Hostname: page-component-76dd75c94c-qmf6w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T08:20:45.680Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Centralizing Reform and its Opponents in the Late Timurid Period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Maria Eva Subtelny
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The disintegration of the Timurid empire after the death of its founder, Timur, in 807/1405 followed the normal pattern for Central Asian nomadic empires based on a military tribal elite. The charismatic Timur had exercised a tight hold on the government of his realm, mainly as a result of the highly personal nature of his rule and the flexibility which the absence of a formal administrative apparatus afforded him. But, after his death, the traditional Turko-Mongol concept that territory was held collectively by the patriarchal, agnatic clan and that all lineal male descendants shared the right to claim political sovereignty over it, reasserted itself.

This corporate claim to sovereignty created a free-for-all situation in which individual members of the princely Timurid clan clamored to assert their claims to rule in the steadily shrinking territory under Timurid control, frequently resorting to the time-honored steppe tradition of guerilla struggle (qazāqliq) .

Type
Research Article
Information
Iranian Studies , Volume 21 , Issue 1-2: Soviet and North American Studies on Central Asia , 1988 , pp. 123 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © Association For Iranian Studies, Inc 1988

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.)

Footnotes

*

A summary of this paper was presented at the annual meeting of the Middle East Studies Association of North America, Baltimore, MD, 14-17 November 1987. I would like to express my gratitude to the Social Science Research Council for its generous support during the period of research on it.

References

1 See Manz, Beatrice F., “Administration and the Delegation of Authority in Temür's Dominions,” Central Asiatic Journal, 20, 3 (1976), pp. 206–7Google Scholar; also Beatrice F. Manz, “Politics and Control under Tamerlane” (Ph.D. dissert., Harvard University, 1983), pp. 336-9.

2 Vinogradoff, Paul, Outlines of Historical Jurisprudence, vol. 1Google Scholar: Introduction-Tribal Law (London, 1920), p. 307Google Scholar; Dickson, Martin B., “Uzbek Dynastic Theory in the Sixteenth Century,” in Trudy dvadtsiat’ piatogo mezhdunarodnogo kongressa vostokovedov, Moskva 1960, vol. 3Google Scholar: Zasedaniia sektsii X, XI, XIII (Moscow, 1963), p. 210Google Scholar; Krader, Lawrence, Social Organization of the Mongol-Turkic Pastoral Nomads (The Hague, 1963), p. 367Google Scholar. See also Woods, John E., The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire (Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1976), p. 13.Google Scholar

3 See Petrushevskii, I. P., “K istorii instituta soiurgala,” Sovetskoe vostokovedenie, 6 (1949), pp. 244–5Google Scholar; Petrushevskii, I. P., Zemledelie i agrarnye otnosheniia v Irane XIII-XIV vekov (Moscow-Leningrad, 1960), pp. 272–4Google Scholar; Belenitskii, A., “K istorii feodal'nogo zemlevladeniia v Srednei Azii i Irane v timuridskuiu èpokhu,” Istorik marksist, 4 (1941), esp. pp. 57–8Google Scholar; Busse, Heribert, Untersuchungen zum islamischen Kanzleiwesen an Hand türkmenischer und safawidischer Urkunden (Cairo, 1959), pp. 97–102Google Scholar; Bert Fragner, “Social and Internal Economic Affairs,” in The Cambridge History of Iran [hereafter CHI], vol. 6: The Timurid and Safavid Periods, ed. Jackson, Peter & Lockhart, Laurence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 504 ff.Google Scholar

4 For an overview of published documents, see Fragner, Bert G., Repertorium persischer Herrscherurkunden. Publizierte Originalurkunden (bis 1848) (Freiburg im Breisgau: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1980), pp. 30–51.Google Scholar

5 Manz, “Administration,” pp. 197, 203-4. Manz's conclusions contradict the thesis of Belenitskii (“K istorii,” p. 49) that soyurghal land grants were made extensively by Timur toward the end of his life, as well as that of A. Iakubovskii [“Timur (Opyt kratkoi kharakteristiki),” Voprosy istorii, 1946, nos. 8-9, p. 66].

6 For examples of soyurghals distributed under Shahrokh, see Petrushevskii, I. P., Ocherki po istorii feodal'nykh otnoshenii v Azerbaidzhane i Armenii v XVI-nachale XIX vv. (Leningrad, 1949), pp. 149-50Google Scholar; Petrushevskii, “K istorii,” p. 230; Belenitskii, “K istorii,” p. 50; Deny, Jean, “Un soyurghal du timouride Šahruḫ en écriture ouigoure,” Journal asiatique, 245, 3 (1957), pp. 253–66Google Scholar. For soyurghals distributed by Abu al-Qasim Babur and Abu Saᶜid, see Belenitskii, “K istorii,” p. 55; H. R. Roemer, “The Successors of Tīmūr,” in CHI, vol. 6, p. 117.

