The Jalayirids (Edinburgh2016)

THE
JALAYIRIDS
DY N A S T I C S TAT E F O R M AT I O N I N
THE MONGOL MIDDLE EAST
PAT R I C K W I N G

THE JALAYIRIDS
The Royal Asiatic Society was founded in 1823 for the investigation of
subjects connected with, and for the encouragement of science, literature
and the arts in relation to Asia. Informed by these goals, the policy of the
Societys Editorial Board is to make available in appropriate formats the
results of original research in the humanities and social sciences having to
do with Asia, defined in the broadest geographical and cultural sense and
up to the present day.
The Monograph Board

Professor Francis Robinson CBE, Royal Holloway, University of
London (Chair)
Professor Tim Barrett, SOAS, University of London
Dr Evrim Binbas, Royal Holloway, University of London
Dr Barbara M. C. Brend
Professor Anna Contadini, SOAS, University of London
Professor Michael Feener, National University of Singapore
Dr Gordon Johnson, University of Cambridge
Dr Rosie Llewellyn Jones MBE
Professor David Morgan, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Professor Rosalind OHanlon, University of Oxford
Dr Alison Ohta, Director, Royal Asiatic Society
For a full list of publications by the Royal Asiatic Society
see www.royalasiaticsociety.org
THE JALAYIRIDS
DYNASTIC STATE FORMATION IN THE MONGOL MIDDLE EAST
Patrick Wing
For E. L., E. L. and E. G.
Patrick Wing, 2016
Edinburgh University Press Ltd

The Tun H olyrood Road
12 (2f ) Jacksons Entry
Edinburgh EH8 8PJ
www.euppublishing.com
Typeset in 11/13 JaghbUni Regular by

Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire
and printed and bound in Great Britain by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon CR0 4YY
A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 978 1 4744 0225 5 (hardback)

ISBN 978 1 4744 0226 2 (webready PDF)
ISBN 978 1 4744 1093 9 (epub)
The right of Patrick Wing to be identified as author of this

work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act 1988 and the Copyright and Related
Rights Regulations 2003 (SI No. 2498).
Contents
List of Illustrations vi
Acknowledgements vii
Abbreviations for Primary and Secondary Source Texts ix
1 Introduction and Sources for the History of the Jalayirids 1

2 Tribes and the Chinggisid Empire 29
3 The Jalayirs and the Early Ilkhanate 48
4 From Tribal Amirs to Royal In-laws 63
5 Crisis and Transition (133556) 74
6 Shaykh Uvays and the Jalayirid Dynasty 101
7 Dynastic Ideology during the Reign of Shaykh Uvays 129
8 Challenges to the Jalayirid Order 147
9 Conclusions and the Legacy of the Jalayirids 185
Maps and Genealogical Chart 202

Bibliography 209
Index 224
Illustrations
Figure 2.1 The altn urgh: Chinggis Qan and his descendants 37
Figure 2.2 Ilkhan rulers 38
Figure 4.1 The Jalayir gregen relationship 66
Figure 4.2 Amr Chpn at the centre of the Ilkhanid ruling elite 68
Figure 4.3 Shaykh asan Jalayir and the Ilkhanid royal house 68
Figure 4.4 The Chubanids 69
Figure 5.1 Factions following Ab Sads death 76
Figure 6.1 The ancestry of Shaykh Uvays 102
Figure 9.1 Mirj-nma attributed to Amad Ms 188
Figure 9.2Abduction of Zal by the Simurgh, from a Shh-nma
manuscript 189
Figure 9.3 Dvn of Suln Amad, Baghdad, 1403 190
Figure 9.4 Wedding day of Humy and Humyn 192
Map 1 Jalayirid dynasty 202

Map 2 Jalayirid dynasty, c. 1353 204
Map 3 Jalayirid dynasty, c. 1400 206
Genealogy of the Jalayirid dynasty 208

Acknowledgements
It is a pleasure to acknowledge the many colleagues, friends and family

members who have supported this project over the years. While I have
benefited from the generosity of so many individuals, I of course am solely
responsible for all errors and shortcomings in the present work. I first met
the Jalayirids at the University of Chicago, where I wrote a dissertation
in the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations. I must
above all thank my advisor, teacher and mentor John Woods, who contin-
ues to guide and inspire me. I am grateful also to Cornell Fleischer for his
wisdom and ceaseless encouragement. Additional thanks are owed to my
teachers at Chicago, Fred Donner, John Perry and Holly Shissler, and to
Bruce Craig and Marlis Saleh at the University of Chicagos Regenstein
Library, where much of the research for this project was conducted.
Furthermore, I would never have started down the road of Mongol and
Middle East history without the support and example of Jo-Ann Gross at
the College of New Jersey.
I am indebted as well to a number of scholars and friends who have
supported me in Chicago, Redlands, Ghent and beyond. Thanks to Judith
Pfeiffer for her constant support and motivation, and to Evrim Binbas
for his encouragement and for helping to bring this work to publication.
Thanks also to Denise Aigle, Thomas Allsen, Kristof Dhulster, Peter
Golden, Beatrice Manz, John Meloy, David Morgan, Carl Petry, Warren
Schultz, Jo Van Steenbergen, senbike Togan and Bethany Walker.
I am fortunate to enjoy the support of my colleagues in history at the
University of Redlands, Bob Eng, Kathy Feeley, John Glover, Kathy
Ogren, Matthew Raffety and Jim Sandos, and to have been assisted by
two Faculty Research Grants from the University of Redlands, in 200910
and 201314. I would like to thank the librarians at the University of
Redlandss Armacost Library, with particular appreciation to Sandy
Richie, without whom my research could not have continued at Redlands.
I must express my gratitude to the Royal Asiatic Society for supporting
the project, particularly to Alison Ohta, and the two anonymous readers.
vii
The Jalayirids
I owe a great deal of thanks to Edinburgh University Press, in particular

to the editorial talents of Nicola Ramsey and Ellie Bush. I would like to
gratefully acknowledge the following institutions for granting permission
to reproduce images: The British Library Board: Add. 18113, fol. 45v;
Freer Gallery of Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC: Purchase,
F1932.37; Roland and Sabrina Michaud/akg-images.
Finally, thank you to my family for their unwavering support and love.
viii
Abbreviations for Primary and Secondary
SourceTexts
Ahr/TSU Ab Bakr al-Qub al-Ahr, Tarkh-i

Shaikh Uwais (A History of Shaikh Uwais):
An Important Source for the History of
dharbaijn in the Fourteenth Century, trans.
J. B. Van Loon (The Hague: Mouton & Co.,
1954).
Astarbd/Bazm Azz b. rdashr Astarbd, Bazm u Razm,
intro. Kprlzde Memed Fud Bey
[Mehmed Fuad Kprl] (Istanbul: Evf
Mabaas, 1928).
Babinger/GdO Franz Babinger, Die Geschichtesschreiber
der Osmanen und ihre Werke (Leipzig: O.
Harrassowitz, 1927).
Brockelmann/GAL Carl Brockelmann, Geschichte der Arabischen
Literatur (Leiden: Brill, 1949).
BSOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African
Studies
CAJ Central Asiatic Journal
Dawlatshh/Tazkira Dawlatshh Samarqand, Tazkirat al-
Shuar-yi Dawlatshh Samarqand, ed.
Muammad Abbs (Tehran: Kitb-fursh-yi
Brn, 1337 [1958]).
Fa Khvf/Mujmal Fa al-Dn Amad Fa Khvf, Mujmal-i
Fa, ed. Mamd Farrukh (Mashhad:
Kitbfursh-yi Bstn, 1339 [1961]).
Ghiyth/Tarkh Abd Allh b. Fat Allh Ghiyth, al-Tarkh
al-Ghiyth, ed. riq Nfi al-amdn
(Baghdad: Mabaat Asad, 1975).
fi Abr/ZJT Abr, Zayl-i Jmi al-Tavrkh, ed.
Khnbb Bayn (Tehran: Ilm, 1317 [1939]).
fi Abr/Zubda fi Abr, Zubdat al-Tavrkh, ed. Sayyid
ix
The Jalayirids
Kaml jj-i Sayyid Javd (Tehran: Vizrat-i

Farhang va Irshd-i Islm, 1380 [2001]).
HJAS Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies
Ibn Arabshh/Ajib Muammad ibn Amad b. Arabshh,
Ajib al-Maqdr f Nawib Tmr, ed. Al
Muammad Umar (Cairo: Maktabat al-Anjil
al-Miriyya, 1399 [1979]).
Ibn Bb/Erzi Ibn Bb, El-Evmirl-Aliyye fl-Umril-
Aliyye, ed. Adnan Sadk Erzi (Ankara: Trk
Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1956).
Ibn Bb/Houtsma Ibn Bb, Histoire des Seldjoucides dAsie
Mineure daprs lAbrg du Seldjouknmeh
dIbn-Bb, ed. M. Th. Houtsma (Leiden: Brill,
1902).
Ibn ajar/Durar Amad ibn Al b. ajar al-Asqaln, Durar
al-Kmina f Ayn al-Mia al-Thmina, ed.
Abd al-Writh Muammad Al (Beirut: Dr
al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1977).
Ibn ajar/Inb Amad ibn Al b. ajar al-Asqaln, Inb
al-Ghumr bi-Abn al-Umr (Hyderabad:
Mabaat Majlis Dirat al-Marif al-
Uthmniyya, 1967).
Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal Ab al-Masin Ysuf b. Taghr Bird, al-
Manhal al-f wa al-Mustawf bad al-Wf,
ed. Muammad Amn (Cairo: al-Haya al-
Miriyya al-mma lil-Kitb, 1984).
Ibn Taghr Bird/Nujm Ab al-Masin Ysuf b. Taghr Bird, al-
Nujm al-Zhira f Mulk Mir wa-al-Qhira,
ed. William Popper (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1960).
JESHO Journal of the Economic and Social History of
the Orient
JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies
JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society
Khvndamr/Hum Ghiys al-Dn b. Humm al-Dn Khvndamr,
Trkh-i Habb al-Siyar f Akhbr-i Afrd-i
Bashar, ed. Jall al-Dn Hum (Tehran:
Kitb-khna-yi Khayyam, 1954).
Khvndamr/Thackston Ghiys al-Dn b. Humm al-Dn Khvndamr,
Habibus-siyar, Tome Three, The Reign of the
Mongol and the Turk, ed. and trans. Wheeler
x
Abbreviations
Thackston (Cambridge, MA: Department of

Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations,
Harvard University, 1994).
Kutub/TAM Mamd Kutub, Trkh-i l-i Muaffar,
ed. Abd al-usayn Nav (Tehran:
Kitbfursh-yi Ibn Sn, 1956).
Maqrz/Ashr Taq al-Dn Amad b. Al al-Maqrz, Kitb
al-Sulk li-Marifat Duwal al-Mulk, ed. Abd
al-Fatt Ashr (Cairo, 1972).
Maqrz/Ziyda Taq al-Dn Amad b. Al al-Maqrz, Kitb
al-Sulk li-Marifat Duwal al-Mulk, ed.
Muammad Muaf Ziyda (Cairo: Lajnat al-
Talif wa-al-Tarjama wa-al-Nashr, 1934).
Mrkhvnd/Rawza Muammad b. Khvndshh Mrkhvnd,
Trkh-i Rawzat al-af (Tehran: Markaz-yi
Khayyam Prz, 195960).
Nakhjivn/Dastr Muammad bin Hindshh Nakhjivn, Dastr
al-Ktib f Tayn al-Martib, ed. Abd al-
Karm Alghl Alzda (Moscow: Izd-vo
Nauka, Glav. red. vostochno lit-ry, 196476).
Naanz/Aubin Mun al-Dn Naanz, Extraits du Muntakhab
al-tavrkh-i Mun (Anonyme dIskandar),
ed. Jean Aubin (Tehran: Librairie Khayyam,
1957).
Qazvn/Nuzhat amd Allh Mustawf Qazvn, The
Geographical Part of the Nuzhat-al-Qulb, ed.
Guy Le Strange (Leiden: Brill; London: Luzac
& Co., 191519).
Qazvn/TG amd Allh Mustawf Qazvn, Trkh-i
Guzda, ed. Abd al-usayn Nav (Tehran:
Amr Kabr, 1362 [1983]).
Qazvn/ZTG Zayn al-Dn b. amd Allh Mustawf Qazvn,
Zayl-i Trkh-i Guzda, ed. raj Afshr
(Tehran: Naqsh-i Jahn, 1372 [1993].
Rashd al-Dn/Jmi Rashd al-Dn Fazl Allh Hamadn, Jmi
al-Tavrkh, ed. Muammad Rawshan and
Muaf Msav (Tehran: Nashr-i Alburz,
1373 [1994]).
Rashd al-Dn/Shuab Rashd al-Dn Fazl Allh Hamadn, Shuab-i
Panjgna (Istanbul: Topkap Saray Mzesi
Ktphanesi, Ahmet III ms. 2937).
xi
The Jalayirids
afad/Ayn Khall ibn Aybak al-afad, Ayn al-Ar wa-

Awn al-Nar (Beirut: Dr al-Fikr al-Muir
and Damascus: Dr al-Fikr, 1998).
Samarqand/Mala Kaml al-Dn Abd al-Razzq Samarqand,
Mala-i Sadayn va Majma-i Barayn, ed.
Abd al-usayn Nav (Tehran: Shh Riz
Muqbil Dnishgh, 1353 [1975]).
Svaj/Kullyt Salmn Svaj, Kullyt-i Salmn-i Svaj, ed.
Abbs Al Vaf (Tehran: Anjuman-i sr
va Mafkhir-i Farhang, 1382 [2004]).
Shabnkra/Majma Muammad bin Al bin Muammad
Shabnkra, Majma al-Ansb, ed. Mr
Hshim Muaddis (Tehran: Muassasa-yi
Intishrt-i Amr Kabr, 1363 [1985]).
Shm/Lugal Nim al-Dn Shm, Zafernme, ed. Necati
Lugal (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi,
1949).
Shm/Tauer Nim al-Dn Shm, Histoire des conqutes
de Tamerlan intitule afar-nma, par
Nimuddn m, avec des additions
empruntes au Zubdatu-t-Tawri-i Bysunur
de fi-i Abr, ed. Felix Tauer (Prague:
Orientln stav/Oriental Institute, 1937).
Shuj/Trkh Shams al-Dn Shuj, Trkh al-Malik al-
Nir Muammad ibn Qalawn al-li wa-
Awlduhu, ed. Barbara Schfer (Wiesbaden:
Franz Steiner, 197885).
Storey/Persian Literature Charles Ambrose Storey, Persian Literature:
A Bio-Bibliographical Survey (London: Luzac
& Co., 1927).
TMEN Gerhard Doerfer, Trkische und Mongolische
Elemente im Neupersischen (Wiesbaden:
Franz Steiner Verlag, 1963).
Vaf/Trkh Abd Allh b. Fazl Allh Vaf al-azrat,
Trkh-i Vaf [Lithograph ed. Bombay, 1269
(1853); reprint] (Tehran: Ibn-i Sn, 1338
[1959]).
Yazd/afar-nma Sharaf al-Dn Al Yazd, afar-nma, ed.
Muammad Abbs (Tehran: Amr Kabr,
1336 (195758).
xii
1
Introduction and Sources for

the History of theJalayirids
In his chapter The Jalayirids, Muzaffarids and Sarbadrs in volume six

of the Cambridge History of Iran, Hans Robert Roemer characterised the
period between the fall of the Mongol Ilkhanate and the arrival of Tmr
in Iran as grim and unedifying, and mainly significant for its intellectual
achievements, as well as for understanding Tmrs subsequent success
in Iran.1 The period of fifty years, from c. 1335 to 1385, certainly wit-
nessed examples of sublime cultural production; this was the period of
fi, and the refinement of painted manuscript illustration, to name two
important examples. In addition, indeed, a student of the Timurids must
certainly strive to understand Tmrs campaigns in Iran in the context
of the political situation that preceded them. Yet, there is a general sense
among scholars of the late-medieval Middle East (what Marshall Hodgson
called the Later Middle Period, roughly 1250 to 1500) that the middle
of the fourteenth century east of the Euphrates river is best understood as
a tumultuous transition between two important dynastic cycles, those of
the Ilkhans and the Timurids. Additionally, this was a period of political
breakdown with little to offer for our understanding of either the Ilkhanate
or the Timurid and Turkman sultanates that followed in the fifteenth
century. While the half-century in question certainly did see its share of
grim and tumultuous political conflict, the historical significance of the
events of the period can only be fully understood if we consider continui-
ties with the Ilkhanid past, along with the reality of the dramatic end of
stability and dynastic order that took place following the death of Ab
Sad Bahdur Khan in 1335.
We still know very little about the transition between the period of
the Chinggisid Ilkhanate and the rulers that followed its collapse in the
fourteenth century. Several amiral and local dynasties emerged following
the death of Ab Sad. This study takes as its subject one of these post-
Ilkhanid dynasties. The Jalayirid sultans, descendants of the Mongolian
tribe of Jalayir, ruled part of the former Ilkhanid domains in the middle of
the fourteenth century. In the following chapters, the roots of the Jalayirids
1
The Jalayirids
are traced from their origins in the historical record in the tribal society
of the Mongol steppe, through their rise and claims to be the heirs to
theIlkhanate, and finally to the collapse of their authority and prestige in
theworld beyond their domains in the early fifteenth century. Although the
Jalayirid period did see its share of violent conflict, the story of howthe
Jalayirids came to power is illustrative of the political dynamics that
shaped much of the Mongol and post-Mongol period in the Middle East.
The relationship between the most significant elements of the Ilkhanid
ruling elite, the amirs and the court and household of the Chinggisid ruler,
comes into clearer relief when the focus of historical inquiry is taken off
the dynasty itself, and turned onto those non-royal elites who both sup-
ported and challenged the Ilkhanid political order.
The Jalayirid sultans sought to preserve the social and political order
of the Ilkhanate, while claiming that they were the rightful heirs to the
rulership of that order. Central to the Jalayirids claims to the legacy
of the Ilkhanate was their attempt to control the Ilkhanid heartland of
Azarbayjan. This province, and its major city of Tabriz, represented the
symbolic legacy and material wealth of the Ilkhanate, and became the
focus of the Jalayirid political programme. Control of Azarbayjan meant
control of a network of long-distance trade between China and the Latin
West, which continued to be a source of economic prosperity through
the eighth/fourteenth century. Azarbayjan also represented the centre of
Ilkhanid court life, whether in the migration of the mobile court-camp
of the ruler, or in the complexes of palatial, religious and civic build-
ings constructed around the city of Tabriz by members of the Ilkhanid
royal family, as well as by members of the military and administrative
elite.
In the years following the dissolution of the Ilkhanate after the death
of Ab Sad Bahdur Khan in 736/1335, the family descended from
the Jalayir tribal amir lg Noyan established themselves first as heirs to
the traditional governors of the Ilkhanates southwestern march lands,
an area that was home to large numbers of Oyrat tribesmen in Arab
Iraq and Diyarbakr, and later as rulers in the Ilkhanid imperial centre in
Azarbayjan. At the height of their rule, under Sultan Shaykh Uvays (r.
757/1356776/1374), the Jalayirids attempted to portray themselves as
heirs to the Ilkhanid political legacy, and continuators of the Ilkhanate,
albeit on a smaller territorial scale. Although the Jalayirids could not
claim to be direct heirs of the last Ilkhanid ruler, they nevertheless could
and did attempt to legitimise their claims to the Ilkhanid legacy through
their family ties to the Ilkhanid royal house, as well as their role as uphold-
ers of Islamic and Mongol dynastic justice, an ideological combination
2
Introduction and Sources
that had been part of the political programme of the later Ilkhanid rulers
themselves.
In this endeavour, the Jalayirid sultans, beginning with Shaykh Uvays,
could count on representatives of the old Ilkhanid administrative and
bureaucratic elite. The continuation of the patterns of rule of the old order,
which the Jalayirids sought to uphold, was in the interest of those who
had served the Ilkhanate in Tabriz. Members of the Ilkhanid administra-
tive elite helped to construct the political programme and dynastic history
of the Jalayirids, which linked them to the Ilkhanid past. As a result, the
Jalayirids, ruling from their two capitals in Tabriz and Baghdad, came
to represent a continuation of the Ilkhanid political past, through control
of the territorial heartland of the Ilkhanate in Azarbayjan. This Ilkhanid
political ideal only began to break down when Tmr and his descendants
attempted to reconstitute a larger polity on the model of Chinggis Qans
world empire, of which the Ilkhanid domains were only one part. A shift
in political gravity from Azarbayjan to Khurasan and Transoxiana under
the Timurids in the ninth/fifteenth century marked the end of the Ilkhanate
as a principle for future political organisation. Deprived of Tabriz first by
Tmr, and later by the Qarquynl confederation, the Jalayirid dynasty
receded after the death of Suln Amad Jalayir in 813/1410.
At the heart of the history of the Jalayirids is the question of the rela-
tionship of tribal to dynastic authority in the Mongol and Islamic con-
texts in this period. To what extent did a tribal identity, however defined,
matter in the period after the expansion of the Mongol empire in the
thirteenth century, and the establishment of Chinggisid authority over the
non-Mongol populations of the Oxus-to-Euphrates region? The Jalayirids
rose to prominence in a period in which the dynasties ruled by descend-
ants of Chinggis Qan disappeared in Yan China and Chaghatayid central
Asia, as well as in the Ilkhanate. The tribal ancestors of the Jalayirid
sultans had constituted part of the foundation of Chinggis Qans empire.
Yet, the Jalayirids of the fourteenth century were not tribal chiefs. Instead,
they were products of a military elite that owed its structure and hierar-
chy to the Ilkhanid dynastic state. The amirs within this hierarchy owed
their status and position not to their tribes, but to their relationship to the
khan and the royal family. In addition, members of the Ilkhanid military
elite, like the Jalayirids, were often the sons of royal princesses, who had
been married to tribal amirs to secure political alliances. Thus, the status
enjoyed by one branch of Jalayir tribal amirs within the Ilkhanid imperial
hierarchy put them in a position to establish a new dynastic dispensation
in the eighth/fourteenth century. As this study illustrates, the Jalayirid
sultans owed their success not to their tribal origins or identities, but to the
3
The Jalayirids
particular historical circumstances of the role played by their ancestors in

the life of the Ilkhanate. They sought to link themselves as closely as pos-
sible with the resources, symbols and historical rhetoric of the Chinggisid
Ilkhans and the uls (patrimonial commonwealth) that they created in
the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.
This study is organised into chapters tracing the historical past of the
Jalayirid dynasty through individual ancestors in the context of the politi-
cal formation and expansion of Chinggis Qans empire in inner Asia; the
foundation of the Ilkhanate by Hleg Khan and his descendants; and
theaftermath of the Ilkhanates collapse. The post-Chinggisid period is
examined in chapters dealing with the reign of Shaykh asan b. Amr
usayn; the reign of Sultan Shaykh Uvays b. Shaykh asan; the ideologi-
cal strategies deployed to legitimate Shaykh Uvayss reign; and, finally,
the reigns of Shaykh Uvayss sons, Suln usayn and Suln Amad, and
the end of Jalayirid authority in the former Ilkhanid lands.
Sources and Secondary Literature for the Jalayirids

Before turning to a chronological examination of the Jalayir tribe and
its incorporation into the Mongol Ilkhanate, a discussion of sources for
the history of the Jalayirids is in order. In what follows, an attempt has
been made to identify the most important primary sources, and to place
them into the social and political context of their composition, as far as is
known. Then, an overview of secondary literature that has most directly
informed this study is provided.
The earliest source which deals with the Jalayir tribe in relation to
Chinggis Qan and the rise of the Mongol empire is the anonymous Yuan
chao bi shi, or Secret History of the Mongols, a part-mythological, part-
historical account of the ancestry and life of Temjin, the future Chinggis
Qan, stretching in time from the primordial past twenty-two generations
before Temjins birth, until the reign of his son and successor, gdey.2
The Secret History is unique as the only extant source composed by the
Mongols themselves. Although it was originally written in Mongolian,
the version which we have is a transliteration in Chinese characters.
Three major English translations exist,3 which often need to be consulted
together in order to arrive at the clearest interpretation of events.
The Secret History provides an important source for the early Mongol
view of Temjins rise to power within the context of tribal society on the
steppe in the late sixth/twelfth and early seventh/thirteenth centuries. For
the purposes of this study, it is valuable as a kind of ethnographic map
of the Mongol tribes and the relationships of their members to Chinggis
4
Qan in the formative years of the Mongol empire. However, since it ends
during the reign of gdey Qaan, the Secret History provides no informa-
tion on the establishment of the Ilkhanate, the appanage state founded in
the Middle East by Chinggis Qans grandson, Hleg.
For the study of the Jalayir tribe in the Ilkhanate and the period of rule
by the independent Jalayirid dynasty to the year 813/1410, narrative histo-
ries written in Persian provide the most important sources of information.
Histories written for Ilkhanid rulers, which can be understood as repre-
senting the official dynastic view of the past, began in the early eighth/
fourteenth century. Perhaps the most important monument of Persian
historiography was the Jmi al-Tavrkh, written by Rashd al-Dn Fazl
Allh Hamadn (d. 718/1318).4 This universal history is a collection of
several sections on the history of the world and its peoples, including the
Oghuz Turks, Chinese, Franks, Jews and Indians. Of importance for the
Jalayir tribe and its relationship to the Ilkhanate is the section known as
theTrkh-i Ghzn, commissioned by Ghazan Khan, completed during
the reign of ljeyt (r. 704/1304716/1316), and devoted to the history
of the Mongols and the Ilkhanate. Rashd al-Dn was the Ilkhanid vizier,
sharing this position for a period with his rival, Sad al-Dn Svaj. The
Trkh-i Ghzn was written amid a series of centralising reforms initi-
ated during the reign of Ghazan Khan, aimed at limiting the power of
the tribal amirs and strengthening the central government. It is from this
perspective that Rashd al-Dn provides an account of several branches of
the Jalayir tribe within the Ilkhanate from the time of its establishment by
Hleg Khan in the late 650s/1250s. Particularly useful are the sections
covering the years between 680/1282 and 694/1295, when four khans
came to the throne, three of whom were deposed due to efforts by the
amirs, including prominent members of the Jalayir tribe.
A second major work of the Ilkhanid historiographical tradition is the
Tajziyat al-Amr wa-Tazjiyat al-Ar, better known as Trkh-i Vaf
after its author, Abd Allh ibn Fazl Allh al-Shrz Vaf (d. c. 729
/1329).5 In this history, Vaf deals with events in Iran and Anatolia from
the death of Mngke Qaan in 657/1259 through to the year 712/1312, and
including events in various provinces. Like the Trkh-i Ghzn, Vafs
history is important for its account of the conflicts between the Ilkhanid
dynasty and the amirs, as well as between branches of the Jalayir tribe
itself in the late seventh/thirteenth century.
Another early eighth /fourteenth-
century history is the Rawzat l
al-Albb f Tavrkh al-Akbir wa-al-Ansb, completed in 718/1318 by
Fakhr al-Dn Ab Sulaymn Dwd Bankt (d. 730/1330).6 Bankts
history is essentially a summary of Rashd al-Dns Trkh-i Ghzn, with
5
The Jalayirids
some extra information from ljeyts reign. ljeyts reign is more fully
dealt with in the Trkh-i ljyt of Ab al-Qsim Qshn, completed
after the year 718/1318.7 This regnal history provides a great amount
of detail in a straightforward style. Qshns work is important for the
information it provides about the Jalayir Amr usayn Grgn, son of q
Bq, who married his fathers wife, ljetey Khatun, sister of the sultan
ljeyt.
The late Ilkhanid period produced the historian and financial direc-
tor amd Allh Mustawf Qazvn (d. c. 740/1340).8 Among his three
major works was the afar-nma, a work of verse emulating Firdawss
Shh-nma, and covering events up to 734/133334. Charles Melville has
pointed out the historiographic importance of the afar-nma, as a source
for the Timurid-era historian fi Abrs Zayl-i Jmi al-Tavrkh.9
Qazvn also wrote a prose history, Trkh-i Guzda, completed in 730
/1330. Although it depends in large part on older sources, it does contain
some original information for Qazvns own times. His third major work
is the Nuzhat al-Qulb, which provides important information on the
geography and demography of the late Ilkhanid period.10
Within this category of official Ilkhanid historiography can be identi-
fied a subcategory of regional histories written from the perspective of
the Ilkhanid western frontier in Anatolia. The earliest work from this
category is al-Avmir al-Aliyya f al-Umr al-Aliyya by Ibn Bb
(d. after 681/128283).11 This history of the Saljqs of Rm from c.
584/1188 to 680/1281 was composed in a transitional period in which
Anatolia was incorporated into the Ilkhanid polity, as Saljuqid author-
ity was weakened by pressure from both the Mongols and the Mamluks.
Ibn Bbs mother was employed as court astrologer at Konya during the
reign of the Saljq sultan Kay Qubd I (d. 634/1237).12 Following the
Mongol conquest of Saljq forces in Anatolia in 641/1243, and later, after
the arrival of Hleg Khan in Iran in the late 650s/1250s, the Mongols
attempted to bring the Saljq lands to the west under their control. As
part of this programme of Mongol influence in Anatolia, A Malik
Juvayn (d. 681/1283), Khurasanian administrative official, and author
of the Trkh-i Jahngushy,13 commissioned a history of the Saljqs
from Ibn Bb. Charles Melville has suggested that the commission for al-
Avmir al-Aliyya may have come around the year 676/127778, after
the campaign of the Mamluk sultan Baybars in Anatolia and the collapse
of the Saljq state there. This event would have created the need for a
work of history that asserted the ideas of justice, Muslim piety and ancient
Iranian kingship as a means of connecting the Ilkhans more closely with
Irans imperial past, and thus asserting the authority of the Ilkhans in their
6
rivalry with the Mamluks.14 Ibn Bbs history is important for the details
it provides about the period of disorder after the Mamluk invasion and
the uprisings carried out against Ilkhanid rule in Anatolia. These revolts
involved several Jalayir amirs, and the eventual suppression of these
revolts contributed to the elimination of certain Jalayir families, as well
as the promotion of the family of the Ilgayid branch of the Jalayir, which
would later found the Jalayirid dynasty.
A second major work from the Anatolian perspective is the Musmarat
al-Akhbr wa-Musyarat al-Akhyr, written by Karm al-Dn qsary
(d.before 734/1333).15 Almost three-quarters of this universal history deals
with the history of the Mongols in Anatolia.16 It was written for the amir
Tmr Tsh, the son of Amr Chpn, the premier military commander and
political figure during the early reign of Ab Sad (717/1317727/1327).
qsary was a secretary and served as the administrator of religious
endowments (vaqf ) in Anatolia during the reign of Ghazan Khan.17 When
the young Ab Sad came to the Ilkhanid throne in 717/1317, the family
of Amr Chpn came to control the affairs of the state, and Tmr Tsh
b. Amr Chpn became governor of Anatolia. qsary composed the
Musmarat al-Akhbr in 723/1323.18 His accounts of the involvement
of Jalayir amirs in the Mamluk invasion of Anatolia in 675/1277, as well
as the involvement of other Jalayir amirs in the disorder there during the
reign of Ghazan Khan, are important for the activities of several branches
of the Jalayir tribe during the Ilkhanid period.
The histories mentioned above were all composed within the context
of Ilkhanid dynastic rule in the region roughly between the Oxus and
Euphrates rivers until the year 736/1335. Following the death of Ab
Sad in this year, the Ilkhanid territories began to fragment into regions
controlled by amirs and local elites, due to the fact that no commonly
recognised legitimate successor existed. Ab Sad did not have any male
offspring who may have ensured a smooth transition of political authority,
and the continuation of the Ilkhanid dynasty. Although many descendants
of the Ilkhanid rulers were alive, often available to serve as convenient
puppets for powerful amirs, the pattern of succession had been settled on
the descendants of Arghun Khan since his son Ghazan took the throne
in 694/1295. Thus, even though several princes descended from Hleg
Khan emerged as possible candidates, there was no unanimous agree-
ment on any of them among the various regional and tribal factions in the
Ilkhanate.
In this situation, the pattern of history writing changed. With no
universally recognised Ilkhanid ruler, historians wrote for patrons rep-
resenting local dynasties that competed for claims to the Ilkhanid throne
7
The Jalayirids
and its capital territory in Azarbayjan. These works fall chronologically

and ideologically between the histories written for the Ilkhans and those
written for Tmr and his descendants in the ninth/fifteenth century.
The single example of a history written for and about the Jalayirid
dynasty is the Trkh-i Shaykh Uvays, composed by Ab Bakr al-Qub
al-Ahr (or al-Ahar).19 Writing around the year 761/1360, shortly after
Shaykh Uvayss conquest of Azarbayjan, Ahr provides a unique per-
spective on the history of the Ilkhanate, which anticipates the Jalayirids
eventual rise to power. The work is arranged according to the reigns of
the Ilkhans and their successors. Shaykh asans rule is not given an
independent heading, and instead events between 736/1335 and 757/1356
are arranged according to the reigns of the puppet khans installed and
recognised as sovereign by Shaykh asan, as well as those supported by
his rivals. The Jalayirids are recognised as independent sultans only after
the accession of Shaykh Uvays.20 Although he relies on Rashd al-Dn for
much of his information to 704/1304, Ahrs history may be considered an
independent source for the early years of the eighth/fourteenth century.21
An additional work of history dedicated to Shaykh Uvays, but devoted
to an earlier period, is the Ghzn-nma of Nr al-Dn Azhdar.22 This
poetic work, written between 1357 and 136223 by a talented physician and
son of an Ilkhanid vizier,24 deals with the ancestors and reign of Ghazan
Khan. Azhdar dedicated the Ghzn-nma to the king of kings of equity
and religion (shahanshh-i b-dd u dn), Shaykh Uvays.25
Post-Ilkhanid historiography is also represented by the Majma al-
Ansb f al-Tavrkh of Muammad b. Al b. Muammad al-Shabnkra
(d. 759/1358).26 Writing originally in the service of the last Ilkhanid vizier,
Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad Rashd, Shabnkra provides great detail
about the critical years of transition after Ab Sads death. He wrote in
praise of Shaykh asan Jalayirs Chinggisid puppet, Muammad Khan,
whom he describes as the shadow of God.27 While the Majma al-Ansb
does devote particular attention to the province of Fars, it nevertheless
provides a great deal of information on Shaykh asans establishment of
political authority in Arab Iraq, and his attempt to capture the Ilkhanid
imperial centre in Azarbayjan.
A final work of post-Ilkhanid historiography is the Trkh-i l-i
Muaffar of Mamd Kutub.28 The Muzaffarids were a local dynastic
family that brought the provinces of Fars and Persian Iraq under their
control in the period after 736/1335. In fact, the Muzaffarids had acted
as local authorities in the regions of Kirman and Yazd in the later period
of Ilkhanid rule, and also sought to bring Azarbayjan under their control
throughout much of the eighth/fourteenth century. Kutubs work, written
8
in 823/1420 as an addition to a redaction of amd Allh Mustawf

Qazvns Trkh-i Guzda,29 provides a Muzaffarid perspective on the
conflicts with the Jalayirids in Azarbayjan in the period before Tmrs
first campaigns in Iran in the 780s/1380s.
The arrival of Tmr was the beginning of the end of the Ilkhanid
dynastic tradition as the basis for political authority in Iran and Anatolia.
Tmrs invasion and campaigns ushered in what is commonly known as
the Timurid period (c. 13851506), in which authority came to rest with
members of Tmrs family, and the centre of political gravity shifted
from Azarbayjan to Khurasan and Transoxiana. The Timurid period was
accompanied by a new historiographical tradition, which took Tmr and
his family as its focus and object of glorification. Despite the fact that the
Ilkhanate as a political ideal was no longer supported by Timurid histori-
ans, who tended to view the Ilkhanate as one part of a larger Chinggisid
imperial polity which Tmr attempted to reconstruct,30 these historians
provide the majority of information on the Jalayirid dynasty, and for this
reason their work is crucial to this study.
An important link between the Ilkhanid and Timurid historiographical
traditions is the Zayl-i Trkh-i Guzda of Zayn al-Dn Qazvn, a continu-
ation of the work of the authors father, amd Allh Mustawf Qazvn,
up until the year 795/1393.31 Although the Zayl was written for a Timurid
audience, it was intended as a continuation of the Trkh-i Guzda, and
thus maintains a focus on Azarbayjan, the centre of the Ilkhanid realm,
even after the arrival of Tmr and the transfer of political power to other
centres. Because of the attention paid by Zayn al-Dn to Azarbayjan in
the period after 736/1335 (the work begins with the year 742/134142),
the Zayl is an important source for the history of the Jalayirids, who con-
quered Azarbayjan in 759/1358.
Zayn al-Dn Qazvns work is also significant as a source for two later
Timurid historians, fi Abr32 and Fa Khvf.33 fi Abr wrote a
number of historical works under the patronage of Tmrs son Shhrukh
at Herat.34 His Zayl-i Jmi al-Tavrkh, part of the larger Majma-yi
fi Abr, is a continuation of Rashd al-Dns history through to the
end of the Ilkhanid period, until Tmrs arrival in Iran. fi Abr relies
on Zayn al-Dn Qazvn for the basic structure of his account of the post-
Ilkhanid period, which means that he tends to give precedence to events
in Azarbayjan and the rule of the Jalayirids there.35 Five short treatises
on aspects of the eighth/fourteenth century in Khurasan and Mazandaran,
also part of the Majma, are collected in Cinq opuscules de fi-i Abr
concernant lhistoire de lIran au temps de Tamerlan, edited by Felix
Tauer.36 Of particular importance for this study is fi Abrs account
9
The Jalayirids
of Amr Val, the independent governor of Mazandaran, and rival of the

Jalayirids in the period before Tmr, which is preserved in this edition.
Fa Khvf served at the courts of Bysunqur Mrz and Shhrukh, and
presented his Mujmal-i Tavrkh-i Fa to Shhrukh in 845/1442.37 The
sections of his history on the Jalayirid period follow Zayn al-Dn and fi
Abr, but in a much simpler, less detailed style.
Other examples of Timurid history writing important for this study of
the Jalayirids include the earliest history of the life and career of Tmr,
the afar-nma of Nim al-Dn Shm, composed in 806/1404, prior to
Tmrs death.38 Shm provides a first-hand account of Tmrs conquest
of Baghdad in 795/1393, and the flight of the Jalayirid Suln Amad.
Additional relevant historical works composed under Tmrs successors
include the Muntakhab al-Tavrkh-i Mun, written by Mun al-Dn
Naanz for Shhrukh in 817/1414.39 In his 1957 edition, Extraits du
Muntakhab al-tavrkh-i Mun (Anonyme dIskandar), Jean Aubin pre-
served sections of this work devoted to the descendants of Chinggis Qan,
as well as the important ruling families in Iran after the Ilkhanate. The
chapter devoted to the descendants of Shaykh asan Jalayir is especially
important.40 Appearing after Naanzs Muntakhab chronologically was
the afar-nma of Sharaf al-Dn Al Yazd, written c. 826/142223.41
Yazds afar-nma focuses on Tmrs military campaigns, and is a
useful source for the periods of the Jalayirid Suln Amads reign when
he came into conflict with Tmr.
Later Timurid-era histories, which tend to rely on Yazd and fi Abr,
include Abd al-Razzq Samarqands Mala-i Sadayn va-Majma-i
Barayn, written for the Timurid Suln Ab Sad.42 The first part of
the title, translated as The Rising of the Two Fortunes, is a reference to
the two Ab Sads whose reigns provide the starting and ending points
of the work, that is Ab Sad Bahdur Khan (d. 736/1335) and Suln
Ab Sad b. Muammad b. Mrnshh b. Tmr (d. 873/1469). One of
the most well-known Timurid histories of the late ninth/fifteenth century
is the Rawzat al-af of Mr Muammad ibn Sayyid Burhn al-Dn
Khvndshh, better known as Mrkhvnd.43 Writing under the patron-
age of the minister and littrateur Al Shr Nav at Herat, Mrkhvnd
devotes a large portion of this world history to the Ilkhanate and its after-
math in the eighth/fourteenth century. A final word should be added about
Mrkhvnds grandson, Khvandamr, whose abb al-Siyar f Akhbr-i
Afrd-i Bashar, written under Safavid patronage in the late 920s/early
1520s, is a late example of the Persian world historical tradition begun
by Rashd al-Dn, providing a great amount of detail for the seventh/thir-
teenth and eighth/fourteenth centuries.44
10
Although most of the historical writing in Persian was composed for

the Timurid courts in Khurasan and Transoxiana, one contemporary work
written in Anatolia is important for the eighth/fourteenth century. This is
Bazm u Razm, written by Azz ibn rdashr Astarbd for Q Burhn
al-Dn, the ruler of Sivas.45 After assuming a judgeship in Kayseri, Q
Burhn al-Dn had become vizier to ukumdr Al Beg, the heir to the
principality of Eretna in Anatolia. When ukumdr Al Beg died, Burhn
al-Dn became regent to his young son, and the q emerged as the ruler
of a principality in central Anatolia.46 According to Astarbds own
account in Bazm u Razm, he was employed at the court of the Jalayirid
Suln Amad in Baghdad, but migrated to Anatolia and the service of
Q Burhn al-Dn after Tmrs invasion of Iran in 788/1386. Bazm u
Razm provides an account of the first part of the reign of Suln Amad
from a non-Timurid perspective.
Anatolia underwent a political transformation in the years between 784
/1382 and 804/1402. In this period, the authority of the Jalayirids, which
represented a continuation of the pattern of Mongol rule in Anatolia from
Azarbayjan begun in 641/1243, began to break down, as local amirs and
beys such as Qar Muammad of the Qarquynl,47 Eretna (Aratn),48
Q Burhn al-Dn49 and Muahhartan50 carved out independent spheres
of influence. The Ottoman sultan Byezd I greatly expanded his territory
in Anatolia in the late eighth/fourteenth century, and provided a chal-
lenge to Tmrs claims to cities in eastern Anatolia, as well as a source
of protection for the Jalayirid Suln Amad when he was driven from his
capital at Baghdad. Because of the role played by Byezd in the reign of
Suln Amad, early Ottoman historiography treating this period provides
an alternative narrative to the works of Timurid historians. The relation-
ship between Suln Amad Jalayir and Sultan Byezd can be traced to
some of the earliest examples of Ottoman history writing produced during
the period of the Conqueror, Memed II (r. 855/1451886/1481). These
include the Persian Bahjat al-Tavrkh composed by Shukr Allh in the
years 869/1465873/1468.51 In Shukr Allhs history, the outline of later
narratives written at Byezds court in Turkish on Suln Amads time
can be identified. Several of the royal calendars (tavmler) written
around the same time also mention the Jalayirid sultan.52 In addition,
the Arabic history of Memed IIs chancellor and vizier, armnl
Memed Ps, also provides a brief account of Suln Amads arrival at
the service of the Ottoman sultan.53 Accounts are also found in histories
written during the reign of Byezd II (r. 886/1481918/1512), which
include the Tevr-i l-i Osmn of spszde (c. 887/1482).54
This work, written in a popular style, including a question-and-answer
11
The Jalayirids
format indicative of oral origins, provides a narrative different from

that of Shukr Allh. The narratives relating to Suln Amad found in
Bahjat al-Tavrkh, the royal calendars and spszdes Tevr are
repeated and elaborated by historians of the early tenth/sixteenth century.
The Tevr-i l-i Osmn of R,55 completed in 917/1511, before the
death of Byezd II, draws on Shukr Allhs narrative. The Kitb-i Cihan-
nm of Nesr,56 also dedicated to Byezd II, relies on this narrative, as
well as on that found in spszdes Tevr. By the time of Sultan
Sleymn, and historians such as Kemlpszde (d. 940/1534)57 and
Luf Ps (d. 970/1562),58 the main outline of the mid-ninth/fifteenth-
century Ottoman accounts of the Jalayirids had been firmly established as
part of the official histories, which tended to be organised by reign, with
the period of Byezd I typically occupying the fourth book or chapter.
Another major historiographical tradition important for the study of
the Ilkhanid and Jalayirid periods comprises works written in Arabic in
the Mamluk sultanate, the Ilkhanates eastern neighbour. The long period
of Mamluk rule in Egypt and Syria (648/1250922/1517) produced a
rich tradition of history writing, particularly in the form of annalistic
chronicles and biographical dictionaries.59 These Mamluk sources provide
information on Iran and Anatolia in the Ilkhanid and post-Ilkhanid periods
from an outside perspective.
Among eighth/fourteenth-century Mamluk chronicles, al-Mukhtaar f
Tarkh al-Bashar by al-Malik al-Muayyad Imd al-Dn Ab al-Fid60
provides information on affairs on the frontier between the Mamluk and
Ilkhanid territories, particularly in Anatolia. Ab al-Fid was an Ayyubid
prince61 and governor in Hama in Syria under Sultan al-Nir Muammad
(3rd r. 709/1310741/1341),62 and thus was well informed on events close
to Syria during the reign of Ab Sad. Another Syrian chancery official,
Ibn Fal Allh al-Umar (d. 749/1349),63 was also well informed about
the Ilkhanate. The section of his encyclopaedic work Maslik al-Abr f
Mamlik al-Amr dealing with the Mongols has been published with a
German translation by Klaus Lech.64 Another Mamluk chronicle covering
the Ilkhanate in the period after Ab Sads death is the Tarkh al-Malik
al-Nir Muammad b. Qalwn al-li wa-Awldihi, by Shams al-Dn
b. al-Shuj (d. after 756/1355).65 This chronicle survives only as a frag-
ment covering the years 737/1337745/1345,66 which includes accounts
of Shaykh asan Jalayir in Iraq, as well as the conflicts between the
Chubanids and the Sutayids on the Ilkhanid-Mamluk frontier. Biographies
of the major political and religious figures of the eighth/fourteenth century
are provided by Khall b. Aybak al-afad (d. 764/1363) in his compilation
Ayn al-Ar wa-Awn al-Nar.67 afad was one of the awld al-ns
12
(progeny of Mamluk amirs), and served in the chanceries of Damascus,

