into each other’s semantic fields or have lost their exact meanings in various periods; therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to their semantic evolution. In this paper, firstly the oldest uses of the three basic terms “majmūʻe”, “safīne”, and “jong” are studied in Persian texts up to the end of the ninth century A.H. For this purpose, the literati and poets’ references in the texts, and the old anthologies (safīnes and jongs) are examined to clarify the meanings of the terms and their semantic changes during several periods. In addition, the relationship between the terms and their common uses in other eras are referred to in brief.