7 For examples of soyurghals distributed by the Qara Qoyunlu, see Belenitskii, “K istorii,” p. 51; Efendiev, O. A., “Institut ‘suiurgal’ i tsentralistskaia politika pravitelei Ak-Koiunlu i pervykh Sefevidov,” in Formy feodal'noi zemel'noi sobstvennosti i vladeniia na Blizhnem i Srednem Vostoke. Bartol'dovskie chteniia 1975 g. (Moscow, 1979), pp. 168–9Google Scholar; Petrushevskii, I. P., “Vnutrenniaia politika Akhmeda Ak-Koiunlu,” in Sbornik statei po istorii Azerbaidzhana, 2 pts. (Baku, 1949), pt. 1, pp. 145–6Google Scholar; Aubin, Jean, “Un soyurghal Qara-Qoyunlu concernant le bulūk de Bawānāt-Harāt-Marwast,” in Documents from Islamic Chanceries, ed. Stern, S. M. (Oxford, 1965), pp. 159–70Google Scholar. For soyurghals distributed under the Aq Qoyunlu, see Efendiev, “Institut ‘suiurgal’,” p. 172; Woods, Aqquyunlu, p. 166; Minorsky, V., “The Aq-qoyunlu and Land Reforms,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 17, 3 (1955), p. 461CrossRefGoogle Scholar; I. P. Petrushevskii, “Gosudarstva Azerbaidzhana v XV veke,” in Sbornik statei po istorii Azerbaidzhana, pt. 1, pp. 189-90; also Khwandamir, Tārīkh-i Ḥabīb al-siyar, ed. al-Din Homa'i, Jalal, 4 vols. (Teheran, 1333/1954-5) [hereafater HS], vol. 4, p. 431.Google Scholar

8 Woods, Aqquyunlu, p. 166; Minorsky, “Aq-qoyunlu,” p. 461.

9 See Pigulevskaia, N. V., et al., Istoriia Irana s drevneishikh vremen do kontsa XVIII veka (Leningrad, 1958), pp. 240–42.Google Scholar

10 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 111.

11 For the hereditary nature of the soyurghal, see Petrushevskii, Zemledelie, p. 273; Petrushevskii, “K istorii,” pp. 241-2.

12 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 321.

13 See Subtelny, Maria E., “Socioeconomic Bases of Cultural Patronage under the Later Timurids,” International Journal of Middle East Studies, 20, 4 (1988), pp. 479–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14 Bartol'd, V. V., Sochineniia, 10 vols. (Moscow, 1963-77), vol. 5, p. 171.Google Scholar

15 For reference, see n. 7 above.

16 For reference, see n. 7 above. More recently, see Efendiev, “Institut ‘suiurgal’”, pp. 168-75.

17 See also Minorsky's translation of this work--Persia in AD. 1478-1490 (London, 1957).Google Scholar

18 Minorsky, Persia, p. 92.

19 Minorsky, Persia, pp. 94-5.

20 Minorsky, Persia, p. 95.

21 Minorsky, Persia, p. 86.

22 For soyurghals/immunities donated to waqf, Petrushevskii, “K istorii,” pp. 242-3. See also Lambton, Ann K. S., Landlord and Peasant in Persia: A Study of Land Tenure and Land Revenue Administration (Oxford, 1953; rep. ed., Oxford, 1969), pp. 115–16.Google Scholar

23 Minorsky, Persia, p. 98.

24 Minorsky, Persia, p. 96.

25 Minorsky, “Aq-qoyunlu,” p. 458.

26 For these categories of taxes, see Petrushevskii, Zemledelie, pp. 379, 389, 401; Minorsky, Vladimir, “A Soyūrghāl of Qāsim b. Jahāngīr Aq-qoyunlu (903/1498),” Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, 9, 4 (1939), pp. 946–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 443.

28 Rumlu, Hasan, Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, vol. 12Google Scholar: A Chronicle of the Early Ṣafawīs, vol. 1 (Persian Text), ed. Seddon, C. N. (Baroda, 1931) [hereafter AT], p. 19.Google Scholar This could mean either that he refused to confirm the rights of those who had inherited soyurghals or that he refused to confirm the privileges of existing soyurghal holders on his accession.