Cairo and Aleppo.68 The biographies of individuals from the Jalayirid,
Chubanid, Sutayid and Ilkhanid families found in the Ayn al-Ar dem-
onstrate the relationships between these several influential groups and
how they were related through marriage in a way that influenced Ilkhanid
affairs, again with particular focus on the frontier with Mamluk Syria.
Mamluk chronicles from the ninth/fifteenth century are also significant
for information on the Jalayirids through the beginning of the Timurid
period in Iran. Taq al-Dn Amad al-Maqrzs (d. 845/1442)69 Kitb
al-Sulk li-Marifat Duwal al-Mulk is a later Mamluk chronicle detail-
ing the history of Egypt and Syria under the Ayyubids and Mamluks.
Maqrzs history provides accounts from the period of Shaykh asan
Jalayirs rule in Baghdad, as well as the reign of his son, Shaykh Uvays.
A contemporary of Maqrz was Ibn ajar al-Asqaln (d. 852/1449),70
whose chronicle Inb al-Ghumr f Abn al-Umr is important for the
period of Suln Amad Jalayir and his conflicts with Tmr, as well as
his relations with the Mamluks when he was forced out of Baghdad. Ibn
ajar also wrote a massive biographical dictionary, al-Durar al-Kmina f
Ayn al-Mia al-Thmina, which features over 5,000 entries on individu-
als who lived during the eighth/fourteenth century. Here his information
on personalities of the Ilkhanid period tends to follow that of al-afad.
Another biographical work devoted to the life of Tmr was written in
Arabic in Mamluk Syria by Ibn Arabshh (d. 854/1450).71 His Ajib
al-Maqdr f Nawib Tmr is an unsympathetic account of Tmr, which
includes information on Suln Amad Jalayir, and his son Suln hir, as
well as on Abd al-Azz Astarbd, author of Bazm u Razm. Ibn Arabshh
gives an account contrary to that given by Astarbd himself concerning
his migration from Jalayirid Baghdad to the court of Q Burhn al-Dn
in Sivas. Ibn Arabshh and his family had been captured by Tmr during
his conquest of Damascus in 803/1401, and were relocated to Samarqand.
Because of this experience, Ibn Arabshh had both first-hand knowledge
of Tmrs empire and a personal hostility toward him.72
Finally, another ninth/fifteenth-century Mamluk historian, Ab al-
Masin Ysuf b. Taghr Bird (d. 874/1470),73 must also be mentioned
as a source for the Mamluks relations with the Ilkhanate. Ibn Taghr
Birds al-Nujm al-Zhira f Mulk Mir wa-al-Qhira, written after the
year 857/1453, relies on earlier histories for its information on the eighth/
fourteenth century. However, as Donald Little has pointed out, this did not
prevent Ibn Taghr Bird from inserting his own interpretations, and thus
this work represents a unique late Mamluk period perspective on earlier
events.
13
The Jalayirids
Having introduced the relevant narrative historical sources in Persian,

Turkish and Arabic, it should be mentioned that several Armenian histories
also offer important perspectives on the period of Ilkhanid and Jalayirid
rule. The Armenian historians Grigor of Akanc74 and Kirakos of Ganjak75
record the arrival of the Mongols and their dealings with the Armenian and
Georgian ruling elite. Another Armenian historian, Hethum of Korykos,
mentions the Jalayir as one of the seven principle nations of the Mongols
in his early eighth/fourteenth-century work Flor des estoires de la terre
dorient.76 Colophons of Armenian manuscripts record the author, time
and place in which the manuscripts were written, as well as a historical
account of contemporary political and military events. A large number
of these colophons have been translated and provide information about
the later Ilkhans, Shaykh asan and his descendants, as well as Shaykh
asans main Chubanid rival, also known as Shaykh asan, and often
referred to as Shaykh asan-i Kchak.77 An additional Armenian history,
important for the late Jalayirid period, was written by Thomas of Metsop
(d. 85152/1448).78 Vladimir Minorsky has translated Thomass account
of the conflict between the Timurids and Qarquynl in Azarbayjan after
the death of Tmr in 807/1405.79 This account is significant for its treat-
ment of the final years of the reign of Suln Amad Jalayir, and his death
at the hands of the Qarquynl chief, Qar Ysuf, in 813/1410. Also of
value for the early Ilkhanid period is the world history written in Syriac
by Ibn al-Ibr, also known as Bar Hebraeus (d. 1286).80 Metropolitan
of Aleppo, and later head of the Syriac Orthodox Church in Iran, Bar
Hebraeus spent time at the Ilkhanid court as a physician, and provides
many details of Mongol rule up until the year of his death.
In addition to narrative sources in the form of chronicles and biographi-
cal compilations, other literary and artistic artifacts provide information
relevant to the history of the Jalayirids in the eighth/fourteenth century.
These sources include administrative manuals, poetry, chancery docu-
ments and travel literature, as well as numismatic, artistic and architectural
artifacts.
Muammad b. Hindshh Nakhjivns Dastr al-Ktib f Tayn
al-Martib was an administrative manual completed during the reign
of Sultan Shaykh Uvays. The Dastr al-Ktib provides guidance to
secretaries on the appropriate form and style for chancery documents
for a wide variety of occasions, from addressing sultans to muleteers.
Of particular importance for understanding the political ideology of the
Jalayirid dynasty is Nakhjivns introduction and dedication to the work.
Nakhjivn began writing the Dastr al-Ktib under the direction of the
vizier Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad at the end of the reign of Ab Sad,
14
but completed it after Shaykh Uvayss conquest of Azarbayjan in 759

/1358. Nakhjivn thus praises both the Ilkhanid sultan Ab Sad and the
Jalayirid sultan Shaykh Uvays, and attempts to link Shaykh Uvays to the
Chinggisid Ilkhanid past as the legitimate continuator of the Ilkhanate in
Azarbayjan. The Dastr al-Ktib is also valuable for its information on
chancery practice and protocol in the mid-eighth/fourteenth century. In
this regard, it is supplemented by another work from the same period, Abd
Allh b. Muammad b. Kiy al-Mzandarns Risla-yi Falakiyya.81 On
the genre of administrative manuals, mention should also be made of the
Ottoman period insh compilation Mecma-yi Mnset-i Seln, by
Ferdn Amed Bey (d. 991/1583).82 Here are preserved several examples
of letters purported to have been exchanged between the Ottoman sultan
Orn and Shaykh asan Jalayir, Ottoman sultan Murd I and Shaykh
Uvays Jalayir, and Ottoman sultan Byezd I and Suln Amad Jalayir, as
well as exchanges between Byezd I and Tmr, which reference Suln
Amad.
Poetry written at the Jalayirid court represents part of an official con-
struction of the Jalayirid dynastic image. The poet Salmn Svaj (d. 778
/1376) served the Jalayirid royal family as court panegyrist, and composed
qadas in praise of Shaykh asan, his wife Dilshd Khtn, and their son
Shaykh Uvays. Salmns work, like that of Nakhjivn, demonstrates an
attempt to draw parallels between the Jalayirids and the Ilkhanid past, as
well as to promote a more general notion of Chinggisid Mongol heritage
as the source of Jalayirid dynastic sovereignty. Other poets of the period
who wrote for Jalayirid sultans include Khvj Kirmn (d. 753/1352) and
the renowned fi Shrz (d. 791/1389). An important ninth/fifteenth-
century source for the lives of poets during the period is the Tazkirat
al-Shuar of Dawlatshh Samarqand (d. c. 900/1494),83 in which
biographical information on Salmn Svaj and his relations with the
Jalayirids is treated. An additional work dedicated to poetics is the Ans al-
Ushshq, written by Sharaf al-Dn Muammad b. asan Rm Tabrz.84
This treatise on conventions of poetic praise of the beloved was dedicated
to Shaykh Uvays, and includes an introduction devoted to the Jalayirid
sultan. An examination of the titles and imagery ascribed to Shaykh Uvays
in Ans al-Ushshq provides an important indication of the foundations of
Jalayirid political ideology.
In addition to these works produced at the Jalayirid court, designed
to convey a conscious image of the dynasty, other documentary sources
provide further information about social and economic life. In particular,
the work of Gottfried Herrmann on Jalayirid documents dealing with
Azarbayjan, and Ardabil in particular, reveals the relations between the
15
The Jalayirids
sultans and the home region of the afaviyya Sufi order.85 Ardabil was
the hereditary territory of Suln Amad Jalayir, and was also under the
religious influence of Shaykh adr al-Dn (d. 794/1392), head of the
order that would become the ruling dynasty of Iran in the tenth/sixteenth
century. Documents drafted by the Jalayirid chancery also reveal informa-
tion about Jalayirid fiscal policies, as well as forms and titles used by the
sultans.
Finally, literature written by foreign travellers who recorded their
observations of life in the Ilkhanid and Jalayirid territory is a rich source of
cultural, economic and political information. The Maghribi traveller Ibn
Baa passed through the Ilkhanate during the reign of Ab Sad, and
observed life in cities such as Tabriz and Baghdad.86 Later in the century,
the Bavarian crusader Johannes Schiltberger recorded his observations on
Tabriz, as well as reports regarding Tmrs conquest of Jalayirid Baghdad,
and the death of Suln Amad.87 Schiltberger had fought against Ottoman
forces at Nicopolis under King Sigismund of Hungary, and was captured.
He served under Sultan Byezd I from 798/1396 to 804/1402, and under
Tmr from 804/1402 to 807/1405. The Castilian envoy Ruy Gonzalez de
Clavijos account of economic life in Tabriz and Sultaniyya in the early
ninth/fifteenth century also contributes to our understanding of the com-
mercial importance of Azarbayjan to the Jalayirids and all other potential
successors to the Ilkhanate.88
Having provided an overview of some of the most important primary
source materials for the history of the Jalayirids, we turn now to consider
secondary literature which has informed this study. The primary mono-
graph on the Jalayirid dynasty is Shrn Bayns Trkh-i l-i Jalyir.
This work is essential for its survey of the political history of the Jalayirids,
beginning with Shaykh asan, down to the last Jalayirid princes in Iraq
in the ninth/fifteenth century, as well as for its discussion of the adminis-
tration of the fiscal and military departments that the Jalayirids inherited
from the Ilkhanate. Bayn draws extensively on the works ofAhr, fi
Abr, Zayn al-Dn Qazvn and Nakhjivn. She also devotes attention to
social and artistic life under the Jalayirids. While this work provides an
excellent survey of several aspects of Jalayirid history, it does not address
the processes that led to the rise and subsequent legitimation of political
authority of Mongol tribal descendants within the socio-political context
of the Ilkhanate. Tracing the factors that led to this development is an
important aspect of this study.
Works on the Jalayirid period in Arabic tend to follow the pattern set
by Bayn. Nr Abd al-amd ns 1986 work Al-Irq f al-Ahd al-
Jalir 89 gives a thorough treatment of Jalayirid rule in Iraq, including
16
the Jazira and Diyarbakr, based on Arabic, Persian, Turkish and European
language sources. The work is divided into chapters on the political
background, the administration and its personnel, the military, geography
and land use, the arts, commerce and finance. Shabn Rab urrs
Al-Dawla al-Jaliriyya,90 published the following year, owes much to
Bayn in its organisation and content, also dealing with the history of the
Jalayirid dynasty by ruler, then dealing with state institutions, poets, and
the arts and sciences of the period. A less comprehensive work is Yumn
Riwns Al-Dawla al-Jaliriyya,91 published in 1993, which relies
almost exclusively on Arabic sources in its treatment of Jalayirid political
history, foreign relations, administration, economy, society, culture and
the arts. These studies, like Bayns work which they emulate, attempt to
provide a comprehensive view of all aspects of political, social and eco-
nomic life in the period of Jalayirid rule. They provide a good general, if
somewhat static, overview.
The Jalayirids are the subject of several other shorter articles, including
encyclopaedia entries92 and part of a chapter in the Cambridge History of
Iran.93 This literature provides a good general overview of the Jalayirids
and the political history of the post-Ilkhanid period, from 736/1335 to
approximately the period of Tmrs campaigns in Iran (780s/1380s).
These articles mention that the Jalayirid dynasty took its name from a tribe
that had its origins near the Onon river in Mongolia, and was founded by
descendants of this tribe.94 John Masson Smith, Jr points out that Jalayirid
genealogies usually begin with lg (or lk) Noyan, a follower of Hleg
Khan, and proceed through his descendants q Bq and Amr usayn to
Shaykh asan, who was the founder of the dynasty.95 Little attention is paid
to other members of the Jalayir tribe who were prominent figures in the
Ilkhanate, and the factors that led to the rise of Shaykh asan. The impres-
sion may be, then, that Shaykh asan was the chief among the Jalayir tribe
in Iran and Anatolia, and was thus in a natural position to re-establish the
Jalayir tribe when the Ilkhanid political structure broke down. However,
this does not seem to have been the case, as will be shown in subsequent
chapters. In fact, there were several prominent Jalayir families within the
Ilkhanate during its first few decades. It was not Shaykh asans role as a
leader among his fellow tribesmen, but rather the position he held within
the dynastic hierarchy of the Ilkhanid state, that served as the source of his
influence and authority. It was thus not the tribe but theIlkhanate which
provided the social and political context in which Shaykh asan was able
to lay the foundation for an independent dynasty in the eighth/fourteenth
century. senbike Togan and Charles Melville have suggested that the end
of the Ilkhanate resulted in a return to tribalism as the primary political
17
The Jalayirids
medium after 736/1335.96 However, it is very difficult to establish the

form and degree to which the tribes reconstituted themselves in the eighth/
fourteenth century. It seems rather an educated assumption, rather than a
provable fact. What does seem clear is that, in the case of the Jalayir, tribal
history and identity did not form the basis for political ideology. Rather,
the political ideals of the Ilkhanate provided the basis for the legitimising
ideology of the Jalayirids.
Roemer has highlighted the fact that after the murder of aghy Tmr
Khan in 754/1353, only the Jalayirids could claim Mongol descent among
the various political factions vying for power after the Ilkhanate.97 In fact,
as Melville has noted, beginning with Shaykh asans son Shaykh Uvays,
the Jalayirids could claim descent from Hleg through both parents,
albeit through the maternal line on both sides.98 The details of the relations
between the Jalayirids and the Ilkhanid royal family, as well as their politi-
cal and ideological implications, will be discussed in subsequent chapters.
In general, the post-Ilkhanid period has been neglected. The lords of
the moment,99 such as the Jalayirids, Karts, Muzaffarids and Chubanids,
have largely been viewed as representatives of a chaotic interregnum
between the Mongol and Timurid periods. Part of the reason for this may
be the complexity of the political history. As one scholar put it, the years
following the first clash between the two Hasans [Jalyir and Chbn]
are among the most confusing in the history of the Il-Khanid empire.100
It is true that in the decades after 736/1335, several factions in regions
throughout the Ilkhanid realm arose, and sorting out the whos who of
this period does pose a challenge. However, passing over the period, or
dismissing it as irrelevant relative to the periods before and after, is to
ignore a major historical issue, which is the transition in political ideology
from that of the Ilkhanate to that which followed. In the Jalayirid dynasty,
the issues that shaped this transition are evident. This study aims to iden-
tify the place of the Jalayir tribe within the Ilkhanid political system, and
the ways in which the ideology that supported that system was appropri-
ated and adapted by the Jalayirid sultans.
A great deal of scholarship has focused on the works of art and
literature produced under the Jalayirids. Baghdad again became a centre
for artistic patronage,101 although not to the extent it had been in the past.
The Jalayirids acquired a reputation as patrons of Persian poetry, includ-
ing that of Salmn Svaj and Khvj Kirmn.102 Wheeler Thackston
has made available an English translation of one of the most important
sources for the life and career of Salmn Svaj, the Tazkirat al-Shuar
of Dawlatshh Samarqand (d. c. 900/1494). In his work dedicated to the
history and artistic legacy of the post-Ilkhan period in Iran and central
18
Asia, Thackston includes passages written by the ninth/fifteenth-century

biographer of poets Dawlatshh on the life of Salmn and his dealings
with members of the Jalayirid dynasty, including Shaykh asan, his wife
Dilshd Khtn, and their son Shaykh Uvays.103 Thackston also includes
passages from Dawlatshhs Tazkira dealing with poetry written by fi
to the Jalayirid Suln Amad, as well as Dawlatshhs treatment of Suln
Amad as a poet and artist in his own right.104
The Jalayirid court is perhaps most remembered for its patronage of min-
iature painting in Tabriz and Baghdad in the eighth/fourteenth century.105
Bernard OKane has recently suggested that the mysterious siyh-qalam
paintings, featuring distinctive depictions of demons, dervishes and scenes
of everyday life, have their origins in Jalayirid Tabriz, during the reign of
Shaykh Uvays (r. 757/1356776/1374).106 OKane argues that the influ-
ence of this style of painting can also be found in later Jalayirid period
artwork, pointing out that the pen and ink drawings found in the dvn
of Shaykh Uvayss son, Suln Amad (r. 784/1382813/1410), seem
to have been modelled on these siyh-qalam paintings.107 Art historians
have identified a Jalayirid style,108 and most agree that this style reached
its most developed stage under Suln Amad. This sultans own dvn,
or collection of poetry, is noteworthy for its marginal pen and ink illustra-
tions (in a style known as qalamsiyh), consisting not of miniature illu-
mination, but of decorative scenes not always connected with the poetic
text. The dvn and its place within the development of Jalayirid artistic
patronage and production have been examined extensively by Deborah E.
Klimburg-Salter. She argues that these illustrations fall within a period
of experimental transition which saw the movement of the graphic image
from the centre of the page to the margin.109 Klimburg-Salter also con-
tends that the prevalence of images of birds in the dvn represents a
conscious visual reference to the work of the Sufi poet Fard al-Dn Ar
(d.627/1230), the Conference of the Birds (Maniq al-ayr).110
Suln Amad was a connoisseur and active patron of painting. His
workshops in Baghdad were active until Tmrs attack on the city in 803
/1401, and produced several well-known works of art.111 Following the
death of Tmr in 807/1405, Suln Amad attempted to regain control
of Tabriz, and in the process continued to patronise painters in the city.
One of the works thought to have been produced in Tabriz in the period
between the death of Tmr and Suln Amads own death in 813/1410
was a version of Nims Khusraw va Shrn.112 After the fall of Tabriz
to the Qarquynl in 813/1410, artists who had worked in the Jalayirid
ateliers there tended to migrate to Shiraz, where they sought the patronage
of the Timurid prince Iskandar b. Umar Shaykh. Klimburg-Salter traces
19
The Jalayirids
the movement of the centre of artistic life in the late eighth/fourteenth

century from the Jalayirid capitals of Baghdad and Tabriz to the Timurid
cities of Shiraz and Herat, the latter being well-known as the home to a
cultural fluorescence under the patronage of Suln usayn Byqar in the
late ninth/fifteenth and early tenth/sixteenth centuries.113
Other works of visual art produced during the reign of Suln Amad
have been the subject of art historians. Stefano Carboni has described a
late eighth/fourteenth-century illustrated astrological treatise also attrib-
uted to the workshop of Suln Amad. This treatise features illustrations
of the mansions of the moon, lunar-planetary conjunctions, and a treatise
on the zodiac, a so-called Book of Nativities (Kitb al-Mawlid).114 A
more recent study has focused on illustrations contained in a book of
marvels copied for Suln Amad in 790/1388.115 In addition to painting,
Jalayirid calligraphy,116 filigree bookbinding117 and metalwork118 have
been the subject of art-historical studies.
Notes
1. H. R. Roemer, The Jalayirids, Muzaffarids and Sarbadrs, in Peter Jackson
and Laurence Lockhart (eds), The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 6:
The Timurid and Safavid Periods (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1986), 3.
2. Scholarship supplementing the study of the Secret History of the Mongols
includes: Lajos Bese, Some Turkic Personal Names in the Secret History
of the Mongols, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae
32:3 (1978): 35369; J. A. Boyle, Iru and Maru in the Secret History
of the Mongols, HJAS 17 (1954): 40310; Gari Ledyard, The Mongol
Campaigns in Korea and the Dating of the Secret History of the Mongols,
CAJ 9 (1964): 122; Hidehiro Okada, The Secret History of the Mongols,
a Pseudo-Historical Novel, Journal of Asian and African Studies [Tokyo]
5 (1972): 618; Nicholas Poppe, On Some Proper Names in the Secret
History, in G. Dcsy (ed.), Eurasia Nostratica: Festschrift fr Karl
Heinrich Menges, Band III (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1977), 1617;
N. P. Shastina, Mongol and Turkic Ethnonyms in the Secret History of the
Mongols, in Louis Ligeti (ed.), Researches in Altaic Languages (Budapest:
Akadmia Kiad, 1975), 23144.
3. Francis Woodman Cleaves (ed. and trans.), The Secret History of the
Mongols (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982); Urgunge
Onon (trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols: The Life and Times of
Chinggis Khan (Richmond: Curzon, 2001); Igor de Rachewiltz (trans.),
The Secret History of the Mongols: A Mongolian Epic Chronicle of the
Thirteenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 2004).
20
4. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:718 (no. 106). Scholarship on the life and

work of Rashd al-Dn includes: Reuven Amitai-Preiss, New Material
from the Mamluk Sources for the Biography of Rashid al-Din, in Julian
Raby and Teresa Fitzherbert (eds), The Court of the Il-khans, 12901340
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 2337; J. A. Boyle, Juvayn
and Rashd al-Dn as Sources on the History of the Mongols, in Bernard
Lewis and P. M. Holt (eds), Historians of the Middle East (London: Oxford
University Press, 1962), 1337; J. A. Boyle, Rashd al-Dn: The First
World Historian, Iran 9 (1971): 1926; Karl Jahn, Rashd al-Dn as World
Historian, in Ydnma-ye Jan Rypka (The Hague and Paris: Mouton & Co.,
1967), 7987; Karl Jahn, The Still Missing Works of Rashd al-Dn, CAJ 9
(1964): 11322; Zeki Velidi Togan, The Composition of the History of the
Mongols by Rashd al-Dn, CAJ 8 (1963): 6072.
5. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:26770 (no. 344); Russell G. Kempiners,
Jr, Vafs Tajziyat al-Amr wa Tazjiyat al-Ar as a Source for the
History of the Chaghadayid Khanate, Journal of Asian History 22 (1988):
16087. Vafs history can be considered a continuation of the Trkh-i
Jahngushy of the Khurasanian administrator A Malik Juvayn (d. 681
/1283). See Storey, 1:2606 (no. 340).
6. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:7980 (no. 109).
7. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:789 (no. 107); 1:267 (no. 342).
9. Charles Melville, amd Allh Mustawfs afarnmah and the
Historiography of the Late Ilkhanid Period, in Kambiz Eslami (ed.), Iran
and Iranian Studies: Essays in Honor of Iraj Afshar (Princeton: Zagros,
1998), 4.
10. Storey/Persian Literature, 2:12931 (no. 190). On a seventh/thirteenth-
century source for the Nuzhat al-Qulb, see Angelo Arioli, Su una Fonte
di Mustawf Qazvn, in La Bisaccia dello Sheikh: Omaggio ad Alessandro
Bausani, Islamista nel Sessantesimo Compleanno (Venice: Universit degli
Studi di Venezia, 1981), 2941.
12. Charles Melville, The Early Persian Historiography of Anatolia, in Judith
Pfeiffer and Sholeh A. Quinn (eds), in collaboration with Ernest Tucker,
History and Historiography of Post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle
East: Studies in Honor of John E. Woods (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006),
138.
14. Melville, The Early Persian Historiography of Anatolia, 140. Although
most of al-Avmir al-Aliyya was written in the late seventh/thirteenth
century, portions are taken from the Saljq-nma of Qaan. See A. C. S.
Peacock, The Saljq Campaign against the Crimea and the Expansionist
Policy of the Early Reign of Al al-Dn Kayqubd, JRAS 16:2 (2006):
135.
21
The Jalayirids
15. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:267 (no. 343); 1:410 (no. 580).

16. According to Charles Melville, 72.5 per cent of Musmarat al-Akhbr is
devoted to the history of the Mongols in Anatolia. See Melville, The Early
Persian Historiography of Anatolia, 146.
17. Melville, The Early Persian Historiography of Anatolia, 145.
18. Melville, The Early Persian Historiography of Anatolia, 145.
19. . Aka, Ahar, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London
and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983), 1:634; Storey/Persian
Literature, 1:243 (no. 321 [appendix no. 12]).
20. Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 182; (English translation), 81.
21. See Van Loons introduction to his translation of Trkh-i Shaykh Uvays, 5.
23. Denise Aigle, Mythico-Legendary Figures and History Between East and
West, in The Mongol Empire Between Myth and Realities (Leiden: Brill,
2014), 31.
24. Nr al-Dn Azhdar, Ghzn-nma-yi Manm, ed. Mamd Mudabbir
(Tehran: Bunyd-i Mawqft-i Duktur Mamd Afshr, 1380 [2001]),
13.
25. Azhdar, Ghzn-nma, 19. Denise Aigle has pointed out that Azhdar
wrote the Ghzn-nma as a continuation of Firdawss Shh-nma, which
served as a model for several historical works in the Ilkhanid and post-
Ilkhanid periods. See Aigle, Mythico- Legendary Figures and History
Between East and West, 2631.
26. On Shabnkra and his history, see Jean Aubin, Un chroniqueur mconnu:
abankarai, Studia Iranica 10 (1981): 21324; Denise Aigle, Le Frs
sous la domination mongole: Politique et fiscalit (XIIIeXIVe s.), Studia
Iranica, Cahier 31 (Paris: Association pour lAvancement des tudes
Iraniennes, 2005), 656; Storey/Persian Literature, 1:845 (no. 112).
27. Shabnkra commemorates Shaykh asans protg thus: On the 15th
of Dh al-ijja 736 [25 July 1336], the greatest sultan, king of kings of the
inhabited quarter, lord of the necks of the populace, shadow of God in both
worlds (suln al-aam, shhanshh-i rub-i maskn, mlik-i riqb al-
umam, ill allh f al-arayn) Muaffar al-Duny wa-al-Dn Muammad
may God exalt his dignitybecame established upon the throne of the
sultanate, may he rule until Judgement Day. See Shabnkra/Majma,
305.
29. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:2778.
30. On Tmrs attempt to reconstruct the Chinggisid imperial polity through
the installation of Chinggisid puppet khans in the Ilkhanate and the Golden
Horde, as well as a khan from the line of gdey, see Beatrice Forbes Manz,
Mongol History Rewritten and Relived, Revue des Mondes Musulmans et
de la Mditerrane, Srie Histoire 8990 (2000): 1389.
31. See raj Afshrs introduction to his edition of this work (Qazvn/ZTG),
22
512. Afshr characterises this work as one of the important contemporary

documents for events related to the Jalayirid and Chubanid lines between
the years 742/134142 and 794/1392 (although the last date mentioned in
the text is 12 Rab I 795/26 January 1393), particularly in Azarbayjan and
Arran (p. 5).
34. For a detailed discussion of the works and historiographical legacy of fi
Abr, see John E. Woods, The Rise of Timurid Historiography, JNES 46:2
(1987): 969. For an interpretation of fi Abrs conception of the state
and the function of the ruler, see A. K. S. Lambton, Early Timurid Theories
of State: fi Abr and Nim al-Dn m, Bulletin dtudes Orientales
30 (1978): 19.
35. fi Abrs dependence on Zayn al-Dn Qazvn has been pointed out by
Charles Melville in his article amd Allh Mustawfs afarnmah and the
Historiography of the Late Ilkhanid Period, 4. See also Woods, The Rise
of Timurid Historiography, 97.
36. fi Abr, Cinq opuscules de fi-i Abr concernant lhistoire de
lIran au temps de Tamerlan, ed. Felix Tauer (Prague: LAcadmie
Tchcoslovaque des sciences, 1959).
37. Edward Granville Browne, The Mujmal or Compendium of History and
Biography of Fa of Khwf, Le Muson ser. 3, 1:1 (1915): 50; Storey/
Persian Literature, 1:90 (no. 120).
38. Woods, The Rise of Timurid Historiography, 83; Storey /Persian
Literature, 1:2789 (no. 354).
39. This work, previously known as the Iskandar Anonymous, is mentioned
by Storey/Persian Literature, 1:86 (no. 115). See Woods, The Rise of
Timurid Historiography, 8993.
40. Woods, The Rise of Timurid Historiography, 8993. In addition to
Aubins 1957 edition, a new edition of Muntakhab al-Tavrkh-i Mun
was edited by Parvn Istakhr and published in Tehran in 2004.
41. Woods, The Rise of Timurid Historiography, 85; Storey /Persian
Literature, 1:2838 (no. 356).
44. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:1019 (no. 125). An English translation of
abb al-Siyar is available. See Khvndamr/Thackston.
46. smail Hakk Uzunarsl, Anadolu Beylikleri ve Akkoyunlu, Karakoyunlu
Devletleri (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1988), 162.
47. Faruk Smer, Kara Koyunlular (Baslangtan Cihan-Saha kadar), I. Cilt
(Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1962), 4554.
48. Uzunarsl, Anadolu Beylikleri ve Akkoyunlu, Karakoyunlu Devletleri,
15561.
23
The Jalayirids
49. Uzunarsl, Anadolu Beylikleri ve Akkoyunlu, Karakoyunlu Devletleri,

1628.
50. Yasar Ycel, Anadolu Beylikleri hakknda Arastrmalar: Eretna Devleti,
Kad Burhaneddin Ahmed ve Devleti, Mutahharten ve Erzincan Emirlii, II
51. Theodor Seif, Der Abschnitt ber die Osmanen in krllhs persischer
Universalgeschichte, Mitteilungen zur Osmanischen Geschichte 2 (1923
25): 63128. See Babinger/GdO, 1920 (no. 8); Storey/Persian Literature,
1:912 (no. 122).
52. H. Nihal Atsz, Hicri 858 Ylna Ait Takvim, Seluklu Arastrmalar
Dergisi 4 (1975): 22383; Osman Turan, stanbulun Fethinden nce
Yazlms Tarih Takvimler (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi,
1954).
53. armnl Nisnc Memed Ps, Tevr al-Saln al-Osmniyye
(Osmanl Sultanlar Tarihi), trans. Konyal brahim Hakk, in Osmanl
tarihleri: Osmanl tarihinin anakaynaklar olan eserlerin, mtehassslar
tarafndan hazrlanan metin, tercme veya sadelestirilmis sekilleri klliyat
(Istanbul: Trkiye Yaynevi, 1949), 32169. See Babinger/GdO, 246 (no.
11).
54. spszde, Tevr-i l-i Osmn, ed. l Bey (Istanbul: Mabaa-yi
mire, 1332 [191314]); spszde, skpasaolu Tarihi, ed. H. Nihal
Atsz (Istanbul: Milli Eitim Bakanl Yaynlar, 1992). See Babinger/
GdO, 358 (no. 21).
55. Halil Erdoan Cengiz and Yasar Ycel, Rh Trhi, in Belgeler. Trk
Tarih Belgeleri Dergisi, 14/18 (198992); Franz Babinger, R, trans.
Christine Woodhead, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill,
1994), 8:594. See Babinger/GdO, 423 (no. 25).
56. Memed Nesr, Kitb-i Cihan-nm: Nesr Tarihi, ed. Faik Resit Unat and
Mehmed A. Kymen (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1995). See
Babinger/GdO, 389 (no. 22).
57. Babinger/GdO, 613 (no. 42).
58. Babinger/GdO, 801 (no. 64).
59. Athough the Mamluk chronicles and biographical dictionaries have long
been mined for the rich detail they provide on the elite of Mamluk society,
other forms of literature have generally been ignored by historians. Thomas
Bauer has shown that poetry, maqmt, insh and other forms of literature,
while often neglected by scholars of the Mamluk period, in fact were read
widely and offer insight into aspects of Mamluk society and elite commu-
nication not available in the more strictly historical sources. See Thomas
Bauer, Mamluk Literature: Misunderstandings and New Approaches,
Mamlk Studies Review 9:2 (2005): 105132; Thomas Bauer, Mamluk
Literature as a Means of Communication, in Stephan Conermann (ed.), Ubi
sumus? Quo vademus? Mamluk Studies State of the Art (Gttingen: V&R
Unipress, Bonn University Press, 2013), 2356.
24
60. Brockelmann/GAL, 2:557.

