Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:22:38.672Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Principal Offices of the Ṣafawid State During the Reign of Isma'īl I (907–30/1501–24)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

R. M. Savory
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Isma'īl's defeat by the Ottomans at Chāldirān—his first defeat—destroyed the legend of his invincibility. This legend was based on his pretensions to a quasi-divine status, and, after Chāldirān, the qizilbāsh, although they continued to pay lip-service to this idea, showed clearly by their actions that they no longer accorded any special reverence to the person of their ruler. They had lost their faith in Isma'īl's supernatural powers, and this impaired their fundamental relationship with him. Although in theory Isma'īl was still the murshid-i kāmil, and the qizilbāsh were his murīas, the qizilbāsh were no longer prepared to follow him with the fanatical devotion and indifference to personal danger which had been noted by a Venetian merchant in 1518, only two years before Chāldirān. Once the religious bond between Isma'īl and the qizilbāsh had been broken, and their relationship reduced in practice (though not in theory) to a secular plane, it was but a short step to disobedience to his commands and an open flouting of his authority, especially as this authority was further reduced by his virtual withdrawal from the conduct of state affairs and by the fact that after Chāldirān he ceased personally to lead his troops into battle. The oppressive rule of Amīr Khan Turkmān in Khurāsān during 922–8/1516–22, and his arrogant disregard of Isma'īl's express commands, constituted a challenge to Isma'īl's authority which he seemed reluctant or unable to meet.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , February 1960 , pp. 91 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1960

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 See ProfessorMinorsky, 's introduction to the Tadhkirat al-mulūk (Gibb Memorial Series, NS, XVI), London, 1943, 13.Google Scholar

1 Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, ed. Seddon, , Baroda, 1931, 125–6 [AT].Google Scholar

2 See ProfessorMinorsky, 's commentary on the Tadhkirat al-nadūk, 125–6.Google Scholar

3 du Mans, R., Estat de la Perse en 1660, 16.Google Scholar See also Sanson's statement quoted in ProfessorMinorsky, 's introduction to the Tadhkirat al-mulūk, 13–14.Google Scholar

4 Browne, E. G., A literary history of Persia, IV, 404Google Scholar, quoting the Qiṣaṣ al-'ulamā' of Muḥammad b. Sulaymān Tunukābūnī.

1 Tadhkirat al-mulūk, commentary by Professor Minorsky, 126.Google Scholar

2 In A narrative of Italian travels in Persia in the 15th and 16th centuries, London, 1873, 223.Google Scholar

3 cf. Lambton, A. K. S., ‘Quia custodiet custodes’, Studia Islamica, VI, 1956, 128 ff.Google Scholar

1 It is interesting to note that under the Ottoman sultan Muḥammad II (1451–81), the chief minister was referred to as the Sultan, 's ‘absolute representative’ ( Vekīli muṭlaq) (Gibh and Bowen, 1, 108–9 and 109, n. 1).Google Scholar

2 Ḥabīb al-siyar, Bombay 11th. ed. 1273/1856–7, 111, 4, 107 [HS].Google Scholar

3 The term lala, signifying ‘mentor’, ‘tutor’, ‘guardian’, seems to have been adopted from the Aq Qoyunlu; the latter, in addition to the word lala, used the term atabeg, and it is clear that there are marked similarities between the lala of the Ṣafawids and the Aq Qoyunlu and the atabeg of the Seljuq Turks. Under the Aq Qoyunlu and the Safawids, as formerly under the Seljuqs, the guardians of young princes acquired great power, and frequently used their wards without scruple to further their own ambitions. In this instance, the fact that Ḥusayn Beg Shāmlū combined the offices of lala and wakīl-i nafs-i nafīs-i humāyūn naturally enhanced his power. Isma'īl was fourteen years of age at the time of his accession in 907/1501–2.

4 HS, 111, 4, 35.Google Scholar

5 ibid., 47: dar silk-i ashrāf wa a'yān-i rasht … muntaẓam būd.

6 BM MS Or. 3248, f. 31b.

7 ibid., 32b.

1 HS, 111, 4, 47.Google Scholar Cf. Aubin, J., ‘Études safavides. I. Šah Ismā'īl et les notables de l'Iraq persan’, Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient, 11, 1, 1959, 65 ff.Google Scholar

2 For the various muqarrabs of the court, see Professor Minorsky's translation of the Tadhkirat al-mulūk, 55 ff.Google Scholar

3 HS, 111, 4, 47.Google Scholar

4 AT, 110.Google Scholar

5 AT, 111Google Scholar, has Muḥammad, but the majority of the sources have Aḥmad.

6 From Khūzān, a district of Iṣfahān.

7 He had been appointed wazīr the previous year (914/1508–9) (Sharaf-nāma, ed. Véliaminof-Zernof, , St. Petersburg, 1860–1862, 11, 145 [Shar.].Google Scholar

8 AT, 111.Google Scholar

9 HS, 111 4, 53.Google Scholar

10 BM MS Add. 6734, f. 359a.

1 f. 458b.

2 HS, 111, 4, 69.Google Scholar

3 BM MS Or, 3248, f. 216b; Shar., 11, 153.Google Scholar

4 Shar., 11, 153.Google Scholar

1 HS, 111, 4, 71.Google Scholar Amir ‘Abd al-Bāqī, at the time of his appointment to the wikālat, also held the office of ṣadr , to which he had been appointed earlier the same year (Dhu'l-Ḥijja 917/Feb. 1512) (AT, 128).