29 Hasan Rumlu, AT, p. 19; also Minorsky, “Aq-qoyunlu,” p. 460.

30 Hasan Rumlu, AT, p. 19.

31 Minorsky, “Aq-qoyunlu,” pp. 458-61; Petrushevskii, “Vnutrenniaia politika,” p. 149.

32 Khwandamir says that this was the length of his stay in office after his reinstatement, but does not give the precise date of his dismissal--see Khwandamir, Dastūr al-wozarā, ed. Nafisi, S. (Teheran, 1317/1939) [hereafter DW], p. 406.Google Scholar

33 Qotb al-Din Ahmad (d. 878/1474) was the qadi of Herat still from Shahrokh's time (Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 105), while Kamal al-Din Hosayn (d. 888/1483) was its mohtasib from Abu Saᶜid's reign when he had distinguished himself by his efforts on behalf of the artisans of Herat whom he protected from the exactions of the Turkic commander of the city (Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 108).

34 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 152. For the revolt, see Khwandamir, DW, p. 392; also Arunova, M. R., “K istorii narodnykh vystuplenii v gosudarstve timuridov v XV v.,” Kratkie soobshcheniia Instituta vostokovedeniia Akademii nauk SSSR, 37 (1960), pp. 34–36.Google Scholar

35 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 152.

36 Gandjei, Tourkhan, “Uno scritto apologetico di Hosayn Mirza, sultano del Khorasan,” Annali dell’ Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, N. S. 5 (1953), p. 170, 11. 12-14.Google Scholar

37 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 111.

38 Dar zamān-i salāṭīn-i tīmūrī az jalāyil-i manāṣib-i sarkar-i salṭanat būd-- Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 326. The organization of the Timurid administration has not yet been adequately researched--see Roemer, CHI, vol. 6, p. 131. For a recent study of it under Timur, see Manz, “Politics and Control,” pp. 233 ff.

39 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 160. According to Busse, Untersuchungen, p. 67. n. 1, in Timurid times, parwāna (pl. parwānajat) usually meant an order which emanated from the finance office. But, in view of the importance of this office and of those who held it under Hosayn Bayqara (see n. 52 below), and the fact that it implied membership in the diwan-i a ‘la (see n. 62 below), a parwāna in Hosayn Bayqara's time must have been closer to a “sovereign mandate.” For Minorsky's reading of molkī va mālī as milkī va mālī (“[matters] pertaining to land-tenure and taxation”), see Minorsky, Persia, p. 92.

40 Babur calls him the “one man” (yak qalam) of Shahrokh's diwan-see [Babur], The Bābār-nama, fac. ed. Annette S. Beveridge (Leiden, 1905; rep. ed., London, 1971) [hereafter BN], fol. 176b; Babur, Bābur-nāma: Memoirs of Babur, tr. Beveridge, Annette S. (London, 1922Google Scholar; rep. ed., New Delhi, 1970) [hereafter BN tr.], p. 281. He also served Abd al-Latif, Ala al-Dawla and Sultan Mohammad. See the notice on him in Khwandamir, DW, pp. 353-357; Babur, BN tr., p. 281; al-Din Isfizari, Mocin, Rawḍāt al-jannāt fī awṣāf-i madīnat-i Harāt, ed. Kazim, Sayyid Mohammad, 2 vols. (Teheran, 1338-9/1959-60), vol. 1, p. 219.Google Scholar

41 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 160.

42 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 400-401.

43 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 160.

44 Babur, BN, fol. 176b; BN tr., p. 281.

45 Babur, BN, fol. 176b-177a; BN tr., pp. 281-2.

46 For the dual administrative structure of the Timurid state, see Roemer, CHI, vol. 6, pp. 131-2.

47 Which he would sign with the phrase, ittala ‘a ‘alaihi (“He has read it”)--Khwandamir, DW, p. 401.

48 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 159; also Maria E. Subtelny, “‘Alī Shīr Navā'ī: Bakhshī and Beg ,” in Ṡevcenko and F. Sysyn, eds., Eucharisterion: Essays Presented to Omeljan Pritsak on his Sixtieth Birthday, 2 pts. [=Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 3-4 (1979-80)], pt. 2, pp. 803-5.