61. Li Guo, Mamluk Historiographic Studies: The State of the Art, Mamlk
Studies Review 1 (1997): 29.
62. Donald P. Little, Historiography of the Ayybid and Mamlk Epochs,
in Carl F. Petry (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, Volume I: Islamic
Egypt, 6401517 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 423.
64. Das Mongolische Weltreich: Al-Umars Darstellung der mongolischen
Reiche in seinem Werk Maslik al-Abr f Mamlik al-Amr, ed. and
trans. Klaus Lech (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1968).
66. Little, Historiography of the Ayybid and Mamlk Epochs, 427.
68. Little,Historiography of the Ayybid and Mamlk Epochs, 431.
71. Brockelmann/GAL, 2:367; Babinger/GdO, 203 (no. 9).
72. On Ibn Arabshh, see John E. Woods, Ebn Arabh, Encyclopaedia
Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London and New York: Routledge and Kegan
Paul, 1996), 7:670; R. D. McChesney, A Note on the Life and Works of Ibn
Arabshh, in Judith Pfeiffer and Sholeh A. Quinn (eds), in collaboration
with Ernest Tucker, History and Historiography of Post-Mongol Central
Asia and the Middle East: Studies in Honor of John E. Woods (Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz, 2006), 20549.
74. Grigor of Akanc, History of the Nation of Archers, trans. Robert P. Blake
and Richard N. Frye, HJAS 12:3/4 (1949): 269399. An essential supple-
ment is Francis Woodman Cleaves, The Mongolian Names and Terms in
the History of the Nation of Archers by Grigor of Akanc, HJAS 12:3/4
(1949): 40043.
75. Kirakos Gandzaketsis, History of the Armenians, trans. Robert Bedrosian
(New York: Sources of the Armenian Tradition, 1986). J. A. Boyle has dealt
with Kirakoss accounts of the Armenians relations with the Mongols, in
Kirakos of Ganjak on the Mongols, CAJ 7 (1962): 199214, and The
Journey of Hetum I, King of Little Armenia, to the Court of the Great Khan
Mngke, CAJ 9 (1964): 17589.
76. Sven Drfer (ed.), Die Geschichte der Mongolen des Hethum von Korykos
(1307) in der Rckbersetzung durch Jean le Long, Traitiez des estas des
conditions de quatorze royaumes de Asie (1351) (Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Lang, 1998), 237. According to Sven Drfer, the editor of this work,
Hethum of Korykos, from Cilician Armenia, dictated his history as Flor des
estoires de la terre dorient, in French, in 1307 in Poitiers on the command
of Pope Clement V. The book was then translated into Latin by Nicolaus
Faulcon as Flos Historiarum Terre Orientis. It was retranslated into French
25
The Jalayirids
in 1351 by the monk Jean le Long dYpres, as Traitiez des estas et des con-
ditions de quatorze royaumes de Asie.
77. Avedis K. Sanjian (ed. and trans.), Colophons of Armenian Manuscripts,
13011480: A Source for Middle Eastern History (Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1969).
78. Tovma Metsobetsi, History of Tamerlane and His Successors, trans.
Robert Bedrosian (New York: Sources of the Armenian Tradition, 1987).
79. Vladimir Minorsky, Thomas of Metsop on the Timurid-Turkman Wars,
in The Turks, Iran and the Caucasus in the Middle Ages (London: Variorum
Reprints, 1978), XI, 126.
80. Bar Hebraeus, The Chronography of Gregory Abl Faraj, the Son of
Aaron, the Hebrew Physician Commonly Known as Bar Hebraeus Being
the First Part of his Political History of the World, trans. Ernest A. Wallis
Budge (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1932).
81. Abd Allh ibn Muammad ibn Kiy al-Mzandarn, Die Resl-ye
Falakiyy des Abdollh Ibn Moammad Ibn Kiy al-Mzandarn: Ein
persischer Leitfaden des staatlichen Rechnungswesens (um 1363), ed.
Walther Hinz (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1952).
82. Ferdn Amed Bey, Mecma-yi Mnset-i Seln (Istanbul: Dr al-iba
al-mira, 1848). See also Edward Granville Browne, A Literary History
of Persia, Volume 3: The Tartar Dominion (12651502) (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1956), 2046; Babinger/GdO, 1068 (no. 89).
83. Dawlatshh/Tazkira.
85. Gottfried Herrmann, Persische Urkunden der Mongolenzeit (Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz Verlag, 2004); Gottfried Herrmann and Gerhard Doerfer, Ein
persisch-mongolischer Erla des alyeriden ey Oveys, CAJ 19 (1975):
184; Gottfried Herrmann, Ein Erla des alyeriden Soln oseyn aus
dem Jahr 780/1378, in Erkenntnisse und Meinungen I herausgegeben von
Gernot Wiener (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1973), 13563.
86. Ibn Baa, Rilat Ibn Baa: al-Musamm Tufat al-Nur f Gharib
al-Amr wa-Ajib al-Asfr (Mir: al-Maktaba al-Tijriyya al-Kubr,
1964); Ibn Baa, The Travels of Ibn Baa, a.d. 13251354, trans.
H.A.R. Gibb (Cambridge: Hakluyt Society at the University Press, 1971).
See Brockelmann/GAL, 2:3323.
87. Johannes Schiltberger, The Bondage and Travels of Johann Schiltberger: A
Native of Bavaria, in Europe, Asia, and Africa, 13961427, ed. P. Bruun,
trans. J. Buchan Telfer (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970; reprinted from
London: Hakluyt Society, 1879).
88. Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo, Embassy to Tamerlane, 14031406, trans. Guy
Le Strange (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1928).
89. Nr Abd al-amd n, Al-Irq f al-Ahd al-Jalir: 738814 h/1337
1411 M: Dirsa f Awihi al-Idriyya wa-al-Iqtidiyya (Baghdad: Dr
al-Shun al-Thaqfiyya al-mma, 1986).
26
90. Shabn Rab urr, Al-Dawla al-Jaliriyya (Cairo: Dr al-Hidya,

1987).
91. Yumn Riwn, Al-Dawla al-Jaliriyya: wa-Ahamm Mahir al-ara
f al-Irq wa-Adhirbayjn khilla al-Qarnayn al-Thmin wa-al-Tsi
bada al-Hijra (Cairo: Mabi al-Ahrm, 1993).
92. John Masson Smith, Jr, Djalayir, Djalayirid, Encyclopaedia of Islam,
2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1962), 2:4012; Mkrimin Halil Ynan, Celyir,
slam Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Mill Eitim Basmevi, 1945), 3:645;
Muzaffer rekli, Celyirliler, Trkiye Diyanet Vakf slm Ansiklopedisi
(Istanbul: Trkiye Diyanet Vakf Vakf Yaynlar sletmesi, 1993), 7:2645.
93. Roemer, The Jalayirids, Muzaffarids and Sarbadrs, 141.
94. Smith, Jr, Djalayir, Djalayirid, 401; Ynan, Celyir, 64; rekli,
Celyirliler, 264; Roemer, The Jalayirids, Muzaffarids and Sarbadrs, 5.
95. Smith, Jr, Djalayir, Djalayirid, 401.
96. senbike Togan, Flexibility and Limitation in Steppe Formations (Leiden:
Brill, 1998), 1213; Charles Melville, The Fall of Amir Chupan and
the Decline of the Ilkhanate, 13271337: A Decade of Discord in Iran
(Bloomington: Indiana University, Research Institute for Inner Asian
Studies, 1999), 72.
98. Charles Melville, Ab Sad and the Revolt of the Amirs in 1319, in
Denise Aigle (ed.), LIran face la domination mongole (Tehran: Institut
Franais de Recherche en Iran, 1997), 116.
99. This characterisation was made by Ren Grousset in his The Empire of the
Steppes: A History of Central Asia, trans. Naomi Walford (New Brunswick,
NJ, and London: Rutgers University Press, 1999), 391.
100. Luc Kwanten, Imperial Nomads: A History of Central Asia, 5001500
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979), 245.
101. rekli, Celyirliler, 264.
103. Wheeler M. Thackston, A Century of Princes: Sources on Timurid History
and Art (Cambridge, MA: The Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture,
1989), 1112.
104. Thackston, A Century of Princes, 1214.
106. Bernard OKane, Siyah Qalam: The Jalayirid Connections, Oriental Art
49:2 (2003): 2.
107. OKane, Siyah Qalam, 3.
108. Stefano Carboni, Synthesis: Continuity and Innovation in Ilkhanid Art,
in The Legacy of Genghis Khan: Courtly Art and Culture in Western Asia,
12561353 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2002), 223;
Priscilla P. Soucek, Art in Iran: vii. Islamic, Pre-Safavid, Encyclopaedia
Paul, 1987), 2:611.
27
The Jalayirids
109. Deborah E. Klimburg-Salter, A Sufi Theme in Persian Painting: The

Diwan of Sultan Ahmad Galair in the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington,
D.C., Kunst des Orients 11 (197677): 57.
110. Klimburg-Salter, A Sufi Theme in Persian Painting, 65.
111. Works produced at Baghdad under Suln Amad Jalayir include Ajib al-
Makhlqt (1388), Kalla wa Dimna (1392), the dvn of Khvj Kirmn
(1396), and Kitb al-Buldan (1399). See Klimburg-Salter, A Sufi Theme in
Persian Painting, 703.
114. Stefano Carboni, Two Fragments of a Jalayirid Astrological Treatise in
the Keir Collection and in the Oriental Institute in Sarajevo, Islamic Art 2
(1987): 14950.
115. Anna Caiozzo, Une conception originale des cieux: planets et zodiaque
dune cosmographie jalayride, Annales Islamologiques 37 (2003): 5978.
Caiozzo examines a copy of the work Ajib al-Makhlqt wa-Gharib
al-Mawjdt by a certain s Salmn, consisting of an illustrated cos-
mography, inspired by a seventh/thirteenth-century ajib work. Caiozzo
argues that Salmns illustrations are unlike the illustrations in earlier
versions.
116. Soucek, Art in Iran: vii. Islamic, Pre-Safavid, 611.
117. Alison Ohta, Filigree Bindings of the Mamluk Period, Muqarnas 21
(2004): 26776.
118. Y. A. Godard, Bassin de cuivre au nom de Shaikh Uwais, Athr- rn:
Annales du service archaeologique de rn 1 (1936): 3713.
28
2
Tribes and the Chinggisid Empire
The Jalayirid dynasty takes its name from Jalayir, the name of a Mongolian
tribe from which it was descended. In order to understand the historical
factors that led to members of the Jalayir establishing an Islamic sultanate
in Iran and Iraq in the fourteenth century, we need first to examine some
aspects of tribal society in inner Asia. Foremost, we need to address the
question, what do we mean when we talk about tribes? This chapter
provides an overview of scholarship on inner Asian tribes, particularly
those in Mongolia on the eve of the empire of Chinggis Qan. In addition,
the impact of the Chinggisid empire on the tribes, and particularly on the
Jalayir, is explored. The foundation of the empire resulted in a Jalayir
diaspora, as members of this group were redistributed across Eurasia in
accordance with new imperial political and social institutions.
Tribe and State Formation under the Mongols

Mongol society was tribally organised. That is, society was divided among
several identity groups that are mentioned in sources like the Secret
History of the Mongols and that have been characterised as tribes or clans
by modern scholars. The literature on tribes in the fields of anthropology
and history is vast, and the precise definition of tribe is the subject of an
ongoing scholarly debate. While it is impractical to try to sort out all of
the various arguments of the literature about tribes since the nineteenth
century, we need to address some key issues in order to deal with the
specific case of the Jalayir tribe and the history of this group from the
thirteenth to the fifteenth century. These issues include clarifying some of
the major interpretations of the characteristics, functions and ideology of
inner Asian tribes.
One of the most salient characteristics of tribes in inner Asia and
elsewhere is that they are conceived of by their members as describing
kinship relations. That is, tribes are groups defined by real or imagined
blood relationships, in the same way that craft guilds are defined by
29
The Jalayirids
ones profession, or citizenship is defined by ones national home-

land. The fact that the ties of kinship within a tribe are not necessarily
genetic has been understood by scholars of tribal societies for some
time. Anthropologists have described tribes as ideal types that are
essentially imagined or constructed, and represent a state of mind
and model for organisation and action.1 In general, while acknowledg-
ing the constructed or imagined nature of tribal identity, most scholars
have maintained that the idea of kinship was central to tribal identity.
An exception to this notion is the recent work of David Sneath on inner
Asian states, which emphasises the importance of recognising groups,
such as the Jalayir and other Mongol tribes, not in terms of kinship at
all, but as aristocratic orders, in which elite families ruled over sub-
jects who were not thought to be related.2 In his book The Headless
State, Sneath traces the history of western scholarship on tribal societies
of inner Asia to demonstrate that the category of kin-based tribe was
conceived as a preliminary stage in the natural development of human
societies, for which the European nation state was the ultimate outcome.
This scholarly baggage has continued and has, according to Sneath, led
to apparent paradoxes when tribal steppe societies formed large imperial
states on the steppe. However, if we conceive of groups like the Jalayir,
Sulduz and Merkit not as large family groups but as a ruling nobility and
its subject population, such imperial states seem less mysterious. While
there do seem to be some problems with Sneaths interpretation,3 his
suggestion that the names of the Mongol tribes, found in sources like the
Secret History of the Mongols, described individuals identities within
a complex political hierarchy is useful when we begin to examine the
history of the Jalayir tribe, and particularly the ancestors of the Jalayirid
sultans of the fourteenth century.
It would, however, be a mistake to completely discount kinship as a
significant feature of tribal society. Even though tribal elites may not have
thought of themselves as related by blood to their subjects, as Peter Golden
has pointed out, kinship terminology provided at least the vocabulary of
tribal society.4 Crucial to maintaining tribal relationships was genealogy,
which affirmed and legitimised kinship. Every Mongol kinship group had
a male ancestor as a focal point of veneration.5 Genealogies, while defin-
ing the limits of a tribe through reference to common ancestors, were not
static or absolute. Rather, they provided the ideological means for many
groups of nomads to smoothly incorporate and adopt outside groups into
their own ranks, without making any essential structural changes.6 Tribal
genealogy thus was not fixed and closed, but rather frequently amended.
Such amendments were reflections of changes in economic and political
30
circumstances that necessitated the fusion of multiple tribal groups.7 It is

in this sense that tribes, including the Mongolian tribes such as the Jalayir,
must be considered political groups, whose shared memory of kinship
affiliation was the result of specific historical circumstances.
Another characteristic of inner Asian tribes, in addition to the central-
ity of an ideology of kinship legitimised by genealogy, was the flexibility
of tribal structures. In terms of organisation, tribes were characterised by
an openness and fluidity that allowed for the incorporation of outside kin
groups and clients, as well as for the segmentation and division of the
tribe. Eurasian nomadic tribes were open to all who were willing to sub-
ordinate themselves to its chief and who shared common interests with its
tribesmen.8
These characteristics of kin-based ideology and fluidity of organisation
served certain economic and political functions. Economically, the nature
of the nomadic economy, based on movable and divisible animal stock,
lent itself to the mobility and segmentary nature of tribal social organisa-
tion.9 Politically, flexible tribal structures allowed for protection of groups
threatened by other tribes, or by sedentary polities. In fact, the economic
and the political functions of tribal organisation were closely related, and
could contribute to the formation of what are often referred to as supra-
tribal states, or steppe empires. A common interpretation of the formation
of supra-tribal empires like the Xiongnu, Trk and Uyghur confederations
included the challenges posed by confrontation with sedentary, agrar-
ian states to the south of the steppe. The need for protection in the face
of the outside world (to borrow a phrase from Anatoly Khazanov) was
motivation and cause for tribes to enter into more complex, hierarchical
organisations. Such formations were extensions of the pattern of social
protection that were afforded by all tribes. Tribal formations presupposed
the existence of another society, which was threatening in some way.10 The
formation of larger, supra-tribal confederations proved to be an effective
way to defend against other large states, as well as to extract wealth from
agrarian societies.11 In an alternative interpretation, Nicola Di Cosmo has
challenged the idea that supra-tribal empires emerge only as the result
of encounters with sedentary neighbours. Di Cosmo has argued that the
instability and relative poverty of the inner Asian steppe economy led to
chronic low-level violence and social upheaval on the steppe.12 The crisis
of this upheaval led to increased militarisation and the formation of new
political organisations, based around allegiance to a supra-tribal leader.13
In general, most interpretations of inner Asian tribal and supra-tribal
organisation recognise tribes as socio-political units, maintained by an
ideology of common family ancestry, functioning to allow nomadic
31
The Jalayirids
populations to best take advantage of the pastoral economy and defend

themselves against common enemies. The flexibility and open nature of
tribes allowed for the incorporation of outside groups, which could be
legitimised through the construction of genealogies. Thus, it seems most
useful to think of tribes not as static, rigid and egalitarian extended fami-
lies, but rather as political units that defined relationships of social power
among nomads, and provided the framework for allegiance to a ruling elite
that legitimised its authority by appeals to a common history and kinship.
The Tribes of Mongolia on the Eve of the Empire of

ChinggisQan
There is little historical record of the tribes that became part of the
Chinggisid Mongol empire before the twelfth century. The Mongols used a
number of words to describe social and political categories. These include
irgen (people),14 yasun (bone),15 oboq/obogh (clan-lineage)16 and aymagh
(tribe).17 It is difficult to provide precise definitions for these categories,
and to apply more theoretical categories to groups mentioned in historical
sources, such as the Secret History of the Mongols. Scholars have disa-
greed about the political and social organisation of Mongol tribes such as
the Jalayir. One of the major disagreements in historical discourse on
Mongol tribes is over the degree of social stratification or egalitarianism
among members of the tribes. One view is that before Chinggis Qan, the
Mongolian socio-political structure was quite simple, with few aristocratic
and feudal features.18 In other words, the tribes, while having individual
political leadership, were generally equal and independent of one another.
Another view emphasises the divisions within society, which gave rise to
elite ruling lineages to which the other tribes were subordinate.19
A more nuanced approach is that of senbike Togan, who has identi-
fied two types of tribes in the pre-Chinggis Qan period. In one group were
those that had multiple chiefs and favoured decentralisation and sharing
of political power, including the Qongqirat, Ikeres and Mangqut. Another
group displayed some political and administrative centralisation and
hereditary leaders (khns), including the Kereyit and Nayman.20 Togans
work on the Mongolian tribes indicates that there was variation in the
degree of social and political hierarchy among different groups, and that
this variation helps to explain the success that Chinggis Qan achieved in
bringing together various tribes under his leadership.
The tribal order of Mongolia underwent a dramatic change in the
late twelfth century as the core of a supra-tribal empire began to form
around Temjin, later known as Chinggis Qan. Political power came to be
32
concentrated in Temjins hands, while other elite families either trans-

ferred their allegiance to him, voluntarily or by force, or were destroyed
completely. The causes of this strengthening of central political authority
have been attributed to both ecological/economic and political reasons.
One theory is that amidst heightened competition between the nomadic
and sedentary societies on the edge of the steppe in the late sixth/twelfth
century, smaller nomad groups responded by reorganising into larger
groups with definite political leaderships.21 The polity formed by Chinggis
Qan can be viewed as part of these developments. Togan has argued that
it was the larger, centralised tribes, such as the Kereyit and Nayman, that
began to threaten the smaller, decentralised groups in the sixth/twelfth
century. It was in this context that Chinggis Qan was able to emerge as an
alternative source of political leadership.22
It is likely that a combination of factors made it appealing for smaller
tribes to pledge allegiance to Temjins leadership early on. Temjins
first followers were individuals, who swore allegiance to him as nkers, or
personal followers.23 After he had attracted a significant number of nkers,
Temjins successes in battle and raids contributed to a bandwagon effect,
making it more appealing for the Mongol nomads, individually, and
increasingly as larger groups, to join Temjin and submit to his authority.
In 602/1206, Temjin was confirmed as supreme leader of all the Mongol
tribes, as Chinggis Qan, or universal ruler.24
What was the impact of Temjins consolidation of power on tribes
like the Jalayir? The major consequence was that it altered the contours
of the political hierarchy. Chinggis Qan and his relatives, rather than any
other powerful families, could impose his political will because of the
military support he could command. From the point of view of Chinggis
Qans subjects, ones social status became tied to ones proximity to the
household of Chinggis Qan himself. The most important institution for
achieving a status of privilege and authority was Chinggis Qans house-
hold bodyguard, the keshig.
The keshig was composed of units of day guards, night guards and
quiver-bearers (qorchis), who were the only individuals allowed to carry
their bows in the qans presence.25 As Thomas Allsen has shown, the
keshig developed out of the qans household, and became the main pool
for recruiting personnel for the imperial administration.26 The keshig was
a springboard to power and influence for the qans tribal subjects. Many
powerful Mongol commanders (noyans), including those of the Jalayir,
began their careers in the keshig, either of Chinggis Qan or members of
his family.
Another important development within Mongolian society during
33
The Jalayirids
Chinggis Qans time was the establishment of new, decimally organised

military units. Chinggis Qan organised his subjects into units of ten thou-
sand, one thousand, one hundred and ten. At the head of the larger units
were commanders appointed by Chinggis Qan himself, and not traditional
tribal leaders.27 Decimal military organisation was not new. Earlier steppe
empires going back to the Xiongnu had used it as well.28 However, unlike
earlier imperial elites, Chinggis Qan chose to ignore his own tribe, the
Qiyat, and instead rely on his trusted personal retinue.29 Instead of defer-
ring to the elite in his own tribe, Chinggis Qan channelled political author-
ity through himself and his sons.
The promotion of individuals from all different tribal backgrounds
ensured that ones tribal identity no longer provided the primary principle
for political action.30 Decimal unit commanders could bypass the chan-
nels of tribal authority, and instead act solely in the service of Chinggis
Qan and his personal retinue. The effect of this development was the
establishment of the person of Chinggis Qan and, after him, his direct
descendants as the sole source of commonly recognised political author-
ity in the generations to come. In this way, Chinggis Qan addressed the
challenge that had traditionally faced supra-tribal leaders: the tension
between the ruler and the tribal chiefs.31 In the newly founded Chinggisid
empire, the institutions of the nkers, the keshig and the decimal military
units ensured that loyalty to Chinggis Qan and his descendants was the
path to power and prestige.
In addition to bringing tribal subjects more closely under his control,
Chinggis Qan also sought to eliminate alternative centres of power. Tribes
like the Kereyit, Nayman and Merkit, which had strong dynastic ruling
hierarchies, were dismantled in a way that less politically stratified tribes
like the Qongqirat, Sulduz and Jalayir were not.32 However, a question
that this study will attempt to address is the degree of continuity in tribal
identity among the Jalayir as a result of the reorganisation of society and
political culture during Chinggis Qans time. senbike Togan has argued
that in the seventh/thirteenth century, as the Mongol army of conquest
came to identify with the interests of the empire, tribalism, the once
dynamic social element, was pushed to the background as a reserve iden-
tity.33 However, in the eighth/fourteenth century, a retribalisation took
place, as kinship re-emerged as a political factor.34 While it is true that
tribal loyalties are observable within the Chinggisid dynastic state in the
seventh/thirteenth and eighth/fourteenth centuries, it is important also to
recognise the ways in which tribes like the Jalayir had been fundamentally
changed. Individuals maintained their tribal identities, but came to act
within a different set of social and political parameters. These parameters
34
were determined by the historic processes that shaped the Mongol empire
and its successor states. For the descendants of the Jalayir tribe that
founded a dynasty in Iraq and Azarbayjan in the eighth/fourteenth century,
the tribe was replaced by the Chinggisid dynastic state as the source of
political ideology and the context in which political action was taken.
Background to Mongol Expansion into the Islamic World

By the early 610s /mid-1210s, the Mongolian tribes were fully under
Chinggis Qans control, and the nature of his military and political project
changed. Having absorbed the peoples of the Mongolian steppe into a
united military structure, Chinggis Qan could now project these forces
more fully into the sedentary regions to the southeast and southwest. For
the nomadic tribal peoples of the steppe, going back as far as the Xiongnu
confederation in the second century bce, the sedentary, agrarian societies of
China, Transoxiana and Persia had represented sources of material wealth
which could be acquired through raids and larger-scale military operations.
Although exchange always flowed between the agrarian and nomadic eco-
logical zones, a successful nomadic chief could become extremely power-
ful by forcing the terms of this exchange through the threat of violence.
However, raiding was not the only or even alwaysthemost efficient means
of exploiting the sedentary economy. Control of the Eurasian trade routes,
especially the so-called silk road, the transcontinental network of markets,
depots and middlemen that connected China and the Mediterranean, had
long been the goal of steppe leaders. It is likely that Chinggis Qan also
planned his expansion strategy with this in mind.35
Clearly, the spark that ignited the Mongol invasion of the Islamic world
was related to economic issues. When members of a Mongol trade caravan
were killed by the Khwarazmian governor at Utrar in 615/1218, Chinggis
Qan launched an attack on the empire of the Khwrazmshh, the largest
and most powerful state in the eastern Islamic world. This initial cam-
paign, which lasted until 620/1223, began the process of the establishment
of Mongol political influence in the region roughly from the Jaxartes (Syr
Darya) river in the east to the Euphrates river in the west. The administra-
tive structure consisted mainly of imperial officials known as basqqs or
drghachs, backed by troop garrisons.36 These officials were representa-
tives of the great qan (Chinggis Qan until 624/1227; gdey Qaan until
639/1241, and so on), in the citied regions of Eurasia. Transoxiana and
Khurasan were represented by these imperial officials, while in western
Iran, in the regions of Azarbayjan, Mughan and Arran, a less organised
military governorship took hold. By the 660s/1260s, these regions had
35
The Jalayirids
become independent political entities in the form of personal appanages

of Chinggisid princely families. However, in the initial phases of Mongol
conquest in the 620s/1220s, an attempt was made to bring these areas, with
their urban commercial centres, under the control of a centralised imperial
administration.
The spread of Mongol soldiers and their families into regions of China,
Transoxiana and Iran meant an increase in the territorial and material
wealth for Chinggis Qans family as well as for the soldiers themselves.
Chinggis Qan, his siblings, children and other close relatives embodied
sovereignty for the new Mongol imperial enterprise. They were known as
the altn urgh, or golden family, and it would be through the lineage
of Chinggis Qans sons that legitimate political authority would inhere,
even after de facto Chinggisid power had collapsed. The acquisition of
geographic, material and human resources as a result of the early Mongol
conquests was considered an addition to Chinggis Qans personal house-
hold wealth, which would be distributed as inheritance to members of the
altn urgh after his death.
People, as well as territories, were divided primarily among Chinggis
Qans four principal sons (that is, those sons born to Chinggis Qans wife
Brte), and constituted their personal uls. The concept of uls was related
to the household retinue, but constituted an expanded version that also
included specific territory, as well as the people who resided in the towns
and countryside there. The hereditary territory of this primary dispensa-
tion consisted mainly of the steppe lands extending from the Mongols
original pastures in eastern Mongolia to as far west as could be conquered.
Chinggis Qans sons received their share based on their ages. Thus, the
youngest son, Tolui, inherited the Mongol homeland, while the older sons
inherited territories further to the west.37 Each son also received an alloca-
tion of troops. This aspect will be addressed in greater detail below, with
special attention paid to the distribution of Jalayir individuals among the
various princely appanages.
The sedentary, agricultural zone south of the steppe was, for the most
part, not included as personal inheritance for the princes, but instead
remained under the control of the great qans representatives as part of the
central administration. Conflict between two different spheres of authority
that of the princely appanages and that of the central administration
resulted in civil war by the middle of the seventh/thirteenth century. The
basic cause of the conflict was rooted in the concept of political legitimacy
prevalent among tribal-nomadic societies: the notion that sovereignty
resided in the extended family of a leader. Ideally, succession was deter-
mined not by a strict pattern of lineal descent, but by the merits displayed
36
by any member of that family by successfully keeping his predecessors

followers through military and economic success.
Chinggis Qan chose as his successor his third son, gdey. When
gdey died in 639/1241, sovereignty did not pass automatically to his
son Gyk, but was held temporarily by gdeys wife Tregene. It was
not until an assembly (quriltay) could be held and the prominent members
of the royal family agreed on the succession that Gyk was enthroned in
644/1246. When he died less than two years later, a challenge was made to
gdeyid control of the great qanate and the central administration of the
empire by an alliance of representatives of two other princely lines: those
of Chinggis Qans sons Jochi and Tolui. The Jochids were led by Batu
Khan, Jochis son and heir to his familys uls on the western steppe. The
Toluids were led by Toluis widow Sorqaqtani Beki, and her eldest son
Mngke. The Jochid-Toluid alliance resisted continued gdeyid control
of the empire, and by 649/1251 had succeeded in all but destroying the
gdeyid family and weakening their allies, the family of Chinggis Qans
second son Chaghatay. Mngke became great qan, and power within the
empire was shared in practice by Mngke in the east and Batu in the west.
It was during Mngkes reign (648/1251657/1259) that the ground-
work was laid for a fundamental change in the structure of political
authority in the sedentary agrarian zone. The citied regions of Chinese and
I Chinggis Qan
Jochi Chaghatay II gedey=Tregene Tolui=Sorqaqtani Beki
Chaghatayid Khans III Gyk
Jochid Khans
IV Mngke V Qubilay Hleg Arigh Bke
Yan Emperors Ilkhans
Roman numerals indicate succession to the great qanate

Figure 2.1 The altn urgh: Chinggis Qan and his descendants.
37
The Jalayirids
Perso-Islamic civilisation, which until that time had been administered

by imperial representatives who reported to the great qan in Qaraqorum,
were assigned as hereditary appanages by Mngke Qaan to his brothers
in a secondary dispensation of political authority. It was secondary in the
sense that these regions had not been included in Chinggis Qans original
disbursement of princely ulses, but were assigned later as part of a divi-
sion of Toluid family holdings. Mngke sent his brother Qubilay to China
and another brother Hleg to Iran in an attempt to extend Toluid power
into the sedentary agrarian zone and virtually surround the descendants
of Chaghatay who ruled Transoxiana and Semirechye.38 The purpose was
to consolidate the power of the empire of the Toluids as a family, that is,
Sorqaqtani Beki and her sons, but also to remove China and Iran from
the central administration, and put them on par with other princely appa-
nages. That is, China and Iran became the commonwealth of two separate
branches of the Chinggisid royal family in the Toluid line, and eventually
came to constitute separate and independent polities. China became the
uls of the descendants of Qubilay, and, due to Qubilays succession as
great qan, also the seat of the empire as a whole. Iran or, more precisely,
the region between the Oxus and the Euphrates became the uls of the
descendants of Hleg, also known as the Ilkhanate.
The term lkhn was a title first used to refer to Mngke Qaans brother
Hleg following his conquest of the Abbasid caliphate and establishment
of a political administration in the territory between the Oxus and the
I Hleg (r.656/1258663/1265)
II Abaqa (r. 663/1265680/1282) Taraqay III A mad Tegder (r. 680/1282683/1284)
VI Baydu (r. 694/1295)
IV Arghun (r. 683/1284690/1291) V Geykhatu (r. 690/1291694/1295)
VII Ghazan (r. 694/1295703/1304) VIII ljeyt (r. 703/1304716/1316)
IX Ab Sa d (r. 717/1317736/1335)
Figure 2.2 Ilkhan rulers.
38
Euphrates. Several theories have been offered as to the precise meaning

of this title. Definitions have included tribal ruler, royal ruler and even
ruler of the Ili (the river that flows into Lake Balkhash).39 The gener-
ally accepted meaning is something like peaceful, subordinate or obedi-
ent ruler, reflecting a subservient position in relation to the great qan.40
The polity, or uls, established by Hleg was a branch of the Toluid-
controlled Mongol empire, which had its capital in China. However,
this title seems to have been given to Hleg after he had established
himself in Iran, and not at the time of his dispatch by Mngke.41 The title
lkhn first appeared on the coins minted by Hleg in Iran in the year
658/125960,42 and the Mongol court in China continued to bestow titles
on Ilkhan rulers until the end of Qubilays reign (693/1294). Hleg was
formally invested by the Chinese court in 660/1262, when envoys arrived
to recognise him as the ruler of the lands west of the Oxus river to the
furthest reaches of Egypt and Syria.43 Increasingly after Mngkes death,
Hleg and his successors attempted to convert their status from that of a
representative of the great qan to the head of an independent uls. During
the reign of his brother Qubilay as great qan, the formal bestowal of titles
served to confirm and legitimise Hlegs independence, particularly
vis--vis the Jochid khans to the north, who claimed Azarbayjan as their
own.44
The establishment of the Ilkhan uls had several effects on the history
of the region, including an initial antagonism and exploitative attitude
among the Mongol elite toward the agrarian population,45 a new wave of
Mongol and Turkic-speaking people into Iran, and a shift in overland trade
patterns after the conquest of Baghdad and establishment of a new urban
capital at Tabriz.46 The effect of the establishment of the Ilkhanate on
Mongol tribal society, and the Jalayir tribe in particular, will be addressed
in Chapter 3.
The Jalayir Diaspora

Having outlined the dynastic history of the Chinggisids, including the
division of the empire and the civil war that followed, we proceed now
to explore the impact of these events on the Jalayir tribe in this period.
Although the experience of the Jalayir was not identical to that of other
tribes, we can identify a general trend that seems to hold for other tribes
as well. That is, Jalayir individuals and their families were scattered
across Eurasia as part of the military campaigns and imperial adminis-
trative apparatus under Chinggis Qan and his descendants. The Jalayir
tribe, while continuing as a family identity, did not remain a coherent
39
The Jalayirids
political category after this process began. Jalayir individuals did not act
within the bounds of a Jalayir political organisation, but rather within the
framework of the ulses ruled by members of the Chinggisid family. We
can speak, then, of a Jalayir diaspora, in which individuals were sent to
various corners of the empire, under the command of different Chinggisid
princes.
Here we will discuss some prominent Jalayir amirs and officials who
are mentioned in historical sources particularly Rashd al-Dns Jmi al-
Tavrkh who served Chinggisids in China, Transoxiana and the steppe.
The Jalayir who served in the Ilkhanate in Iran will be discussed separately
in Chapter 3. As will be shown, the Chinggisid empire transformed the
social and political relationships of the Jalayir, ensuring that loyalties and
interests would come to rest not necessarily with fellow Jalayir tribesmen,
but with the Chinggisid royal family.
Perhaps the most prominent Jalayir individual of the early period of the
Mongol empire was Muql, who became the supreme commander and
virtual ruler of northern China by the time of his death in 1223. Muql had
been given to Chinggis Qan as a personal servant by his father, and served
in the Mongol campaigns to break the power of the steppe confederations
of the Tatar, Kereyit and Nayman in the early 1200s.47 At the quriltay
of 1206, Muql was named tmen commander, that is, commander of
10,000.48 Muql served in the Mongol campaigns in China in the 1210s,
and in 1217 Chinggis Qan named him commander-in-chief of all of north-
ern China, and granted him the hereditary titles of grand preceptor (taishi)
and prince-of-state (gi-ong).49 In Persian sources, he was known as
Muql Guyang, derived from this Chinese title. In his tmen unit, Muql
commanded two hazras (units of 1,000) of Jalayir troops, as well as
Onggut, Qushiqul, Uruut and others. He was also assigned units of Khitan
and Jrchen auxiliaries (chark).50 Muqls son, Bool, succeeded him in
his role of gi-ong in northern China.51
In addition to Muql, other Jalayir individuals are mentioned in the
Secret History of the Mongols as allies of Temjin early on. These include
Seche Domoq and his sons Harqay and Bala. Following the Mongol
invasion of Khwarazm in the early 1220s, Bala was sent in pursuit of the
fleeing Khwrazmshh Jall al-Dn.52 Rashd al-Dn also mentions that
their relatives included a certain Ughn, a hazra commander posted to
Kirman in Iran.53 These were some of the first Jalayir tribesmen who came
to the Muslim lands west of the Jaxartes river.
Members of the Jalayir and other tribes were also assigned to the
service of the various sons and grandsons of Chinggis Qan. Both territory
and personnel were distributed to these princes as part of their share in
40
the empire. One of the most important of the princely households during
the early period of the Mongol empire was that of Chinggis Qans third
son and heir to the imperial throne, gdey. The sons of one of Chinggis
Qans Jalayir attendants named Qadan passed into gdeys service as
part of his inheritance. One of these sons, lg, had been gdeys tutor
(atabeg) during his childhood, and also commanded one of gdeys
personal hazra units.54 lgs son, Dnishmand, is also mentioned as the
envoy of Qaydu to the court of the Ilkhan Abaqa (r. 663/1265680/1282).
Qaydu was an gdeyid who held the dominant power in the central
Asian Chaghatayid uls during the last third of the seventh/thirteenth
century.55 This seems to indicate that Dnishmand continued to serve the
gdeyids after the accession of Mngke Qaan in 649/1251 and the sub-
sequent purge of many gdeyid princes.
lgs brother, lchdy, also served gdey and his family, and
was mentioned by Rashd al-Dn in his account of the civil war between
the gdeyids and the Toluids after 1248. lchdy objected to Mngke
Qaans accession to the imperial throne by saying:
You all decided and said that as long as there remains a piece of flesh from the
children of gdey Qaan, [even] if he is wrapped in grass a cow would not eat
that grass, and if he is wrapped in fat a dog would not eat that fat, we would
accept him as qan, and another would not sit on the throne. How is it that you
do otherwise?56
The lines in italics are spoken by gdey in the Secret History of the
Mongols, during Chinggis Qans consultation with his sons about who
should succeed him.57 Although one might assume that the appearance of
this text in Rashd al-Dns history is evidence that he had access to the
Secret History, Thomas Allsen has shown that this was not necessarily the
case.58 Rashd al-Dn worked from a collection of chronicles and other
historical documents, known as the Altan Debter, or Golden Register,
which is no longer extant. Although the Secret History and the Altan
Debter contained parallel passages, they were different texts. However,
both preserve the gdeyid point of view that succession should have
rightly continued with them, no matter how weak or unskilled their candi-
date may have been.
Rashd al-Dn was writing in a context in which the Toluids had
become the ruling family, and thus needed to account for the abrogation
of the previous agreement made between Chinggis Qan and his sons.
What is important to note for our purposes in examining the history of
the Jalayir is that lg and lchdys fortunes were tied to the fortunes
of gdeys personal household. These Jalayir brothers served gdey
41
The Jalayirids
as a result of their personal relationship to him. In addition, lchdys

interests continued to lie with gdeys descendants, the inheritors of his
personal share of human and territorial resources (uls or yrt).59 When
the position of this uls was threatened by the internal political struggles
within the empire, lchdy objected to the new rise of Toluid authority as
a usurpation of gdeyid claims to the imperial throne, and with them his
own status within the imperial system.
While lg and lchdy sought to defend the gdeyids right to rule,
another Jalayir, Mingsr Noyan, benefited from the Toluid ascendancy.
Mingsr served as chief judge (yrghch)60 under Mngke Qaan, as
well as grand chancellor (chngsng),61 and oversaw the trials of the
gdeyids and their supporters after Mngkes accession in 649/1251.
Mingsr owed his position to an earlier military assignment with Tolui
Khan and Mngke on campaign against the Qipchaqs during the initial
Mongol conquests. He later served with Mngke on campaign in south-
ern China.62 After Mngke became qan, he sent Mingsr Noyan with
2,000 horsemen to meet the sons of Gyk and demand that they present
themselves and their armies at Mngkes court.63 Mingsr tried Oghul
Ghaymish, the wife of Gyk Qan, and Qdgch Khtn, the mother
of gdeys son Shrmun.64 Mingsrs attachment to Mngke Qaan
resulted in the appointment of his son Hindqr Noyan to Iran as a com-
mander of a unit of 10,000.65 The establishment of the independent appa-
nage meant that Hindqr Noyan entered the service of the Ilkhans.
In addition to connections to the princely lines of gdey and Mngke,
Jalayir amirs were also assigned to the ls of Chaghatay, whose heredi-
tary appanage extended from the western Mongolian steppes to the Oxus
river. One of these Jalayir amirs was Qshq Noyan Jalayir, although
we know little about his life and relationship to the Chaghatayid rulers.66
Another was Mngka Noyan Jalayir, commander of one of the four
hazras Chinggis Qan left to Chaghatay. Mngka Noyans son, Ysr
Noyan, became an amir in the army of Barq, khan of the Chaghatayid
uls from 664/1266667/1269. In the case of Ysr Noyan, we see an
example of how a tribal amir could cross between princely appanage
states. Ysr Noyan was sent to the Khurasan frontier by Da Khan (r.
681/1282706/1306). He was captured there by the Ilkhanids and passed
into the service of the Oyrat amir j.67
Finally, at least two Jalayir amirs were in the service of the family of
Arigh Bke, the fourth son of Tolui and Sorqaqtani Beki, and challenger
to Qubilays claim to the qanate. The Jalayir Jngq Krgn and Abghn
both served Arigh Bkes son Malik Tmr.68
The Chinggisid empire changed Mongol society as much as it changed
42
the societies that were conquered by the Mongols. Tribes like the Jalayir
constituted the social and political order of the steppe. This order came
to an end in the early thirteenth century. The major consequence was
that most tribes were dismantled as political organisations in a process of
redistribution of land and personnel among Chinggis Qans family as the
Mongol empire expanded. Individuals maintained their tribal identities
and memories of their genealogies that traced the ties of kinship that went
back many generations. However, by the middle of the thirteenth century,
to be a Jalayir said more about ones familys past than about ones politi-
cal identity. Political allegiances had come to be defined by ones place
within the Chinggisid imperial order, which meant which Chinggisid
prince one served. Thus, members of the Jalayir tribe served Chinggis Qan
in China, gdey and his descendants, the Toluids and the Chaghatayids.
A number of Jalayir families also came to Iran to serve the uls founded
by Chinggis Qans grandson Hleg in the 1250s. The following chapter
is devoted to this aspect of the Jalayir diaspora, and examines how the
ancestors of the Jalayirid dynasty began their rise to power in the late
thirteenth century.
Notes
1. Philip S. Khoury and Joseph Kostiner, Introduction: Tribes and the
Complexities of State Formation in the Middle East, in Philip S. Khoury
and Joseph Kostiner (eds), Tribes and State Formation in the Middle
East (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), 4; Richard Tapper,
Anthropologists, Historians, and Tribespeople on Tribe and State Formation
in the Middle East, in Khoury and Kostiner (eds), Tribes and State
Formation in the Middle East, 56.
2. David Sneath, The Headless State: Aristocratic Orders, Kinship Society and
Misrepresentations of Nomadic Inner Asia (New York: Columbia University
Press, 2007).
3. See the review of The Headless State by Peter Golden, in Journal of
Asian Studies 68 (2009): 2936; David Sneaths rejoinder to this review
in Journal of Asian Studies 69 (2010): 65860; and Goldens response
to Sneaths rejoinder in the same issue, 6603. See also the review of
Thomas Barfield, in Comparative Studies in Society and History 51 (2009):
9423.
4. Peter Golden, review of David Sneath, The Headless State, in Journal of
Asiatic Studies 68 (2009): 295.
5. Sechin Jagchid and Paul Hyer, Mongolias Culture and Society (Boulder:
Westview, 1979), 247.
6. Anatoly M. Khazanov, Nomads and the Outside World (Madison: University
of Wisconsin Press, 1994), 143.
43
The Jalayirids
7. Lawrence Krader, Peoples of Central Asia (Bloomington: Indiana University

Press, 1963), 156.
8. Rudi Paul Lindner, What Was a Nomadic Tribe?, Comparative Studies in
Society and History 24:4 (October 1982): 701.
9. Khazanov, Nomads and the Outside World, 139; G. E. Markov, Problems
of Social Change among the Asiatic Nomads, in Wolfgang Weissleder, The
Nomadic Alternative: Modes and Models of Interaction in the African-Asian
Deserts and Steppes (The Hague: Mouton, 1978), 307.
10. Lindner, What Was a Nomadic Tribe?, 710.
11. Joseph Fletcher, The Mongols: Ecological and Social Perspectives, HJAS
46:1 (1986): 16.
12. Nicola Di Cosmo, State Formation and Periodization in Inner Asian
History, Journal of World History 10 (1999): 14.
13. Di Cosmo, State Formation and Periodization in Inner Asian History,
1719.
14. Paul D. Buell, Historical Dictionary of the Mongol World Empire (Lanham,
MD, and Oxford: The Scarecrow Press, 2003), 166.
15. B. I. Vladimirtsov, The Life of Chingis-Khan, trans. Prince D. S. Mirsky
(London: George Routledge and Sons, 1930), 1.
16. Jagchid and Hyer, Mongolias Culture and Society, 264; Luc Kwanten,
Imperial Nomads: A History of Central Asia, 5001500 (Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979), 189.
17. Jagchid and Hyer, Mongolias Culture and Society, 264.
18. Kwanten, Imperial Nomads, 188.
19. Lawrence Krader, The Origin of the State among the Nomads of Asia, in
Pastoral Production and Society: Proceedings of the International Meeting
on Nomadic Pastoralism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979),
2278.
20. senbike Togan, Flexibility and Limitation in Steppe Formations (Leiden:
Brill, 1998), 10.
21. Paul Buell, Tribe, Qan, and Ulus in Early Mongol China: Some Prolegomena
to Yan History, PhD dissertation, University of Washington, 1977, 19, 26.
22. Togan, Flexibility and Limitation, 11.
23. Krader, The Origin of the State among the Nomads of Asia, 2289.
24. Paul Ratchnevsky, Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy, ed. and trans.
Thomas Nivison Haining (Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1991),
89.
25. Timothy May, The Mongol Art of War: Chinggis Khan and the Mongol
Military System (Yardley: Westholme, 2007), 35.
26. Thomas T. Allsen, Guard and Government in the Reign of the Grand Qan
Mngke, 125159, HJAS 46:2 (1986): 50713.
27. Ratchnevsky, Genghis Khan, 176.
28. Thomas J. Barfield, The Perilous Frontier (Cambridge: Blackwell, 1989),
197.
44
29. Barfield, The Perilous Frontier, 191, 197.

