The following is an excerpt from the history textbook Empires of the Orient. It provides an interesting snapshot into Persian culture, but is a bit scholarly.
In the afterglow of a successful revolution, the people of Persia felt true pride. Granted, plenty of people had died, but the Zands, infidel scourge that they were, were gone. And now their two favorite groups, the clerics, whom they listened to and respected, and Ardashir, whom they adored, ruled the nation together. And granted, it was only a thousand mercenaries and loyalists that were crushed, but think of the glory of the Battle of Shiraz! And think of the glory that would be the Persia of the future. And of course, not one acre of territory lost in the Great Misery (late 18th, early 19th centuries) had been returned to them, but Persia was respected. A favorable treaty had been negotiated with the Federates, who used to treat Persians like slaves, and embassies had been reestablished with France, Turkmenistan, and Kalat, too. Certainly they werent the lords of a world spanning empire, but at least the Persian people felt that they had a place in the world. At least they now knew that history would not pass them by.
The submissive, defeatist Persia of the past was giving way to a new nation, one that had hope for the future. Societies were springing up everywhere; literary societies, religious societies, and even the odd philosophical debating society popped up in Shiraz, Teheran, and all over the country. Libraries opened, new mosques were built, and the pounding of hammers was heard across Shiraz, as a cadre of carpenters and architects descended on the city to build the marbled halls of the new bureaucracy. The one point most crucial to understanding the Eastern Renaissance of Persia after the reinstatement of the (New) Safavid dynasty was that Persia was being enriched with a flourishing of culture and modernization. But it was not European modernization. Universities were opened, but the curriculum, while open-minded, always deferred to Islamic interpretation. Not that this was bad, but commonly modernization is viewed, in part, as an opening of barbaric countries to Judeo-Christian and European morals and interpretations. Not so in Persia.
The climate of the nation was one of exuberance, and the people were happy. In a term coined by the eminent historian Ivan Dasovitch, Persian society after the Ardashiri Revolution was Freedom without representation, freedom without assembly. There were no more repressions, crackdowns, or book-burnings of the Zand dynasty, so in this sense the nation was becoming more liberal-minded. But the triumph of the Gray Turbans and the Islamic Council made the conservative theocracy stronger than ever. Persia was an anomaly of the 19th century, modernizing completely free of Western influence. As personal freedom expanded, so did the power of the undemocratic government. Industrially and socially, Persia was reforming itself towards a confluence of values that would, in many cases lead to dissent in other countries. But due to the popularity of the recent revolution, the enlightened masses were, strangely, more supportive of absolutism than before the Renaissance.