49 Khwandamir, DW, p. 401.

50 Babur, BN, fol. 176b; BN, tr., p. 281.

51 Also nawīsanda-'i tāzīk--see for example [Anon.], Mo'izz al-ansāb, MS. Bibliothéque Nationale, Paris, ancien fonds persan, 467, fol. 159b. For the Moᶜizz al-ansāb, see Stori, Ch. A. [Storey, C. A.], Persidskaia literatura: Bio-bibliograficheskii obzor, tr., rev. and expanded by Iu. E. Bregel’, 3 vols. (Moscow, 1972), vol. 2, pp. 818–19.Google Scholar

52 Mo'izz, fols. 158a-b. This fact, together with the statement made by Ali Shir (see n. 62 below), point to the fact that the office of parwāna belonged to the diwan-i a ᶜla or Türk diwani, the supreme military council (see Roemer, CHI, vol. 6, p. 132).

53 Tamām Khorāsān mamālikida ani ikhtiyār qilib--Babur, BN, fol. 177; BN tr., p. 282.

54 Mo'izz, fol. 158b.

55 Hasan Rumlu, AT, p. 56. For cha[hā]rqab see Doerfer, Gerhard Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, 4 vols. (Wiesbaden, 1963-75), vol. 3, pp. 22–3.Google Scholar In his translation of vol. 12 of the Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, Seddon called him “Mujiddu'd-din” (p. 25) and was not able to identify him (p. 226, n. 35)--see [Rumlu, Hasan], A Chronicle of the Early Safawis Being the Ahsanu ‘t-Tawarikh of Ḥasan-i-Rūmlū, vol. 2 (English Translation), tr. Seddon, C. N. (Baroda, 1934).Google Scholar

56 Hasan Rumlu, AT, p. 56.

57 Bar akthar-i omarā rotba-’i taqaddom dasht--Khwandamir, DW, p. 401. For his turbulent career, see Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, pp. 160-161. Khwandamir castigates him not only for his disloyalty, but also for his “total lack of respect for his benefactors,” and he makes the point that he was especially ungrateful to Hosayn Bayqara, despite all the favors that he received from him.

58 Khwandamir, DW, p. 401.

59 Khwandamir, DW, p. 402.

60 See Roemer, CHI, vol. 6, p. 132, where he says that it was identical with the tuwaji diwani or the Türk diwani, which he calls a “sort of general staff.”

61 See Subtelny, “‘Alī Shīr Navā'ī,” pp. 799-802.

62 Khwandamir, DW, p. 402.

63 Hasan Rumlu, AT, p. 56. For Sam Mirza's account of the same episode, see Safavi, Sam Mirza, Toḥfa-'i sāmī, ed. Dastgardi, Wahid (Teheran, 1314/1935), p. 180Google Scholar, where he says that Ali Shir's overcoat was worth 13 tangas and 2 miris.

64 Khwandamir, DW, p. 402.

65 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 160.

66 Khwandamir, DW, p. 402.

67 Khwandamir, DW, p. 402.

68 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 160.

69 Khwandamir, DW, p. 434. For the careers of both, see Khwandamir, DW, pp. 418-32 and 433-41, respectively.

70 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 403-4. Khwandamir says that Nizam al-Molk and Afzal al-Din both started questioning Majd al-Din at once. Hosayn Bayqara objected to this, saying that it would have been fairer for each to address Majd al-Din separately rather than ganging up against him. Majd al-Din interpreted this as a sign of Hosayn Bayqara's favor and grasped the opportunity to leave the hearing.

71 The exact date is not given in the sources; it is based here on Khwandamir's statement that Majd al-Din was out of office for nine years and then reinstated in 892/1487--see below.

72 He appears to be identical with Amir Mohammad Ali Ataka--see n. 131 below.

73 Khwandamir, DW, p. 404.

74 Khwandamir, DW, p. 404.

75 Babur, BN, fol. 177a; BN tr., p. 282.

76 Khwandamir, DW, p. 405. Majd al-Din's official honorific title now became “mo ‘tamad al-saltana va mo’ taman al-mamlaka” (“The one on whom sovereignty relies and to whom [the welfare of] the kingdom has been entrusted”)--Khwandamir, DW, p. 405.

77 First published in Bartol'd, V. V. (ed.), Mir-Ali-Shir. Sbornik k piatsotletiiu so dnia rozhdeniia (Leningrad, 1928), pp. 100–64Google Scholar. Now in Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2 (2), pp. 199-260.

78 Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2(2), esp. pp. 240-48.

79 Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2(2), p. 239. Bartol'd's conclusion was based on his assumption that Ali Shir financed his building activity not from his own resources, but from those of the central treasury--see Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2(2), p. 238.