30. The reorganisation of Mongol society under Chinggis Qan and his succes-
sors also gave rise to new tribal identities. Jean Aubin has shown how the
origin of the Qarunas as a new ethnicity on the central Asian frontier with
India in the thirteenth century was a result of the creation of a new military
unit, comprising representatives from different Mongol tribes from each
of the four princely ulses. See Jean Aubin, LEthnognse de qaraunas,
Turcica 1 (1969): 748.
31. John E. Woods, The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire (Salt Lake
City: University of Utah Press, 1999), 11.
32. Togan, Flexibility and Limitation, 1112, 137.
35. Paul Buell has characterised Chinggis Qans campaigns in 616/1219617/1220
in Transoxiana not as an accidental and sudden event, but as the logical con-
tinuation of a decade and a half of Mongol infiltration into the region. This
infiltration, brought about through the process of political unification of the
Mongol tribes around Chinggis Qan and the accompanying expansion of
the newly formed Mongol polity, brought the nomads in closer contact with
the sedentary societies of central Asia. With this contact came new interests
in the affairs of that region including the control of overland trade between
central Asia and China. See Paul D. Buell, Early Mongol Expansion in
Western Siberia and Turkestan (12071219): A Reconstruction, CAJ 36
(1992): 30.
36. On the Mongol basqqs, see V. V. Barthold, Turkestan Down to the Mongol
Invasion, trans. H. A. R. Gibb (London: Luzac, 1928), 468; John of Plano
Carpini in Christopher Dawson (ed.), Mission to Asia (Toronto: Toronto
University Press, 1998), 40; Istvn Vsry, The Origin of the Institution
of Basqaqs, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hung. Tomus 32:2
(1978): 205. On the related term drghach, see TMEN, 1:31923 (no. 193);
Francis Woodman Cleaves, DARUA and GEREGE, HJAS 16 (1953):
23759. Gerhard Doerfer equates bsqq and drgha, as does Thomas
Allsen. See TMEN, 2:241 (no. 691); Thomas T. Allsen, Mongol Imperialism:
The Politics of the Great Qan Mngke in China, Russia, and the Islamic
Lands, 12511259 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 46.
37. Al al-Dn A Malik Juvayn, Trkh-i Jahn-gushy, ed. Muammad
ibn Abd al-Wahhb Qazvn, 4th edn (Tehran: Intishrt-i Arghavn, 1370
[1991]), 1:312; originally published in E. J. W. Gibb Memorial Series 16
(Leiden: Brill, 1912). See also Boyles English translation: Al al-Dn A
Malik Juvayn, Genghis Khan: The History of the World Conqueror, trans.
J.A. Boyle (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997), 423.
38. See Allsen, Mongol Imperialism, 4551.
39. TMEN, 2:208.
40. TMEN, 2:208; Allsen, Mongol Imperialism, 48; Reuven Amitai- Preiss,
45
The Jalayirids
Evidence for the Early Use of the Title lkhn among the Mongols, JRAS
3:1 (1991): 353.
41. Amitai-Preiss, Evidence for the Early Use of the Title lkhn among the
Mongols, 354.
42. Amitai-Preiss, Evidence for the Early Use of the Title lkhn among the
Mongols, 353.
43. Thomas T. Allsen, Changing Forms of Legitimation in Mongol Iran,
in Gary Seaman and Daniel Marks (eds), Rulers from the Steppe: State
Formation on the Eurasian Periphery (Los Angeles: Ethnographics Press,
University of Southern California, 1991), 227.
44. Peter Jackson, The Dissolution of the Mongol Empire, CAJ 22 (1978): 235.
45. I. P. Petrushevsky, The Socio- Economic Condition of Iran under the
Ilkhans, in J. A. Boyle (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 5:
The Saljuq and Mongol Periods (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1968), 491.
46. Janet L. Abu-Lughod, Before European Hegemony: The World System a.d.
12501350 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 120.
47. Igor de Rachewiltz, Hok-lam Chan, Hsiao Chi-ching and Peter W. Geier
(eds), In the Service of the Khan: Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-
Yan Period (12001300) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1993), 34.
48. De Rachewiltz et al., In the Service of the Khan, 4.
50. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 459.
52. The Secret History of the Mongols, 257, 264.
55. Michal Biran, Qaidu and the Rise of the Independent Mongol State in
Central Asia (Richmond: Curzon, 1997), 32.
57. The Secret History of the Mongols, 255.
58. Thomas T. Allsen, Culture and Conquest in Mongol Eurasia (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2001), 90.
59. Juvayn writes that in the time of the reign of Chingiz Khan, the area of the
country expanded. He assigned to everyone their place of residence (mawzi-i
iqmat) which they call yrt. See Juvayn, Trkh-i Jahn-gushy, 31.
60. On the office of yrghch and aspects of the Mongol legal system,
see Valentin A. Riasanovsky, Fundamental Principles of Mongol Law
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1965).
61. Denise Aigle, Le Frs sous la domination mongole: Politique et fis-
calit (XIIIeXIVe s.), Studia Iranica, Cahier 31 (Paris: Association pour
lAvancement des tudes Iraniennes, 2005), 85.
63. Bar Hebraeus, The Chronography of Gregory Abl Faraj, the Son of Aaron,
46
the Hebrew Physician Commonly Known as Bar Hebraeus Being the First
Part of his Political History of the World, trans. Ernest A. Wallis Budge
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1932), 417.
64. When Oghul Ghaymish was brought before the tribunal (yrgh), Mingsr
stripped her naked. She was tried and then wrapped in felt and cast into the
river. See Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 839.
66. One of the few references to Qshq Noyan credits him with bringing the
secretarial skills of a Khitan named Vazr to the attention of Chaghatay. See
Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 7734.
47
3
The Jalayirs and the Early Ilkhanate
The military governorships that the Mongols had established in Khurasan

and Azarbayjan were replaced by the Ilkhanate in the 1250s. Unlike the
former governorships, which were responsible directly to the great qan
in Qaraqorum, the Ilkhanate was a new princely uls, or appanage state,
under the rule of Hleg Khan, the brother of Mngke Qaan. Hlegs
primary missions were to eliminate the Nizr Ismls, or Assassins,
who had made an attempt on Mngkes life, and the Abbasid caliphate
in Baghdad. Hlegs forces were successful in both of these missions,
and by 1260 the lands between the Oxus and the Euphrates were under
Hlegs control. As in the other princely ulses, which were mentioned
in Chapter 2, members of the Jalayir and other Mongol tribes provided
the manpower for Hlegs army, and became the new amirs, or military
elite, in Iran.
In the early years of the Ilkhanate, tensions developed between the
khans (Hleg and his descendants) and the amirs. In general, the khans
sought to centre political power and wealth in their own hands, through
a central government staffed mainly by native Persians. The amirs, in
general, tended to resist this tendency toward centralisation, which threat-
ened their own independence, power and wealth. Resistance among the
amirs took the form of supporting alternative members of the Hlegids,
members of the Ilkhanid royal family, for the throne. Several Jalayir tribal
families played a role in this struggle, which became particularly intense
between 1282 and 1295.
This chapter examines the details of this struggle, which led ultimately
to a centralisation process that eliminated all but one Jalayir family from
political influence in the Ilkhanate. These Jalayirs were the descendants of
lg Noyan, a trusted commander of Hleg during the Mongol invasion
of the 1250s. By the end of the thirteenth century, the Ilgayid Jalayirs had
become powerful amirs within the Ilkhanate, due to their ties to the royal
family.
48
lg Noyan and the Early Ilkhanate

The Jalayirid sultans of the fourteenth century were descended from
lg Noyan, who came to Iran in the army of Hleg. He took part in the
assault on Baghdad in January of 1258, leading a contingent of Mongol
troops from the south of the city along the Tigris.1 On the day that the
Abbasid caliph al-Mustaim bi-llh was executed, lg and his grandson,
Qar Bq, were charged with undertaking reconstruction operations in
Baghdad.2 Two years later, following the Mongols defeat by the Mamluks
at Ayn Jalut, lg Noyan led the remaining Mongol forces out of Syria,
and headed north to Diyarbakr.3 Here lg was shot from his horse during
the Mongol siege of Mayyafariqin (modern Silvan), but was carried off
the field by two of his men.4 In the winter of 126263, lg appeared again
in an Ilkhanid campaign against the Mongols of the Golden Horde at the
Terek river in the Caucasus,5 a sign that the once united Mongol empire
had split into independent and mutually hostile khanates.
lg Noyan served Hleg until the khans death in 663/1265. When
Abaqa came to the royal court camp (urd) in Jumd I/March of that
year, unaware that his father had died, lg Noyan met him to break the
news. Rashd al-Dn writes:
Because lg Noyan was commander-in-chief (amr-i rdh) and followed
the path of affection in the service of the Ilkhan for a long time, he gave Abaqa
Khan food and drink. In private he informed him of the circumstances of his
father.6
Abaqa succeeded Hleg as Ilkhan. During his reign, lg Noyan became

the most respected senior amir.7 An illustration of his position in the
Ilkhanid hierarchy is given in an account of a diplomatic mission from
the Chaghatayid uls. The vizier Masd Beg came in the winter of 665
/126667 to obtain an accounting of the Chaghatayid property (nch) in
Iran.8 At Abaqas court, only lg Noyan sat closer to the khan than the
visiting dignitary Masd Beg.9
lgs prominence in the new Ilkhanid appanage state, and the sub-
sequent prominence of his sons, seems attributable to his close relation-
ship with Hleg and his role in many of the military campaigns which
established the territorial limits of the Ilkhanate. In Baghdad, Syria,
Diyarbakr and the Caucasus, lg was one of the principal military leaders
in conflicts with the Ilkhans neighbours and rivals, the Mamluks and the
Jochids.
49
The Jalayirids
The Jalayir and Tribal Factionalism (128295)

lg Noyan was one of the many prominent amirs among the Ilkhanid
elite. These amirs provided the military support that the khans required to
maintain their authority. However, the amirs could also challenge a khan
and assert his own independence by backing other Hlegid princes. The
tension between the centralisation of royal authority and the independent
power of the amirs became acute following the death of Abaqa Khan in
1282.
Much of the account that follows is based on Rashd al-Dns Jmi
al-Tavrkh, and the ideological background to this history should be kept
in mind. In the struggle between royal centralisation and the dispersal
of power among the amirs, Rashd al-Dn most certainly favoured the
former. It is possible, then, to read his account of this period, some thirty
years earlier, as a kind of warning against factionalism among the elite,
which would lead to civil war and the breakdown of order. This history is
crucial, however, for the details it provides about the personnel within the
Ilkhanid elite, and particularly their tribal affiliations. In other words, if we
want to know what role tribal identity played in the internal politics of the
Ilkhanate, Rashd al-Dn is an indispensable source.
When Abaqa Khan died in 680/1282, his brother Amad Tegder was
in Georgia, and immediately set out for the royal court at Maragha. He
was met by some of the most powerful Ilkhanid amirs, including Shktr
Noyan and Bq of the Jalayir tribe.10 Shktr was lg Noyans second
son. Like his father, he served in the earliest Ilkhanid military cam-
paigns in Syria in 657/1259.11 In 658/1260 he accompanied emissaries
from Mongolia to Hleg in Anatolia to announce the death of Mngke
Qaan.12 He later served in the left wing of the Ilkhanid army on campaign
against the Chaghatayid khan Barq in 668/1270.13 By 680/1282, he was
a respected senior amir.
Bq was the son of guly Qrch Jalayir, who had come to Iran with
Hleg as a scout (qarvul).14 guly died when Bq was still a child
and Bq was raised at the court of Abaqa Khan. Here he served as a grand
counsellor (am-nq), as well as keeper of the royal treasury (khazin-i
nrn)15 and keeper of pelts (khizna-yi pustn).16 In addition, Bq served
in the capacity of tamghch, keeper of the red imperial seal (l tamgh)
under Abaqa.17
After the period of mourning for Abaqa, the princes, ladies and amirs
who were present at the court at Maragha deliberated over who should
succeed him.18 They were divided between support for Amad Tegder
and Arghun, who served in Khurasan and had yet to arrive at the assembly.
50
Among the Jalayir amirs, Shktr Noyan supported Amad Tegder,

while his brother, q Bq, as well as Bq and Bqs brother Arq,
supported Arghun.19 In the end, Arghun was convinced to step aside, for
most of the amirs were in favour of Amad Tegder.20 Arghun was forced
to acquiesce, and on 26 Muarram 681/6 May 1282 all of the amirs agreed
to confer rulership upon Amad Tegder.21 The enthronement followed
over a month later, on the summer solstice, 13 Rab I 681/21 June 1282.
An oath (mchalg)22 was given, and Amad Tegder was seated on the
throne by the amirs Qnqrty and Shktr Noyan Jalayir.23
Shktr Noyan certainly held a prominent rank within the Ilkhanate
at this time. q Bq also achieved a high status under Amad Tegder,
despite his initial support of Arghun. He became an intimate (nq) of
the new khan,24 a relationship that prompted resentment from Bq.25
Bq continued to resist Amad Tegders rule, although he was forced
to leave Arghuns household in Khurasan and join the royal court in
Azarbayjan.26
The tensions between Amad Tegder and Arghun, which reflected
broader factionalism among the amirs, broke into open conflict in afar
683/May 1284. Armies representing the two sides clashed at q Khvja
in a battle that marked the beginning of Amad Tegders fall.27 Bq
continued to serve Amad Tegder as tamghch and chief military com-
mander. Uncertain by this time of the loyalty of his men, Amad Tegder
ordered his amirs to submit written oaths swearing that they would not
transgress the command of Bq.28 Although Bq was the khans most
trusted amir, he began to harbour resentment toward Amad Tegder.29
At the same time, according to Rashd al-Dn, Amad Tegder began to
ignore Bq in favour of his Jalayir rival q Bq, son of lg. For these
reasons, Bq became more inclined to support Amad Tegders brother
Arghun.30
Less than a month later, Arghun surrendered to Amad Tegder, who
chose not to execute his cousin. Bq Jalayir, with the help of his brother
and two other Jalayir kinsmen, engineered a coup that freed Arghun and
began a purge of Amad Tegders supporters. q Bq Jalayir, Bqs
main rival, was also captured. A quriltay was then held to name Amad
Tegders successor. According to Rashd al-Dn, Bq made the case for
Arghuns enthronement:
The qan who is the ruler of the inhabited quarter of the world and q of the
entire family of Chinggis Qan, gave rulership of the lands of Iran after his own
brother Hleg Khan to his eldest son Abaqa Khan, who was the most perfect
and intelligent. After him, by way of inheritance, it should go to his beloved
son, the true successor Arghun. If meddlers ( fazln) had not interfered, the
51
The Jalayirids
crown and throne would have gone to the sons, and none of this turmoil ( fitna)
would have happened. God knows where this all will end.31
These words, of course, belong to Rashd al-Dn and not to Bq, and
reflect Rashd al-Dns own interested view that rulership in the Ilkhanate
belonged to Arghun, the father of his patrons Ghazan and ljeyt.
With Amad Tegder deposed, and eventually executed, and his own
candidate on the throne, Bq Jalayir was at the height of his power. Both
Rashd al-Dn and his contemporary Vaf make it clear that Arghun
owed his throne to Bq.32 Bqs influence was reflected in the fact that
he controlled both the military and the financial administration. He was
in charge of the army and the affairs of the royal household. Bq also
became the Ilkhanid grand vizier, and executed the ib-dvn, Shams
al-Dn, and replaced him with three individuals of his own choosing.33
Bqs authority was recognised by Qubilay Qan in China, to whom
the Ilkhans were still technically subordinate. Qubilays representative
arrived at the Ilkhanid court in 1286, with a decree (yrlgh) recognising
Arghun as khan and Bq as chancellor (chngsng).34 Bqs power was
formally recognised as virtually unlimited, for he was exempted from
being tried for up to nine crimes.35 He used his influence to protect his
family as well. In 685/1286, his brother Arq killed three men in Baghdad,
including the personnel (nch) of Arghun Khans brother Geykhatu.
Bq offered his brother sanctuary at the royal court, and refuge from
retribution from Geykhatu.36
Arq eventually returned to Baghdad, where, according to Rashd
al-Dn, he behaved less like an amir than like a king, withholding tax
receipts from the central treasury.37 These abuses by Bq and Arq bred
resentment among the other amirs and officials.38 Rashd al-Dn puts the
following indictment of Bq in the mouth of the future grand vizier adr
al-Din Zanjn:
Bq has arranged rulership for himself. Without an order from the pdishh or
counsel with the amirs he does whatever he wants, and he dispenses wealth the
way he wants. No one knows Arghun is the pdishh, rather its Bq. Things
have finally gotten to the point that whenever an envoy goes with a decree or
passport (yrlgh va piza) to Tabriz, Amr Al, who is the governor (vl) of
that place, doesnt pay any attention unless [the document] has the red seal of
Bq (l tamgh-yi bq), and he turns back empty-handed.39
Arghun Khan was not pleased with these reports, and punished Bq by
removing the financial registry from his possession and dismissing his
deputies and dependants from the royal council.40 Realising that he had
completely fallen out of favour with Arghun, Bq paid off a number
52
of Jalayir amirs in order to secure their loyalty, and again attempted to

bring an Ilkhanid prince to the throne. These efforts failed, however, and
Bq was eventually executed, his mutilated corpse displayed publicly, in
January 1289.41 Trials of his relatives and dependants followed, and most
of them were also executed.42
Bq Jalayirs rise and fall reflects the tension between the amirs and
princes in the Ilkhanate. Rashd al-Dn attributed his fall to the corrupt
use of his authority to protect his brother, who acted ever more indepen-
dently in Baghdad. The other amirs, as well as Arghun Khan, sought to
bring Bq under control. When he attempted to overthrow Arghun, as he
had with Amad Tegder, other amirs stepped in to stop him. Bqs fall
was the end of the Ugulayid branch of the Jalayir in the Ilkhanate, which
meant that the Ilgayids, including Shktr, q Bq and ughn, would
gain prominence.
Challenges to the central authority of the khans did not end with Bqs
downfall, however. In the 1290s, the Ilkhanates northwestern frontier
in Anatolia became the site for a number of rebellions among the tribal
amirs, including several from the Jalayir tribe. The political situation in
Anatolia and the elimination of these rebellions by the central Ilkhanid
authority are examined below.
Jalayir Amirs and the Anatolian Frontier

The Mongol presence in Anatolia began in 641/1243 with the victory
of Byj Noyan, the imperial military governor of western Iran, at Kse
Dagh. Byj defeated the army of the Saljq sultan Kay Khusraw II
(r.634/1237644/1246) and opened up eastern Anatolia to the Mongols. A
second wave of Mongols migrated westward after 654/1256, when Byj
was forced to cede his control over Azarbayjan to the new Ilkhan ruler
Hleg Khan.43 While Hleg was successful in securing the relatively
accessible plain of Diyarbakr, the higher country between the Euphrates
and Krsehir was a region of political fluidity for those political powers
that sought to control it: the Ilkhans from Azarbayjan, the Mamluks from
Cairo and Syria, and the Saljq and Armenian rulers whose loyalty was
sought by the larger imperial powers.
Zeki Velidi Togan has highlighted the importance of Anatolia to the
Ilkhanid empire in an article discussing references made by Rashd al-Dn
in his letters.44 The authenticity of these letters has been the subject of
much debate among scholars.45 Without addressing the issue of whether
or not the letters are authentic, it is worth mentioning some general aspects
of Togans work that suggest the importance of Anatolia to Rashd al-Dn
53
The Jalayirids
and the Ilkhanate. Togan cites Ibn Bbs report that the city of Erzincan
was incorporated into the personal property (inj=nch) of Abaqa Khan.46
When one also considers that over a third of Rashd al-Dns personal
property was located in Anatolia,47 the importance of this western prov-
ince to the Ilkhanid ruling elite is clear. The reason seems to have been the
significance of Anatolia for overland trade, which passed through Ilkhanid
territory in northern Iran on its way west. ljeyt, under whom Rashd
al-Dn served as vizier, constructed a new imperial capital at Sultaniyya,
southeast of Tabriz, in the early eighth/fourteenth century.48 As Togan
points out, Sultaniyya marked the central point along the Ilkhanid impe-
rial highway (shh-rh), extending from the Oxus to the Mediterranean. A
large portion of the western half of this route (shh-rh-i gharb) passed
through Anatolia, via Erzurum, Erzincan and Konya.49 Anatolia was more
than just a frontier march; it was an integral part of the Ilkhanid economic
system.
Following Abaqa Khans accession in 663/1265, a son of lg Jalayir,
named Tq (or gh), had been appointed to the province of Rm as a
secretary (btikch), along with Tdn of the Sulduz tribe.50 They were
soon called upon by Abaqa to help put down the rebellion of Sharaf al-Dn
Masd b. Khar, who had challenged the authority of the Mongols
Saljq protectorate from his bases in Nide and Develi.51
Although the suppression of the revolt of Sharaf al-Dn Masd
helped to consolidate the position of the Saljuqid governor Mun al-Dn
Sulaymn, known as the parvna, in Anatolia, it had also demonstrated
that the parvna was dependent on Ilkhanid military support to maintain
that position. In an attempt to achieve a greater degree of autonomy, the
parvna sent emissaries to the Mamluk sultan Baybars, encouraging him
to invade Anatolia. Baybars, who had seized the sultanate after the Battle
of Ayn Jalut in 658/1260, and who had laid the foundation of the sultan-
ate through his campaigns against the Syrian crusader states, was eager to
extend his northern frontier into Anatolia. As the Mamluk forces headed
north in late 675/early 1277, Tq and Tdn left their winter resi-
dence at Krsehir to join the amir Qt, who was to arrive from Nide.52
However, when Tq reached the plain of Abulustayn (Elbistan), Qt
was not there, and Baybars forces soundly defeated the Mongols on 9
Dh al-Qada 675/14 April 1277.53 Baybars went on to Kayseri, where the
khuba and sikka were given in his name.54 Both Tq and Tdn, as
well as rght Jalayir, were killed at this battle.55
Mamluk supremacy in Anatolia did not last long. Baybars retreated
when he realised that Abaqa himself was preparing an expedition to deal
with the Mamluks and the parvna, who had not been at Abulustayn to aid
54
the Mongol troops.56 The Ilkhanid amirs Samghar and Kuhrgy soon
replaced Tq and Tdn as governors in this region.
Eastern Anatolia remained a stronghold for the Ilkhans under Jalayir
and Sulduz governors, the ancestors of the Jalayirid and Chubanid dynas-
ties of the eighth/fourteenth century. lg Noyans son q Bq, who
had become a favourite of Amad Tegder, served on the fringes of the
Ilkhanid political scene in Anatolia during the reign of Arghun Khan
and Bq Jalayir. Here, q Bq became attached to prince Geykhatu,
Arghuns brother.57 His time in Anatolia with Geykhatu meant that his
status rose after Geykhatu became khan in 690 /1291, leading to his
appointment as chief amir (mr-i mrn).58 During Geykhatus reign,
q Bq Jalayir played a prominent role in the administrative affairs of
the Ilkhanate. He became the patron (murabb) of adr al-Dn Zanjn,
Geykhatus grand vizier. He also carried out the execution of his own
brother ughn, who had supported Baydu to succeed Arghun Khan, and
had conspired with several other amirs against Arghuns vizier, Sad al-
Dawla.59 As one of Geykhatu Khans trusted amirs, q Bq was sent to
Tabriz in 693/1294 to introduce the new Chinese-inspired paper currency,
known as chao (chw).60 However, this fiscal experiment was short-lived,
as its introduction led to utter chaos and a standstill of economic activity
in Tabriz.61
Geykhatu ruled as khan from 690/1291 until 694/1295. He returned
to Anatolia following the investigations into his brothers death in 690
/1291, and spent most of his reign in that region.62 Geykhatu placed Iran
under the command of q Bqs brother, Shktr Noyan, as his deputy in
Iran,63 while q Bq remained at Geykhatus court in the west. During
his reign, Geykhatu seems to have dispensed with the title lkhn on his
coins, omitting at times even the name of the great qan Qubilay.64 Such a
policy indicates an attempt to establish the full independence of the uls
of Hleg by severing the nominal ties of allegiance to the eastern court of
the great qan, which had been at the foundation of the Ilkhanates political
identity since its establishment.
Despite these symbolic declarations of independent sovereignty,
Geykhatu faced a challenge to his authority similar to that which Amad
Tegder had faced a decade earlier. As lateral successors that is, broth-
ers of the previous khan they were both threatened by the existence
of the former khans sons as rallying points for political opposition. For
Geykhatu, this threat was represented not only by Arghuns son Ghazan,
who had inherited his fathers personal appanage in Khurasan, but also
by his cousin Baydu, the grandson of Hleg through his son araqy.
Several disaffected amirs, led by aghchr, gathered around Baydu in
55
The Jalayirids
Baghdad and launched a rebellion in 694/1295. When aghchr moved

against the army of Geykhatu Khan, q Bq warned him that such an
action was unlawful (khilf-i ys). aghchr responded, saying:
Until today, q Bq was commander of the entire country on the order of
Geykhatu Khan. Now, by the virtue of Baydus decree, leadership belongs to
me.65
q Bqs forces were overwhelmed, and Geykhatu was eventually cap-

tured and executed.66
Baydus reign lasted only four months before he was toppled by Ghazan.
By the time of Ghazans accession in 694/1295, most of the sons of lg
Noyan Jalayir had disappeared from the political scene. Shktr Noyan
seems to have died around this time, while q Bq, ughn, rght and
Tq had all been killed between 675/1277 and 694/1295. lgs family
had represented a major component of the early Ilkhanates military and
administrative elite. However, by the early period of Ghazans reign, rep-
resentatives of other branches of the Jalayir tribe attempted to establish
independent authority on the western frontier.
While Rm had been Geykhatus personal appanage, Ghazan had
inherited Khurasan and thus had fewer personal ties to the west. It is
perhaps this weakness in terms of dependants and allies in Anatolia that
prompted or allowed for a series of uprisings in the region between 695
/1296 and 698/1299. These uprisings involved several Jalayir amirs who,
unlike the Ilgayids and Ugulayids, did not have close ties to the royal
family, but who used the opportunity presented by their post in the west to
carve out their own local influence.
One of these Jalayir amirs was yna Beg. His father, Qipchaq, was a
relative of the family of guly Qrch Jalayir. His brother, Ishk Tughl,
was an amir in Amad Tegder Khans army, and fought at the battle of
q Khvja in 683/1284 between Amad Tegder and Arghun.67 However,
he is not mentioned after this point, and it is likely that he was killed in
683/1284 during the purge of Amad Tegders supporters, led by Bq
Jalayir. yna Beg survived this purge, and is mentioned as having being
sent by Ghazan Khan to Anatolia to intercept a rebel named ldr. After
his forces seized ldr near Erzurum,68 yna Beg himself turned against
Ghazan. He joined a faction of amirs who attacked Ghazans army at
Baylaqan in February or March 1296.69 The next day, Ghazans troops
rallied, and yna Beg was captured. He was brought to Tabriz, where he
was publicly executed.70
The following year, another Jalayir amir named Blt raised another
rebellion. Blt had served in Anatolia along with his father, Tyj, from
56
the period of Abaqas reign (663/1265680/1282).71 As in the case of

yna Beg, Blts rebellion began as part of a campaign to put down
the rebellion of another amir. This amir was aghchr, who had sided
with Baydu against Ghazan in the civil war of 1295.72 After Baydu was
defeated, aghchr left Azarbayjan for Anatolia, taking refuge in Tokat.73
aghchr was eventually captured and executed by Blts forces, but
Blt then repeatedly ignored Ghazans demands that he return.74 Blt
himself was defeated at Malatya,75 and later captured in May of 1297.76
Like yna Beg, Blt was publicly executed in Tabriz later that year.77 In
addition, the Saljq sultan Masd II was suspected of having conspired
with Blt. Ghazan had Masd deposed, and replaced by his nephew,
Al al-Dn Kay Qubd III.
This Saljq coup still did not end the unrest in Anatolia. In the winter
of 129899, a number of amirs, led by Sulaymish, who had led the coup
against Masd II, revolted against Ghazans appointed governors. Among
the rebels was the Jalayir amir Iqbl. By the spring of 1299, Ghazans new
commander in Anatolia, Amr Chpn Sulduz, had defeated Sulaymish
and captured Iqbl. This event marked a turning point in the Ilkhanid mili-
tary administration in Anatolia.78 Particularly after the death of the Saljq
sultan Masd II in 702/1303, Rm came to be governed almost as an
autonomous principality under Amr Chpn.79 During the early reign of
the young Ab Sad Bahdur Khan (717/1317727/1327), Amr Chpn
became the Ilkhanid commander-in-chief and virtual sovereign.
The years between 1282 and 1300 were characterised by internal strug-
gles in the Ilkhanate. The conflicts between Amad Tegder and Arghun,
and between Geykhatu, Baydu and Ghazan, reflected not only the compet-
ing interests of the Ilkhanid royal family, but also those of the amirs who
backed them. As we have seen in this chapter, an amir in the Ilkhanate
who could help his candidate on to the throne could become extremely
powerful, as Bq Jalayir had been. Bq was aided by other Jalayir
tribesmen, but he was also opposed by other Jalayir, most notably q
Bq, the son of lg Noyan. The Jalayir certainly did not act as a cohesive
group during this period of civil war in the Ilkhanate. Conflict occurred not
between tribes, but between supporters of different royal princes. After
Ghazan Khan came to power in 1295, the amirs who had opposed Ghazan,
and thus did not have a royal patron after Ghazans succession, attempted
to rebel. Several Jalayir tribesmen took part in these rebellions in Anatolia
in the first years of Ghazans reign.
By the turn of the fourteenth century, Amr Chpn Sulduz had begun
to consolidate his authority in Anatolia, in the name of Ghazan Khan.
This was part of a wider programme of centralisation under Ghazan Khan.
57
The Jalayirids
The khan and the non-Mongol administrative elite attempted to remove

power from the hands of the amirs, and place it in the hands of the central
government. This process involved a series of reforms, which included
the regularisation of the financial administration, the collection of taxes,
the revocation of individuals privileges granted by previous rulers, and
the increase in the authority of the khan as religious leader, through mass
conversion to Islam and the formulation of an ideology that presented the
khan as the pdishh-i islm, and an ideal Muslim sovereign.
There were fewer challenges to the central authority of the khan
from the amirs after 1300. Jalayir families that had opposed Ghazan had
been eliminated, and the line of lg Noyan was the one Jalayir family
that had any political influence. As the following chapter illustrates, the
son and grandson of q Bq became closely tied to the Ilkhanid royal
house during this period of political centralisation in the early fourteenth
century.
Notes
1. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1008. lg Noyan, Kt Bq and Qdsn are also all
mentioned among Hlegs amirs in Rashd al-Dns genealogical work
Shuab-i Panjgna. lg Noyan is among the first names listed in the account
of the amirs in Hlegs time. lg is described as follows: lg Noyan
from the Jalayir was a great amir. He came here from that province (vilyat)
with Hleg. Kt Bq is listed two names below lg in the same column:
Kt Bq from the Nayman tribe was an amir of the army and extremely
respected. He conquered Syria and Damascus (shm va dimashq), and after
that was killed in battle with Egypt (dar jang-i mir). Qdsn (or Qudusn,
as his name is written in the Shuab-i Panjgna manuscript) was a respected
amir and was among the amirs who conquered Baghdad. See Rashd al-Dn/
Shuab, 139b140a.
2. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,019.
7. lg is listed among the top amirs during Abaqas time in the Shuab-i
Panjgna. He is described as a greatly respected amir (amr-yi bas
mutabar). See Rashd al-Dn/Shuab, 144b.
8. On the issue of extra-territorial possessions of the Chinggisid princes, see
Thomas T. Allsen, Sharing Out the Empire: Apportioning Lands under the
Mongols, in Anatoly M. Khazanov and Andr Wink (eds), Nomads in the
Sedentary World (Richmond: Curzon, 2001), 173; Paul D. Buell, Tribe,
58
Qan, and Ulus in Early Mongol China: Some Prolegomena to Yan History,
PhD dissertation, University of Washington, 1977, 125.
10. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,124. Rashd al-Dn listed Shktr Noyan among
the top amirs during Amad Tegders reign in the Shuab-i Panjgna.
However, Rashd al-Dn also mentioned that Shktr did not pay much
attention to him (ziydat-i iltift nam-kard). See Rashd al-Dn/Shuab,
141b.
14. For an overview of Bqs career, see Jean Aubin, mirs Mongols et
vizirs Persans dans les remous de lacculturation (Paris: Association pour
lAvancement des tudes Iraniennes, 1995), 30.
17. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,110. The l tamgh was probably adopted by the
Mongols from Uyghur chancery practices. It was used for general imperial
decrees, while the altn tamgh (gold seal) was used specifically for finan-
cial documents or decrees. See Gerhard Doerfer, l Tam, Encyclopaedia
Paul, 1983), 1:7668.
19. Jean Aubin has described Bq as leading a movement to return to Mongol
tradition in the events surrounding the succession in 1284. See Aubin, mirs
Mongols et vizirs Persans, 38.
22. For the meaning of mchalg, see TMEN, 1:5025 (no. 370).
26. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,129; Rashd al-Dn/Shuab, 141b.
29. Rashd al-Dn records a clash between Amad Tegder and Bq; see
Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,140.
32. Vaf writes that since Arghun considered that he had become sultan thanks
to Bqs efforts, he conferred on him all but the name of khan. See Vaf/
Trkh, 230; Vaf, Tarr-i Trkh-i Vaf, ed. Abd al-Muammad yat
(Tehran: Muassasa-yi Mulaat va Taqqt-i Farhang [Pizhhishgh],
1372 [1993]), 129.
59
The Jalayirids
33. For the period of Bqs power at the head of the administration, see Aubin,
mirs Mongols et vizirs Persans, 3841.
34. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,161; Vaf/Trkh, 229. Vaf writes that the title
chngsng came from his majesty (az azrat), that is, Qubilay Qan. On the
meaning of this Chinese title, and for an analysis of this incident, see Thomas
T. Allsen, Notes on Chinese Titles in Mongol Iran, Mongolian Studies 14
(1991): 2830.
35. Vaf/Trkh, 229.
38. Vaf/Trkh, 230.
41. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,171; Vaf/Trkh, 233.
42. Vaf/Trkh, 233. Bqs son, bch, was raised by his fellow Jalayir
tribesman ughn, a son of lg Noyan. ughn wanted to free him, and
brought him before Arghun to have him show allegiance (hljmsh).
Arghun was still angry about Bqs betrayal, however, and ordered ughn
to purge his family. bch and his brothers Malik, Tarkhn Tmr and
Qutlugh Tmr were killed. See Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,171.
43. Claude Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey: A General Survey of the Material and
Spiritual Culture and History c. 10711330, trans. J. Jones-Williams (New
York: Taplinger, 1968), 275.
44. Zeki Velidi Togan, References to Economic and Cultural Life in Anatolia
in the Letters of Rashd al-Dn, trans. Gary Leiser, in Judith Pfeiffer
and Sholeh A. Quinn (eds), in collaboration with Ernest Tucker, History
and Historiography of Post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East:
Studies in Honor of John E. Woods (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006),
84111.
45. For the main arguments concerning the authenticity of the letters of Rashd
al-Dn, see Reuben Levy, The Letters of Rashd al-Dn Fal Allh, JRAS
(1946): 748; A. H. Morton, The Letters of Rashd al-Dn: lkhnid Fact
or Timurid Fiction, in Reuven Amitai-Preiss and David O. Morgan (eds),
The Mongol Empire and its Legacy (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 15599; Abolala
Soudavar, In Defense of Rad-od-dn and his Letters, Studia Iranica 32
(2003): 77120. Gary Leiser thoroughly summarises the entire debate in the
introduction to his translation of Togans article; see Togan, References
to Economic and Cultural Life in Anatolia in the Letters of Rashd al-Dn,
847.
46. Togan, References to Economic and Cultural Life in Anatolia in the Letters
of Rashd al-Dn, 90.
of Rashd al-Dn, 100.
48. On the founding of Sultaniyya, see Dvd ibn Muammad Bankat,
60
Trkh-i Bankat: Rawzat l al-Albb f Marifat al-Tavrkh wa-al-

Ansb, ed. Jafar Shir (Tehran, 1348 [1969]), 475; Qazvn/TG, 607.
of Rashd al-Dn, 101.
50. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,060. Tdn was the grandfather of Amr Chpn,
eponym of the fourteenth-century Chubanid dynasty.
51. Ibn Bb/Houtsma, 314; Ibn Bb/Erzi, 6667; Paul Wittek, Nide,
Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 8:1516. The
Khatirids had governed the district of Nide under the Saljqs. Following
the death of the Saljq sultan Rukn al-Dn Qilij Arsln in 663/1265, which
marked the rise in power of the parvna, Mun al-Dn Sulaymn, Sharaf
al-Dn Masd b. Khar attempted to assert his own influence over the new
sultan, the young Kay Khusraw III. His actions brought reprisals from the
Mongols after the parvnas report of the situation.
52. Karm al-Dn Mamd al-qsary, Musmarat al-Akhbr va Musyarat
al-Akhyr, ed. Osman Turan (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 1993), 113.
53. qsary, Musmarat al-Akhbr, 113; Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,101.
54. Ibn Bb/Houtsma, 317; Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,101.
55. Ibn Bb/Houtsma, 317; qsary, Musmarat al-Akhbr, 114; Rashd
al-Dn/Jmi, 68.
56. Cahen, Pre-Ottoman Turkey, 289. Ibn Bb reports that Baybars turned back
to Egypt because he had not been joined by the parvna or any of the other
Saljq amirs, his animals were dying due to lack of forage, and because he
feared an attack from the Ilkhanids. See Ibn Bb/Houtsma, 31718.
58. Vaf/Trkh, 2645.
59. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,1813. For an account of ughns final days, see
also qsary, Musmarat al-Akhbr, 16770.
61. See Karl Jahn, ao, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill,
1961), 2:14; Karl Jahn, Das iranische Papiergeld, Archiv Orientalni 10
(1938): 30840. For an account of the chao experiment, see Bar Hebraeus,
The Chronography of Gregory Abl Faraj, the Son of Aaron, the Hebrew
Physician Commonly Known as Bar Hebraeus Being the First Part of his
Political History of the World, trans. Ernest A. Wallis Budge (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1932), 4967.
63. Rashd al-Dn/Jmi, 1,192; Vaf/Trkh, 260.
64. Thomas T. Allsen, Changing Forms of Legitimation in Mongol Iran,
in Gary Seaman and Daniel Marks (eds), Rulers from the Steppe: State
Formation on the Eurasian Periphery (Los Angeles: Ethnographics Press,
University of Southern California, 1991), 230.
65. Vaf/Trkh, 278.
66. According to Vaf, q Bq was executed on Baydus order; see Vaf/
61
The Jalayirids
Trkh, 282. According to Rashd al-Dn, q Bq escaped this initial purge

and continued to oppose Baydu, fighting alongside Ghazan. However, later
that year he was captured and killed in battle near Hashtrd; see Rashd
al-Dn/Jmi, 1,202.
73. qsary, Musmarat al-Akhbr, 1902.
78. Rudi Paul Lindner has pointed out the correlation between the suppression
of Sulaymishs revolt and the proliferation of mints striking silver coins in
Anatolia in the year 699/1299, probably an effort by Ghazan Khan to win
support from the Turkmans there who had joined with Sulaymish, by letting
them benefit from the profits from the silver coinage. See Rudi Paul Lindner,
How Mongol Were the Early Ottomans?, in Reuven Amitai-Preiss and
David O. Morgan (eds), The Mongol Empire and its Legacy (Leiden: Brill,
1999), 287.
79. Ren Grousset, The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia, trans.
Naomi Walford (New Brunswick, NJ, and London: Rutgers University
Press, 1999), 387.
62
4
From Tribal Amirs to Royal In-laws
In the preceding chapter, an attempt was made to trace the ways in which
several Jalayir tribal families participated in the formation of the Ilkhanate
and subsequent political events up until approximately the year 1300 ce.
Most branches of the Jalayir tribe, whose members had attained promi-
nent positions in the political hierarchy, had been eliminated by the end
of the seventh/thirteenth century. These included the family of the vizier
Bq, as well as a number of Jalayir amirs who had led revolts in Anatolia
against Ghazan Khan in the first years after his accession in 694/1295.
By the beginning of the eighth /fourteenth century, only the Ilgayid
branch of the Jalayir retained a strong position in the Ilkhanate. During
the reigns of the last three Ilkhan rulers, the descendants of lg would
ensure their influence in the post-Ilkhanid period through their status as
royal in-laws. By marrying into the Ilkhanid royal family, the Ilgayids
not only achieved a proximity to the channels of political power, but
also established an important aspect of their legitimising ideology which
would be developed during the reign of the Jalayirid sultan Shakh Uvays
(r. 757/1356776/1374).
The purpose of this chapter is to examine the relationship between the
Ilgayid Jalayirs and the Ilkhanid dynasty during the last forty years of
effective Hlegid rule (694/1295736/1335), and to analyse the factors
which enabled the Jalayirid amir Shaykh asan to establish a personal
base of political power after this period, and lay the groundwork for
the establishment of an independent Jalayirid sultanate. These factors
include the Jalayirs role as royal in-laws (grgn, gregen) at a time
when attempts were made to limit the influence of the amirs and centralise
authority in the Ilkhanate; the position of Shaykh asan Jalayir as military
governor in Anatolia; and the establishment of Shaykh asans control of
Arab Iraq and that regions Oyrat tribal military elite.
One of the most significant aspects of the reign of Ghazan Khan
(694 /1295703 /1304) was his programme of religious and economic
reforms.1 In an attempt to consolidate his power after coming to the
63
The Jalayirids
throne, Ghazan issued a series of decrees designed to give the royal court
and its cadre of fiscal administrators more control over economic affairs.
Ghazans programme was an attempt to reorganise what, from the point of
view of the administrators, had been a weakening of the political and eco-
nomic authority of the khan and a dispersal of wealth and resources among
the amirs. In the fifteen or so years after Abaqas death in 680/1282, fac-
tions of amirs had played a major role in determining who would accede
to the royal throne, leaving the khan beholden to his military backers and
weakening his authority. A sign of the authority of the amirs was the fact
that a Mongol, Bq Jalayir, had become the vizier, a position commonly
held by individuals from the non-military classes and the non-Mongol
population.2
Ghazans reforms covered a wide range of issues, but can be categorised
generally as addressing religious and economic concerns. Ghazan and all
of his amirs converted to Islam as a group in 694/1295.3 It has been a
matter of debate in modern scholarship, as well as in Ghazans own time,4
whether his conversion was a sincere act of faith or a political calculation.
While the complex issue of religious conversion will not be addressed
here,5 it seems clear that one aspect of Ghazans acceptance of Islam was
an attempt to align the Ilkhan amirs with him as members of a single reli-
gious community, and thus limit the threat of political opposition.
In terms of the state economy, Ghazans reforms aimed to regularise
tax collection, monetary measure and land tenure. These measures were
designed to centralise control over sources of income in the imperial
court, and eliminate multiple claims to land or property by amirs or other
members of the local elite who may have been granted rights to them
in the past. The architect of these reforms was Ghazans vizier Rashd
al-Dn, who represented those in the administrative corps who sought a
return to an order based on a prosperous state supported mainly by agrar-
ian sources of wealth and preserved by justice enforced by a powerful,
independent ruler. This vision of the proper political order, which looked
to past rulers such as the Sasanian king Anshirvn, or the Abbasid caliph
Hrn al-Rashd, as models for right government, contrasted with the tra-
ditional Mongol vision of the political economy, which relied upon wealth
in the form of movable animal stock and tax on commercial traffic, which
would be redistributed by a khan to his supporters (nkers).
In the seventh/thirteenth century this conception of legitimate authority
was combined with an ideology of Chinggisid royalism, whereby politi-
cal legitimacy derived from ones patrilineal descent from Chinggis Qan.
It was understood in the Ilkhanate, as well as in the Chaghatay khanate,
Golden Horde and Yan empire, that only a member of the Chinggisid
64
royal family had the right to rule. Within each of these Mongol states,
a secondary legitimising principle existed as well. In the Ilkhanate, this
secondary legitimising principle was ones descent from Hleg Khan,
and it was generally accepted by both the amirs and the administrators that
only a Hlegid that is, a member of the Ilkhanid royal family had the
right to rule. During Ghazan Khans time, under the tutelage of Rashd
al-Dn, the concept of Hlegid legitimacy became combined with the
concept of a strong, just, Islamic ruler in the pre-Mongol mould. Such a
rulers obligation was not to redistribute wealth to his nkers in exchange
for political support, but rather to consolidate wealth and authority in order
to maintain order and justice in his realm. As a result of this ideology and
the practical reforms that accompanied it, the amirs began to play less of
an independent role in the eighth/fourteenth century. This did not mean,
however, that the non-Chinggisid military elite were not influential in this
period. The amirs consolidated their own power within the context of the
existing royal structure. There were fewer open challenges to the authority
of the Ilkhans after Ghazan Khan than there were before him.
For the Jalayir (and, more specifically, the Ilgayid branch of the
Jalayir), their proximity to the Ilkhanid royal family, and eventual incor-
poration into it, allowed them to emerge as contenders to inherit the
Ilkhanid political legacy after 736/1335. In this period the Ilgayid Jalayirs
became incorporated through marriage into the Ilkhanid royal family, and
thus put themselves in close contact with the newly centralising Ilkhanate.
The descendants of lg Noyan Jalayir became powerful in the early four-
teenth century as a result of these processes. Their interests became those
of the Ilkhanid dynasty and the centralised state that was the aspiration of
administrators like Rashd al-Dn. In other words, they became part of not
a Jalayir tribal order, but the Ilkhanid dynastic order. This process is the
subject of what follows in this chapter.
Amr usayn Grgn, 694/1295722/1322

q Bq Jalayir was killed in 694/1295 after Geykhatu Khan was over-
thrown by his cousin Baydu. q Bq had been closely associated with
Geykhatu Khan before and during his reign (690/1291694/1295), and
when the coup that toppled him was carried out, q Bq was one of the
first amirs to be purged. Had Baydu continued to reign as khan, it is likely
that q Bqs family would not have been heard from again. However,
the continuation of his family, and ultimately the rise of the Jalayirid
dynasty, was tied directly to the rise of Ghazan and his overthrow of
Baydu later in 1295. q Bq had been married to Ghazans sister, ljetey
65
The Jalayirids
Arghun
h
Ghazan j
ljeyt
ljetey Sultan ==== q B q (d. 694/1295)
====
== Am r usayn (d. 722/1322)
==== indicates marriage relationship

