Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-12T14:18:17.489Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explaining Nadir Shah: Kingship and Royal Legitimacy in Muhammad Kazim Marvi's Tārīkh-i ‘ālam-ārā-yi Nādirī

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Ernest Tucker
Ernest Tucker*
Affiliation:
Department of History, United States Naval Academ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the most important contemporary Persian prose chronicles of Nadir Shah's life is the Tārīkh-i ‘ālam-ārā-yi Nādirī (The World-Illuminating History of Nadir). Its author, Muhammad Kazim Marvi, served Nadir as a financial officer, and appears to have witnessed many of the events that he depicts. Completed after Nadir's death in 1160/1747 but before the last Afsharid ruler fell in 1210/1796, the AAN offers one of the most detailed contemporary accounts of Nadir's career. Several scholars, including N. D. Miklukho-Maklai and Muhammad Amin Riyahi, have begun to investigate the historical context of the work, discussing such issues as the date of its composition and its relationship to other accounts of the period. This article will attempt to build upon their work by focusing on what Muhammad Kazim's account of Nadir's career may reveal about his views on kingship and legitimacy.

Type
Research Article
Information
Iranian Studies , Volume 26 , Issue 1-2 , Spring Winter 1993 , pp. 95 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Association For Iranian Studies, Inc 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Muhammad Kazim Marvi, Tārīkh-i ‘ālam-ārā-yi Nādirī, ed. Muhammad Amin Riyahi, 3 vols. (Tehran: Naqsh-i Jahan, 1364 Sh./1985), hereafter AAN.

2. Mirza Muhammad Mahdi Khan Astarabadi, Tārīkh-i jahān-gushā-yi Nādirī, ed. Sayyid ‘Abdullah Anvar (Tehran: Bahman, 1341 Sh./1962), hereafter JGN.

Because other contemporary chronicles either do not discuss Nadir's entire career or were not written by someone who had worked for him, I have chosen to restrict my comparison to the JGN. For two negative portraits of Nadir by contemporary authors who did not serve under him see Muhammad ‘AH Hazin Gilani, Tārīkh-i Hazln (Isfahan: n.p., 1322 Sh./1943), and Mirza Muhammad Kalantar-i Fars, Rūznāmah-yi Mīrzā Muhammad Kalāntar-i Fārs, ed. Abbas Iqbal (Tehran: Tahuri, 1362 Sh./1983).

3. See Said Amir Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), for a discussion of the evolution of Safavid concepts of legitimation.

4. Shahrukh ruled in Khurasan 1161–63/1748–50, and then, after an eighty-day hiatus, 1163–1210/1750–96.

5. Shahrukh was the son of Nadir's son, Riza Quli Mirza, and Sultan Husayn's daughter, Fatimah Begum. For a comprehensive discussion of the lingering support for Safavid legitimacy throughout the 12th/18th century see John, Perry, “The Last Safavids,” Iran 9 (1971): 59–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a discussion of the checkered careers of the other Afsharid pretenders—Nadir's nephews Ibrahim and ‘Ali Quli—see idem, Karim Khan Zand (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 1–7Google Scholar.

6. AAN, 4.

7. Shahrukh had two sons, Nasrullah Mirza and Nadir Mirza, who helped him rule in Khurasan during virtually his entire reign. Ironically, these princes are depicted in a pro-Safavid chronicle written in 1211/1796, as irreligious rogues and brigands who were responsible for damaging the shrine of the eighth Imam, ‘Ali Riza, in Mashhad. See Abu al-Hasan Qazvini, Favā'id al-Safavīyah, ed. Maryam Mir-Ahmadi (Tehran: Mu'assasah-yi mutala'at va tahqiqat-i farhangi, 1367 Sh./1988), 155–8.

8. For a discussion of the context of Mirza Mahdi Khan and the JGN see Lockhart, Laurence, Nadir Shah (London: Luzac, 1938), 292–6Google Scholar, and the preface of Sayyid ‘Abdullah Anvar to the modern edition of the JGN (pp. i-xxxii).

9. The Taẕkirat al-mulūk, an administrative manual composed around 1137/1725, lists various vazīrs whom it describes as financial officers of the shah's army. See Tadhkirat al-mulūk, ed. Minorsky, V. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1943), 72–3.Google Scholar

10. Miklukho-Maklai, N. D., Opisanie persidskikh i tadzhikskikh rukopisei instituta vostokovedenia (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo “Nauka,” 1975), 3:209–14Google Scholar.

11. The third volume of the manuscript has a small section added at the end of the work tentatively dated 2 Safar 1210/19 August 1795, establishing a plausible terminus ad quern for its final completion. For a discussion of dating the AAN see Riyahi's analysis in his introduction (pp. xxvii–xxix).

12. AAN, 670. For a summary of what is known about Muhammad Kazim Marvi's life see ibid., xviii–xxiii.

13. See, for example, Muhammad Kazim's discussion of the 1157/1744 revolt of Sam Mirza, the Safavid pretender, in the Caucasus in ibid., 1036–41.