80 For Bregel“s summary of the arguments of A. A. Semenov and Hans Robert Roemer, see Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2(2), p. 240, n. 1.

81 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 180.

82 For an opposite view about his involvement in this episode, see Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2(2), p. 243 & n. 18.

83 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, pp. 183-4.

84 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 180.

85 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 181. After receiving an order to return to Herat, Afzal al-Din decided to flee to the Aq Qoyunlu court of Sultan Yaᶜqub, and from there led a pilgrimage caravan to Mecca-Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 183. He later returned to Herat in 903/1498--Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 218. For an interesting letter (kitābat) written to him on behalf of Hosayn Bayqara and allowing him to endow the excess revenues (zava’ id) from a soyurghal for the support of a khānaqāh-madrasa complex he had earlier willed a large sum of money to by way of thanks (bi-shokrāna) to Hosayn Bayqara (probably for letting him leave Herat alive after Majd al-Din's reinstatement), see Roemer, Hans Robert Staatsschreiben der Timuridenzeit. Das Šaraf-nāmä des ᶜAbdallāh Marwārīd in kritischer Auswertung (Wiesbaden, 1952), pp. 74–5 [Nr. 70(71b)].Google Scholar The date of this document can now be established as 903/1498 or shortly thereafter.

86 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 187.

87 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, pp. 187-8. See also Khwandamir, DW, pp. 421-2.

88 The ichki was a member of the personal bodyguard of the sultan, an “inner courtier”--see Doerfer, Türkische und mongolische Elemente, vol. 2, pp. 174–5Google Scholar where muqarrabān va īchkīyān is rendered as “die Vertrauten und Hofleibgarden” (intimates and palace bodyguards). This word, in both singular and plural forms, is invariably spelt incorrectly in both the Teheran and Bombay (1273/1857) editions of the Ḥabīb al-siyar.

89 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 181.

90 Khwandamir, DW, p. 405.

91 In view of Majd al-Din's fall from favor around 895/1490, the date of 1 Jumada II 897/31 March 1492 which is given in al-Din Wasifi, Zayn, Badāyiᶜ al-Waqāyi’ ed. Boldyrev, A. N., 2 vols. (Moscow, 1961) [hereafter BW], vol. 1, p. 531Google Scholar for an entertainment which was organized by Majd al-Din in Herat and at which Ali Shir himself and a group of great amirs and notables were supposed to be present raises some doubts. But see Boldyrev, A. N., “Alisher Navoi v rasskazakh sovremennikov,” in Alisher Navoi. Sbornik statei, ed. Borovkov, A. K. (Moscow, 1946), pp. 132–3Google Scholar, where he thinks that their meeting actually took place, but that it was for appearances’ sake only.

92 Khwandamir, DW, p. 406. Ali Shir was himself an intimate (moqarrab) of Hosayn Bayqara's and his honorific title was moqarrab-i haḍrat-i solṭānī-- see Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 137.

93 Khwandamir, DW, p. 406. Dating from Mongol times, the qalan was usually mentioned together with the qobchūr --see Doerfer, Türkische und mongolische Elemente, vol. 3, pp. 488–90Google Scholar; Petrushevskii, Zemledelie, p. 384. Elsewhere Khwandamir says that Majd al-Din “saved the peasants (ra'āyā va mozāri'ān) and the artisans (moḥtarifāt va pīshawarān) from the oppression of the functionaries of the diwan “--Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 181.

94 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 404-5. In HS, Khwandamir states that Majd al-Din did not pay the slightest attention to what Ali Shir said and opposed him on every matter he raised--Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 188.

95 The first scholar to suggest that this may have been the basis for Ali Shir's opposition to Majd al-Din, although she did not elaborate on her idea, was Annette Beveridge, the translator of the Bābur-nāma--see Babur, BN tr., p. 282, n. 1. For a study of the socioeconomic background of the Timurid elite during this period, see Subtelny, “Socio-economic Bases.” Note the erroneous statement made in Pigulevskaia, Istoriia Irana, p. 239, that Ali Shir was himself the initiator of these reforms!

96 See Subtelny, ‘“Alī Shīr Navā'ī,” pp. 800-802.

97 Alisher Navoi, “Waqfiia,” in Alisher Navoii, Asarlar (in Uzbek), 15 vols. (Tashkent, 1963-8), vol. 13, p. 169. See also the abridged Persian translation of the original Chaghatay Turkish text in Ali Shir Nawā'ī, Majālis al-nafā'is, ed. Ali Asghar Hikmat [Eng. title p. The Majalis-un-Nafa'is, “Galaxy of Poets,” of Mir Ali Shir Nava'i. Two 16th Century Persian Translations] (Teheran, 1323/1945), p. xxi.