2 HS, 111, 4, 88, 106.Google Scholar

3 AT, 374.Google Scholar

4 AT, 150.Google Scholar

5 Sitar., 11, 159.Google Scholar

6 MS in the Kitābkhāna-yi Millī, Tehran.

7 Falsafī, Naṣr Allāh, ‘Jang-i Chāldirān’, Majalla-yi Dānishkada-yi Adabiyyāt-i Tihrān, 1–2, 1953–1954, 106–9.Google Scholar

1 HS, 111, 4, 106.Google Scholar

2 Tārīkh-i īlchī-yi Niẓāmshāh, f. 462b [TIN].

3 BM MS Or. 3248, f. 92a.

4 HS, 111, 4, 83.Google Scholar

5 ibid., 111, 4, 80.

6 TIN, f. 463a.

7 HS, 111, 4, 106.Google Scholar

8 TIN, f. 463b.

9 Haft iqlīm, BM MS Add. 6734, f. 360a.

10 AT, 177–8.Google Scholar

11 During the wikālat of Mīrzā Shāh Ḥusayn, Qāḍī Jahān Qazwīnī and Khwāa Jalāl al-Dīn Muḥammad Tabrīzī were joint wazīrs (AT, 374).Google Scholar

12 AT, 180.Google Scholar

1 HS, 111, 4, 107.Google Scholar

2 TIN, f. 463b.

3 AT, 184.Google Scholar

4 Shar., II, 167.

5 AT, 181.Google Scholar

6 ibid., 184.

7 See AT, 110; Shar., 11, 145Google Scholar; TIN, f. 454a.

8 BM MS Or. 3248, f. 76b.

9 TIN, f. 448a.

10 See above for his appointment to the wikālat.

11 AT, 107.Google Scholar

12 TIN, f. 453b.

1 Professor Minorsky considers the reference in the Aḥsan al-tawārīkh to the appointment of Amīr Najm al-Dīn to the amīr al-umarā'ī to be a mistake (see his commentary on the Tadhkirat al-mulūk, 115, n. 1).Google Scholar

2 TIN, f. 454a.

3 cf. the case of Abdāl Beg Dada the same year (915/1509); in this instance the ulkā of a Dhu'l-Qadar chief was given to a Shāmlū, (AT, 110).Google Scholar

4 In addition, ‘Abbās I appointed non-Turkoman ghulāms to be amīrs of qizilbāsh tribes; cf. Professor Minorsky's introduction to the Tadhkirat al-mulūk, 17.Google Scholar

1 Thus Shar., 11, 169Google Scholar, and Jawāhir al-akhbār, f. 293b.; contra: AT, 181Google Scholar, which states that Dīw Sulṭān Rūmlū succeeded Chāyān Sulṭān as amīr al-umarā in 930/1523–4.

2 AT, 88.Google Scholar

3 BM MS Or. 3248, f. 119a.

4 Shar., 1, 311.Google Scholar

5 Shar., 11, 158Google Scholar; AT, 149.Google Scholar

1 HS, 111, 4, 35.Google Scholar

2 Nusakh-i Jahān-ārā (BM MS Or. 141), f. 200b.

3 AT, 54.Google Scholar He died in 918/1512 (AT, 136).Google Scholar

4 TIN, f. 448a.

5 AT, 81.Google Scholar

6 He had been the wazīr of Ya'qūb Sulṭān Aq Qoyunlu (regn. 1478–90). For further details concerning the earlier career of these two wazīrs, see Aubin, J., op. cit., 60 ff.Google Scholar

7 There is in fact one further mention of the wizārat, in the Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, which states that in 909/1503–4 Qāḍī Muḥammad Kāshī was appointed wazīr (AT, 81).Google Scholar The British Museum MS of the Aḥsan al-tawārīkh, Or. 4134, confirms the reading of the printed text, but in spite of this I feel that wizārat is probably a misreading for ṣadārat, as it is not supported by any of the other chronicles.

8 AT, 374.Google Scholar

9 There were, however, compensations. As the qizilbāsh had no wish to fill the ranks of the wizārat, the holder of the post of wazīr usually enjoyed a longer and more peaceful tenure of office than his more powerful colleagues in the wikālat, an office which the qizilbāsh considered their prerogative and to which ambitious Persians continually aspired.

1 Roemer, H. R., Staatsschreiben der Timuridenzeit, 143.Google Scholar

2 HS, 111, 3, 140.Google Scholar

3 For a detailed study of the position and function of the ṣadr under the Ṣafawids, see Lambton, A. K. S., op. cit., 133 ff.Google Scholar

4 BM MS Or. 3248, f. 247a-b.

5 TIN, f. 479a.

6 See A. K. S. Lambton, loc. cit.

7 AT, 82.Google Scholar

8 Shar., 11, 136; cf. Aubin, J., op. cit., 58.Google Scholar

9 AT, 124.Google Scholar

10 HS, 111, 4, 35.Google Scholar

11 ibid., 111, 4, 37.

12 AT, 110.Google Scholar

13 Jawāhir al-akhbār (Leningrad MS Dorn 288), f. 288a.

1 TIN, f. 454a.

2 BM MS Or. 3248, f. 208a.

3 AT, 128.Google Scholar

4 HS, 111, 4, 71.Google Scholar

5 Jāmi'-i mufīdī, BM MS Or. 210, f. 48b.

6 HS, 111, 4, 71.Google Scholar

7 BM MS Or. 3248, f. 221b.

8 TIN, f. 459b–460a.Google Scholar

9 HS, 111, 4, 80.Google Scholar

10 TIN, f. 461b.

11 AT, 190.Google Scholar