14. Vassili Bartol'd, “O nekotorikh vostochnikh rukopisyakh,” in Sochineniia (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo “Nauka,” 1973), 8:340–49Google Scholar.

15. Sir Jadunath Sarkar, letter to Laurence Lockhart, quoted in Laurence, Lockhart, Nadir Shah (London: Luzac, 1938), 298Google Scholar.

16. Ibid., 264.

17. Marvi, Muhammad Kazim, Nāmah-yi ‘ālam-ārā-yi Nādirī, ed. Miklukho-Maklai, N. D., 3 vols. (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Akademiya Nauk SSR, 1960–66)Google Scholar.

18. Riyahi includes a translation of Miklukho-Maklai's prefaces to the three volumes of his facsimile edition in the Iranian edition of the AAN (pp. lix–xcvi).

19. M. Arunova and K. Z. Ashrafyan, Dawlat-i Nādir Shāh-i Afshār, Persian trans. Hamid Amin (Tehran: Danishkadah-yi ‘ulum-i ijtima'i, 2536=1356 Sh./1977), 9.

20. Ibid., 11.

21. See, for example, Oraz Amantyev, Turkmenistan i lurkmeny v pervoi polovine XVIII v.: podannym sochineniia Mukhammeda Kazima “Name-ii alam ara-ii Nadiri,” ed. Agadzhanova, S. G. (Ashkhabad: “Ylym,” 1980), and Arunova, M. R., “Some Persian Sources on the History of Turkey,” Belleten 144 (1972): 527–34Google Scholar.

22. AAN, xviii.

23. Ibid., xxiv.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid., xxvi.

26. See below the analysis of the treatment of Nadir's last years on the throne by the two texts.

27. Sha'bani, Riza, Tārīkh-i ijtimā'ī-yi Irān dar ‘aṣr-i Afshārīyah, 2 vols. (Tehran: Khushah, 1365 Sh./1986)Google Scholar.

28. Ibid., 1:153–9.

29. Peter, Avery, “Nadir Shah and the Afsharid Legacy,” in The Cambridge History of Iran, ed. Peter, Avery, Gavin, Hambly, and Charles, Melville (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 7:11Google Scholar.

30. Ibid., 56–7.

31. Ibid., 59.

32. AAN, 5.

33. Ibid., 4.

34. Ibid., 5.

35. The Sīyāsatnāmah of Nizam al-Mulk enumerates the qualities required of a successful ruler. See Nizam, al-Mulk, The Book of Government or Rules for Kings (Sīyāsatnāmah), trans. Hubert Darke (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978), 9–10Google Scholar.

36. AAN, 18.

37. Ibid., 19.

38. Ibid., 28. Ironically, Fath ‘Ali Khan Qajar would meet his demise while serving as viceroy to Sultan Husayn's son, Shah Tahmasb II.

39. Ibid., 30.

40. Ibid., 31. Shaykh Safi al-Din is considered the founder of the Safavid order which evolved into the Safavid dynasty.

41. The AAN's negative view of the Afghans may also have been colored by the rise of Ahmad Shah Durrani, who made Shahrukh his vassal in the spring of 1169/1755. See Perry, Karim Khan Zand, 9.

42. AAN, 63.

43. Ibid., 63–4. Muhammad Kazim alludes several times to Tahmasb's fondness for alcohol.

44. Ibid., 64–5.

45. Ibid., 209.

46. Ibid., 224.

47. Ibid., 232.

48. Ibid., 225.

49. JGN, 77.

50. Dawlah here can be translated as either “fortune” or “state,” conveying the idea that as fortune no longer favored the Safavids, the Safavid state also came to an end. For a discussion of the implications of the term dawlah see Encyclopedia of Islam, 2nd ed., s.v. “DAWLAH.“

51. AAN, 7.

52. Ibid. Avery argues that Nadir's birth date can be established as 1110/1698, based on several manuscripts of the JGN. However, the text of the modern edition of the JGN, although citing Nadir's birth date as 1110/1698, then states that this date corresponds to luy yil (“year of the snake” of the Turco-Mongol 12-year cycle), which is incorrect (JGN, 27). The year 1100/1688, though, is a luy yil, which suggests that more research will be needed to establish an accurate text of the JGN. Also, Riyahi reads “1099” as the date for Nadir's conception from the manuscript of the AAN. See Avery, “Nadir Shah and the Afsharid Legacy,” 7:5.

53. AAN, 15–16. This inscription apparently alludes to Timur's capture of Kalat, after a long siege, from ‘Ali Beg Ja'un-i Qurbani in 783/1381. The implication of the inscription in the AAN is that Timur spared the population, but contemporary chronicles report that many of the citizens of Kalat were deported to Samarkand. See Roemer, H. R., “Timur in Iran,” in Peter Jackson and Laurence Lockhart, eds., The Cambridge History of Iran (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 6:49Google Scholar.