98 For the complete list, see Alisher Navoii, “Waqfiia,” pp. 176-8.

99 See Alisher Navoii, “Waqfiia,” p. 172 where he makes a statement to this effect. See also Krcsmárik, J., “Das Waḳfrecht vom Standpunkte des Sariᶜatrechtes nach der ḥanefitischen Schule,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, 45 (1891), p. 523.Google Scholar

100 Since waqf property was inalienable, converting one's own property into waqf was a common means of safeguarding it from confiscation, particularly in times of political instability. For a graphic example of this practice under the early Uzbeks, see R. G. Mukminova, “K kharakteristike feodal'nogo instituta ‘tiiul’ v srednei Azii,” in Formy feodal'noi zemel'noi sobstvennosti, pp. 123-4.

101 Dawlatshah, Tazkirat al-shu'ara, ed. Edward G. Browne [Eng. title p.: The Tadhkiratu ‘sh-Sho'arā, “Memoirs of the Poets”] (London, 1901), p. 505Google Scholar. If Dawlatshah's figure is taken as an estimate of annual revenues, it is corroborated by the daily estimate made by Mohammad Haydar, who in the Tārīkh-i rashīdī says that Ali Shir's daily income from his estates was 18,000 Shahrokhis (=kapaki dinars) --see [Haydar, Mohammad], “Iqtibas az Tarikh-i rashidi,” ed. Shafi', Mohammad, Oriental College Mazagine (Lahore), 10, 3 (1934), p. 156.Google Scholar

102 For the legality of this practice in Hanafi law, see Kresmárik, , “Das Waḳfrecht,” pp. 558-60; also W. Heffening, “Waḳf,” The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1st ed., vol. 4 (Leiden, 1934), p. 1097.Google Scholar

103 See Robert D. McChesney, “Waqf at Balkh: A Study of the Endowments at the Shrine of ᶜAlī Ibn Abī Tālib” (Ph.D. dissert., Princeton University, 1973), p. 330; Kresmárik, “Das Waḳfrecht,” pp. 529-30.

104 For the document of a waqf of his which appears to have been partly constituted of immunities, see Saljuqi, Fikri, ed., Risāla-'i mazārāt-i Hirāt (Kabul, 1967), pt. 3Google Scholar: Taᶜliqat, p. 34. For an example of a soyurghal being donated to a waqf during his time, see Roemer, Staatsschreiben, p. 75; fol. 72a (Persian text); p. 163 (commentary).

105 Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2(2), p. 238; but see also Bregel's comments, p. 238, n. 56. Most recently, O'Kane has stated that Ali Shir, in connivance with the other amirs, must have been “creaming [funds] from the state treasury,” and that since this was “the abuse which Majd al-Din set out to right,” it explains Ali Shir's opposition to him--see O'Kane, Bernard, Timurid Architecture in Khurasan, (Costa Mesa, Calif.: Mazda Publishers, 1987), p. 87Google Scholar. Not only does this statement have no basis in fact, but O'Kane's interpretation of A. Beveridge's above-mentioned note (Babur, BN tr., p. 282, n. 1) to which he refers as corroborating his conclusion is not accurate. Although she raised the question of the sources of Ali Shir's income, nowhere did she suggest that he was stealing from the state treasury; rather, she took for granted that those sources lay in landed properties which he had inherited from his father and even inferred from Ali Shir's opposition to Majd al-Din that he “took a partial view of the ‘rights’ of the cultivator.” Moreover, Ali Shir did not have direct access to the financial apparatus since he was not a vazier. Judging from the accounts of their careers in the Dastūr al-vozarā (see esp. pp. 380-465), it would appear rather that it was Majd al-Din and other high officials of the finance department who were the ones who were regularly embezzling funds from the state treasury.

106 Khwandamir, DW, p. 407; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 182.

107 Khwandamir, DW, 407.

108 Khwandamir, DW, p. 408; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 182.

109 Khwandamir, DW, p. 407; Khwandamir HS, vol. 4, p. 182. For the description of one such majlis at which a practical joke was played on the learned and serious Abd al-Wasiᶜ Monshi, see Wasifi, BW, vol. 1, pp. 523 ff. For him see Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 339.