Figure 4.1 The Jalayir gregen relationship.
Sultan (ljaty Suln), and after Ghazan took the throne, he gave his
sister to q Bqs son, Amr usayn.6 Through this match Amr usayn
acquired the title grgn (gregen), or royal son-in-law.7
Little is known about Amr usayns life during the reign of Ghazan.
However, after the accession of ljeyt in 1304, Amr usayn seems
to have acquired a prominent status within the Ilkhanid ruling elite. He
appears in the sources as one of the four keshig amirs under ljeyt, along
with Qutlughshh, Amr Chpn and Pld Chngsng.8 Vaf records
that when ljeyt came to the throne, he put Amr usayn in charge of
overseeing the crown lands. A document dating from 704/1305 confirms
that Amr usayn had conducted an inspection of crown properties in the
vicinity of Tabriz and Ardabil.9 In addition to his administrative duties,
Amr usayn also took part in the major military campaign in Gilan in
130708.10
Amr usayn seems to have enjoyed a great deal of favour from
ljeyt, as reflected in his provincial command appointment in the years
after the Gilan campaign. Amr usayn was assigned to Arran in 712
/131213, while ljeyt personally led a campaign to secure the Syrian
frontier with the Mamluks.11 Arran was a major royal pasture region
between the Kur and Aras rivers, in modern-day Azerbaijan. The Ilkhanid
royal court made seasonal migrations from high-altitude summer pasture
(yylq) in Persian Azarbayjan, near Tabriz, to lower-lying winter pasture
(qishlq) in the north, in Qarabagh and Arran. Here, Amr usayn had
the opportunity to host the khan in his own home near Tabriz,12 as well
as host, on at least one occasion, a banquet for a visiting Jochid envoy.13
Thus, Amr usayns appointment to Arran meant proximity and access
to ljeyt Khan and the royal court, a privilege not afforded to amirs in
more remote provinces.
66
Family ties helped to secure and reinforce this access to the royal court.
Amr usayns daughter, Suyurghatmish, was married to ljeyt. At the
same time, Amr usayns wife, ljetey Sultan, was the khans sister. The
marriage to ljetey Sultan is particularly significant when we consider
the statement by the historian Ahr that ljeyt virtually shared rulership
with his sister.14 Ahr stresses that ljeyt was very fond of Amr usayn,
both because he was a gregen, and because he was of eminent birth and
always in his company.15 Some of Ahrs account can surely be considered
designed to glorify the ancestor of his own Jalayirid patron, Sultan Shaykh
Uvays. However, other sources confirm that Amr usayn did enjoy a
close and favourable relationship with ljeyt. In addition, Amr usayn
also had a close relationship with ljeyts vizier, Khwja Tj al-Dn Al
Shh, who had previously attended to Amr usayn in his own house-
hold.16 His personal connections with the vizier, the khan and the khans
influential sister all ensured high status and influence for Amr usayn and
his family within the Ilkhanate.
However, the status of Amr usayn and the other amirs was always
dependent on the favour of the Chinggisid khan. This dependence became
painfully clear to Amr usayn in 1316 when ljeyt died. His son and
successor, Ab Sad, was still a child, and real power in the Ilkhanate fell
to Amr Chpn of the Sulduz tribe. Like the Jalayirid amirs before, Amr
Chpn consolidated a great deal of power in Anatolia during ljeyts
reign, and was the only Ilkhanid governor who had any success in compel-
ling the tribes on the western frontier to submit to the khans authority.17
From ljeyts death in 1316 to his own downfall in 1327, Amr
Chpn was the de facto ruler of the Ilkhanate,18 a status confirmed by
titles bestowed by emissaries from the Yan dynasty and China.19 Like
Amr usayn, Amr Chpn had married into the Ilkhanid royal family.20
He also forged family ties with the Ilgayid Jalayirs, marrying his daughter
Baghdd Khtn to Amr usayns son Shaykh asan. This three-way
connection between the Ilkhanid royal household, the Ilgayid Jalayirs and
the Sulduz-Chubanids would constitute the nexus of political power in the
Ilkhanate through the 1340s.
The rise of Amr Chpn meant the marginalisation of Amr usayn
Jalayir, who was removed from his post in Arran to the eastern frontier.21
Here, he spent the last years of his life attempting to subdue Chaghatayid
incursions. Amr usayn no longer had access to the heart of government
at the Ilkhanid royal court, where he was replaced by Amr Chpn and
his son Dimashq Khwja as the real power behind the young Ab Sad
Khan.22
When Amr usayn died in 1322, his son Shaykh asan became the
67
The Jalayirids
Jalayir Sulduz Ilkhanid Royal House
ljeyt
Am r usayn Am r Ch p n==========S Beg
Shaykh asan===== Baghd d Kh t n
====== indicates marriage relationship

Figure 4.2 Amr Chpn at the centre of the Ilkhanid ruling elite.
head of the family of the Ilgayid Jalayirs. Shaykh asan was both a cousin
of Ab Sad and the son-in-law of Amr Chpn, the most powerful man
in the Ilkhanate. Yet the sources tell us very little about Shaykh asans
life under Amr Chpns rule. However, just five years later, Amr
Chpn and his sons would be overthrown, and Shaykh asan would
begin to lay the foundation of the independent Jalayirid dynasty. The
remainder of this chapter is devoted to these developments, from the fall
of Amr Chpn to the end of the reign of Ab Sad.
Reaction against Amr Chpns power came from the other Ilkhanid
amirs and from a maturing Ab Sad in 1327. The coup began when
Dimashq Khwja was accused of having an affair with ugh Khtn,
a wife of the late ljeyt Khan, and was executed.23 Soon after, Amr
Chpn was executed by the Kart malik of Herat. Amr Chpns son,
Tmr Tsh, had fled to Damascus after his brothers execution, and was
given refuge by the Mamluk sultan al-Nir Muammad (3rd r. 131041).
However, after Amr Chpn was killed, it was clear that the balance of
power had shifted in Iran, and the Chubanids would find no refuge in the
Mamluk sultanate. Tmr Tsh was executed in Cairo in 1328.24 Although
Arghun Khan
Am r usayn===ljetey Sultan ljeyt
Shaykh asan Ab Sa d
Figure 4.3 Shaykh asan Jalayir and the Ilkhanid royal house.
68
Am r Ch p n
Baghd
Ba d Kh t n Dimashq Khw ja T m r T sh
Shaykh asan JJalayir

l yi
Dilsh
Di d Kh t n Shaykh asan Malik Ashraf
indicates
ind marriages of Shaykh asan Jalayir
first marriage to Baghdd Khtn
second marriage to Dilshd Khtn
Figure 4.4 The Chubanids.
his head was sent to Ab Sad,25 the fact that he was not killed in Iran,
combined with his own claims to have been the mahd, or messiah in
Islamic tradition, allowed for the rumour to spread that Tmr Tsh was
still alive. The consequences of this rumour will be discussed in the fol-
lowing chapter.
Shaykh asan Jalayir would eventually benefit from the fall of the
Chubanids. However, he too suffered initially, when Ab Sad forced
him to give up his wife, Baghdd Khtn, the daughter of Amr Chpn.
The young Ab Sad had long desired Baghdd Khtn, but Amr
Chpn had not allowed him to marry her, instead giving her to Shaykh
asan. According to the Mamluk bibliographer afad, Baghdd Khtn
controlled Ab Sad with her beauty, and thus acquired great power.26
Shabnkra writes that although the amirs, the vizier and other officials
warned Ab Sad that she had bad intentions and that women could not
be trusted, they became inseparable.27
However much Baghdd Khtn influenced Ab Sad, it was clear that
power had shifted back to the Ilkhanid house after 1327. Ab Sad had
come of age and was intent on preserving his personal authority against
threats from the amirs. Shaykh asan Jalayir did not openly challenge his
royal cousin, even after Ab Sad took his wife from him. Instead, Shaykh
asan replaced Tmr Tsh in Anatolia, where he began acquiring his own
power. His growing influence is evident in Mamluk records of messages
sent to Egypt in 132829 from Shaykh asan, who was recognised as
the khans deputy (nib).28 The following year, Shaykh asans envoys
arrived in Egypt with greetings from the Mamluk sultan, independent of
Ab Sads own messengers.29 Shaykh asan is also named among the
69
The Jalayirids
rulers of the day in the colophon of an Armenian manuscript dated 780

/1331, after Ab Sad, and the Armenian and Georgian kings.30
Shaykh asan thus quickly established himself as a powerful local
governor in Anatolia. As we have seen, the Anatolian frontier had tradi-
tionally been a place where Ilkhanid amirs could acquire personal power
and launch rebellions against the central government. Shaykh asans
growing influence thus probably prompted Ab Sad to take action
against him. In 732/133132, a rumour was circulated in the royal house-
hold that Shaykh asan was conspiring with Baghdd Khtn against the
khan.31 Only the intervention of Shaykh asans mother, ljetey Sultan,
saved him from execution. Both of them were exiled to the Kemah fortress
in Anatolia, while Baghdd Khtn also suffered (maflk bd) for her
alleged part in the plot. However, after an inquiry, the rumour was judged
to be false, and she returned to favour.32 It seems that Shaykh asan was
also cleared, for he resumed his role as chief amir in Anatolia around
732/1332.33 He served with Ab Sads favour until the khans death in
736/1335.34
Thus, by 1335, Shaykh asan Jalayir was at the top of the Ilkhanid mil-
itary hierarchy. It is true that the fall of his father-in-law Amr Chpn and
his family resulted in Ab Sad Khan taking his wife Baghdd Khtn.
However, the fall of the Chubanids also meant that Shaykh asan became
the chief amir, or beylerbeyi, of the Ilkhanate. His mother, the Chinggisid
princess ljetey Sultan, acted as his protector at court, while he received
foreign envoys at his own household in Anatolia. Shaykh asan was
enmeshed in the ruling household and dependent on the Ilkhanid royal
house for his authority and status. However, the stability of the ruling
hierarchy came to a crashing halt by the end of 1335 when Ab Sad
died without a suitable successor. The chaos that ensued would result in
a scramble by Shaykh asan and several other members of the Ilkhanid
ruling elite to preserve the Ilkhanid uls, with themselves at the top of the
pile. As we will see in the next chapter, the period from 1335 to Shaykh
asans death in 1356 was a period of transition, as Shaykh asan strug-
gled to assert himself as a protector of Ilkhanid sovereignty and eventually
was resigned to the role of a local strongman in Baghdad.
Notes
1. See Bertold Spuler, Die Mongolen in Iran: Politik, Verwaltung, und Kultur
der Ilchanzeit, 12201350 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1955), 31422.
2. As Jean Aubin has pointed out, Mongol amirs tended to take over the admin-
istration of the state following succession struggles. Bqs vizierate was
70
followed by that of Shktr Noyan during Geykhatus reign, and Nawrz

under Ghazan. See Jean Aubin, mirs Mongols et vizirs Persans dans les
remous de lacculturation (Paris: Association pour lAvancement des tudes
Iraniennes, 1995), 85.
4. Rashd al-Dns insistence on Ghazans sincerity and complete impossibility
of hypocrisy in his conversion perhaps implies some question of Ghazans
motives in his own time: It is not hidden from all the intelligent people
that the Islam and faith of the pdishh of Islam Ghzn Khn was true and
sincere, and free from the impurity of hypocrisy and laxity. For with his
royal greatness and ability, and the perfection of his authoritative power, it
is not imaginable that he was compelled or forced. With needlessness and
independence, hypocrisy and suspicion are not possible. See Rashd al-Dn/
Jmi, 1,256. Charles Melville has pointed out that Rashd al-Dn was at
pains to stress the sincerity of Ghazans conversion. See Charles Melville,
Pdishh-i Islm: The Conversion of Sultan Mamd Ghzn Khn,
Pembroke Papers 1 (1990): 159.
5. For studies on conversion to Islam in the Mongol context, see Devin
DeWeese, Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde (University
Park: Penn State Press, 1994); Judith Pfeiffer, Reflections on a Double
Rapprochement: Conversion to Islam among the Mongol Elite during the
Early Ilkhanate, in Linda Komaroff (ed.), Beyond the Legacy of Genghis
Khan (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 36989; Judith Pfeiffer, Conversion Versions:
Sultan ljeyts Conversion to Shiism (709/1309) in Muslim Narrative
Sources, Mongolian Studies 22 (1999): 3567.
6. It is not clear who Amr usayns mother was. There is no record of q
Bqs other wives. On the title grgn, see TMEN, 1:4757 (no. 340).
8. Vaf/Trkh, 468; Vaf, Tarr-i Trkh-i Vaf, ed. Abd al-
Muammad yat (Tehran: Muassasa-yi Mulaat va Taqqt-i Farhang
[Pizhhishgh], 1372 [1993]), 252; Ab al-Qsim Qshn, Trkh-i ljyt,
ed. Mahin Hambly (Tehran, 1969), 8; fi Abr/ZJT, 8. Shabnkra lists
Amr usayn third among the amirs after Amr Chpn and Pld. See
Shabnkra/Majma, 270.
9. Gottfried Herrmann, Persische Urkunden der Mongolenzeit (Wiesbaden:
Harrassowitz Verlag, 2004), 845.
10. fi Abr/ZJT, 1617. On the Gilan campaign, see Charles Melville, The
lkhn ljeits Conquest of Gln (1307): Rumour and Reality, in Reuven
Amitai-Preiss and David O. Morgan (eds), The Mongol Empire and its
Legacy (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 73125.
11. Vaf/Trkh, 610.
12. Qshn, Trkh-i ljyt, 83.
13. The banquet was a disaster, as the envoy insulted Amr usayns lineage.
See Qshn, Trkh-i ljyt, 1756.
71
The Jalayirids

16. Qshn, Trkh-i ljyt, 121.
17. Mehmed Fuad Kprl, Islam in Anatolia after the Turkish Invasion
(Prolegomena), ed. and trans. Gary Leiser (Salt Lake City: University of
Utah Press, 1993), 26.
18. See Charles Melville, The Fall of Amir Chupan and the Decline of the
Ilkhanate, 13271337: A Decade of Discord in Iran (Bloomington: Indiana
University, Research Institute for Inner Asian Studies, 1999); Charles
Melville, Ab Sad and the Revolt of the Amirs in 1319, in Denise Aigle
(ed.), LIran face la domination mongole (Tehran: Institut Franais de
Recherche en Iran, 1997), 89120; Charles Melville, Wolf or Shepherd?
Amir Chupans Attitude to Government, in Julian Raby and Teresa
Fitzherbert (eds), The Court of the Ilkhans, 12901340 (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1996), 7993.
19. As Thomas Allsen has pointed out, in 724/1324 the Yan emperor, after a
recommendation from Ab Sad, had issued an order to make Amr Chpn
a commander unequalled in honour and duke who assists the state. Allsen
has shown that these titles seem to be calques on the Islamic title amr al-
umar. See Thomas T. Allsen, Notes on Chinese Titles in Mongol Iran,
Mongolian Studies 14 (1991): 334.
20. Amr Chpn married ljeyts daughter Dland. When she died in 707
/130708, Amr Chpn was betrothed to his other daughter S Beg. See
Qshn, Trkh-i ljyt, 78; Dvd ibn Muammad Bankat, Trkh-i
Bankat: Rawzat l al-Albb f Marifat al-Tavrkh wa-al-Ansb, ed.
Jafar Shir (Tehran, 1348 [1969]), 473.
21. Amr usayn may have been removed from Arran even before ljeyts
death; Vaf writes that he was in Baghdad at that time. See Vaf/Trkh,
623.
22. Amr Chpn was grooming Dimashq Khwja as his successor. An illustra-
tion of Dimashq Khwjas position in the state is provided by Ibn Baa,
who arrived in Baghdad in 727/1327, coinciding with a visit by Ab Sad
to the city. He saw the khan and his vizier, Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad, on a
boat on the Tigris. In front of them was Dimashq Khwja who, Ibn Baa
wrote, held mastery over Ab Sad (al-mutaghallib al ab sad). See
Ibn Baa, Rilat Ibn Baa: al-Musamm Tufat al-Nur f Gharib
1964), 1:143; Ibn Baa, The Travels of Ibn Baa, a.d. 13251354, trans.
H.A. R. Gibb (Cambridge: Hakluyt Society at the University Press, 1971),
2:3367.
23. Ibn Baa, Rila, 1:144; Ibn Baa, The Travels of Ibn Baa, 2:337.
24. afad/Ayn, 2:11115.
25. afad/Ayn, 2:115.
26. afad/Ayn, 1:696.
72
27. Shabnkra/Majma, 295: literally, he was with her in one garment, both
stuck their heads out from one collar (b vay dar yak jma m-bd har d az
yak garbn sar brn karda).
28. Maqrz/Ziyda, 1:310.
30. Avedis K. Sanjian (ed. and trans.), Colophons of Armenian Manuscripts,
13011480: A Source for Middle Eastern History (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1969), 75.
31. Melville surmises that this accusation originated with rivals centred around
Ab Sads mother, j Khtn. See Melville, The Fall of Amir Chupan,
35.
32. fi Abr/ZJT, 142.
34. fi Abr/ZJT, 142. In 1334, Ab Sad appointed Masd Shh, son of the
Injuid governor of Fars, Mamd Shh, as Shaykh asans deputy; see fi
Abr/ZJT, 143. Masd Shh had been deported from Fars after his fathers
failed attempt to oust Ab Sads chosen governor there. Yet, he was soon
released, and would remain an ally of Shaykh asan Jalayir in the years that
followed. On the Injuids in Fars, see Shabnkra/Majma, 296; J. A. Boyle,
ndj, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1971), 3:1,208.
73
5
Crisis and Transition (133556)
When Ab Sad Bahdur Khan died on 13 Rab II 736/30 November

1335, in the words of fi Abr, the kingdom without a sultan became
like a body without a soul and a flock without a shepherd.1 With no
clear heir to the throne, the Ilkhanid political order broke down. This had
been an order based on the royal leadership of the Chinggisid dynasty
descended from Hleg, which by 1295 had settled in the line of Abaqa
Khan. The centralising tendency that gained traction with Ghazan Khan
and had reached its height under Ab Sad had created strong ties
between the Ilkhanid royal house and other military grandees, such as
Shaykh asan, as well as administrative families such as that of Rashd
al-Dn and Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad. The death of Ab Sad put an
end to the centralising dynamic of Ilkhanid politics. The period after
1335 was characterised by multiple power centres throughout the former
Ilkhanid lands. An aspect of this development was the rise in power of the
Oyrats, one of the few Mongolian tribes that still maintained its cohesion
within the Ilkhanate in the fourteenth century. Although the Oyrats were
initially led by their chief who attempted to take power after Ab Sads
death, Shaykh asan ultimately became the lord of the Oyrat territories
in Diyarbakr and northern Iraq. In this sense, Shaykh asan was a tribal
chief; however, it was not the Jalayir, but the Oyrat tribe that came under
his command in the 1340s. By the time of Shaykh asans death in 1356,
he was only one of several regional rulers, in control of the region from
Khuzistan in the south to Diyarbakr in the north. However, he was unable
to capture the real prize, which was Azarbayjan and its capital Tabriz.
This was also a period in which the notion of Chinggisid sovereignty
seems to have lost some of its significance. Until the 1340s, amirs who
attempted to claim the Ilkhanate for themselves generally offered their
services to a Chinggisid puppet, who served to legitimise their bid for
power. After the 1340s, however, local rulers had largely dispensed with
Chinggisid pretenders and attempted to construct alternative ideological
narratives. It would be Shaykh asans son, Shaykh Uvays, who would
74
develop this narrative most fully, after finally conquering Azarbayjan in

the late 1350s.
The Death of Ab Sad and Crisis in the Ilkhanate

Ab Sad had no living male children. The only hope for the continuation
of the dynasty was the unborn child of his wife Dilshd Khtn. She was
the daughter of Dimashq Khwja b. Amr Chpn, and had become the
favourite of Ab Sad in the later years of his reign.2 Her child would not
be born until the following May, and in the intervening months various
factions manoeuvred for position in the political vacuum.
One of these factions was led by Ab Sads vizier, Ghiyth al-Dn
Muammad, the son of the vizier and historian Rashd al-Dn.3 According
to Shabnkra, at the time of Ab Sads death, the only grandees present
at the urd were Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad and the Injuid amir Sharaf
al-Dn Mamd Shh. The amir favoured a temporary ruler until all the
amirs could convene and agree on a proper successor to Ab Sad, and thus
suggested that ljeyts daughter, S Beg, act as regent in the interim.4
However, Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad favoured a more permanent solution
to what he regarded as an urgent problem, that is, a vacancy on the throne
and an absence of royal authority in the Ilkhanate. Shabnkra demon-
strates this point of view by quoting the vizier as saying:
If we do this [enthrone S Beg temporarily], an unspeakable uproar will
arise. If rulership is not absolute (mustaqill), pain will reach the people of the
country, and unlawful killing and plunder will be the price.5
Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad then revealed that Ab Sad had designated

as his successor a descendant of Tolui Khan, named Arp, whom Ab
Sad had made a day labourer (muyvama), and who was currently
working in the stables.6 According to fi Abr, Arp was a descend-
ant of Hlegs brother, Arigh Bke, son of Tolui.7 In the absence of a
commonly recognised heir, Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad was free to des-
ignate Arp as his own candidate to succeed Ab Sad. The faction of
Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad and Mamd Shh, along with Ab Sads
mother and sister, j Khtn and S Beg, conferred rulership on him
the night that Ab Sad died, and the next day, the khuba was given in
his name, as Sultan Muizz al-Duny wa-al-Dn Mamd.8 In an effort to
enhance Arps legitimacy as the continuator of the Ilkhanid dynasty, he
was married to S Beg,9 who, for the next several years, would become
central to the political manoeuvring of the amirs. As an Ilkhanid princess,
S Beg represented the charisma of the Chinggisids, and thus became
75
The Jalayirids
Court faction:
Ghiy th al-D n Mu ammad, supported Arp , a descendant of Tolui
Sharaf al-D n Ma m d Sh h nj , supported S Beg, sister of Ab Sa d
Consensus eventually made for Arp
Oyrat faction:
Al P dsh h and Oyrat tribe, supported M s, a descendant of Baydu
Figure 5.1 Factions following Ab Sads death.
an important symbolic figure as different parties attempted to claim that

charisma for themselves.
The authority claimed by Arp Khan and Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad
was not recognised as legitimate throughout the Ilkhanid realm, however.
In Anatolia, the amir Shaykh asan Jalayir refused to recognise Arp
Khan. Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad understood that this was a major obsta-
cle to his plan, and warned the new khan that as long as [Shaykh asans]
opinion is not settled, nothing will be stable (mumahhad).10
Opposition to the regime of Ghiyth al-Dn and Arp Khan also came
from the Oyrat amirs who were led by Al Pdshh, Ab Sads maternal
uncle.11 Al Pdshh had two important advantages over the vizier and
his Chinggisid protg. First, he commanded the Oyrat tribal groups that
resided in Mesopotamia, between Baghdad and Diyarbakr. The Oyrats
were one of the few remaining cohesive tribal factions, and were mobi-
lised frequently in the post-Ilkhan period. Second, Al Pdshh became
the guardian of Dilshd Khtn and her unborn child after she had fled
to Baghdad after Ab Sads death.12 It seems likely that Al Pdshh
assumed that if she gave birth to a son, he would have an undisputed claim
to the Ilkhanid throne. However, before the birth, Al Pdshh and the
Oyrats raised their own Chinggisid protg as their symbolic leader, a
descendant of Baydu Khan named Ms.13
It is clear at this stage (c. 736/1336) that no military or political leader
believed they could rule on their own terms without the prestige inherent
in the family of Chinggis Qan. The fact that Arp, a Chinggisid but not
a Hlegid, was enthroned raises the question of how important the sec-
ondary Ilkhanid dynastic dispensation was to the concept of legitimacy.
Such a choice suggests that a more general Chinggisid descent was the
primary requirement, although in Khurasan in the same period a descend-
ant of Chinggis Qans brother was recognised as khan. Such developments
suggest that precise lineal proximity to the Ilkhans was not as important as
76
a more broadly conceived Mongol prestige, where an appeal to the gran-

deur of the altn urgh in its most general terms was the factor that lent
legitimacy to political claims.14
The two contending factions of Arp Khan and Ghiyth al-Dn
Muammad on one side, and Ms Khan and Al Pdshh on the other,
met in battle in the spring of 736/1336.15 Although the forces of Arp and
Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad greatly outnumbered the Oyrats, Al Pdshh
emerged victorious after two of Arps amirs defected, and after concoct-
ing a ruse which convinced both Arp and Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad
that the other had been defeated.16 Tribal affiliation may have played a
role in the defection of Arps troops to Al Pdshhs side. According
to Shabnkra, before the battle, Arps amir Akrunj had pledged his
allegiance to Al Pdshh and told him:
Come with me, for your soldiers are all from among the Uyghur tribes
(qabil-i uyghr), and are of the same race (hamjins) as my tmn. When it is
the day of battle, we all will separate from Arps army.17
The connection between the Oyrats, who made up Al Pdshhs

army, and the Uyghur mentioned here is not entirely clear. However,
Shabnkra makes it clear in his account of Akrunjs appeal to Al
Pdshh that there was some kind of affinity between the men they
commanded. As a consequence of the Oyrat victory, Ghiyth al-Dn
Muammad and his brother Pr Suln were captured and brought before
Al Pdshh. fi Abr reports that Al Pdshh wanted to spare
them, but the other amirs pressured him to execute these sons of Rashd
al-Dn.18 The familys quarter in Tabriz (rab-i rashd) was thoroughly
plundered by the mob (rind va awbsh).19 Arp Khan was also eventually
captured and executed.20
Al Pdshh had emerged as the dominant figure in the western
Ilkhanid lands. Nine days after the battle with Arp Khan and Ghiyth
al-Dn Muammad, Dilshd Khtn gave birth to a daughter, and the hope
for the continuation of the male Hlegid line was ended. Al Pdshh
attempted to rule through his Chinggisid protg Ms Khan and his
vizier, Jaml j b. Tj al-Dn Al Shrvn, but opposition to his regime
soon emerged, finding a focus in Anatolia with Shaykh asan Jalayir.
In the following section, we will examine the rise of Shaykh asan, his
assumption of control over Oyrat-dominated Arab Iraq, and the establish-
ment of Baghdad as the base of Jalayirid power.
77
The Jalayirids
Shaykh asan Jalayir and the Regionalisation of the

Post-Ilkhan Period
Opposition to the Oyrat regime of Al Pdshh formed part of a wider
struggle over control of the frontier zone between the western Ilkhanid
provinces of Anatolia, Diyarbakr and Arab Iraq, and the Mamluk sultanate.
At the heart of this conflict was the control over the traditional migration
corridor of the Oyrats, between their summer pastures in eastern Anatolia
and their winter pastures in the area around Mosul.21 These provinces were
politically significant for two reasons. As the western edge of the Ilkhanid
domains, they had served as a buffer against the Mamluk sultanate of
Syria and Egypt, the Ilkhans traditional rivals in the west. In addition,
as home to the Oyrats, organised around their own tribal leadership, the
region offered potential as a source of loyal military manpower.
The main opposition to the rule of Al Pdshh and Ms Khan came
from the amir j aghy, whose family had served as governors of the
Ilkhanid province of Diyarbakr. His father, Sty Akhtj, was the head of
a tmn of troops in Diyarbakr from the beginning of ljeyts reign until
his death in 732/133132.22 According to afad, when he died, control
of Diyarbakr passed to Al Pdshh.23 j aghy and his family, who
had hereditary claims to Diyarbakr, found themselves threatened from two
sides after the rise of Al Pdshh. Not only did they face pressure from
the Oyrats in Iraq,24 who sought to control Diyarbakr after Stys death,
but they also faced pressure from the Mamluks, who sought to establish
a secure eastern frontier. Al Pdshh had offered this possibility to the
Mamluk sultan al-Nir Muammad, promising to turn Baghdad over
to him and act as his deputy there in return for Mamluk aid against the
sons of Sty and Arp Khan.25 j aghy thus sought assistance from
Shaykh asan Jalayir in Anatolia, and was soon joined by several other
major amirs who opposed the Oyrat regime. Shaykh asan summoned a
Hlegid prince named Muammad from Tabriz, and crowned him sultan.
After entrusting Anatolia to his deputy Eretna (Aratn),26 Shaykh asan
set out for Tabriz with his following of amirs and the army of Rm to
confront Al Pdshh.27
Thus Shaykh asan joined the scramble for power in the post-Ab
Sad Ilkhanate. He was in a good position and it is understandable that he
would attract a large number of followers. According to the Mamluk chan-
cery official al-Umar (d. 749/1349), Shaykh asan was the biklr bik
[beglerbeg], or amr al-umar, the same position held by Qutlughshh
under Ghazan Khan, and Amr Chpn under ljeyt.28 We may assume
that he had a large number of troops under his direct command in Anatolia,
78
the right hand of the Ilkhanid uls. Since the death of the Saljq sultan
Masd II at Konya in 702/1303, and further after the death of Amr
Chpn in 727/1327, Ilkhan amirs in Anatolia had come to act with greater
autonomy.29 Such an increased regional independence was a common
phenomenon in other regions of the Ilkhanate, which began to come
under the control of local amirs and elite families. In Persian Iraq (Irq-i
Ajam), the Injuids held sway, while the Muzaffarids emerged in Yazd and
Kirman. At the same time, Ilkhan Iran became more profoundly divided
between two spheres of political activity. In the west, the royal migration
corridor between Sultaniyya and Tabriz in the south and Qarabagh, Arran
and Mughan in the north became the centre of political gravity, and the
area which all of the political contenders aspired to control.
During the rule of the Ilkhans, the city of Tabriz became the centre
of imperial government and international trade, and a site for monumen-
tal architecture. Because of its administrative, economic and symbolic
importance as the centre of Ilkhanid political authority, Tabriz remained
the most important city in western Iran until the transfer of the Safavid
capital to Qazvin in 955/1548. At the time of the conquests of Hleg in
Iran in the 650s/1250s, Tabriz was already an important city in the Mongol
imperial administration. It became the site of the new central mint in 650
/125253, making it the financial centre of the entire Mongol empire.30
After Hlegs arrival, it seemed as if Maragha would replace Tabriz as
the Mongol capital in Azarbayjan. Hleg constructed an observatory at
Maragha, as well as a castle on the island of Shh near the city, where he
was buried. According to amd Allh Mustawf Qazvn, Maragha was
the original capital (dr al-mulk) of Azarbayjan before Tabriz.31 However,
during the reign of Hlegs grandson Arghun (r. 683/1284690/1291),
Tabriz began to emerge as the primary Ilkhanid city. Arghun built an
urban quarter to the west of the city of Tabriz, at a place known as Sham
(or Shamb), beginning around 689/1290. The building project included
two palaces and a Buddhist temple, as well as a canal to encourage others
to build houses in the area.32 This quarter became known as Arghniyya,
and set the precedent for subsequent building and urban development by
members of the Ilkhanid ruling elite. Arghuns son Ghazan resided in the
palace of Arghniyya, and also began construction of his own tomb in
the district of Sham in 696/1297. Around his mausoleum, Ghazan built a
number of other public buildings, which came to form the core of the new
suburb (shahrcha) of Ghzniyya.33 These structures included a mosque,
two madrasas, a hospice (dr al-siyda), an observatory, a library, a
council chamber (dvn-khna) and several baths.34 The famous traveller
Ibn Baa camped outside Tabriz at the suburb of Sham during the reign
79
The Jalayirids
of Ab Sad, and described its madrasa and zviya where food was pro-
vided to travellers.35
The Ilkhan rulers were not the only patrons of urban development in
Tabriz. On the heights northeast of the city at a place called Valyn Kh
the vizier and historian Rashd al-Dn built his own quarter, known as the
Rab-i Rashd.36 Rashd al-Dns son, Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad, who
served as the vizier to Ab Sad, continued building in the Rab-i Rashd.37
Another important building project was the Dimashqiyya quarter, built by
Baghdd Khtn, the wife of Shaykh asan Jalayir and Ab Sad. The
area was named for Baghdd Khtns brother, Dimashq Khwja, who
died in 727/1327 amid the downfall of the Chubanid family. Little trace
remains of the Dimashqiyya quarter, which, according to a tenth/sixteenth-
century source, was situated on the east side of the city.38 Three sons of the
Jalayirid sultan Shaykh Uvays were buried in the Dimashqiyya.39
In addition to these four districts, which represented the efforts of the
Ilkhanid political elite to contribute to the flourishing of the religious and
civic life of Tabriz, as well as to glorify their own memories, other build-
ing projects were undertaken in the city in the eighth/fourteenth century.
One of the most important for the defence of the city was the extension of
the city walls by Ghazan Khan in 702/130203,40 an indication that Tabriz
was growing at the turn of the eighth/fourteenth century. One of the major
reasons for the urban growth during Ghazans reign was probably the eco-
nomic prosperity of the city as a centre of long-distance trade. The loca-
tion of Tabriz on the east-west route that passed from Khurasan, through
Qazvin, and into Anatolia to the Black Sea and Mediterranean ensured its
importance as a centre for commercial traffic. Parallel to this, the cities of
Baghdad and Basra suffered, due to the increased importance of Tabriz, as
well as the growth of a commercial route to Hormuz that bypassed these
cities and instead passed to the east through Iran.41 In addition to economic
decline, Arab Iraq suffered in terms of agricultural production following
the Mongol invasions. This decline, which had begun in Abbasid times,
was accelerated by the interruption of intensive cultivation that was only
possible through a highly organised and co- ordinated administrative
structure. At the same time, such a drop in production undermined the
financial basis for any such centrally organised state, as had existed under
the Sasanians and early Abbasids.42
The subsequent contraction of the economy in Arab Iraq due to the
decline of commercial traffic and agricultural production helps to explain
attempts by the Jalayirid amir Shaykh asan and Sultan Shaykh Uvays to
extend their authority beyond Iraq into Azarbayjan. The growth of trade
in Tabriz is reflected in another one of Ghazans building projects, the
80
Ghzniyya market. Ibn Baa was impressed by the size of this bazaar,
as well as the quality of the items for sale, particularly the jewellery.43
The Castilian envoy Clavijo, who passed through Tabriz some sixty years
later, also commented on the great amount of merchandise and large
number of merchants in the city.44 Johannes Schiltberger, a Bavarian cru-
sader and captive of Tmr, wrote that the ruler of Tabriz was wealthier
than the most powerful Christian king, because so many merchants came
to Tabriz.45 Thus, during the eighth/fourteenth century, Tabriz was impor-
tant for its role in regional and long-distance trade, and in periods of politi-
cal instability in Azarbayjan, especially in the years 736/1335744/1343,
753/1352759/1358, and 786/1384809/1406, Tabriz became a target and
a prize for sultans and amirs who sought to profit from this trade.
In the eighth/fourteenth century, Tabriz remained the focus of politi-
cal and economic life in western Iran, even after the death of Ab Sad
and the collapse of the political unity of the Ilkhanate. The successors to
the Ilkhans continued to build in the city. The most important building
of the Jalayirid period in Tabriz was the palace complex known as the
dawlat-khna. Built by Shaykh Uvays after his conquest of Azarbayjan in
759/1358, the dawlat-khna served as the royal residence and home to the
central government administration. Clavijo described the dawlat-khna
as a great palace, surrounded by a wall, with twenty thousand rooms.46
The Qarquynl sultan Jahnshh later built what became known as
the new dawlat-khna at a place called ib-bd during his reign
(843/1439872/1467).47
An important consequence of the disintegration of political unity in
the Ilkhanate after 736/1335 was that the eastern Ilkhanid territory, par-
ticularly Khurasan, became significantly removed from the horizon of the
factions competing for Azarbayjan, and developed along its own course.
Of primary importance in Khurasan were the Kart maliks at Herat, the
Shii-Sufi-ayn condominium at Sabzavar, known as the Sarbadrs,48 and
the Mongol military elite under the leadership of aghy Tmr Khan. As
will be shown below, the Khurasanians made occasional contact with the
western leaders, but for the most part Khurasan and Azarbayjan remained
distinct political spheres until the rise of the Safavids in the tenth/sixteenth
century. Even Tmr and his descendants, who conquered all of Iran and
most of Anatolia, could not retain control over the west, which remained
effectively ruled by the Jalayirids, followed by the Qarquynl and
qquynl Turkman confederations.
Shaykh asans confrontation with Al Pdshh and the Oyrats was
the first step in the establishment of Jalayirid control over the western
regions. For Shaykh asan, however, the main issue may not have been
81
The Jalayirids
a matter of seizing power for himself, but rather of limiting the personal
power of Al Pdshh and ensuring consensus among the amirs. Before
confronting Al Pdshh in battle, Shaykh asan called on Al Pdshh
to give up his power and allow a sultan to be named by all the amirs.
He appealed to the custom of their ancestors, and their background in
a common Ilkhanid uls. This sentiment is recorded in Shabnkras
Majma al-Ansb, as well as the Zayl-i Jmi al-Tavrkh of fi Abr.
In Shabnkras version, Shaykh asan insists:
In the ys of Chinggis Qan, when it comes to the affairs of royalty (kr-i
khniyat), war is not permitted. Why did the army of the pdishh all fall into
the hands of discord and ruin on the pretense of opposition between the amirs?
Al Psh is an q. Be patient, for I will arrive. Let the qs and ns and
ladies hold a quriltay and establish someone from his lineage, and by him let us
bring the dignity ( jvir) of Tolui and Hleg nearer.49
fi Abrs version reflects the same concern for the tradition of consen-
sus lest order break down:
We have all been in one uls and we know one another. The customs of the
fathers and ancestors is clear. It is better that we all agree and seat a ruler on
the throne who is deserving of the sultanate, and that everyone stays on his own
path and custom.
Like this strife, that one seeks that which
Brings discord throughout the land
In order that unlawful (n-aqq) blood does not flow and the country
remains flourishing and inhabited,
The condition we give to you
Is to either heed my words or suffer.50
In both versions, Shaykh asan urges the amirs to agree to a convention

of political acclamation (quriltay) in order to put an end to armed con-
flict and elect a ruler peacefully. The quriltay was a tradition of nomadic
steppe politics, and had precedent in the Mongol empire going back to the
assembly that named Chinggis Qan the ruler of all Mongols in 602/1206,
although more often than not a quriltay was a symbolic confirmation of a
single dominant contender for the throne, rather than an election among
several candidates, and served as an occasion for members of the royal
family and the amirs to gather and assert their voice in the collective
political enterprise. The fact that a major quriltay had not been held for
either Arp or Ms Khan meant that Shaykh asan, the amr-i uls, had
not consented to these choices for political leadership, and was asserting
what he assumed to be his traditional right to take part in the process of
enthroning the new khan.
82
Although their accounts of Shaykh asans message to the Oyrats are

similar, Shabnkra and fi Abr provide differing interpretations of
his actual motives. According to the Majma al-Ansb, Shaykh asans
words were designed to lull the Oyrats into a false sense of security that
would allow him to prepare his army from among the troops in Anatolia
and Georgia.51 fi Abr, however, ascribes the cause of the conflict
between Shaykh asan and Al Pdshh to the Oyrat amirs, who replied
that we have taken the kingdom by the power of our own hands...
[Shaykh asan] cannot deceive us with these fables (afsnh).52 The
Oyrat position was that their rule was justified merely by the military force
they were able to command. Contrary to this was Shaykh asans appeal
to the tradition of consensus and election of the ruler by all members of
the military elite.
With the Oyrats refusal to compromise, both sides prepared for mili-
tary conflict. In the ensuing battle at Qar Durra, near ldgh, on 14 Dh
al-ijja 736/24 July 1336, Shaykh asans forces, referred to by fi
Abr as the Anatolians (rm), and the supporters of Muammad Khan
(muammadyn), defeated Al Pdshh and the Oyrat army.53 Shaykh
asan and Muammad Khan occupied Tabriz, the Ilkhanates urban
capital. Shaykh asan married Dilshd Khtn, the former wife of Ab
Sad, in retribution for Ab Sads seizure of Baghdd Khtn nine
years earlier.54 He also began to rebuild Tabriz, and returned the family of
Rashd al-Dn to the vizierate, naming Khwja Shams al-Dn Zakary to
this office.55 Now in control of eastern Anatolia and Azarbayjan, Shaykh
asan had assumed the paramount position in the dissolving Ilkhanate.
The continuing decentralisation and regionalisation of political power
would make it impossible for Shaykh asan to reconstitute the united
Ilkhanid uls with Muammad as khan, Shams al-Dn Zakary as vizier,
and himself as amr-i uls. Without a strong, commonly recognised ruler,
and with the related increase in the power of local leaders of various social
strata, Shaykh asan could not unite the whole of the Ilkhanid military to
his banner.
For most of the next twenty years, until his death in 757/1356, Shaykh
asan would face a number of challenges from competing regional
powers, the most important of which was that of Shaykh asan Chbn,
also known as asan-i Kchak. The aim of Shaykh asan Jalayir in this
period was to control Azarbayjan, while at the same time retaining his
influence in Arab Iraq and eastern Anatolia. As time went on, it became
apparent that the ideal of preserving the unity of the Ilkhanate as a single
uls under the rule of a single Chinggisid khan was no longer a realis-
tic possibility. During the period 736/1336757/1356, Shaykh asan
83
The Jalayirids
conducted a number of experiments with various Chinggisid princes in an

effort to continue the Ilkhanid dynastic tradition, while he retained his own
position as amr-i uls. The descendants of Chinggis Qan were no longer
in any position to rule; at the same time, the tribal contingents which had
formed the basis of Mongol political culture before Chinggis Qan had
been dismantled.
With these changing circumstances, the identity of the Jalayir as a
group had also changed. The end of effective Ilkhanid rule represented
the third phase in a process of reorganisation of the tribal groups, includ-
ing the Jalayir, within the Mongol empire. In the first phase, they had
been dispersed among Chinggis Qans imperial army on a world scale
at the start of the seventh/thirteenth century. The creation of the princely
ulses reprioritised the meaning of ones tribal identity, and represented a
second phase of reorganisation. For the Jalayir of the Ilkhanate, they were
amirs of the uls first, and only secondarily members of a common tribe,
although this tribal affiliation was remembered. In the third phase, the end
of a realistic hope for a viable Ilkhan uls left an opening for new concep-
tions of political relationships and hierarchy. The old tribal structure could
not be reconstituted after being so profoundly disrupted by the phenom-
enon of the Mongol world empire.56 At the same time, neither a Sunni
caliph nor a Chinggisid khan could be called on to fill the political void;
in neither case could a suitable candidate be agreed upon after the end
of both of those dynastic lines, in 656/1258 and 736/1335 respectively.
Thus, the rise of the Jalayirid dynasty in the eighth/fourteenth century did
not represent a reconstitution of tribal identity as the operative political
mode.57 Instead, the Jalayirids were a ruling family whose paternal herit-
age (Jalayir tribalism) and maternal heritage (Chinggisid royalism) had
been the two former bases for political hierarchy among the Mongols, but
were no longer viable. Nevertheless, their practical military and political
strength allowed them to dominate much of the western Ilkhanid lands.
This de facto authority at a time of ideological uncertainty contributed
to fluid and changing notions of what legitimate political authority
meant in the eighth/fourteenth century. At the height of Jalayirid power
(757/1356776/1374), Shaykh asans son Shaykh Uvays would assume
independent authority, deriving from a variety of ideological sources.
However, during the period before Shaykh Uvays claimed royal authority
for himself, Shaykh asan and his contemporaries attempted to rule in the
name of Chinggisid puppet khans.
We have already mentioned Shaykh asans enthronement of
Muammad Khan, a descendant of Hleg through his son, Mngke
Temr.58 Following his victory over the Oyrats led by Al Pdshh and
84
Ms Khan, Shaykh asan issued decrees to the Ilkhanid provinces declar-

ing that the right of rulership belonged to him. However, theoretically,
Shaykh asan served Muammad Khan, whose titles included the great-
est sultan, king of kings of the inhabited quarter, lord of the necks of the
populace, shadow of God in both worlds (suln al-aam, shhanshh-i
rub-i maskn, mlik-i riqb al-umam, ill allh f al-arayn).59 The
authority of Muammad Khan was not recognised everywhere throughout
the Ilkhanate, despite his lofty titles. Shaykh asan faced further opposi-
tion from a number of factions, including the Mongol leadership in the
northeastern Iranian province of Khurasan.60 The Khurasanian army,
led by Shaykh Al b. Al Qshch, agreed to invade Azarbayjan, and
chose a descendant of Chinggis Qans brother Otchigin (tikn),61 named
aghy Tmr, as their khan. In the spring of 737/1337 the Khurasanian
forces occupied Sultaniyya, and threatened to oust Shaykh asan and
Muammad Khan from Azarbayjan.62 Faced with this invasion, Shaykh
asan renewed his alliance with S Beg, the daughter of ljeyt and
former wife of the short-lived Arp Khan.
After being defeated by the Khurasanians, Ms Khan and his Oyrat
followers joined them, and together they attacked Shaykh asan in Dh
al-Qada 737/June 1337 at Maragha.63 aghy Tmr retreated during
the battle, and Shaykh asan defeated the combined Khurasanian-Oyrat
army.64 Both Ms Khan and Shaykh Al were executed on the Feast of
the Sacrifice (d al-a). Soon after, Shaykh asan executed the rebel-
lious amirs san Qutlugh and Akrunj.65 Although Shaykh asan continued
to serve in the name of Muammad Khan, there was no doubt that he was
the real power behind the throne.66
This victory had two important consequences for the position of
Shaykh asan, and for the former Ilkhanid territory in general. First, the
Khurasanian and Oyrat leadership had been eliminated. The Oyrats, who
remained primarily in Iraq, would eventually come under the control of the
Jalayirids. Second, although aghy Tmr survived, Khurasan became
even more isolated from political events in the west. Shaykh asan had
consolidated his power in Azarbayjan, albeit for only a brief period. The
following year he would be driven out of Azarbayjan by a resurgence of
the other great family of Ilkhanid in-laws, the Chubanids.
The JalayiridChubanid Rivalry