54. AAN, 37.

55. Ibid., 42.

56. Ibid., 43.

57. Ibid., 44.

58. Ibid., 46.

59. Ibid., 67–8.

60. Ibid., 110.

61. Ibid., 120.

62. Ibid., 126–7.

63. Ibid., 134.

64. Ibid., 233.

65. Ibid., 234.

66. Ibid.

67. Ibid.

68. Ibid., 236.

69. Ibid., 449–50.

70. Ibid., 455. Muhammad Kazim does not discuss, in any detail. Nadir's celebrated proposal to have Twelver Shi'ism considered as a fifth maẕhab of Sunni Islam: the Ja'fari maẕhab. His account of Nadir's introduction of the proposal at the Mughan coronation and his attempt to have it confirmed at the 1156/1743 Najaf council of Sunni and Shi'i ulama is confined to reproducing documents issued on the two occasions. He briefly comments that Nadir's attempt to ban the ta'ziyah commemorations in conjunction with the Ja'fari proposal met with little success, but provides virtually no other discussion or analysis about the affair. See AAN (pp. 978–87) for the account of the council of Najaf. For a more comprehensive treatment of the Ja'fari maẕhab issue, see Tucker, Ernest, “Religion and Politics in the Era of Nadir Shah: The Views of Six Contemporary Sources” (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1992)Google Scholar.

71. AAN, 453.

72. Ibid.

73. Ibid., 767.

74. Ibid.

75. Ibid., 770.

76. Ibid., 771.

77. Ibid., 851.

78. Ibid., 853.

79. Ibid., 914.

80. Ibid., 1196.

81. Ibid., 1195.

82. Nadir actually changed the title of Abu al-Fayz Khan, the khan of Bukhara, from “khan” to “shah,” preserving titular symmetry with the Mughal ruler Muhammad Shah (JGN, 352).

83. JGN, 1.

84. Ibid., 2.

85. Ibid., 29.

86. Ibid., 26.

87. Ibid., 9–10.

88. Ibid., 34.

89. Ibid., 34–5.

90. Ibid., 45.

91. “Nah har kih chihrah bar afrūkht dilbarī dānadlnah har kih āyinah sāzad sikandari dānad.lNah har kih ṱarf-i kulah kaj nihād u lund nishastlsipahdārī u ā'īn-i sarvarī dānad” (JGN, 45).

92. Ibid., 102.

93. In contrast to Muhammad Kazim, Mahdi Khan does not emphasize the Sunni orientation of the Afghans to contrast them with the Shi'i Qizilbash.

94. JGN, 176.

95. For a discussion of the Mongol quriltay see David, Morgan, The Mongols (London: Blackwell, 1986), 40Google Scholar.

96. JGN, 268.

97. Ibid.

98. The JGN covers the use of the Ja'fari maẕhab at the 1156/1743 council of Najaf quite extensively, in contrast to the AAN's virtual silence on the issue.

99. JGN, 396–9.

100. Ibid., 422.

101. AAN, 238, 237. The sentiment is echoed in the Tārīkh-i Aḥmad Shāhī, an 1186/1773 chronicle of the reign of the Afghan ruler Ahmad Shah Durrani who enjoyed close relations with Shahrukh. Its author makes a point of noting that “Shahrukh … on his father's side was descended from the Nadiri house, and on his mother's side from the exalted Safavid family.” See Mahmud, al-Husayni, Tārīkh-i Ahmad Shāhī, 2 vols., ed. D. Saidmuradova (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo “Nauka,” 1974), 1:148Google Scholar.

102. Muhammad Kazim in this passage refers to Shahrukh as the “prince of Iran (shāhzādah-yi Irān)” perhaps another reference to his combined lineage (AAN, 238).

103. AAN, 1199. The AAN does not mention the eighty-day rule of Mir Sayyid Muhammad as “Shah Sulayman II” in Mashhad in 1163/1750.

104. JGN, 347.

105. Ibid, 431.

106. Mirza Muhammad Mahdi Khan Astarabadi, Histoire de Nader Chah, trans. William Jones (Paris: n.p., 1770), 2:134. The published Persian edition of the JGN does not contain this passage, but the earliest manuscript apparently consulted by Anvar is dated 1195/1781, while the manuscript used by Jones is dateable to before 1179/1765. Although I agree with Anvar that Jones's translation does contain many obvious errors, especially in the transcription of proper names, it still contains an additional section of information about events after Nadir's death which is not covered in Anvar's edition. Jones's translation appears to have been based on Persian ms. 62 of the Royal Library of Denmark in Copenhagen. See Mehren, A. F., Codices Orientales Bibliothecae Regiae Hafniensis (Copenhagen: Schultz, 1857), 3:22–3Google Scholar.

107. Mahdi Khan, Histoire de Nader Chah 2:135.