110 Khwandamir, DW, p. 407; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 182. On one occasion, he reportedly commissioned Hosayn Bayqara's famous cook, Abu al-Malih, to concoct 40 brand new dishes for an entertainment he held in Herat--see Wasifi, BW, vol. 1, p. 528.

111 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 406-7. But see Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 181, where he gives the figure of 2000 kapaki tumans.

112 Khwandamir, DW, p. 407; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 181.

113 Khwandamir, DW, p. 407; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 181.

114 For ‘olūfa , see Petrushevskii, Zemledelie, p. 384; Minorsky, “A Soyūrghāl,” p. 948.

115 For moqarrarī , see Minorsky, V. (ed. & tr.), Tadhkirat al-Mulūk. A Manual of Ṣafavid Administration (circa 113711725) (London, 1943; rep. ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), p. 183.Google Scholar

116 Khwandamir, DW, p. 406.

117 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 408-9.

118 Mowāfiqat-i omarā dar bāb-i mokhālafat-i Khwaja--Khwandamir, DW, p. 409. See also Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 195, where he says that Hosayn Bayqara dismissed Majd al-Din from his post “because of the alliance of the amirs” (bi-sabab-i ittifāq-i omarā).

119 Tanazzol-i qadr-i Amīr ‘Alīshīr bi-ū sarāyat karda az hoāumat ma ᶜzūl shawad--Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 188.

120 Mohimm munjarr bi-sulūk-i ṭarīq-i khilāf khwahad shd--Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 189.

121 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 189. In Khwandamir's account of Darwish Ali's revolt (ᶜiṣyān), Darwish Ali was pardoned for his treasonous conduct by Hosayn Bayqara on account of the witty intercession of a court jester by the name of Khwaja Ghiyath al-Din Mohammad Dihdar-Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 189. This Ghiyath al-Din, however was one of Ali Shir's closest companions--for him, see Khwandamir, Makarim al-akhlaq, fac. ed. Gandjei, T. ([Cambridge]Google Scholar: The Trustees of the “E. J. W. Gibb Memorial,” 1979) [hereafter MA], fol.169r; also Wasifi, BW, vol. 1, p. 632 where Wasifi says about him that “no one was closer to the Mir than he was.” In return for being pardoned, Darwish Ali arranged a lavish entertainment for Hosayn Bayqara at which he presented him with all the embroidered tents and pavilions that he had set up for the occasion and all the silk carpets, Chinese porcelains and gold and silver vessels that had been used during the banquet as a gift (pīshkash )--for a description, see Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 190.

122 See n. 55 above.

123 Khwandamir, DW, p. 409. Bartol'd was of the opinion that it was on the occasion of this second dismissal of Majd al-Din by Hosayn Bayqara that Ali Shir presented him with his own overcoat (see n. 63 above), but that would not have been possible in light of the above developments--see Bartol'd, Sochineniia, vol. 2(2), pp. 244-5.

124 Khwandamir, DW, p. 409.

125 No doubt to contrast his attitude toward the amirs with Majd al-Din's, Khwandamir makes the point that he did not even keep a chamberlain or porter in his house--Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 195. See also Khwandamir, DW, p. 423, where Khwandamir says that people could present petitions to him directly.

126 Khwandamir, DW, p. 409; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 195.

127 Khwandamir, DW, p. 410.

128 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 410-11; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 196.

129 Khwandamir, DW, p. 411. See also Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 196 where Jami tells Hosayn Bayqara that his reappointment was “necessary for the flourishing of the state and the satisfaction of the peasantry and soldiers.” For a letter written by Jami in support of Majd al-Din in which he mentions the “clash” between the officials of the diwan and the populace, see Urunbaev, A. (ed. & tr.), Pis'ma-avtografy Abdarrakhmana Dzhami iz “Al'boma Navoi” (Tashkent, 1982), p. 65.Google Scholar For an interesting document in which reference is made to the fact that Majd al-Din was the one who first presented Jami's Bahāristan (completed 1487) to the court of Hosayn Bayqara (according to Roemer, in 1487, the year of Majd al-Din's reinstatement), see Roemer, Staatsschreiben, p. 129 [Nr. 47(53a)] and p. 198 (commentary).

130 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 196.

131 In Khwandamir, DW, p. 415, he is called Amir Mohammad Ali Bushakchi.

132 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 411-12; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 196. Jahangir was soon released and pardoned; Burunduq spent a year in prison and was then reinstated as Hosayn Bayqara's amīr al-omarā --Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 196.

133 Turko-Mongol court of law--see Doerfer, Türkische und mongolische Elemente, vol. 4, pp. 58 ff. This only in Khwandamir, DW (p.412).