The JalayiridChubanid rivalry would be the major theme of the remain-
ing years of Shaykh asans life, and would only be resolved after the
final destruction of the Chubanids by an invasion from the Golden Horde
85
The Jalayirids
in 758/1357. With the containment of the Oyrats and the Khurasanians,

the conflict between Shaykh asan Jalayir and Shaykh asan Chbn
over control of Azarbayjan would dominate events in western Iran and
would shape the development of the contemporary political ideology.
One aspect of this conflict was the competition between these two amirs
for legitimacy through the khans they raised and supported. These khans
were descended from various Chinggisid lines, with one exception. The
JalayiridChubanid rivalry was not a tribal conflict, a latent Jalayir-Sulduz
feud in an eighth/fourteenth-century form, but instead was an attempt by
two Ilkhanid amirs to reconstitute the Ilkhanid uls, albeit on a smaller
scale, and reclaim their place within a political structure where practical
affairs and symbolic legitimacy were firmly under their control.
The re-emergence of the Chubanids was led by Shaykh asan Chbn,
the son of Tmr Tsh (d. 728/1328) and grandson of Amr Chpn (d. 727
/1327). As mentioned above, Amr Chpn had been the amr-i uls and
virtual sovereign of the Ilkhanate until Ab Sad engineered his removal
and execution. The decade-long weakness of the Chubanid family allowed
for the rise of Shaykh asan Jalayir in Anatolia, and his conquest of
Azarbayjan in 737/1337. However, around this time, Shaykh asan
Chbn hatched a plot to reclaim his familys prominence, which con-
tributed to his reputation as a master of trickery.67 He produced a certain
Turk named Qar Jur, who had been the slave of one of his fathers depu-
ties, and claimed that he was in fact his father Tmr Tsh.68 It should
be recalled that Tmr Tsh had taken refuge in the Mamluk sultanate
during the coup against Amr Chpn and his family, but was eventually
executed on the order of Sultan al-Nir Muammad.69 However, Shaykh
asan Chbn claimed that his father had survived, and had returned
from Egypt and the jj pilgrimage to assume the right of the Chubanids
in the Ilkhanate.70 Shaykh asan Chbn sent a message to Shaykh asan
Jalayir announcing the return of his father. Shaykh asan Jalayir was
sceptical, and sent Tmr Tshs former chamberlain to ascertain the truth
of the matter. Shaykh asan Chbn deceived (bi-firft) the chamberlain,
so that when he returned to Shaykh asan Jalayir, he confirmed that it was
the real Tmr Tsh.71 fi Abr reports that with this news, all of the
Chubanids parted from Shaykh asan Jalayir and joined Shaykh asan
Chbn and the false Tmr Tsh. They were also joined by the Oyrats,
who turned against the Jalayirid amir. The loss of these important troop
contingents was a disastrous blow to Shaykh asan Jalayir. In the face of
the Chubanids superior force at ldgh on 27 Dh al-ijja 738/16 July
1338, Shaykh asan Jalayir retreated, and his forces were defeated. His
Chinggisid protg Muammad Khan fell into the hands of the enemy
86
and was killed. At this point, Shaykh asan Chbn suspected that Qar
Jur, the false Tmr Tsh, was plotting against him. He exposed him as a
Turkman beggar, not Tmr Tsh,72 and abandoned him. Qar Jur went
to Tabriz, but was routed there by Shaykh asan Jalayir, and eventually
went to Baghdad with the Oyrats.73
Shaykh asan Jalayir thus found himself in an extremely weak position.
He had lost much of his military backing, as well as his Chinggisid puppet
khan, and had been driven out of Azarbayjan. He fled first to Sultaniyya,
then further east to Qazvin. He returned to Sultaniyya after reaching a
truce with the Chubanids in 739/late 1338.74 Not only had he been driven
out of Azarbayjan, but he had also lost his original base of operations in
Anatolia, which was held by Shaykh asan Chbns brother, Malik
Ashraf. The Chubanids thus occupied the entire northwestern region of
the former Ilkhanate, while Qar Jur and the Oyrats controlled Baghdad
and Arab Iraq.
Shaykh asan Jalayir desperately needed a fresh source of military
manpower if he hoped to retake what he had lost in the western prov-
inces. For this, he looked to the east and the Khurasanians. Shaykh asan
Jalayir recognised aghy Tmr as khan, and invited him and his forces
to invade. It is likely that Shaykh asan thought that he could control
aghy Tmr the way he had controlled Muammad Khan. However,
when the Khurasanians reached Sultaniyya in mid-739/early 1339, Shaykh
asans followers resented their high-handed behaviour and resisted their
leadership.75 Needless to say, this did not help his position vis--vis the
Chubanids.
Meanwhile, Shaykh asan Chbn was attempting to establish his
own legitimacy in Arran and Azarbayjan by recognising S Beg as
pdishh. Although it was fairly common for women to rule in the
Mongol political context, they were usually the wives of deceased khans,
who presided as regents or place-holders until a new male candidate could
be enthroned at a quriltay.76 It appears that S Beg was at first more than
a place-holder, and was intended by Shaykh asan Chbn to rule in her
own right, lending legitimacy to his amirate. S Beg was not an obscure
and distant cousin of the main line of Ilkhan rulers, as Arp, Ms and
Muammad had been. She was the daughter of ljeyt Khan, had been
betrothed to Amr Chpn, and had been married to Arp Khan. To further
bolster his claims to legitimate authority, Shaykh asan Chbn named
descendants of the two most important administrative families to the
vizierate, Rukn al-Dn Shaykh Rashd, and Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad
Alshh.77 Having taken Azarbayjan and installed as his allies represent-
atives of the Ilkhanates ruling elite, Shaykh asan Chbn turned to the
87
The Jalayirids
Khurasanians, who had been invited west by Shaykh asan Jalayir, and
were threatening Chubanid rule.
Instead of going to war, Shaykh asan Chbn concocted another ruse,
this time against aghy Tmr Khan. He promised to turn the province of
Arab Iraq over to the khan, in addition to the full support of his Chubanid
followers, provided aghy Tmr opposed Shaykh asan Jalayir.78
However, when aghy Tmr and the Khurasanian amirs arrived in
Sultaniyya in the summer of 73940/1339, Shaykh asan Chbn turned
the tables. He revealed to Shaykh asan Jalayir the Khurasanians pledge
to himself, along with his own assurance to the Jalayir amir that you are
my q, lord and kinsman.79 That is, Shaykh asan Chbn, by reveal-
ing the promises made to himself by aghy Tmr, created a rift between
the Khurasanians and Jalayirids. Shocked by aghy Tmrs treachery,
Shaykh asan Jalayir soundly rebuked him. The following day, aghy
Tmr and the Khurasanians returned to the east.80
Thus, by the summer of 73940/1339, Shaykh asan Jalayir had
lost Anatolia, Azarbayjan, and any possibility of Khurasanian military
support. However, he came to dominate the lowlands west of the Iranian
plateau, including Diyarbakr, Arab Iraq and Khuzistan, with his capital
at Baghdad.81 While it is not clear exactly how he was able to control
these areas, it is likely that he had secured the loyalty of the Oyrats, who
had dominated this region in the late Ilkhanid period. The Oyrats had lost
their chief, Al Pdshh, in 736/1336, followed by subsequent elite allies,
Ms Khan in 737/1337 and Qar Jur, the false Tmr Tsh, in 738/1338.
By the time Shaykh asan Jalayir had given up on Khurasanian support,
he found new hope in Arab Iraq with the Oyrats. Here he crowned a new
Chinggisid khan, a descendant of Geykhatu Khan named Jahn Tmr.82
By the summer of 74041/1340, Shaykh asan Jalayir was ready to
challenge the Chubanids again for control of Azarbayjan. Shaykh asan
Chbn had become concerned that S Beg was plotting against him,
and enthroned a new khan, a descendant of Hleg through his son
Samat, named Sulaymn. The new Sulaymn Khan married S Beg,
thus keeping her symbolic presence at the court, but limiting her freedom
to take independent action against Shaykh asan Chbn. In Dh al-
ijja 740/June 1340, the Chubanid forces met Shaykh asan Jalayir and
the armies of Diyarbakr, Arab Iraq and Khuzistan at the Jaght river in
Azarbayjan. Once again, the Chubanids were victorious.83 Shaykh asan
Jalayir and Jahn Tmr retreated to Baghdad, and Shaykh asan Chbn
took up residence in Tabriz.
Despite this defeat, Shaykh asan Jalayir did not give up his attempts
to take back Azarbayjan. Although he had acquired considerable territory
88
in upper Mesopotamia, including several major cities, including Baghdad

and Mosul, Azarbayjan and the city of Tabriz remained his ultimate goal.
Having been defeated in battle against the Chubanids in the summer of
74041/1340, Shaykh asan Jalayir attempted a different strategy the
following year. He had already attempted to make an alliance with the
Mongol ruler in the east, aghy Tmr Khan. Now, Shaykh asan looked
to the west, and the Mamluks, for an alliance against Shaykh asan and the
Chubanids. The Mamluks would naturally be concerned with the growth
of Chubanid power in Azarbayjan and Anatolia, particularly considering
that Shaykh asan Chbns father had been killed on the orders of the
Mamluk sultan al-Nir Muammad. Furthermore, the millenarian aspect
of Tmr Tshs claims to be the mahd,84 and the potential for militant reli-
gious calls for action among the tribal populations of the Mamluk frontier
(as had happened with the appearance of Qar Jur, the false Tmr Tsh),
would give the Mamluks an interest in breaking Chubanid power in Tabriz.
Shaykh asan Jalayir had already sent a message to Sultan al-Nir
Muammad in 740/133940, requesting the Mamluk army be sent to
Baghdad, Mosul and Persian Iraq, and for the sultan to broker an alliance
between Shaykh asan Jalayir and j aghy, the son of Sty Akhtj
and claimant to the Oyrat territories on the Mamluk-Ilkhanid frontier.85
Such a move would involve both the Mamluks and j aghy in Shaykh
asan Jalayirs struggle to oust the Chubanids from Azarbayjan. Shaykh
asan Jalayir was thus willing to sacrifice his amirate in Baghdad and
Diyarbakr in exchange for Azarbayjan. j aghy would certainly have
demanded his familys traditional territory in Diyarbakr, while al-Nir
Muammad would be assured of a secure eastern frontier.
When a Mamluk representative arrived in Sultaniyya in 741 /1341
to demand pledges of allegiances from Shaykh asan Jalayir and
jaghy, Shaykh asan Jalayir repeated his request for the Mamluk
army to be sent to the eastern lands (bild al-sharq).86 As security, j
aghy sent his son, Barhashn, and Shaykh asan Jalayir delegated j
aghys nephew, Ibrhm Shh, to travel to Syria and make a show of the
Jalayirids and Sutayids commitment to an alliance with the Mamluks. In
Dh al-ijja 741/May 1341, Barhashn and Ibrhm Shh were received
by al-Nir Muammad in Aleppo. Here, the qs of Baghdad, Mosul
and Diyarbakr presented oaths from Barhashn and Ibrahm Shh, as well
as from the people of those provinces, that they would be obedient to the
Mamluk sultan. They also reported that the khuba had been given in the
sultans name in Baghdad, Mosul and Diyarbakr.87 The mission was a
success, and al-Nir Muammad gave the order that the Mamluk army
should be dispatched to them.88
89
The Jalayirids
It seemed that Shaykh asan Jalayirs diplomatic efforts had paid off.
He had agreed to exchange Arab Iraq and Diyarbakr for Mamluk military
support against Shaykh asan Chbn. However, the agreement soon
broke down due to a series of events in the summer of 74142/1341.
Differing accounts are given by Ahr, fi Abr and Maqrz. According
to Ahr, the Jalayirids and Chubanids met in battle, and both sides fell
back, with Shaykh asan returning to Baghdad.89 fi Abr writes that
Shaykh asan Jalayir actually withdrew when he mistook the migration
of a large number of Turks and Tajiks with their animals for the Chubanid
army.90 If this was true, it is understandable that the Jalayirid histo-
rian Ahr might suppress it. After the Jalayirids retreat, Shaykh asan
Chbn dealt with the Jalayirids ally j aghy. The Chubanid amir
attacked j aghy after offering to make peace with him. After isolat-
ing j aghy, Shaykh asan Chbn appointed Ibrhm Shh, his
nephew, over the Sutayids (styyn) in Diyarbakr.91
The question remains, however, why did the Mamluk army not arrive
to aid Shaykh asan Jalayir and j aghy? The answer may rest with
a report that reached al-Nir Muammad from the governor (ib) of
Mardin.92 This was the Artuqid governor of that city, al-Mlik al-li
(r. 712/1312765/1364). According to Maqrz, the dispatch from Mardin
informed the sultan not to bother sending an army to Tabriz, for Shaykh
asan Jalayir had sworn his allegiance to the Chubanids, and that the
Jalayirids and Chubanids had written to j aghy saying that they
would henceforth watch over the Euphrates as far as Syria.93 In other
words, the alliance between Shaykh asan Jalayir and j aghy had
been broken, and the Mamluks could no longer count on the assistance of
the Jalayirids. However, this is not the account given by Persian histories,
which report Shaykh asan had retreated to Baghdad, either as a result of
or before doing battle with Shaykh asan Chbn. What can account for
this discrepancy?
It seems likely that Shaykh asan Chbn engineered a diplo-
matic move of his own to neutralise the threat of a Mamluk invasion of
Azarbayjan. fi Abr reports that after Shaykh asan Chbn had
attacked j aghy, and began winning the Kurds and Sutayids of
Diyarbakr to his side, he arrived at Mardin, where he received comfort
and offerings of gifts from al-Mlik al li.94 Shortly after this, fi
Abr reports that Shaykh asan Chbn appointed Ibrhm Shh as gov-
ernor of Diyarbakr in the place of his uncle, j aghy.95 According to
afad, Ibrhm Shh had married the daughter of the Artuqid governor
of Mardin, al-Mlik al-li.96 It seems possible that, while in Mardin,
Shaykh asan Chbn may have promised al-Mlik al-li a place for
90
his son-in-law Ibrhm Shh as Chubanid governor of Diyarbakr in return

for the favour of al-Mlik al-li sending word to the Mamluk sultan al-
Nir Muammad that there was no longer any need for Mamluk military
intervention against the Chubanids. In this way, Shaykh asan Chbn
would have broken the alliance between Shaykh asan Jalayir and j
aghy, and kept the Mamluks from attacking Azarbayjan. At the same
time, the Artuqid al-Mlik al-li would ensure the continuation of
his familys influence in Diyarbakr. The Mamluks failure to launch an
invasion was probably also connected to the death of Sultan al-Nir
Muammad. He had been suffering from illness for some time, which the
report from Mardin seemed to exacerbate. Maqrz and Ibn Taghr Bird
write that news of peace between the Chubanids and Jalayirids so upset
the sultan that he was afflicted with bloody diarrhoea.97 He died just a few
days later.
This incident in 741/1341 is significant for our overall assessment of
the development of the Jalayirid ruling family and its relationship to the
Ilkhanid political legacy in the years after Ab Sads death. It seems clear
that Shaykh asan Jalayir, although unchallenged as amir in Baghdad and
the western Ilkhanid provinces of Arab Iraq and Diyarbakr, was willing to
exchange his control over that region for military aid from the Mamluks.
His goal was the defeat of Shaykh asan Chbn and the Chubanids,
and the establishment of Jalayirid rule in Azarbayjan. The major Ilkhanid
economic and political centre of Tabriz represented the seat of Ilkhanid
political authority. As long as the Chubanids continued to rule there, they
could continue to designate sultans like Sulaymn Khan to rule as heirs
to the Ilkhans. With this privilege came power and prestige for the entire
Chubanid family; several sons of Amr Chpn and Tmr Tsh shared in
the commonwealth that Shaykh asan Chbn had built. The Chubanids
had reclaimed their position as the power behind the Ilkhanid throne,
which had been established by Amr Chpn Sulduz and had ended in 727
/1327 when Ab Sad asserted his personal authority and the top military
position in the state passed to Shaykh asan Jalayir. After being foiled in
his attempts to forge alliances with the Khurasanians and the Mamluks,
Shaykh asan Jalayir must have had to resign himself to his role as amir
of a provincial capital, and not kingmaker for the heir to the Ilkhanid
throne. He dismissed his Ilkhanid protg, Jahn Tmr, in 740/1340 or
1341, and henceforth did not raise his own candidate for the sultanate.
For the remainder of Shaykh asan Jalayirs life, he ruled over
Baghdad, clashing occasionally with the Chubanids. The leader of the
Chubanids after 744/1343 was another son of Tmr Tsh named Malik
Ashraf. He earned a reputation as a capricious and cruel ruler, who
91
The Jalayirids
brought Azarbayjan to ruin. He enthroned his own puppet khan, named

Anshirvn, who was not a Hlegid but was described instead as being
from the race of the kvyn.98 The name kvyn refers to the figure of
Kvah from the Shh-nma, a blacksmith who led the people of Isfahan
against Zahk, under the banner of his apron, the dirafsh-i kvyn.99
This reference and the name Anshirvn itself suggest that Malik Ashraf
sought to appeal to the tradition of pre-Islamic Iranian kingship as the
ideological foundation of his rule in Azarbayjan. This was a sign that by
the mid-740s/1340s, Chinggisid ancestry was no longer seen as a prereq-
uisite for legitimate rule, a development that would allow Shaykh asan
Jalayirs son Shaykh Uvays to establish a Jalayirid dynasty in Azarbayjan
in the late 750s/1350s.
The decades of the 740s/1340s and 750s/1350s were particularly diffi-
cult in Baghdad, where years of warfare since 736/1335 had led to scarcity
of food and high prices.100 As a result, many people left Baghdad for Syria
and Egypt in the mid-740s/1340s.101 These hardships were made worse by
the fact that plague broke out in Azarbayjan and Arab Iraq in 747/1347.
Malik Ashraf attempted to escape the plague in Azarbayjan that year
by sending his army to attack Baghdad. Faced with a Chubanid attack,
Shaykh asan wanted to flee Baghdad, but he was convinced (or forced)
to stay and fortify the city by his wife Dilshd Khtn, and other members
of the urban elite.102
Dilshd Khtns influence over her husband Shaykh asan Jalayir,
demonstrated in the account above, was discussed by afad in his Ayn
al-Ar. afad wrote that Dilshd Khtn had seduced Shaykh asan with
her beauty, and controlled him completely. afad referred to her as the
governor (al-kima) of Iraq, whom no one opposed.103 Dilshd Khtns
great influence over the government in Baghdad, and the fact that her
father was Dimashq Khwja b. Amr Chpn, leads one to question
whether the territory between Baghdad and Diyarbakr could be consid-
ered an extension of the Chubanid state in the western Ilkhanid provinces.
afad mentions that it was rumoured after Dilshd Khtns death in 752
/1351 that Shaykh asan had poisoned her because he was worried she
was too inclined toward her cousin, Malik Ashraf.104
While it is impossible to know whether Shaykh asan actually did
murder his wife, there was evidence he remained wary of Chubanid
intrigue. In 751/135051, he wrote to the Mamluk sultan al-Nir asan
warning him not to trust Chubanid envoys who brought greetings and
salutations to Cairo, for Malik Ashraf had sent them as spies to learn the
orders of the Mamluk army, and that he planned to take over Egypt and
Syria.105 Perhaps Shaykh asan only sought to disrupt a possible alliance
92
between al-Nir asan and Malik Ashraf, but the potential for Chubanid
intrigue, both in Cairo and in Baghdad, probably seemed a dangerous pos-
sibility to Shaykh asan Jalayir, especially when his Chubanid rivals were
also his in-laws.
Shaykh asan Jalayir lived for five years after the death of Dilshd
Khtn. He made no further attempts to capture Azarbayjan, nor did he
promote any other Hlegid puppet khans. Shaykh asans capital of
Baghdad had undergone war, scarcity and disease during his rule. Many
people left the city for refuge in Mamluk Syria and Egypt. When Shaykh
asan died, almost a century after Hlegs conquest of Baghdad, the
former caliphal capital was a shadow of its former glory. The Ilkhanate
had raised Tabriz and Sultaniyya to the status of imperial cities and major
commercial centres. However, Tabriz itself underwent hardships similar
to those in Baghdad in the 740s/1340s and 750s/1350s, including the out-
break of plague. This was compounded by what the sources describe as
the capricious and ruinous administration of Malik Ashraf. In the coming
years, Tabriz would be conquered several times, including by Shaykh
asans son Shaykh Uvays, who founded a Jalayirid dynasty as heir to the
Ilkhanate in the traditional imperial centre.
Shaykh asan Jalayir had failed to take back the heart of the Ilkhanid
territory of Azarbayjan. Instead, he found himself in control of the
Oyrat heartland. Until the end of his life, his goal would be to recap-
ture Azarbayjan. However, the amirate he founded in Baghdad, as well
as around Mosul and Diyarbakr, would lead to new political networks
that would establish the upper Tigris region as a coherent political zone.
Although Shaykh asan did not succeed in claiming Azarbayjan and
the economic and political centre of the Ilkhanate, it can be argued that
Shaykh asan, as successor to the traditional Oyrat migration corridor
between Diyarbakr and Arab Iraq, was heir to the Sutayids in the fron-
tier region between Iran and the Mamluk sultanate. While this provided
Shaykh asan with a large territorial domain, and a significant military
force composed mainly of Oyrat tribesmen, the Jalayirid amirate fell short
of the prestige that accrued to the Chubanid lands to the north. Chubanid
rule in Azarbayjan and its capital city of Tabriz by Malik Ashraf b. Tmr
Tsh was the focus of post-Ilkhanid historical writing in Persian after 736
/1335. That is, the prestige of the former Ilkhan imperial centre was the
focus of history in the post-Ab Sad period, rather than any one ruling
family. Little mention of Shaykh asan Jalayir is made in Persian histo-
ries for the years after 744/1343. The Jalayirid amirate was given more
attention by Mamluk historians writing in Arabic, for whom Baghdad and
Diyarbakr retained their interest as part of the Mamluks eastern frontier.
93
The Jalayirids
An attempt has been made in this chapter to analyse the factors that
enabled Shaykh asan Jalayir to establish a basis for a Jalayirid dynastic
state in the mid-eighth/fourteenth century. The emergence of the Jalayirids
was not a consequence of retribalisation of pre-Ilkhanid Jalayir groups,
but rather a combination of circumstances related to the relationship of
the Ilgayid branch of the Jalayir to the Ilkhanid royal family in the early
eighth/fourteenth century. The marriage of Amr usayn to princess
ljetey Sultan established close ties with the royal court in a period when
attempts were being made by the central administration to limit the power
and influence of the amirs. In addition, the establishment of a power
base in Anatolia after the fall of Amr Chpn gave Amr usayns son
Shaykh asan a distinct advantage when central authority collapsed after
736/1335. Shaykh asans position as amr-i uls, and his independent
power base on the western frontier, enabled him to challenge rival regional
power brokers and eventually assume control of Arab Iraq and the Oyrat
tribal elements which formed the military elite in that region. Although
Shaykh asan did not declare his own political independence,106 instead
ruling through a series of Chinggisid protgs, the base he established in
Baghdad provided a launching pad for his son Shaykh Uvayss conquest
of Azarbayjan and an attempt to reconstitute the Ilkhanate in the west,
with its centre in Tabriz, under the independent authority of the Jalayirid
sultans. The historical and ideological aspects of this development consti-
tute the focus of the following two chapters.
Notes
1. fi Abr/ZJT, 143.
2. Charles Melville, Deld Ktn, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
Yarshater (London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1996),
7:255; afad/Ayn, 2:355.
3. Peter Jackson and Charles Melville, t al-Dn Moammad,
Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London and New York:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 2001), 10:598.
4. Shabnkra/Majma, 293.
7. fi Abr/ZJT, 145.
8. Shabnkra/Majma, 294; fi Abr/ZJT, 145.
9. fi Abr/ZJT, 147.
10. Shabnkra/Majma, 299. Arp countered, asking what the problem was
(chih ghamm), since he and Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad controlled the
original capital (takht-gh-i al) and the royal army (lashkar-i suln).
94
11. Al Pdshh was the brother of Ab Sads mother, j Khtn Oyrat.

See Dvd ibn Muammad Bankat, Trkh-i Bankat: Rawzat l al-
Albb f Marifat al-Tavrkh wa-al-Ansb, ed. Jafar Shir (Tehran, 1348
[1969]), 473.
13. fi Abr/ZJT, 149. Shabnkra seems to indicate that Ms was not
named khan officially until after Al Pdshhs defeat of Arp Khan and the
vizier Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad. He also mentions that Ms was in fact
Al Pdshhs second choice for khan. The first, a silk maker (shar-bf)
from Baghdad, introduced Al Pdshh to a boy who he said was descended
from Baydu Khan. After discerning signs of princeliness (pdishhzdag)
in the lad, he enthroned him as Ms Khan. See Shabnkra/Majma,
3012.
14. Marshall Hodgson writes of the broad concept of Mongolism, an appeal
to the greatness of Mongol imperial power, founded partly on a new con-
sciousness of power on a world scale, as the prevalent political ideology
between the Nile and the Oxus in the eighth/fourteenth and ninth/fifteenth
centuries. See Marshall G. S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, Volume 2:
The Expansion of Islam in the Middle Periods (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1974), 4045.
15. Shabnkra records the date as 17 Raman 736/29 April 1336. fi
Abr has 27 Raman 736/9 May 1336.
16. Shabnkra/Majma, 301; fi Abr/ZJT, 149.
20. fi Abr/ZJT, 151. Arp Khan was turned over to the family of
Mamd Shh nj to be executed in retaliation for Mamd Shhs
death.
22. afad/Ayn, 2:487. In the correspondence erroneously attributed to Rashd
al-Dn, Sty is referred to as commander of the army of Diyarbakr,
as well as in charge of the Ilkhanids tmn-i yaka (yeke tmeni), or
the rulers elite (kh) army. See Rashd al-Dn Fazl Allh Hamadn,
Muktabt-i Rashd, ed. Muammad Abarqh and Muammad Shaf
(Lahore: University of the Punjab Oriental Publications, 1945), 17: amr
suty va j aghay kih umar-yi tmn-i yakaand. See also Zeki Velidi
Togan, References to Economic and Cultural Life in Anatolia in the Letters
of Rashd al-Dn, trans. Gary Leiser, in Judith Pfeiffer and Sholeh A. Quinn
(eds), in collaboration with Ernest Tucker, History and Historiography of
Post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East: Studies in Honor of John
E. Woods (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), 98.
23. afad/Ayn, 2:487.
95
The Jalayirids
24. Claude Cahen has characterised Stys son, j aghy, as the chief
Oyrat who represented the principal surviving military force of the Mongol
regime in upper Mesopotamia in the 730s /1330s. See Claude Cahen,
Contribution lhistoire du Diyr Bakr au quatorzime sicle, Journal
Asiatique 243 (1955): 76. However, his conflict with Al Pdshh and the
Oyrats, according to fi Abr, was based on the ancient hatred (kna)
which he held in his heart for Amr Al Pdishh and the Oyrat tribe.
Because of this, he raised his head in opposition to them. He committed all
of his efforts to eradicating that tribe. See fi Abr/ZJT, 152. Due to this
conflict of j aghy with the Oyrat tribe, and based on this reason given
by fi Abr, it seems safe to say that j aghy, and hence his father
Sty, were not from the Oyrat tribe.
26. smail Hakk Uzunarsl, Anadolu Beylikleri ve Akkoyunlu, Karakoyunlu
Devletleri (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1988), 156.
28. Das Mongolische Weltreich: Al-Umars Darstellung der mongolischen
Reiche in seinem Werk Maslik al-Abr f Mamlik al-Amr, ed. and
trans. Klaus Lech (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1968), 93 (Arabic text);
153 (German translation). Al-Umar writes that there were four umar al-
uls, the beglerbegi, and three others, known as the umar al-ql (amirs
of the centre). For a description of the four bey system in the context of
the Golden Horde, see Beatrice Forbes Manz, The Clans of the Crimean
Khanate, 14661532, Harvard Ukrainian Studies 2 (1978): 282309; Halil
nalck, The Khan and the Tribal Aristocracy: The Crimean Khanate under
Sahib Giray I, Harvard Ukrainian Studies 3/4 (197980): 44566; Uli
Schamilolu, Tribal Politics and Social Organization in the Golden Horde,
PhD dissertation, Columbia University, 1986.
29. Ren Grousset, The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia, trans.
Naomi Walford (New Brunswick, NJ, and London: Rutgers University
Press, 1999), 387. Grousset suggests that had it not been for the fall of Amr
Chpns family, they would have established an independent sultanate in
Anatolia, which would have hindered the expansion to the Ottomans. See
Grousset, The Empire of the Steppes, 388.
30. Judith Kolbas, The Mongols in Iran: Chingiz Khan to Uljaytu 12201309
(London and New York: Routledge, 2006), 153.
31. Qazvn/Nuzhat, 75.
32. Muammad Javd Mashkr, Trkh-i Tabrz t Pyn-i Qarn-i Nuhum-i
Hijr (Tehran: Anjuman-i sr-i Mill, 1352 [1973]), 449.
34. Mashkr, Trkh-i Tabrz, 472.
35. Ibn Baa, Rilat Ibn Baa: al-Musamm Tufat al-Nur f Gharib
1964), 1:147; Ibn Baa, The Travels of Ibn Baa, a.d. 13251354,
96
trans. H. A. R. Gibb (Cambridge: Hakluyt Society at the University Press,

1971), 2:344.
38. Mashkr cites the Rawat al-Jinn of fi usayn Karbal. See
Mashkr, Trkh-i Tabrz, 596.
41. Janet L. Abu-Lughod, Before European Hegemony: The World System a.d.
42. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam, 2:38990.
43. Ibn Baa, Rila, 1:147; Ibn Baa, The Travels of Ibn Baa, 2:3445.
Le Strange (London: George Routledge & Sons Ltd, 1928), 152.
London: Hakluyt Society, 1879), 44.
46. Clavijo, Embassy to Tamerlane, 152.
48. The Sarbadrs did not formally declare themselves independent of the
Ilkhanate, as evidenced by their coinage, until 748/134748. Until this
time, they attempted only to assert their autonomy against the local military
elite. See John Masson Smith, Jr, The History of the Sarbadr Dynasty,
13361381 a.d. and its Sources (The Hague: Mouton, 1970), 68.
52. fi Abr/ZJT, 1523.
53. fi Abr/ZJT, 153; Shuj/Trkh, 1:6. According to the Majma al-
Ansb, Al Pdshh was dispatched on the field by Shaykh asans own
son, Ilkn Noyan. See Shabnkra/Majma, 304.
54. fi Abr/ZJT, 1534.
55. fi Abr/ZJT, 154. Khwja Shams al-Dn Zakary was the son-in-law
and nephew of Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad b. Rashd al-Dn.
56. Beatrice Forbes Manz uses two criteria to distinguish tribal from non-
tribal groupings: (1) possession of a corporate name and identity, and (2)
existence of an internal political structure able to supply the leadership of
a tribe from within it. See Beatrice Forbes Manz, The Ulus Chaghatay
Before and After Temrs Rise to Power: The Transformation from Tribal
Confederation to Army of Conquest, CAJ 27 (1983): 85. Although the
corporate name of the Jalayir was remembered, it seems that the political
structure that existed to supply the leadership was not that of the Jalayir
tribe, but that of the Ilkhanid dynastic state.
97
The Jalayirids
57. senbike Togan has suggested that the eighth/fourteenth century witnessed
a retribalization following the expansive phase of the Mongol army of
conquest. Tribalism, once the dynamic social element, was pushed to the
background as a reserve identity in the seventh/thirteenth century, as all
tribes came to identify their interests with the larger imperial enterprise. See
senbike Togan, Flexibility and Limitation in Steppe Formations (Leiden:
Brill, 1998), 1213. However, it is important to emphasise that the pre-
imperial tribes were not reconstituted in their former structure, but took on
new forms. Togan argues that in the post-Chinggisid era, the tribes, rather
than displaying structural differences and fighting among themselves for
different goals, became more uniform entities which attempted to establish
themselves around a centre in the person of a khan. See Togan, Flexibility
and Limitation, 146.
58. fi Abr/ZJT, 152; Maqrz/Ziyda, 1:404.
60. fi Abr writes that the amir Al Jafar was the catalyst for the
Khurasanian invasion of Azarbayjan; see fi Abr/ZJT, 154. However,
Maqrz writes that Ms had fled to Khurasan after Al Pdshh was
killed, and had joined with aghy Tmr against Shaykh asan and the
sons of Dimur Dsh [Tmr Tsh]; see Maqrz/Ziyda, 1:431.
61. Temge Otchigin was Chinggis Qans youngest brother. See The Secret
History of the Mongols, 60.
63. fi Abr/ZJT, 156; Shuj/Trkh, 1:23.
65. fi Abr reports that san Qutlugh and Akrunj had embraced sufism (dar
z taavvuf raftand) and had returned to Shaykh asan through the interven-
tion of the shaykh al-islm Sharaf al-Dn Darkanz. Shaykh asan first
gave them full amnesty, due to the ruin and confusion in the kingdom, but in
738/133738 at the winter residence of Mughan, they were both executed.
See fi Abr/ZJT, 156.
66. As Shuj recorded, Muammad Khan remained on the throne, while
Shaykh asan governed the country (al-bild); see Shuj/Trkh, 1:23.
67. Ibn Taghr Bird, writing in the Mamluk sultanate, recorded in his biogra-
phy of Shaykh asan Chbn that he was a sly fox (dhiya), a master of
trickery, cunning and deceit. See Ab al-Masin Ysuf Ibn Taghr Bird,
al-Nujm al-Zhira f Mulk Mir wa-al-Qhira (Cairo: Mabaat Dr al-
Kutub al-Miriyya, 192972), 10:107.
69. afad/Ayn, 2:115.
70. fi Abr/ZJT, 156. According to Shuj, the rumour was that Tmr Tsh
had not been executed in Egypt, but had escaped after switching places
with his prison guard (taayyala al al-sijjn l an khalaa). See Shuj/
Trkh, 1:36.
98
71. afad writes that Tmr Tshs women and children also believed in this
deception; see afad/Ayn, 2:115. fi Abr reports that Shaykh asan
Chbn gave his mother to the false Tmr Tsh; see fi Abr/ZJT, 156.
75. fi Abr writes that it became clear that the khan and his amirs were not
acting of their own accord, but were under the influence of the Khurasanian
administrators, led by Khwja Al al-Dn Muammad. He began a pro-
gramme of confiscating the property of the peasants and other officials in
western Iran, including Shaykh asan Jalayirs own hereditary possessions
he had held since the time of Ghazan and ljeyt. See fi Abr/ZJT,
15960.
76. Women who ruled the Mongol great qanate included Tregene Khatun, who
reigned after the death of her husband gdey Qaan, 639/1241644/1246;
Oghul Ghaymish, after the death of her husband Gyk Qaan,
646/1248649/1251; and Sorqaqtani Beki, the wife of Tolui Khan, who
acted as the head of Toluis personal uls, 630/1233649/1251, and played
a major role in establishing her sons Mngke, Qubilay and Hleg in high
positions in the empire. In the Chaghatay khanate, Orghina Khatun ruled
after the death of her husband Qara Hleg, 650/1252658/1260.
77. They were, as their names indicate, descendants of the Ilkhanid viziers
Rashd al-Dn (d. 718/1318) and Tj al-Dn Alshh (d. 724/1324).
79. Shabnkra/Majma, 311. According to fi Abr, Shaykh asan
Chbn promised that once aghy Tmr attacked the Jalayirids, or
lkns, he would have him marry S Beg and the kingdom would
be theirs. However, when he received aghy Tmrs written promise,
Shaykh asan Chbn turned it over to Shaykh asan Jalayir. See fi
Abr/ZJT, 161.
81. Ibn Baa reports that Shaykh asan captured the city of Hilla from
Amad b. Rumaytha, son of Ab Numayy, the amir of Mecca, who had
seized the city after the death of Ab Sad. See Ibn Baa, Rila, 1:139;
Ibn Baa, The Travels of Ibn Baa, 2:325.
83. fi Abr credits the Chubanid victory to the bravery of Pr usayn
Chbn and the strength of the Chubanid left wing against the right flank of
the Baghdds.
84. afad/Ayn, 2:111; Ibn ajar/Durar, 1:307.
99
The Jalayirids

