1. Introduction
Power has always occupied a central position as one of the fundamental subjects and basic concepts that are simultaneously complex, in social, political, and cultural analyses. From a sociological perspective, power can be regarded as the exercise of the structured coercion of one class to suppress another class (Moradi & Khayrati, 1400: 59). Foucault distinguishes his approach from others by examining power relations on the basis of discourse analysis and investigating the planned transformation of human beings into controllable objects within a network of relations (Gholami, 1392: 46–47). In his view, discourse analysis is the analysis of the reciprocal relations between knowledge and power in the construction of truth (Kalantari, 1391: 14), and the two fundamental concepts of the “archaeology of knowledge” and the “genealogy of power” constitute the principal axes of this type of discourse analysis (Davoudi, 1390: 98).
The rich history of Iranian literature has been a manifestation of power relations, diverse ideologies, and numerous cultural and social transformations. The relationship between language and literature and structures of power is highly complex and dynamic, and, depending on the cultural, political, and social conditions of each era, takes on different forms. Makhzan al-Asrar by Nezami Ganjavi is one of the valuable works of Persian literature which, due to its distinctive discursive characteristics, can be examined through the approach of Michel Foucault’s discourse analysis. This study seeks to answer the question of how the sage Nezami, by employing linguistic elements and rhetorical techniques, has established a coherent and effective network of floating signifiers around the central signifier (the pursuit of justice and the seeking of redress) and, through a purposeful shift, presented a new and desirable dimension of power to his audience, particularly those in positions of power.

2. Methodology
The present study employs a descriptive-analytical method and, relying on Michel Foucault’s discourse analysis, which is rooted in his approaches to genealogy and archaeology, examines the central signifier, floating signifiers, articulation, and hegemony in this story; for this purpose, Foucault’s archaeological approach has been used to investigate epistemic and discursive transformations, while his genealogical approach has been employed to analyze the social, political, and cultural contexts underlying the emergence of the discourse of the aforementioned story.

3. Discussion
In his critical discourse, Nezami, by employing the mechanisms of allegory and symbolism, presents the contrast between a great king such as Anushirvan and sultans such as Sanjar and, in this comparison, emphasizes the importance of consultation and the rulers’ receptiveness to criticism from scholars and wise ministers. In this critical-political discourse, Bozorgmehr, as a floating signifier alongside other signifiers such as Anushirvan, contributes to strengthening fundamental concepts such as justice, rationality, and ethics within a discursive context, and enables the poet, by drawing upon literary capacities, to organize his critical act in an intelligent and indirect form and, by creating discursive oppositions, to take a position against the real Other, namely the injustice and irrationality of the contemporary monarchy. Thus, the power of discourse and the field of meanings, which emerge in close connection with knowledge, ethics, and social criticism, are aligned with Foucault’s theoretical foundations concerning the relationship between knowledge and power and the role of discourse in the production of truth (Nasrollahi & Abbaszadeh Mobaraki, 1401: 267).

4. Conclusion
An analysis of the characteristics of the subject, object, central signifier, floating signifiers, and articulation in the story “Anushirvan with His Minister” through the Foucauldian discourse-analysis approach demonstrates that the sage Nizami, by drawing upon the cultural and historical capacities of Persian literature and linguistic and rhetorical elements, has created an effective discourse for critiquing power and redefining political legitimacy and accountability in the art of governance. The power represented in this story operates as a multilayered and networked relationship, and the sage Nezami, through the axis of succession and by narrating the story through the voices of the king, the minister, and even the birds, plays a role in constructing and reproducing a new meaning of legitimate power; this is consistent with Foucault’s view of power as dispersed and productive. Thus, it can be understood that Makhzan al-Asrar is not merely an ethical or didactic text. Rather, it is a discursive context in which the poet, through the power of language, thought, and reasoning, rereads and redefines the concept and relations of power.