134 This complete list only in Khwandamir, HS (vol. 4, p. 197).

135 For example, when he later orchestrated the dismissal of Afzal al-Din, he told Hosayn Bayqara that he did not want to be regarded as the cause of his downfall and sought instead an immediate pretext for his execution which would mask his role in it--Khwandamir, DW, p. 428.

136 For example, he made Nizam al-Molk and his descendants trustees of a waqf he established for the shrine of Khwaja Abu al-Walid at Azadan outside Herat--see O'Kane, Timurid Architecture, p. 272. Also, Khwandamir mentions the “former privileges” ( savabiq-i huquq) that Ali Shir had conferred upon him and his sons--Khwandamir, DW, p. 426.

137 For an allusion to the fact that not only did Majd al-Din not present petitions he received to Hosayn Bayqara for approval, but did not even read them himself, see Ali Shir Nawa'i Majālis, pp. 60-61 where the following lines are quoted by the scholar/poet Alim, who composed them after himself presenting a petition to Majd al-Din:

Khwaja Majd al-Din Mohammad did not attend to our matter;

He did not [even] read our petition that day, but simply folded it back together again.

138 The full account of the line of questioning only in Khwandamir, DW (pp. 413-14).

139 Khwandamir, DW, p. 414. In HS (vol. 4, p. 197), Khwandamir states that she had been Khwaja Pir Ahmad's slave (mamlūka).

140 Khwandamir, DW, p. 414.

141 Khwandamir, DW, p. 414; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 197.

142 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 414-15.

143 Khwandamir, DW, p. 415.

144 Khwandamir, DW, p. 415; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 197.

145 Khwandamir, DW, p. 415; Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 197.

146 Khwandamir, DW, p. 416. In the HS (vol. 4, pp. 197-8) he simply says that a certa in sum was to be paid to the diwan within the next few months (sic).

147 Compare a similar phrase used in a comparable context in Minorsky, “Aqqoyunlu,” p. 456: turkan-i buzurg-chomaq, which Minorsky translates as “sturdy Turks” (lit. “with big sticks”).

148 Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 198; Khwandamir DW, p. 417 (although note tan for tankhwāh).

149 Khwandamir, DW, p. 417. For the date of his death, see Khwandamir, HS, vol. 4, p. 198.

150 The full phrase is sar-shomār va sarā-shomār va barda-shomār va nāmbardār. For the sar-shomār, or capitation tax, see Petrushevskii, Zemledelie, p. 381; Makhmudov, N., “Feodal'naia renta i nalogi pri Timure i timuridakh,” Voprosy istorii SSSR. Trudy Tadzhikskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. V. I. Lenina (Seriia istoricheskikh nauk), 2 (1966), pp. 246–8Google Scholar; Fragner, CHI, vol. 6, pp. 549-50. The sarā-shomār or khāna-shomār was a dwelling tax--see Fragner, CHI, vol. 6, p. 550. I have not been able to find a satisfactory explanation for the barda-shomār in the secondary literature, but see my n. 156 below where it appears to be identical with the capitation tax. For a possible explanation for the nāmbardār , see Makhmudov, “Feodal'naia renta,” pp. 250-52; also Makhmudov, N., “Iz istorii zemel'nykh otnoshenii i nalogovoi politiki timuridov,” Izvestiia Otdeleniia obshchestvennykh nauk AN Tadzhikskoi SSR, 1, 32 (1963), pp. 29–30.Google Scholar

151 Zar-i lashgar --see Makhmudov, “Feodal'naia renta,” pp. 250 ff..

152 Perhaps the equivalent of the modern “essential services”? Khwandamir, DW, pp. 428-9.

153 Khwandamir, DW, pp. 429-32. See also Babur, BN, fol. 177a; BN tr., p. 282, where Babur places the responsibility for his death squarely on the shoulders of the begs/amirs and the holders of high office, led by Ali Shir. For the popular perception of the cause of his downfall and execution, see Wasifi, BW, vol. 2, pp. 1205-13.

154 Khwandamir, MA, fol. 171v.

155 The actual phrase is sar-shomār yā barda-shomār which seems to indicate that the two were identical. See n. 151 above. For another reference to it, see Khwandamir, DW, p. 429.

156 In 1457 and 1470--see Arunova, “K istorii,” pp. 34-6.

157 Az khāṣṣa-'i khwīsh --Khwandamir, MA, fol. 171v.

158 See Minorsky's conclusion, “Aq-qoyunlu,” p. 462.