96. afad/Ayn, 1:64.
97. Maqrz/Ziyda, 1:522; Ibn Taghr Bird, al-Nujm al-Zhira, 9:162.
98. Qazvn/ZTG, 35; fi Abr/ZJT, 176.
99. Kwah, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1976), 4:775.
100. Isml b. Al Ab al-Fid, al-Mukhtasar f Akhbr al-Bashar, ed.
Muammad Zaynahum Muammad Azab (Cairo: Dr al-Marif, 1998),
166; afad/Ayn, 2:192; Ibn ajar/Durar, 2:9.
101. afad/Ayn, 2:192.
102. Qazvn/ZTG, 42.
103. afad/Ayn, 2:355.
104. afad/Ayn, 2:356; Melville, Deld Ktn, 255.
106. Shaykh asan continued to use only the title uls beg that he had held
under Ab Sad. See John Masson Smith, Jr, Djalayir, Djalayirid,
Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1962), 2:401.
100
6
Shaykh Uvays and the Jalayirid Dynasty
This chapter examines the political history of the reign of the Jalayirid
sultan Shaykh Uvays (757/1356776/1374). This period witnessed several
developments in the dynamics of power and authority in the former
Ilkhanid realm. The most significant developments were the Jalayirid
conquest of Azarbayjan, Shaykh Uvayss claiming of independent royal
authority, and the elimination of the Chubanids as contenders for the
Ilkhanid throne. The eighteen-year reign of Shaykh Uvays represents the
height of the Jalayirid dynastys political power, and a critical turning
point between the disappearance of the Chinggisid Ilkhans and the rise to
power of Tmr and his descendants at the end of the eighth/fourteenth
century. While this chapter focuses primarily on a chronological analysis
of political events during Shaykh Uvayss rule, the following chapter
addresses the ideological aspects of his assertion of independent authority
as heir to the Ilkhanid tradition.
Shaykh Uvays and the Jalayirid Re-conquest of Azarbayjan

Shaykh Uvays was born in 743/1342431 to Shaykh asan and Dilshd
Khtn, the daughter of Dimashq Khwja Chbn and Trsun Khtn.
Trsun Khtn was the granddaughter of Amad Tegder Khan through
his daughter Knjak Khtn.2 With the exception of some basic genea-
logical information and panegyric found in the Jalayirid chronicle Trkh-i
Shaykh Uvays, all of the Persian narrative sources for the period of Shaykh
Uvayss life were written by Timurid historians, including Zayn al-Dn
Qazvn, fi Abr and Mun al-Dn Naanz. These histories are sup-
plemented by a number of non-narrative sources, including land grant
documents, court poetry and a major insh manual.
Shaykh asan Jalayir died in Rajab 757/July 1356 and was succeeded
by his son Shaykh Uvays. fi Abr commemorated his accession with
these lines:
101
The Jalayirids
(Jalayir) (Ilkhanid Royal House) (Sulduz)
Hleg Khan
lg Noyan Abaqa Khan A mad Tegder Khan
*
qB q Arghun Khan K njak Kh t n Am r Ch p n
Am r usayn ======== ljetey Sultan T rsun Kh t n ======= Dimashq Khw ja
Shaykh asan ============================ Dilsh d Kh t n
Shaykh Uvays
*
q B q married Arghun Khans daughter ljetey Sultan. When he died in 694/1295, ljetey Sultan
married q B q s son Am r usayn.
Figure 6.1 The ancestry of Shaykh Uvays.
In the month of Rajab of the year 757

By the consent of the people and by the favour of the creator
The Khusraw of the face of the earth, by right
Sat upon the throne of sultans in the capital of Iraq
Lord of the sultans of the age, Shaykh Uvays
The absolute refuge and support of the kings of the world3
If Shaykh Uvays appears as a glorious ruler in Timurid historical

memory, such a legacy seemed far from certain when he succeeded
his father in 757/1356. At this time he ruled Arab Iraq, with nominal
control over Diyarbakr, which remained a zone of conflicting politi-
cal loyalties. Azarbayjan, eastern Anatolia and Persian Iraq remained
under the control of the Chubanid Malik Ashraf b. Tmr Tsh and his
puppet ruler Anshirvn. Malik Ashraf also sought to extend his influ-
ence in Diyarbakr, forming a union with the Artuqid governor of Mardin,
102
al-Malik al-li (r. 712/1312765/1364).4 In this same year, Mubriz

al-Dn Muammad Muaffar deposed the Injuid governor in Fars, and
took over that province.5 The Muzaffarids came to control much of central
and southwest Iran, and the cities of Yazd and Shiraz. Mubriz al-Dn
Muammad took the title of caliph, with the laqab al-Mutaid bi-Allh,
nib-i amr al-muminn.6
The political situation changed abruptly in 758/1357 when the khan of
the Jochid uls, Jn Beg, invaded Azarbayjan and toppled the regime of
Malik Ashraf Chbn. According to the narrative sources, the invasion
was prompted by the maladministration of Malik Ashraf, which led many
influential members of the population of Azarbayjan to seek refuge else-
where.7 Some of those who emigrated were prominent holy men, includ-
ing the head of the young afaviyya order, adr al-Dn Ardabl. Another
of these shaykhs, Q Muy al-Dn Bard, travelled to the Jochid
imperial capital at Saray (Sary Jq), where he began preaching of the
oppression of Malik Ashraf back in Tabriz.8 Those present were so moved
by the qs account of Malik Ashrafs tyranny that they were driven to
tears. Among those in his audience was the khan of the Golden Horde,
Jn Beg, who recognised the troubles in Azarbayjan as an opportunity for
expansion of his empire. Since the time of Hleg and the formation of the
Chinggisid successor states in Iran and the Qipchaq steppe, the territory
south of Darband had been a region of contention and conflict between
the Ilkhans and their Jochid cousins. Jn Beg realised that the growing
dissatisfaction among the people, including the religious leadership in
Tabriz, would enable him to finally conquer Azarbayjan and bring it into
the Jochid political sphere. Indeed, this seems to have been the intention
of Q Muy al-Dn Bard as well.
In 758/1357, Jn Beg marched south toward Azarbayjan. Ahr records
an exchange of messages between Jn Beg and Malik Ashraf, which pro-
vides an indication of one of the major sources of conflict in the Mongol
successor states: the tension between the claims of the Chinggisid princes,
and the independent political identities of the separate ulses. According
to Ahr, when Jn Beg reached Shirvan, he sent the following message to
Malik Ashraf:
I am coming to take possession of the uls of Hleg. You are the son of
Chbn whose name was in the yarlgh of the four ulses. Today three ulses
are under my command and I also wish to appoint you amir of the uls. Get up
and come to meet me.9
Here in Ahrs account, Jn Beg promises to recognise Malik Ashrafs

status as the grandson of Amr Chpn, the chief non-Chinggisid figure
103
The Jalayirids
in the Ilkhanate during the time of Ab Sad. However, as a member of

the Chinggisid royal family, the Jochid khan was not willing to recognise
theindependent authority of Malik Ashraf or his puppet ruler.
Malik Ashrafs reported response reveals the point of view of the
Chubanids and, certainly, the Jalayirids for whom Ahr was writing:
He [Jn Beg] is the pdishh of the uls of Berke, he has nothing to do with the
uls of Abaqa [the Ilkhanate], for here the pdishh is Ghazan and the amirate
is mine.10
The clear message is that the Jochids have no business in the Ilkhanid ter-
ritory, and that any claims they may make to Azarbayjan on the grounds
of Chinggisid lineage are illegitimate.
The forces of Jn Beg easily overran Azarbayjan and conquered
Tabriz. Malik Ashraf was captured after fleeing to Khuy, and was paraded
through the city of Tabriz, where people poured ashes on his head from
the rooftops.11 Jn Beg sent him back to Jochid territory, but was con-
vinced by Q Muy al-Dn and Ks, the Shrvnshh, that rebellion
and disorder would only increase if Malik Ashraf was allowed to survive.
Jn Beg thus allowed Malik Ashraf to be killed on the road, and his head
hung in the maydn in Tabriz.12 With the Chubanid amir eliminated, and
Azarbayjan under his control, Jn Beg left his son Bird Beg in the region
with 50,000 men, and returned to Saray with Malik Ashrafs son, Tmr
Tsh, and daughter, Sulnbakht.13
Although Jn Beg had successfully captured Azarbayjan, Jochid rule
there was short-lived. Soon after Jn Beg returned, he fell ill. Bird Beg
left Tabriz and eventually succeeded his father as khan.14 The departure
of the Jochids left a power vacuum that was filled by Akh Jq, a former
amir of Malik Ashraf who had entered the service of Jn Beg.15 According
to Zayn al-Dn Qazvn, Akh Jq was able to attract a group of support-
ers by distributing jewels that he found sewn into a garment belonging to
Malik Ashrafs sister. When Bird Beg left Azarbayjan, Akh Jq marched
to Tabriz, where he was welcomed by a large group of Malik Ashrafs
followers.16 The upheaval caused by the Jochid invasion created this
opportunity for Akh Jq to seize power, although it is doubtful that many
considered him as legitimate. Ahr describes the period after the Jochid
departure as the period of the cunning of Akh Jq (sharat-i akh jq).17
This derogatory characterisation contrasts with the way Ahr recorded
the reigns of the previous Chubanids in Azarbayjan, whom he considered
legitimate.18 Part of the dissatisfaction toward Akh Jq seems to have been
related to his continuation of Malik Ashrafs exploitative fiscal policies.19
The departure of the Jochids and the emergence of a former amir as
104
ruler in Tabriz was enough to convince Shaykh Uvays that the time was
ripe for the Jalayirids return to Azarbayjan. In Ahrs history, Shaykh
Uvayss conquest of Azarbayjan is of tremendous significance, for it
signals the real beginning of the reign of Shaykh Uvays.20 This event is
described in the following way in the Trkh-i Shaykh Uvays:
There was a rumor of the imperial banners and an auspicious constellation
which spread in the world, and that the sun of the sultanate would rise from
Baghdad and this darkness of oppression of Azarbayjan would set. By the
ray of light of its justice the world would be brightened, and the star of its
mercy would illuminate the surface of hearts with color and fragrance. From
the stronghold of the saints [Baghdad], the greatest king of kings, the ruler of
Islam, Sultan Shaykh Uvays, set out to struggle and fight with the oppressors
and the depraved.21
In the battle that took place in Shabn 759/August 135822 near Sty
mountain, the Jalayirid forces defeated what remained of the Chubanid
supporters.23 Although Akh Jq escaped, Shaykh Uvays entered Tabriz
and took up residence at the complex of Rashd al-Dn (imrat-i
rashd).24 A decree issued by Shaykh Uvays in Dh al-Qada 759/
October 1358, confirming the tax revenues to be paid to a dervish lodge in
Azarbayjan, indicates that attention was paid to the fiscal administration
of the region shortly after the conquest.25 Shaykh Uvays pardoned many
of the amirs, but executed forty-seven of the close allies of Malik Ashraf.26
The possibility of a Chubanid resurgence was one of the most danger-
ous political threats to Shaykh Uvayss authority. The Chubanids, or sons
of Tmr Tsh as they were commonly called in Mamluk chronicles,
were similar to the Jalayirids in terms of their origins and aims. They both
shared similar family backgrounds, descending from Ilkhanid royal sons-
in-law and Chinggisid princesses. Shaykh Uvayss mother was Dilshd
Khtn, daughter of the Chubanid amir Dimashq Khwja b. Amr Chpn.
Both the Jalayirids and Chubanids saw control of Azarbayjan as the key
to their success, and almost all of the major battles fought between 736/
1335 and 759/1358 took place in this region. Azarbayjan held significant
material and symbolic attractions, as a centre of trade, capable of sup-
porting large cavalry-based armies, and as the centre of the Ilkhanid royal
domains. This last factor was certainly related to the first two, but it also
carried with it a prestige of its own, as the two amir-gregen families the
Jalayirids and Chubanids attempted to reconstitute the uls of Hleg on
their own terms.
Those individuals loyal to the Chubanids and their new leader, Akh
Jq, were not completely eliminated in Shaykh Uvayss purge of the major
105
The Jalayirids
Chubanid amirs in Tabriz. Those who remained took refuge in Nakhjivan

with Akh Jq, who had survived his armys defeat by the Jalayirids.
Shaykh Uvays sent his amir Al Pltan to eradicate the ashraf27 hold-
outs there. However, we are told by Zayn al-Dn Qazvn that Al Pltan
moved slowly toward Nakhjivan out of the opposition and bad intent
he harboured toward Shaykh Uvays.28 The armies of Qarabagh and the
Turkmans, who were supposed to join Al Pltan, discerned his negli-
gence (tahwun), and instead joined Akh Jq.29 Al Pltan was routed in
the subsequent battle with Akh Jq on 27 afar 760/28 January 1359,30
and it seemed as if the Jalayirid occupation of Azarbayjan was at an end.
Because the Jalayirid army was dispersed and weakened under the winter
conditions, Shaykh Uvays was forced to withdraw from Tabriz and return
to Baghdad.31 Thus, by the end of winter 760/1359, Akh Jq had returned
to power in Azarbayjan as the representative of the remaining support-
ers of the Chubanid regime of Malik Ashraf. However, in the spring of
760/1359, Tabriz was conquered again, this time by the Muzaffarid ruler
Mubriz al-Dn Muammad. After defeating Akh Jq near Sultaniyya,
Mubriz al-Dn Muammad occupied Tabriz.32
Having driven out Akh Jq and Shaykh Uvays, it seemed as if the
Muzaffarids were in a good position to unite Azarbayjan and central Iran
under a single rule. Instead, Mubriz al-Dn Muammad Muaffar quickly
departed. Ahr ascribes this departure to the approach of the Jalayirids led
by Shaykh Uvays, and claims that when Mubriz al-Dn Muammad
got word of the advance of the triumphant army arriving with joy and
victory, he left and did not stop until he reached [Persian] Iraq.33 Zayn
al-Dn Qazvn gives a similar account, but adds that the astronomers had
warned the Muzaffarid sultan that this year he would be troubled by a tall,
Turkish-looking youth, whom he understood to mean Shaykh Uvays.34
When he fled, Shaykh Uvays returned to Tabriz. Muammad Muaffar
was seized and blinded when he returned to Isfahan.35 Akh Jq was cap-
tured and executed, along with Al Pltan, who had conspired with them
against Shaykh Uvays.36
Thus, by 761/1360, the Jalayirids under Shaykh Uvays had united
Azarbayjan and Iraq and had eliminated the major threat to their power
in the north: Akh Jq and the supporters of Malik Ashraf Chbn.
However, the Chubanid threat remained as long as descendants from
Amr Chpn through his son Tmr Tsh survived. Malik Ashrafs son
Tmr Tsh, who had been taken to Saray by Jn Beg after the Jochid
invasion of Azarbayjan in 758/1357, attempted to take the province back
himself in the spring of 761/1360. Tmr Tsh left the Jochid uls, passing
through Khwarazm to Shiraz, where he left his sister Sulnbakht. Tmr
106
Tsh himself went to Ahlat and took refuge with the local governor, Khizr
Shh.37 Unwilling to harbour the Chubanid, Khizr Shh turned him over
to Shaykh Uvays for execution.38
The death of Tmr Tsh b. Malik Ashraf in 761/1360 marked the end
of any Chubanid revival in Azarbayjan. The Jochid invasion, the execution
of Malik Ashraf and the subsequent Muzaffarid invasion of Azarbayjan
had all weakened the Chubanids and greatly facilitated Shaykh Uvays in
conquering the region. With the dissolution of Chubanid power, Shaykh
Uvays became recognised in Azarbayjan, as well as by foreign rulers,39 as
the political authority in both Baghdad and Tabriz. The following section
examines the consolidation of Shaykh Uvayss authority through the con-
frontation and conciliation of individuals representing challenges to that
authority in the period between 761/1360 and 768/1367.
Consolidation through Conciliation, 761/1360768/1367

Our sources for the bulk of the reign of Sultan Shaykh Uvays do not
include the history written in his name, Ahrs Trkh-i Shaykh Uvays.
Instead, for the period beginning after Shaykh Uvayss conquest of
Azarbayjan, we must rely on other sources, including Zayn al-Dn
Qazvns Zayl-i Trkh-i Guzda, which was the source for fi Abrs
Zayl-i Jmi al-Tavrkh, and Fa Khvfs Mujmal-i Fa.40 Thus,
the main sources for the life of Shaykh Uvays after the conquest of
Azarbayjan and the elimination of the Chubanids were written for Timurid
patrons, and were primarily dedicated to glorifying the life and conquests
of Tmr. However, geographically, these histories focus their attention
on the territory southwest of the Oxus, that is, the former Ilkhanid realm.
Of the three works mentioned above, only Fa Khvf includes infor-
mation about Tmrs activities in the context of the Chaghatayid uls,
before his first campaigns in Khurasan, beginning in 786/1384. However,
Fa Khvf also devotes attention to the Jalayirids, and it is clear that he
utilised the works of fi Abr and Zayn al-Dn Qazvn. The reason for
such attention to the activities of the Jalayirid sultan in the Ilkhanid lands
in these Timurid histories is the fact that Zayn al-Dn Qazvns work is
a continuation of the Ilkhanid chronicle Trkh-i Guzda, written by his
father amd Allh Mustawf Qazvn for the sultan Ab Sad. For this
reason, Zayn al-Dn devotes his attention to the central Ilkhanid lands, par-
ticularly Azarbayjan. Thus, the Zayl-i Trkh-i Guzda represents a tran-
sitional work, with a dual focus both on the lands of the Ilkhanate which
were absorbed by Sultan Shaykh Uvays Jalayir, and on the Timurids.
However, Tmr remains outside the scope of Zayn al-Dns history until
107
The Jalayirids
his emergence within the Ilkhanid territory in the 780s/1380s. This struc-
ture was followed by fi Abr and Fa Khvf.
The fact that these histories were written by authors sponsored by the
Timurids did not mean that they portrayed Shaykh Uvays negatively.
He ruled in Azarbayjan and Iraq before Tmr arrived there, and so did
not represent a threat to the Timurids claims to these provinces. At the
same time, however, we can know little about the specific ideological
claims made by Shaykh Uvays himself from the Timurid histories. For
fi Abr, these details were secondary to Shaykh Uvayss role as the
predecessor and placeholder for Tmrs inevitable conquests in the uls
of Hleg. Shaykh Uvays could thus be portrayed in a positive light by
fi Abr in a manner in which his son Suln Amad whose reign cor-
responded with that of Tmr in the Ilkhanid lands, and thus represented a
direct challenge to Timurid claims there could not.41
The Revolt of Khwja Mirjn in Baghdad

By putting an end to the family of Amr Chpn as a source of authority
in Azarbayjan, Shaykh Uvays had accomplished what his father had not
been able to: the establishment of Jalayirid authority in the seat of the
former Ilkhanate. Shaykh Uvays was thus in a position to assume the role
of a continuator of that dynasty. Although Azarbayjan had come under
his control by 761/1360, local elites in other provinces attempted to test
the limits of Shaykh Uvayss actual authority, and his ability to keep the
enlarged Jalayirid realm intact. Perhaps the most critical was the rebellion
of his governor in Baghdad, Khwja Mirjn Khdim. The disobedience of
a Jalayirid servant in the heart of the territory first taken by Shaykh asan
was a significant challenge to Shaykh Uvays. Khwja Mirjn seems to
have co-ordinated his rebellion with Shaykh Uvayss campaign to the
north, against the Shrvnshh Ks, in order to maximise the distance
between the sultans army and Baghdad. However, when Shaykh Uvays
got word of Khwja Mirjns show of rebellion and open hostility toward
him in the winter of 765/136364, he abandoned his Shirvan campaign
and turned his attention to Baghdad.42
The reason for the rebellion is unclear. It does not seem to have been
connected with any Chubanid or Oyrat resurgence, although one of
Khwja Mirjns allies was Amr Muammad Pltan, a kinsman of Al
Pltan, who had joined with Akh Jq.43 Clearly there were elements
among the amirs who opposed the sultan and sought to take advantage of
his absence to take Baghdad for themselves. There is also evidence that
Khwja Mirjn and the rebels recognised the authority of the Mamluks
108
in Baghdad at this time. According to Maqrz, Khwja Mirjn gave the

khuba and struck coins in the name of the Mamluk sultan al-Ashraf
Shabn (r. 764/1363778/1377), and took an oath of allegiance to him on
behalf of the people of Baghdad.44 Khwja Mirjn also sent emissaries to
the Mamluk court, who presented Mirjns repudiation (qad khalaa) of
Shaykh Uvays.45
Such independent action on the part of Khwja Mirjn, and the recogni-
tion of Mamluk authority in Arab Iraq, soon drew the attention of Shaykh
Uvays, who turned his military resources toward Baghdad from Shirvan.
In addition to leading his own forces to Arab Iraq, Shaykh Uvays sought
assistance from the Mamluk sultan al-Ashraf Shabn. Maqrz writes that
the q of Tabrz46 sent a message to Shabn, informing him that Shaykh
Uvays intended to put down the rebellion in Baghdad, and not to allow
Khwja Mirjn to take refuge in Mamluk territory in Syria or Egypt. The
qs message also called on the Mamluk sultan to march out with his
own army and help the Jalayirid forces.47
Faced with the approach of the Jalayirid army, the rebels led by
Khwja Mirjn took defensive action in an attempt to halt the attack. Zayn
al-Dn Qazvn explains that since it was the beginning of spring 765/
1364 when the army reached Baghdad, and there was an excess of water,
Khwja Mirjn was able to open the Awza dam,48 flooding the plain of
Baghdad.49 The tactic succeeded in stalling Shaykh Uvayss troops, who
were forced to commandeer boats from along the Tigris for an amphibi-
ous assault on the city.50 When the army of Shaykh Uvays finally faced
Khwja Mirjn and his allied amirs, the amirs were routed and the opposi-
tion collapsed. The rebel amirs were executed or sent to Tabriz.51 Khwja
Mirjn managed to escape temporarily, but was also eventually captured.
Despite calls by the ulam and notables of Baghdad for Khwja Mirjns
execution, Shaykh Uvays pardoned him.52
This clemency on the part of Shaykh Uvays is curious. The fact that
he executed a number of amirs, including Kay Khusraw, Al Khwja
and Muammad Pltan, suggests that he blamed the uprising more on
these military commanders than on Khwja Mirjn himself. Nevertheless,
Shaykh Uvays stayed in Baghdad for eleven months in his fathers former
palace to ensure that rebellion did not quickly flare up again.53 In the
spring of 767/1366, Shaykh Uvays appointed Sulaymn Shh Khzin as
the new governor of Baghdad and set out for Diyarbakr.54 When Sulaymn
Shh died in 769/136768, Shaykh Uvays reinstated Khwja Mirjn in his
former post as governor.55 Zayn al-Dn Qazvn and fi Abr write that
Shaykh Uvays had forgiven his crime, and that Khwja Mirjn served the
last six years of his life as a worthy governor.56
109
The Jalayirids
Khwja Mirjns pardon and reinstatement just two years later indicate
a desire on the part of Shaykh Uvays to establish his authority in Arab
Iraq through a show of force, while at the same time making the governor
Khwja Mirjn more dependent on himself as the sultan and sole arbiter
of justice there. Shaykh Uvays eliminated the amirs who gave support to
the rebellion, yet did not give in to calls from the urban elite to eliminate
Khwja Mirjn. Thus, Shaykh Uvays isolated Khwja Mirjn from any
local support in Baghdad, by removing his amir allies, and leaving him
among the ulam and ayn who were hostile to him. It is not surprising,
then, that Khwja Mirjn remained a loyal governor in Baghdad until his
death in 775/1374, for he would have been solely dependent on the sultan
against the local elite. In this way Shaykh Uvays ensured a relatively
stable situation in Arab Iraq after 767/1366, which would enable him to
be absent for long periods in Azarbayjan or elsewhere, without fear of
disobedience from his governor there. Baghdad does seem to have thrived
under Jalayirid rule, after a certain amount of neglect in the Ilkhanid
period. Hlegs sack of the city in 656/1258 did great immediate damage
to the welfare of Baghdad. However, even in the years that followed, as
the Ilkhanids worked to rebuild a flourishing state for themselves, Baghdad
remained a secondary urban centre, peripheral to Tabriz and Sultaniyya,
which became the primary focus of architectural patronage by the Ilkhans.
With the emergence of the Jalayirids as the major power in the western
Ilkhanid lands during the reign of Shaykh Uvays, Baghdad, which had
become the Jalayirid centre during the lifetime of Shaykh asan, enjoyed
a period of development and renewal.
The Emergence of the Qarquynl Turkmans under

BayrmKhwja
Following the Khwja Mirjn rebellion and Shaykh Uvayss extended
stay in Baghdad from 765/1364 to 767/1366, the Jalayirid sultan turned
his attention to Diyarbakr and the Qarquynl. Shaykh Uvayss cam-
paign against the Qarquynl in 767/1366 represents one of the earliest
mentions of this Turkman confederation in the historical sources, although
neither Zayn al-Dn Qazvn nor fi Abr uses the name Qarquynl
referring to the Turkmans in this context. The rebellion of Khwja Mirjn
had represented a threat to one half of Shaykh Uvayss territories inherited
from his father, the Mesopotamian heartland of Arab Iraq. After bringing
this region under control, Shaykh Uvays turned to the other half of Shaykh
asans territory: the upper Tigris region and Diyarbakr. This had been
the main homeland of the Oyrat tribe in the Mongol period, and Shaykh
110
asan had emerged as the dominant amir over the Oyrats following the
defeat of their chief, Al Pdshh, in 736/1336. Although the Oyrats
maintained a presence in this region, in the mid-eighth/fourteenth century,
in the northern regions of Diyarbakr, into eastern Anatolia, a confedera-
tion of Turkman tribesmen was emerging under the political leadership of
their own chiefs. In the 760s/1360s, the leader of this group, which would
become known as the Qarquynl, was a certain Bayrm Khwja, whose
brother Bird Khwja had come to power in Mosul.
Shaykh Uvays left Baghdad in the spring of 767/1366, and marched
north along the Tigris. After taking Tikrit, he came to Mosul and seized
Bird Khwja,57 before continuing north toward Bayrm Khwja. The
Turkmans were defeated by Shaykh Uvays and the Jalayirid forces on
theplain of Mus in the early summer of 767/1366. Following the battle, the
Jalayirids plundered the Turkmans population around Mus.58 The aim of
Shaykh Uvayss campaign against the Turkmans was very different from
that of his campaign against Khwja Mirjn in Baghdad, and thus it called
for different tactics. In Baghdad, the sultan had to deal with a city which
was his second capital, and which was an integral part of the Jalayirid
realm. Shaykh Uvays sought to preserve Baghdad, as well as its governor,
by treating him lightly, and thereby bringing him more closely under his
direct control. However, the Turkmans in Diyarbakr and eastern Anatolia
existed outside Shaykh Uvayss direct authority, and constituted a distinct
political entity with its own leadership. Shaykh Uvays recognised the
danger that a large, nomadic confederation on the fringe of Azarbayjan
and Arab Iraq could pose to his authority in these provinces. He thus
pursued a policy aimed at destroying the unity of the Turkmans by attack-
ing members of their leading family (Bird Khwja and Bayrm Khwja)
and pillaging the Turkman population. In 767/1366, the balance of power
favoured the Jalayirids, and Shaykh Uvays could afford a campaign of
general destruction against the Turkmans. As discussed in Chapter 8,
however, his successors were no longer able to subdue the Turkmans by
force, and instead were obliged to conciliate them with official recogni-
tion of their possessions of land and people in Anatolia, and eventually to
employ them as military auxiliaries in return for even further concessions.
Shirvan
Shaykh Uvays showed conciliation similar to that shown to Khwja
Mirjn when he faced the third major challenge in this consolidation
phase of his reign. It has been mentioned above that Shaykh Uvays had
intended to confront Ks Shrvn in 765/1363, before the rebellion of
111
The Jalayirids
Khwja Mirjn forced him to give it up. The Shrvnshhs had long been
semi-autonomous rulers in the region north of Azarbayjan. Their control
of Darband, the primary but narrow pass from the Qipchaq steppe south
into Iran, made them significant regional rulers. Although Shirvan was
nominally a vassal of the Ilkhanate, and later of the Jalayirids, the relative
independence of the Shrvnshhs, and their position as guardians of the
traditional entryway of the Jochids into the Ilkhanid territories, required
that they remain on friendly terms with whoever sat on the throne in
Azarbayjan. Since Shaykh Uvays had come to the throne, Ks Shrvn
had tested the resolve of the new Jalayirid sultan, and the limits of his
authority. While Shaykh Uvays had been occupied with Khwja Mirjn
between 765/1364 and 767/1366, Ks twice invaded Tabriz and caused
much of the population in Azarbayjan to leave the province.59
Shaykh Uvays returned to Tabriz in the summer of 767/1366 after
his campaign against Bayrm Khwja and the Turkmans. The following
spring he sent his favourite, Bayrm Beg,60 to Shirvan with a number
of amirs and troops to bring Ks to heel. After a three-month siege of
Kss stronghold, the Jalayirids forced the Shrvnshh to surrender.61
He was sent to the court of Shaykh Uvays, who kept him in confinement
for another three months. However, he then pardoned Ks, and entrusted
Shirvan to him again.62 Zayn al-Dn Qazvn and fi Abr report that
because of the favour and compassion the sultan showed to him, Ks
readily subjugated all of Shirvan and Darband for Shaykh Uvays, and
remained a faithful servant as long as he lived.63 When Ks died in 774/
137273, Shaykh Uvays confirmed his son, Hshang, as his successor as
Shrvnshh.64 We are told that Hshang had been attendant on Shaykh
Uvays at the time of his fathers death, indicating that the Jalayirid sultan
had kept Hshang away from Shirvan as an incentive for Kss loyalty.
As was the case with Khwja Mirjn, Shaykh Uvayss clemency toward
the previously rebellious Shrvnshh was coupled with the certainty
that he would remain loyal after the sultans show of force and eventual
pardon. While Shaykh Uvays had left Khwja Mirjn among those in
Baghdad who opposed him, he held Kss son hostage after returning
Ks to his position in Shirvan. Both tactics allowed Shaykh Uvays to
ensure servants remained loyal to his rule in the provinces without blood-
shed. The moderation and clemency shown by Shaykh Uvays contributed
to his reputation for compassion and justice in Timurid historiography.
Naanz described Shaykh Uvays as a
ruler of extremely passionate heart, and just. In his time, the common people
and the elite ( jumhr-i avmm va khav) were quiet and content ... at all
112
times, he was in the service of the tranquility of the populace, such that in the
times of his government, all of Azarbayjan was the envy of paradise.65
Shaykh Uvays was able to increase the degree of his personal authority
with regard to his provincial governors, and thus ensure the stability of his
regime. However, when faced with the threat of the Turkman confedera-
tion, Shaykh Uvays was not willing to bring their leaders into the Jalayirid
political structure, and instead attempted to destroy their leadership and
eliminate the Turkman presence in Diyarbakr and eastern Anatolia. The
Turkmans of the Qarquynl confederation would maintain a close but
uneasy relationship with the Jalayirids into the Timurid period, and would
eventually succeed the Jalayirid dynasty in Azarbayjan and Arab Iraq.
However, in the period from 768/1367 to his death in 776/1374, Shaykh
Uvays was at the height of his power after the period of conquest and con-
solidation. It was in these years that the royal power of the sultan in Tabriz
reached the extent that had existed during the period of the later Ilkhanid
rulers.
The Height of Sultanic Power in the Post-Ilkhanid Period

(768/1367776/1374)
The last seven years of Shaykh Uvayss reign was characterised by relative
stability, without significant challenges to his authority as sultan within
the borders of Azarbayjan, Arab Iraq and Diyarbakr. The period from 768/
1367 to 776/1374 was characterised by three main developments, which
are discussed below: Shaykh Uvayss campaigns against Amr Val in
Mazandaran, the political marriages arranged between Shaykh Uvayss
children and prominent political and religious figures, and the succession
of deaths and disasters that affected the Jalayirid royal family, capped by
the death of the sultan himself in 776/1374. The death of Shaykh Uvays
initiated a new period in which sultanic power declined due to the rise
of the authority of Amr dil among several Jalayirid princes who each
made their own claims for the authority Shaykh Uvays had established for
the family. This trend was accelerated by the campaigns of Tmr and the
Jalayirids loss of Azarbayjan and, periodically, Baghdad as well.
The primary source for the life of Amr Val is the treatise (risla)
devoted to him by fi Abr.66 According to fi Abr, Amr Vals
father, Amr Shaykh Al Hind, was the governor of Astarabad under
aghy Tmr Khan, a descendant of Chinggis Qans brother, and the
ruler of Khurasan after the death of Ab Sad. Amr Val was well
regarded by aghy Tmr during his youth, and was educated and
113
The Jalayirids
brought up by the khan.67 He began to acquire his own following among

those Mongol amirs opposed to the rise of the Sarbadrs at Sabzavar, an
alliance of urban elites and followers of a Shii Sufi order.68 After defeat-
ing the Sarbadr army, Amr Val established independent authority in
the region southeast of the Caspian, from Astarabad to Damghan and
Simnan.69 Although Amr Val owed his allegiance in his youth to aghy
Tmr Khan, he did not recognise aghy Tmrs son, Pdishh Luqmn,
as his nominal overlord. After initially summoning Pdishh Luqmn to
Astarabad, Amr Val turned him away and instead ruled in his own right.
He also eliminated other members of the Taghay-Timurid family,70 who
represented the main source of Chinggisid authority in the eastern Ilkhanid
provinces.
Amr Vals career in some ways mirrored that of Shaykh asan
Jalayir. Both owed their positions to the Mongol khans whom their
families had served. When the authority of the khans was weakened,
they both were able to establish regional amirates for themselves in for-
merly Ilkhanid provinces. Amr Val, like Shaykh asan, did not declare
himself a sultan or khan. However, it seems that, after he had defeated the
Sarbadrs and brought Damghan and Simnan under his control, he set his
sights further to the west, possibly to Azarbayjan. fi Abr reports that
at the end of 772/mid-1371, Amr Val assembled an army and set out for
(Persian) Iraq.71 This campaign prompted a response from Shaykh Uvays,
who marched to meet Amr Val near Rayy. The threat to the Jalayirid
state from Amr Val was different from those Shaykh Uvays faced in the
period 761/1360768/1367, as discussed above. Khwja Mirjn and Ks
Shrvn had been nominal servants of the Jalayirid sultan. The Turkmans
under Bayrm Khwja were also vassals of the sultan, and resided within
the Jalayirid territory in Diyarbakr. Amr Val, on the other hand, was a
foreign threat, and represented an extension of the eastern Ilkhanid mili-
tary elite into the west, similar to the campaigns of aghy Tmr Khan
in 739/1339. However, unlike aghy Tmr, who had been invited by
Shaykh asan Jalayir to help him in his conflict with the Chubanids, Amr
Val was an unwelcome threat to Shaykh Uvayss eastern frontier, and
particularly to the cities of Rayy and Sultaniyya, which were vital to the
commercial traffic bound for Tabriz.
In the battle that took place near Rayy, Amr Vals army defeated a
smaller Jalayirid force and killed two major Jalayirid amirs.72 The loss of
these commanders led Shaykh Uvays to withdraw and give a temporary
victory to Amr Val. However, the Jalayirids counterattack forced Amr
Val and his army to disperse, and Shaykh Uvays advanced to Simnan.73
The sources report that the Jalayirid amirs did not favour pressing the
114
advance beyond Simnan, and that Shaykh Uvays returned to Tabriz after
entrusting Rayy to one of his own men.74
The Jalayirid amirs did not favour extending the sultans authority
into Mazandaran, a fact that supports the view that the former Ilkhanid
provinces continued to maintain distinct political identities, as well as a
division between Khurasan and Azarbayjan as separate centres of politi-
cal authority. Such a division can perhaps be traced to the pre-Ilkhanid
Mongol administration, which comprised an imperial representative in
Khurasan, and another military governor in Azarbayjan. After a long
period of political unity under the Ilkhanate, this separation re-emerged in
the Jalayirid period. Despite his defeat in 772/1371, Amr Val maintained
his authority in Astarabad, without any further pressure from Shaykh
Uvays. The region of Rayy was established as the frontier zone between
the Jalayirids and Amr Val.
The peripheral position of Rayy, away from the central authority of
the Jalayirid sultan, perhaps contributed to the rise of the autonomy of
Amr dil, who would come to dominate politics in the Jalayirid realm
after Shaykh Uvayss death. Amr dil, who will be discussed further in
Chapter 8, became the Jalayirid governor of Rayy around the year 775/
1373.75 Amr Val continued to threaten the Jalayirid eastern frontier, and
in 774/137273 Shaykh Uvays prepared another campaign to confront
him. However, the operation was called off due to the death of Shaykh
Uvayss brother, as is discussed below. Shaykh Uvays did not carry out
another campaign against Amr Val, although he planned to shortly before
his own death in 776/1374.76 Later, Amr Val looked to the Jalayirids for
refuge and assistance against Tmr, who drove him from Astarabad and
installed aghy Tmrs son Pdishh Luqmn in 786/1384.
The success of Shaykh Uvays against Amr Val and the establishment
of Rayy as the Jalayirids eastern frontier helped to establish the territo-
rial limits of the sultans authority. The reluctance of the amirs to remain
in Simnan illustrates that Shaykh Uvayss authority was not absolute, but
still subject to some degree of consensus by the amirs. However, the mili-
tary elite was willing to recognise the Jalayirid sultan as the only source
of royal authority in the western Ilkhanid lands, and did not oppose his
assertion of independent authority.
Shaykh Uvayss growing power was also recognised by a representa-
tive of the Muzaffarids, another of the regional dynasties within the former
Ilkhanid provinces. Descended from an elite Arab family from Khurasan,
Mubriz al-Dn Muammad ibn Sharaf al-Dn Muaffar was recognised as
the Ilkhanid governor of Yazd by Ab Sad in 719/131920. In the years
that followed, he expanded his territory, taking Shiraz in 754/1353 and
115
The Jalayirids
Isfahan in 757/1356. That Mubriz al-Dn and his sons sought to incorpo-
rate Azarbayjan into their domains is evidenced by the several invasions
they made to the north between 758/1357 and 776/1375. As mentioned
above, after bringing all of Fars and Persian Iraq under his control,
Mubriz al-Dn claimed the caliphate for himself.77 He also attempted to
take advantage of the disorder in Azarbayjan following the invasion of the
Jochid Jn Beg Khan, and thwarted the Chubanid-revivalist aspirations
of Akh Jq in 758/1357. However, he soon had to withdraw after Shaykh
Uvayss conquest the following year. Mubriz al-Dn was deposed and
blinded by his sons, who henceforth shared political authority in the
Muzaffarid state.78
In the years following Mubriz al-Dns deposition and death, his
sons and nephews competed for control over Fars and Persian Iraq from
their bases in the cities of Shiraz, Isfahan, Yazd and Kirman. During the
reign of Shaykh Uvays, Shh Mamd b. Mubriz al-Dn challenged
his brother, Shh Shuj, for leadership of the Muzaffarid family. The
Jalayirids became involved in the internal struggles of the Muzaffarids
when Shaykh Uvays gave his daughter in marriage to Shh Mamds
son in 771/136970.79 The alliance between Shaykh Uvays and Shh
Mamd Muaffar had the effect of neutralising Shh Shuj. However,
after Shaykh Uvays died in 776/1374, followed by Shh Mamd in 776/
1375,80 Shh Shuj was free to launch a campaign in an attempt to capture
Azarbayjan for the Muzaffarids.
In the same year that Shaykh Uvayss daughter married into the
Muzaffarid family (771/136970), Shaykh Uvays married his son Shaykh
asan to the daughter of Q Shaykh Al, the most prominent member
of the ulam in Tabriz.81 This marriage was probably an attempt to
strengthen the ties between the Jalayirids and the urban elite of Tabriz,
with the uprising of Khwja Mirjn in recent memory. Q Shaykh Al
naturally wanted his son-in-law Shaykh asan to succeed ShaykhUvays
as sultan. However, when Shaykh Uvays designated his son Suln
usayn as his successor, Q Shaykh Al protested, saying that Shaykh
asan is not bearing it. Since he is the elder brother, Suln usayn would
not be suited to the sultanate (bi-salanat suln usayn dar naszad).82
However, the amirs kept Shaykh asan confined, and executed him imme-
diately after Shaykh Uvayss death was confirmed.83 After the execu-
tion of his son-in-law, Q Shaykh Al remained a prominent figure in
Tabriz, and took part in a conspiracy against the new ruler Suln usayn.
In addition to forging ties with the family of Q Shaykh Al, Shaykh
Uvays also associated with religious figures of a more antinomian incli-
nation, including Fazl Allh Astarbd (d. 796/1394). Founder of the
116
messianic Sufi movement known as the urfiyya, Fazl Allh came to

Tabriz in the early 770s/1370s, after having travelled throughout Iran.84
He came to believe, after a series of revelations, that he was the mahd,
the messiah who would bring order and justice to the world as he ushered
in the end of time.85 However, before he took up this mission (around the
year 788/1386), Fazl Allh was primarily known as a talented dream inter-
preter, and ib-i tavil (master of esoteric interpretation).86
urf sources maintain that Shaykh Uvays himself, along with several
viziers, had contact with Fazl Allh.87 These sources also say that Fazl
Allh presented a qiya, a hat worn by Sufi dervishes, to Shaykh Uvays,88
perhaps symbolising the sultans inclinations or sympathies for followers
of the mystic path. While in Tabriz, Fazl Allh also married the daughter
of one of Shaykh Uvayss viziers, Khwja Byazd Dmghn.89 Fazl
Allh is not mentioned in the standard accounts of the reign of Shaykh
Uvays written by Timurid historians. Neither is Khwja Byazd, although
it is likely he was a member of the family of ministers from Damghan who
had served the Chubanids in Tabriz before the Jalayirid conquest of the
city.90 In the time of Shaykh Uvays, Fazl Allh did not yet think of himself
as a prophetic figure. Instead, as Shahzad Bashir has claimed, it is likely he
served more as an advisor to the elite of Jalayirid Tabriz through his dream
interpretation.91 The encounter between Fazl Allh Astarbd and Shaykh
Uvays indicates both a desire for access to circles of political power on the
part of Fazl Allh, as well as a policy of recognition and accommodation
of Sufi circles on the part of Shaykh Uvays.
The final years of Shaykh Uvayss reign were marked by a string of
natural disasters and deaths among the royal family and ruling elite. The
plague returned to Tabriz in 771/1369,92 killing around 300,000, accord-
ing to Zayn al-Dn Qazvn.93 The following year, a great flood inundated
Tabriz, ruining most of the buildings there.94 These two devastating events
were followed by a flood in Baghdad in 776/1374, which killed around
40,000 people.95 The precise consequences of these events are difficult
to gauge, beyond the destruction and loss of life that occurred. However,
the fact that these disasters primarily affected the urban populations of the
sultanates two major cities suggests that, with respect to the state elite,
the non-amir urban notables, ulam and administrative classes were
affected to a greater degree than the military elites, whose activities were
more closely connected with the mobile court-camp of the sultan, as well
as their own herds. Such a consequence may have contributed to a decline
among those who benefited from the stability and order of a commonly
recognised sovereign who could act as a mediator among factions who
would otherwise engage in violent conflict to settle disputes. At the same
117
The Jalayirids
time, such a decline would lead to an increase in the influence of compet-

ing factions of amirs who came to dominate the sultanate, and weaken the
authority of Shaykh Uvayss successor, Suln usayn, in the years that
followed.
The last years of Shaykh Uvayss reign also witnessed the deaths of
many prominent figures within the sultanate. In 769/136768, the sultans
brother, Amr Qsim, died of consumption (zamat-i diqq) and was buried
near his father, Shaykh asan, in Najaf.96 In the same year, Bayrm Beg,
mentioned above in connection with the subjugation of Shirvan, died as
a result of excessive drink. We are told that Bayrm Beg was beloved
by Shaykh Uvays (mabb-i suln), who wore a black woollen cloak in
mourning for his friend.97 j Mm Khtn, described by Zayn al-Dn
Qazvn as beloved by the sultan and the mother of his children, died in
770/136869.98 Four years later, in 774/137273, Shaykh Uvays prepared
his second campaign against Amr Val in Mazandaran. However, as he
readied the army in Ujan, his intoxicated brother Amr Zhid fell off the
roof of the palace99 and died, causing the sultan to call off his campaign.100
In addition to these deaths within the royal family, two of the sultans
governors, Khwja Mirjn and Ks Shrvn, both mentioned above,
passed away shortly before Shaykh Uvays himself. There is a sense in
the sources where all of these deaths are recorded, and where they com-
prise much of the information provided about the final years of Shaykh
Uvayss reign, that this period represented the end of a generation within
the Jalayirid sultanate, corresponding with the end of the reign itself. In
the period after 776/1374, the sultanate under Suln usayn would move
away from the centralisation of Shaykh Uvayss period, and the conflicts
of a new generation of royal princes and factions of amirs would contrib-
ute to a decentralisation of political authority. However, at the same time,
the symbolic authority of the Jalayirid royal family continued, as several
sons of Shaykh Uvays claimed that authority for themselves, or for the
amirs that supported them.
The Jalayirids and Italian Merchants in Azarbayjan

A final issue relating to the reign of Shaykh Uvays and the Jalayirids
relationship to Azarbayjan in this period was the sultans attempt to re-
establish Tabriz as the commercial centre it had been under the Ilkhans.
Azarbayjan had suffered economically during the period of Chubanid rule
under Malik Ashraf in the 740s/1340s and 750s/1350s. The Chubanid
regime turned against the Latin Christian merchants who had traded in
Tabriz since the 680s/1280s. Genoa and Venice had sent the most mer-
118
chants from the Latin West to the Ilkhanate in the seventh/thirteenth and
eighth/fourteenth centuries. The result was that trade with Italian mer-
chants dropped off almost completely after the death of Ab Sad in 736/
1335.101 As a result of persecution of the foreigners in Tabriz, Genoese
merchants abandoned the route through Iran for their trade with China.
Instead, they followed a northern route, from Caffa in the Crimea, to
Tana (Azov), to Saray on the Volga, and then around the north side of the
Caspian Sea to Urgench.102 The year 74041/1340 seems to have been the
beginning of the Chubanids closing Tabriz to Italian merchants. While
the Genoese trader Marco Morosini had sent his agents to Sultaniyya in
73940/1339,103 Genoa declared a boycott of the Chubanid lands in two
decrees, issued in 74041/1340 and 74243/1342.104 Jean Richard has
written that Iran was closed to the Genoese in 74344/1343.105 Thus, if
we take the years between 74041/1340 and 74344/1343 as the height of
mutual hostility between the Chubanids and Genoa, it can be concluded
that Shaykh asan Chbn was responsible for the cutting-off of trade
with the Latin West.
After Shaykh asan Chbns death, the economic repercussions of
this policy began to be felt, prompting Malik Ashraf to send an emissary
to propose peace with Genoa, and to return Genoese goods that had been
seized.106 However, this overture did not succeed in bringing the Genoese
back to Tabriz.107 The reluctance of Genoa to trade in Chubanid Tabriz
may have been influenced by Malik Ashrafs reputation as an unpredict-
able and despotic ruler, who could have seized Genoese commercial
property.
After he took control of Tabriz in 759/ 1358, the Jalayirid sultan
Shaykh Uvays attempted to revive trade with both Genoa and Venice.
The Genoese did not return,108 perhaps because the Tana-Saray-Urgench
route had proven secure and lucrative, under the protection of the Jochid
khans. This may have also been due to conflict between the Genoese and
Shaykh Uvays himself. According to Clavijo, writing thirty years after the
sultans death, tension arose between the Genoese merchants and Shaykh
Uvays when the Genoese began to construct a castle outside Tabriz on
land they purchased from the sultan.109 Accustomed to operating out of
their own strongholds on the Black Sea coast, the Genoese were extending
this practice to the Jalayirid city. However, Shaykh Uvays informed them
that it was not customary for merchants to build castles, before ordering
them to be executed.110
Shaykh Uvayss attempts to lure the Venetians were also unsuccessful.
In order to re-establish contact between the republic and Tabriz, Shaykh
Uvays named an envoy to Venice in 77071/1369.111 The Venetians in
119
The Jalayirids
Trabzond on the Black Sea coast responded to the sultan that they had
waited for two years to be granted passage for their caravan, and were
clearly reluctant to believe the Jalayirid sultans assurance. Shaykh Uvays
wrote to the Venetian bailo in Trabzond again in 77475/1373, in an
attempt to convince the Venetian merchants that the caravan routes from
the Black Sea to Tabriz were open and secure. The sultan gave his assur-
ances that he would punish anyone who would impede or pillage the cara-
vans. However, Venice did not respond to these overtures, unconvinced of
the promises of Shaykh Uvays.112
It is not clear whether the disappearance of the Italian merchants had
a negative effect on the economic prosperity of Tabriz. On the one hand,
the Genoese and Venetians had been the main agents of commercial
exchange with the Black Sea and Mediterranean economies in Iran. A shift
to a northerly route, passing through the Jochid uls, would have hurt the
Jalayirid economy. However, Tabriz continued to flourish in subsequent
years. This can possibly be attributed to a shift in the silk trade in the late
eighth/fourteenth century, as more caravans began carrying silk overland
from Tabriz to Ottoman Bursa.113 The European observers Schiltberger
and Clavijo both commented on the many merchants and the high volume
of trade in Tabriz around the turn of the ninth/fifteenth century, after the
trade with the Italian states had slowed. Even though Shaykh Uvays failed
to reopen trade channels with Genoa and Venice, Jalayirid Tabriz, as well
as Sultaniyya, continued to prosper.
The Death of Shaykh Uvays

Sultan Shaykh Uvays died in Jumd I 776/October 1374. His death is sur-
rounded with a legend in both the Timurid and the Mamluk historiographi-
cal traditions, in which Shaykh Uvays foresaw his own death in a dream a
few months before his actual demise. According to Zayn al-Dn Qazvn,
the sultan became aware of his fate three months before he died, and in the
time that remained prepared a burial shroud and coffin, and put his affairs
in order.114 The Timurid historian Naanz gives a similar account, writing
that Shaykh Uvays became aware that he was going to die, and con-
structed a tomb for himself at a place called Kajjn-i Tabrz.115 Maqrz,
also writing in the ninth/fifteenth century, reported that while sleeping he
saw the pronouncement of his own death (li-manm rhu naayat ilayhi
nafsihi). Shaykh Uvays then turned the kingdom over to his son Suln
usayn, and began to devote himself to God (aqbala yataabbad).116
Shaykh Uvayss tomb is located six kilometres southeast of Tabriz
at a village called Pna Shalvr, at the Shd-bd cemetery (Gristn-i
120
Shd-bd-i Mashikh).117 The place is known locally as Zva-Gul,118

and was the final resting place for a large number of sufis and holy men.119
The inscription on Shaykh Uvayss tombstone reads:
The late great sultan and the inspired and felicitous khqn (al-suln al-aam
al-maghfr wa-al-khqn al-mulham al-masrr), asker of the forgiveness of
God (al-rj afw allh), the forgiven and strengthener of the religion of God
(al-maghfr wa muizz-i dn allh), the victorious Shaykh Uvays Bahdur
Khan, may the mercy and blessing of God be upon him, was transported from
this world (dr al-amal) to the garden of paradise ( firdaws al-jinn) on the
2nd of Jumd I, 776 [10 October 1374].120
The preceding sections of this chapter have focused on providing an

analysis of the military and political developments that contributed to the
establishment of the rule of Shaykh Uvays Jalayir as sultan in the western
provinces of the former Ilkhanate. By the end of his reign, the Jalayirid
dynasty could claim to be the heir to the Chinggisid Ilkhan dynasty, some-
thing that was not achieved by Shaykh asan during the period of his rule
as amir of Baghdad between 736/1336 and 757/1356. The Jalayirid con-
quest of Azarbayjan in 759/1358 contributed greatly to the material and
territorial gains of Shaykh Uvays. However, the military successes that he
achieved were connected with and supplemented by an elaboration of an
ideological programme expressed through the literature and public artifacts
produced during his reign by individuals whose positions depended on the
continuity of the Ilkhanate, or an Ilkhanate-modelled system of admin-
istration and political patronage. In the following chapter, an analysis is
carried out of the historical, literary and material artifacts produced under
Shaykh Uvays, which helped to develop the notion of the Jalayirid dynasty,
represented by Sultan Shaykh Uvays, as the heir to the Ilkhanid political
tradition, in which the ruler acted as defender of Islam, upholder of royal
justice, and the embodiment of the dynastic legacy of Chinggis Qan.
Notes
1. This is according to Naanz, who gives his age as thirty-four at his death
in 777/137576. However, his death is commonly accepted as 2 Jumd I
776/9 October 1374. See Naanz/Aubin, 167.
3. fi Abr/ZJT, 184. These lines are attributed to Salmn Svaj. See
Svaj/Kullyt, xxxxi.
4. Malik Ashraf married the daughter of al-Malik al-li in a lavish ceremony
in Tabriz. However, she was not to his liking, and he ignored her after their
first night together. See fi Abr/ZJT, 184.
121
The Jalayirids
5. Qazvn/ZTG, 57.
7. Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 1767; (English translation), 76; Qazvn/ZTG,
57; fi Abr/ZJT, 184; Samarqand/Mala, 1:289.
10. Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 177; (English translation), 77. The reference here
is to Malik Ashrafs puppet, Ghazan II. Little is known about this appar-
ent successor to Anshirvn, although several coins struck in his name
are known from the years 757/1356 and 758/1357. See Stephen Album,
Checklist of Islamic Coins, 2nd edn (Santa Rosa: S. Album, 1998), 110. My
thanks to Stephen Album for the reference.
11. Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 178; (English translation), 78; Qazvn/ZTG, 62;
fi Abr/ZJT, 187.
13. Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 179; (English translation), 78. Ahr does not
mention the Chubanid hostages. See also Qazvn/ZTG, 64; fi Abr/ZJT,
188.
15. fi Abr mentions that Akh Jq was among the troops of Malik Ashraf.
See fi Abr/ZJT, 186. Shrn Bayn describes him as the governor of
Tabriz and deputy (nib) of Jn Beg. See Shrn Bayn, Trkh-i l-i
Jalyir (Tehran: Intishrt-i Dnishgh-i Tihrn, 1962), 34.
16. Qazvn/ZTG, 64; fi Abr/ZJT, 1889; Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 179;
(English translation), 79.
18. Cf. Ahrs reference to the amirate of Malik Ashraf (imrat-i malik ashraf ),
in Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 171; (English translation), 72.
19. Qazvn/ZTG, 65: He was tormenting the people with unnecessary confis-
cation and exactions; fi Abr/ZJT, 189.
20. In Ahrs periodisation, the sultanate of Shaykh Uvays begins not when he
succeeds his father in Baghdad, but after the defeat of the Chubanids and
the conquest of Azarbayjan. See Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 182; (English
translation), 81.
22. Van Loon notes that the year of the battle has been left out of the manuscript
of Ahrs history, with only the last day of the month (salkh) of Shabn
indicated. Thus, the date is end of Shabn 759/early August 1358; see Ahr/
TSU, (Persian text), 181; (English translation), 80. Zayn al-Dn Qazvn,
and thus also fi Abr, have the end of Shawwl 759/early October 1358.
However, Shabn (August) must be correct, since at a later point in Zayn
al-Dns narrative he records the execution of the Ashraf amirs in Tabriz as
taking place on 28 Raman of that year (3 September 1358). See Qazvn/
ZTG, 667; fi Abr/ZJT, 189.
122
23. Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 181; (English translation), 80; Qazvn/ZTG,

67; fi Abr/ZJT, 189. According to Zayn al-Dn Qazvn, who is fol-
lowed by later Timurid historians, Shaykh Uvayss Oyrat troops, who
comprised the left wing of his army, were in disagreement with each other
and dispersed, leaving only the right wing to battle the Ashrafs. See also
Samarqand/Mala, 1:293; Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:570.
24. Qazvn/ZTG, 67; fi Abr/ZJT, 189; Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:571.
25. Gottfried Herrmann and Gerhard Doerfer, Ein persisch- mongolischer
Erla des alyeriden ey Oveys, CAJ 19 (1975): 184.
26. Qazvn/ZTG, 67; fi Abr/ZJT, 190; Samarqand/Mala, 1:294;
Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:571; Bayn, Trkh-i l-i Jalyir, 345.
27. Both Ahr and Zayn al-Dn Qazvn describe Akh Jqs followers as
ashrafs, implying that they were the former supporters of Malik Ashraf
Chbn. See Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 183; (English translation), 82;
Qazvn/ZTG, 65; fi Abr/ZJT, 190.
28. Qazvn/ZTG, 67; fi Abr/ZJT, 190; Samarqand/Mala, 1:294.
29. Qazvn/ZTG, 67; fi Abr/ZJT, 190; Samarqand/Mala, 1:294.
31. Qazvn/ZTG, 68; fi Abr/ZJT, 190; Samarqand/Mala, 1:294;
Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:571.
34. Qazvn/ZTG, 69. See also fi Abr/ZJT, 190.
35. Ahr and Zayn al-Dn write that Muammad Muaffar was blinded by his
sons; see Ahr/TSU, (Persian text), 184; (English translation), 82; Qazvn/
ZTG, 69. fi Abr writes that he was blinded by his commanders (sarn);
see fi Abr/ZJT, 191.
36. Qazvn/ZTG, 70; fi Abr/ZJT, 191. Ahr writes, no one against whom
Uvays harbored enmity in his heart escaped. They were seized by the serv-
ants of this highness and doomed to death; see Ahr/TSU, (Persian text),
184; (English translation), 83.
37. Qazvn/ZTG, 71; fi Abr/ZJT, 191; Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 93;
Samarqand/Mala, 1:312.
38. Qazvn/ZTG, 71; fi Abr/ZJT, 191; Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 93;
Samarqand/Mala, 1:312.
39. A letter purportedly sent by the Ottoman sultan Murd I to Shaykh Uvays
in 762/1361 is preserved in Ferdn Amed Bey, Mecma-yi Mnset-i
Seln (Istanbul: Dr al-iba al-mira, 1848), 8990. In the letter, the
sultan explains that until then no one had come from the Ottoman court due
to the difficulties caused by the blockages of the roads through Anatolia,
and that he was sending two individuals to be attendant at Shaykh Uvayss
court, as well as a servant (or eunuch: khdim), ten beardless Rm slaves,
and three pieces of red broadcloth (chqa-yi surkh).
40. fi Abrs dependence on Zayn al-Dn Qazvn has been pointed out by
123
The Jalayirids
Charles Melville in his article amd Allh Mustawfs afarnmah and the
Historiography of the Late Ilkhanid Period, in Kambiz Eslami (ed.), Iran
and Iranian Studies: Essays in Honor of Iraj Afshar (Princeton: Zagros,
1998), 4.
41. The positive historical image of Shaykh Uvays was continued in the
Ottoman context as well. As Cornell Fleischer has pointed out, in Muaf
ls treatment of the Mongol successor states in his Ful-i all ve Ad,
Shaykh Uvays is praised as a ruler who used his wealth to patronise art
and learning, which served to glorify his memory. This positive image of
the Jalayirid sultan was incorporated into Muaf ls discourse on the
degradation of Ottoman institutions in the late tenth/sixteenth century, and
served a primarily rhetorical function in ls criticism of the situation
in his own time. See Cornell H. Fleischer, Bureaucrat and Intellectual in
the Ottoman Empire: The Historian Mustafa Ali (15411600) (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1986), 282, n. 22.
42. Qazvn/ZTG, 74; Naanz/Aubin, 167; fi Abr/ZJT, 192; Fa Khvf/
Mujmal, 96. Fa Khvf refers to Khvja Mirjn as Khvja Jawhar
Khdim, although he does refer to Khvja Mirjn as the successor to
Sulaymn Shh Khzin in Baghdad in 770/136869. See Fa Khvf/
Mujmal, 101. fi Abr describes Khvja Mirjn as the vl of Baghdad in
Zayl-i Jmi al-Tavrkh, 192; Naanz describes him as an atabeg (nisbat
bi- rh-i atbk dsht) and governor (kim) of Baghdad.
46. This was Q Shaykh Al, whom Shaykh Uvays had entrusted with the
administration of Tabriz when he set out for Baghdad. See Qazvn/ZTG,
74.
48. fi Abr has Quraysh Dam (band-i quraysh). See fi Abr/ZJT,
192.
50. Qazvn/ZTG, 756; fi Abr/ZJT, 1923. Zayn al-Dn Qazvn and fi
Abr mention Shaykh Uvayss son and successor Suln usayn for the first
time in the context of the plans for the assault on Baghdad.
52. Qazvn/ZTG, 77; Naanz/Aubin, 167; fi Abr/ZJT, 193; Fa Khvf/
Mujmal, 96. Maqrz writes that Khvja Mirjn was blinded (saml aynayhi),
a detail not mentioned by the Persian sources. See Maqrz/Ziyda, 4:293.
55. Qazvn/ZTG, 83; fi Abr/ZJT, 195; Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 101.
57. Qazvn/ZTG, 79; fi Abr/ZJT, 194; Faruk Smer, Kara Koyunlular
124
(Baslangtan Cihan-Saha kadar), I. Cilt (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu

Basmevi, 1962), 41.
58. Zayn al-Dn writes that Shaykh Uvays plundered all of Bayrm Khvjas
l va uls, which can be translated generally as population and land. See
Qazvn/ZTG, 79. fi Abr adds tents (khna) to his description of the
targets of the pillage of the Jalayirids; see fi Abr/ZJT, 194.
59. Qazvn/ZTG, 81; fi Abr/ZJT, 194; Fa Khvf, Mujmal-i Fa,
100.
60. Bayrm Beg b. Suln Shh is described by fi Abr as the beloved of the
sultan. A conflict between Bayrm Beg and two amirs in the royal council
session (majlis) in 761/1360 prompted Shaykh Uvays to send Bayrm Beg
to Baghdad for a time. This separation was the subject of Salmn Svajs
Firq-nma. See fi Abr/ZJT, 1912; Jan Rypka, History of Iranian
Literature (Dordrecht: D. Reidl, 1968), 262.
64. Qazvn/ZTG, 90; fi Abr/ZJT, 1967; Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 106. The
close association between Shaykh Uvays and his vassal the Shrvnshh is
illustrated by a manuscript of work known as the Farhd-nma, composed
between 1369 and 1372 by one Muammad b. Muammad b. al-Arif al-
Ardabl. A poetic work in Persian, the Farhd-nma, as described by Filiz
aman and Zeren Tannd, contains two masnavs, the first dedicated to
Shaykh Uvays, and the second dedicated to the Shrvnshh Hshang. See
Filiz aman and Zeren Tannd, Selections from Jalayirid Books in the
Libraries of Istanbul, Muqarnas 28 (2011): 2245.
65. Naanz/Aubin, 1636.
66. This risla was published by Felix Tauer in 1959 under the title Cinq opus-
cules de fi-i Abr concernant lhistoire de lIran au temps de Tamerlan,
and was part of fi Abrs larger work, the Majma-yi fi Abr. See
Charles Ambrose Storey, Persian Literature: A Bio-Bibliographical Survey
(London: Luzac & Co., 1927), 1:86.
67. fi Abr, Cinq opuscules de fi-i Abr concernant lhistoire de
lIran au temps de Tamerlan, ed. Felix Tauer (Prague: LAcadmie
Tchcoslovaque des sciences, 1959), 9.
68. On the Sarbadrs, see Jean Aubin, Aux origins dun movement populaire
medieval le cheykhisme du Bayhaq et du Nichpour, Studia Iranica 5
(1976): 21324; Jean Aubin, La fin de ltat Sarbadr du Khorassan,
Journal Asiatique (1974): 95118; John Masson Smith, Jr, The History
of the Sarbadr Dynasty, 13361381 a.d. and its Sources (The Hague:
Mouton, 1970).
69. fi Abr, Cinq opuscules, 11.
125
The Jalayirids
72. Qazvn/ZTG, 87; fi Abr, Cinq opuscules, 11; fi Abr/ZJT, 196;

Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 104.
73. Qazvn/ZTG, 878; fi Abr, Cinq opuscules, 11; fi Abr/ZJT, 196;
Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 104.
74. Qazvn/ZTG, 88; fi Abr/ZJT, 196; Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 104 (Fa
Khvf does not mention the reluctance of the amirs to stay in Simnan).
75. Qazvn/ZTG, 88; fi Abr/ZJT, 196; Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 105. A
decree, probably issued by Shaykh Uvays in Rab I 775/August 1373,
instructed a certain Shuj al-Dn dil Bahdur to recognise the rights of
the disciples of the afav shaykh adr al-Dn in the district of Garmrd.
In his commentary on this document, Gottfried Herrmann suggests that
this Shuj al-Dn dil Bahdur could possibly be identified with Amr
dil. See Gottfried Herrmann, Persische Urkunden der Mongolenzeit
(Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2004), 171.
78. Peter Jackson, Muaffarids, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden:
Brill, 1992), 7:8202.
80. Shh Mamd died on 9 Shawwl 776/13 March 1375. See Kutub/TAM,
91.
81. Qazvn/ZTG, 86; fi Abr/ZJT, 196. Q Shaykh Al is first mentioned
by Zayn al-Dn Qazvn when Shaykh Uvays entrusted Q Shaykh Al
and the sultans brother, Amr Zhid, with the city of Tabriz in 765/1364,
when Shaykh Uvays went to Baghdad to put down Khvja Mirjns rebel-
lion; see Qazvn/ZTG, 74. He is next mentioned with reference to his
daughters marriage to prince Shaykh asan b. Shaykh Uvays. In the period
after Shaykh Uvayss reign, Q Shaykh Al was the most prominent
member of the religious elite in Tabriz, and apparently built a madrasa in the
city; see Qazvn/ZTG, 12930, 134. Along with Amr dil, Q Shaykh
Al guided the actions of Suln usayn b. Shaykh Uvays, and was exiled
to Damascus following a plot against Suln usayn; see fi Abr/ZJT,
205. Fa Khvf reports that Q Shaykh Al paid one hundred tmn
aqchas to avoid execution; see Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 113.
84. Fazl Allhs travels took him to Isfahan, Mecca, Khwarazm, Sabzavar and
back to Isfahan before he came to Tabriz. See Shahzad Bashir, Fazlallah
Astarabadi and the Hurufis (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005), 719.
85. Bashir, Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis, 27, 30.
86. H. Algar, Astarbd, Fazlallh, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
Yarshater (London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1987), 2:841;
Shahzad Bashir, Deciphering the Cosmos from Creation to Apocalypse:
The Hurufiyya Movement and Medieval Muslim Esotericism, in Abbas
126
Amanat and Magnus Bernhardsson (eds), Imagining the End: Visions of

Apocalypse from the Ancient Middle East to Modern America (London:
I.B. Tauris, 2002), 173; Bashir, Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis, 11.
87. Abdlbki Glpnarl, Hurflik Metinleri Katalou (Ankara: Trk Tarih
Kurumu Basmevi, 1973), 6; Yaqb zhand, urfiyya dar Trkh
(Tehran: Nashr-i Nay, 1369 [1990]), 11; Algar, Astarbd, Fazlallh,
842; Bashir, Deciphering the Cosmos from Creation to Apocalypse, 173;
Bashir, Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis, 1920.
88. Glpnarl, Hurflik Metinleri Katalou, 6; zhand, urfiyya dar Trkh,
11; Algar, Astarbd, Fazlallh, 842; Bashir, Deciphering the Cosmos
from Creation to Apocalypse, 173.
89. Bashir, Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis, 21.
90. Masd Dmghn, the son-in-law of former vizier Khvja Abd al-ayy,
was named vizier by the Chubanid Malik Ashraf in 750/1349. See Qazvn/
ZTG, 46.
91. Bashir, Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis, 20.
92. The plague first appeared in Tabriz in 747/134647. See Michael W. Dols,
The Black Death in the Middle East (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1977), 45.
99. This palace, or pavilion, at Ujan is referred to as kshk by Zayn al-Dn
Qazvn and fi Abr, and qar by Fa Khvf.
101. Luciano Petech, Les Marchands Italiens dans lEmpire Mongol, Journal
Asiatique 250 (1962): 569; Michele Bernardini, Genoa, Encyclopaedia
Paul, 2001), 10:423.
102. Michel Balard, Les Gnois en Asie centrale et en extrme-orient au XIVe
sicle: un cas exceptionnel?, in conomies et socits au moyen age:
mlanges offerts Eduoard Perroy (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne 5,
1973), 686.
103. Petech, Les Marchands Italiens dans lEmpire Mongol, 569.
104. Bernardini, Genoa, 423.
105. Jean Richard, Buscarello de Ghizolfi, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
Yarshater (London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1990),
4:569.
106. Petech, Les Marchands Italiens dans lEmpire Mongol, 569; Bernardini,
Genoa, 423.
107. Nevertheless, Genoese trade did not completely disappear, despite Genoas
127
The Jalayirids
official boycott. In January 1344 (Shabn or Raman 744) a Genoese

citizen named Tommasino Gentile was absolved of having violated the
boycott. See Balard, Les Gnois en Asie centrale et en extrme-orient,
685.
108. Bernardini, Genoa, 423.
Le Strange (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1928), 1512.
110. Clavijo, Embassy to Tamerlane, 152.
111. Petech, Les Marchands Italiens dans lEmpire Mongol, 569.
112. Muammad Javd Mashkr, Trkh-i Tabrz t Pyn-i Qarn-i Nuhum-i
Hijr (Tehran: Anjuman-i sr-i Mill, 1352 [1973]), 593; Petech, Les
Marchands Italiens dans lEmpire Mongol, 570.
113. Halil nalck, The Question of the Closing of the Black Sea under the
Ottomans, in Essays in Ottoman History (Istanbul: Eren, 1998), 428.
114. Qazvn/ZTG, 92.
117. Bayn, Trkh-i l-i Jalyir, 51; Mashkr, Trkh-i Tabrz, 591.
118. Mashkr gives the meaning of this name as istakhr-i zviya (dervish lodge
lake, or zaviye gl). See Mashkr, Trkh-i Tabrz, 592.
120. Bayn, Trkh-i l-i Jalyir, 53.
128
7
Dynastic Ideology during the Reign of

ShaykhUvays
By 1360, Sultan Shaykh Uvays had taken control of Azarbayjan, the first
step in consolidating Jalayirid rule over the lands of the western Ilkhanate.
In addition to this military conquest, and the consolidation of authority
as described in the previous chapter, the ideological foundations of the
Jalayirid sultanate were elaborated during the reign of Shaykh Uvays.
In this period, the servants and supporters of Shaykh Uvays created a
complex narrative and official image of the Jalayirid dynasty as the right-
ful successors to the Ilkhanids. Unlike previous Chubanid amirs like
Malik Ashraf, as well as Shaykh asan Jalayir, who had ruled in the name
of figurehead khans, Shaykh Uvays claimed a number of royal titles for
himself, including sultan, khan and ib-qirn (lord of the auspicious
conjunction). This ideological programme was created by individuals who
relied on the Jalayirid court for their livelihood, and had also served the
Ilkhanids and had a professional interest in the continuation of the Ilkhanid
political order. They stood to benefit from a royal patron who ruled from
the wealthy province of Azarbayjan and who patronised the urban liter-
ate religious and administrative culture in Tabriz. This chapter explores
some of the major aspects of Mongol imperial, Ilkhanid and Perso-Islamic
ideologies of legitimate rulership that came to be incorporated into works
of history, administrative protocol, poetry, architecture and art during the
reign of Shaykh Uvays. What we find is an ideology of legitimate ruler-
ship that looked to the Ilkhanid past while at the same time acknowledging
the unique nature of the Jalayirid sultans identity as the ideal upholder of
the values of the steppe, justice and Islam.
Shaykh Uvays as Heir to the Ilkhanate

An important aspect of the political identity of Shaykh Uvays as presented
by individuals in the service of the Jalayirid court was the close connec-
tion of his family to the Ilkhans. An attempt to present Shaykh Uvays as
the legitimate heir to the Ilkhanid dynastic tradition is found in the only
129
The Jalayirids
surviving work of history written for and about the Jalayirid dynasty, the
Trkh-i Shaykh Uvays, completed around 761/1360 by Ab Bakr al-Qub
al-Ahr. This work is a universal history, from the beginning of the world
down to the accession of Ahrs patron Shaykh Uvays. Ahr depends for
much of his information on the monumental universal history of the Ilkhan
vizier Rashd al-Dn (d. 718/1318). However, the final section of the work
is valuable for its account of the post-Ilkhan political situation from a
Jalayirid perspective.
Ahrs organisation of his account of the post-Ab Sad period is
significant. The history is arranged by the reigns of the Ilkhans. For the
years after the death of Ab Sad, Ahr continued to present a linear suc-
cession of sultans, and organised his information under the reigns of the
Chinggisid protgs installed by the amirs who held actual power. Thus,
while the Chinggisid puppet khans installed by Shaykh asan Jalayir are
given headings, Shaykh asan himself is not recognised as a legitimate
ruler. It was Shaykh Uvays, whose reign is given the heading the sultan-
ate of the supreme Ruler, lord of the necks of the populace (salanat-i
pdishh-i aam mlik-i riqb-i umam) Shaykh Uvays Bahdur Khan,
who was recognised by Ahr as the first legitimate Jalayirid sovereign.1
Thus, Ahrs work is not a history of a Jalayirid dynasty per se, with
Shaykh Uvays as the climax of a noble ruling family. Although Shaykh
Uvayss father and grandfather are given great respect, it is the Chinggisid
ruling family that provides the basis for Ahrs presentation of his univer-
sal history. Shaykh Uvays is of course the pinnacle and culmination of his
narrative; however, it is a narrative that conforms to a notion of the privi-
leged place of Chinggisid lineage, even when those who held power could
not claim this lineage for themselves.
Although Shaykh Uvays was not a Chinggisid though the lineage of
his father, Ahr emphasised his genealogical ties to female members of
the Ilkhanid royal house. The final section of his Trkh is dedicated to
Shaykh Uvayss noble lineage (naab-i sharfash).2 Here Ahr points
out that Shaykh Uvayss mother Dilshd Khtns own mother was
descended from the Ilkhan Amad Tegder. He also reminds his reader
that Shaykh Uvayss paternal grandmother was ljetey Sultan, the daugh-
ter of Arghun, another former Ilkhan ruler.3 Thus, Shaykh Uvays could
claim a place in the noble Ilkhanid family tree through two female lines,
relationships not commonly considered sufficient to make one a legitimate
Chinggisid prince. Ahr had to be careful to situate Shaykh Uvays into a
narrative which recognised the Chinggisid legitimising principle, despite
the fact that he was not only not a Chinggisid, but also did not claim to
rule in the name of a protg or puppet khan as his father Shaykh asan
130
Dynastic Ideology during the Reign of ShaykhUvays
had done. The ambivalence this created among those who served him
and helped to cultivate his imperial image is reflected in Ahrs work.
Ahr and others who were patronised by the Jalayirid court attempted to
accommodate the non-Chinggisid Jalayirid dynasty as continuators of the
Chinggisid and, more specifically, the Ilkhanid tradition.
In addition to his genealogical ties to the Ilkhanids, attempts were also
made to present Shaykh Uvays as the logical successor to the last Ilkhan,
Ab Sad, despite the fact that Shaykh Uvays was not a direct descend-
ant of Ab Sad. The author of the manual of court protocol written for
Shaykh Uvays, Dastr al-Ktib f Tayn al-Martib, Muammad b.
Hindshh Nakhjivn, devoted a portion of his dedication in this work
to the praise and memory of the last Ilkhan ruler Ab Sad and his grand
vizier Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad.4 Here Nakhjivn describes how he
was commissioned to write his book:
In the days of the reign (dawlat) of the late fortunate sultan (suln-i sad) and
pious praiseworthy ruler (khqn-i amd-i mabrr) Al al-Duny wa-al-Dn
Ab Sad... the late august martyr (ib-i sad-i shahd-i maghfr) Khwja
Ghiyth al-aqq wa-al-Dn Muammad Rashd, may God cool his grave, and
the other pillars of state and assistants of His Majesty repeatedly sent the order
for the compilation of such a book.5
Nakhjivn goes on to relate that he was able to complete his assignment

in the service of the sultan of Islam [Shaykh Uvays] ..., who occupies
the position of heir and lieutenancy to Sultan Abu Said (dar maall-i
vilyat-i ahd va qim-maqm-yi suln-i sad ab sad).6 Here
Nakhjivn clearly acknowledges the prominence of the Ilkhanate and its
last ruler Ab Sad. Although he dedicated his work to Shaykh Uvays,7 he
sought to connect the Jalayirid sultans current rule directly to the former
authority of Ab Sad, with the suggestion that Shaykh Uvays was the
inheritor of the Ilkhanid charisma which Ab Sad had possessed. The
rhetorical appeal to the recent Ilkhanid past illustrates the conservative
impulse found among individuals like Nakhjivn whose privileged social
positions had been ensured by the Ilkhanid political order. A desire for the
continuation of this order is found in Nakhjivns Dastr al-Ktib.
A similar rhetorical project is at work in another work, written and
dedicated to Shaykh Uvays in the early part of his reign. The Ghzn-
nma, composed by Khwja Nr al-Dn Azhdar around the year 1361, is
a poetic work in the style of the Shh-nma about the reign of the Ilkhan
Ghzn Khan. Azhdar achieved notoriety as a physician after curing
Shaykh Uvays of an illness that none of the other royal doctors had been
able to treat. He dedicated his work about Ghzn Khan to Shaykh Uvays
131
The Jalayirids
in an opening section in praise of the pdishh-i islm Shaykh Uvays.8

This title given to Shaykh Uvays, in a work on the first Ilkhanid pdishh-i
islm, suggests the connection and continuity between Ghzn Khan and
Azhdars Jalayirid patron.
Expression of the Jalayirid imperial image during the reign of Shaykh
Uvays was also found on coins struck in his name.9 The formulas found
on these coins, similar to the organisation of Ahrs history, suggest that
Shaykh Uvays was able to assert his political authority in his own right
in a way that his father had not. Shaykh asan Jalayir had struck some of
his coins in the name of his Chinggisid protgs,10 and others without the
name of a sovereign at all. These coins included only the Muslim declara-
tion of faith (shahda) or other religious formula and the names of the first
four caliphs.11 However, Shaykh Uvayss coins bear several variations
with his own name and titles. These include the formula the greatest
[or, most just] sultan Shaykh Uvays Bahdur [Khan], may God preserve
his rule and his sultanate (al-suln [al-aam or al-dil] shaykh uvays
bahdur [khn] khallada [allh] mulkahu [wa salanatahu]).12 The for-
mulas found on the coins echo those used by the later Ilkhans, particularly
Ab Sad. A typical coin struck in Azarbayjan during Ab Sads reign
includes the formula:
struck in [uriba f]
the reign of the greatest sultan [dawlat al-suln al-aam]
the great Ilkhan Ab [lkhn al-muaam ab]
Sad, may God preserve his rule [sad khallada allh mulkahu]13
Another example, struck in Anatolia, uses the title master of the necks of
the populace, which was also used by Ahr to refer to Shaykh Uvays. The
formula on this Anatolian coin was:
Struck in the reign of the greatest sultan [uriba f dawlat al-suln al-aam]
Master of the necks of the populace [mlik riqb al-umam]
Ilkhan of the world Ab Sad [lkhn al-lam ab sad]
May God preserve his rule [khallada allh mulkahu]14
Although the names and formulas on most of Shaykh Uvayss coins reflect
an Islamic religious tradition expressed in Arabic script, some coins were
also struck using Mongol (Uyghur) script.15 Such a measure surely rein-
forced the Mongol heritage of the Jalayirid court.
A final example of an attempt to identify Shaykh Uvays as the heir
to the Ilkhanids, and even as an Ilkhanid himself, is an inscription on a
copper water bowl made for the Jalayirid sultan. The inscription on the
vessel reads:
132
Made on the order of the greatest sultan [al-suln al-aam]

The great Ilkhan, the most just and noble khqn [al-lkhn al-muaam al-
khqn al-adal al-akram]
Master of the necks of the populace [mlik riqb al-umam]
Shadow of God on Earth [ill allh f al-lam]
Strengthener of the world and religion [muizz al-duny wa-al-dn]
Shaykh Uvays, may God preserve his realm and his power16
Here, Shaykh Uvays is referred to as the great Ilkhan, a clear illustration
that in official circles within the Jalayirid court at Tabriz, an attempt was
being made to portray Sultan Shaykh Uvays as the rightful heir to Ab
Sad.
Shaykh Uvays and the Legacy of Chinggis Qan

The historian Ahr, the administrator Nakhjivn, the poet Azhdar and
the anonymous creator of the copper water bowl all produced works that
presented their patron, the Jalayirid sultan Shaykh Uvays, as the rightful
successor to the line of the Ilkhans. In addition to these references to the
descendants of Hleg, other examples of official Jalayirid propaganda
emphasise Shaykh Uvayss connections to the more distant Mongol impe-
rial past. In official literature and public displays, the Jalayirids sought to
invoke the memory of Chinggis Qan and to suggest a link between them-
selves and the Mongol conqueror.
In the dedication to the Dastr al-Ktib, Nakhjivn refers to Shaykh
Uvays as the reviver of the customs of Chinggis Qanid fortune (muy-yi
marsim-i dawlat-i jinkiz khn) and the refuge of the noble magna-
nimity of the qans (panh-i ukrma-yi makrama-yi qn).17 Both of
these references seem designed to suggest Shaykh Uvayss connections
to the former glories of the Mongol empire, ruled by the great qans of
Qaraqorum. Nakhjivns use of the word reviver (muy) in the first ref-
erence suggests not only that the fortune of rulership had passed to Shaykh
Uvays, but also that the customs (or rites; marsim) of Chinggisid
authority had lapsed, presumably following the death of Ab Sad. The
second reference suggests that Shaykh Uvays had inherited the legacy of
Turko-Mongol (qn) rulership. Nakhjivns language suggests that
the memory of Chinggis Qan remained an important aspect of Jalayirid
authority, despite the fact that Shaykh Uvays himself was not a patrilineal
descendant of Chinggis Qan.
A similar presentation of Shaykh Uvays as carrying on the legacy of
Chinggis Qan can be found in an inscription in the Mirjniyya madrasa
in Baghdad. The madrasa was built by the Jalayirid governor of Baghdad
133
The Jalayirids
Khwja Mirjn (d. 775/1374) and funded by an endowment from the

mother of Shaykh asan, ljetey Sultan.18 Khwja Mirjn was discussed
in the previous chapter in the context of his rebellion against Shaykh
Uvays in Baghdad in 765/1363. Earlier in his life Khwja Mirjn had been
a slave at the court of the Ilkhan ruler ljeyt (r. 703/1304716/1316),
and was assigned to the governorate of Baghdad by Shaykh asan Jalayir
in 755/1354.19 He began the construction of his madrasa during Shaykh
asans lifetime, although it was completed after his death, and so fea-
tures inscriptions dedicated to Shaykh asan as well as to his son Shaykh
Uvays. One of these inscriptions describes Shaykh Uvays as the adorner
of the emblem of the Chinggis Qanid fortune (muzayyin shir al-dawla
al-jinkiz khniyya).20 Here we find an echo of Nakhjivns panegyric.
The similarity in the language suggests that this was a standard theme in
Jalayirid ideological rhetoric. Shaykh Uvays and those who served him
attempted to present a link between the current sultan and the unques-
tioned authority of Chinggis Qan. The fact that we find this language on
a public building as well as in a book written for court officials suggests
the interests of the dynasty in making their ideological message available
to large numbers of religious as well as administrative elites throughout
the realm.
Shaykh Uvays as the Ideal Muslim Ruler

In addition to these references to the Jalayirid sultan as the rightful heir
to the Ilkhanate and Chinggis Qanid fortune, the role of Shaykh Uvays
as a Muslim ruler who upholds and defends the faith is also emphasised
in the official literature. If we return to the work of Nakhjivn, we find
reference to Shaykh Uvays as the raiser of the banners of prophetic law
(bar afrzanda-yi ryt-i shar-i nabaw) and the lighter of the candle of
the chosen religion [or, the religion of Muammad] (bar afrzanda-yi
sham-i dn-i mutafaw), as well as strengthened by the assistance of
God, lord of the two worlds (muayyad bi-tayd allh rabb al-lamn).21
Such titles emphasise the role of Shaykh Uvays as an Islamic ruler whose
authority is derived from God and who defends the religion of the Prophet.
Since the period of Ghazan Khan, the Ilkhans had been not just khans in
the image of Chinggis Qan, but Muslim rulers as well. They were sultans,
pdishhs of Islam.22
The Jalayirid sultans role as a ruler who upholds right religion is also
expressed in the Ans al-Ushshq, a treatise on poetics written by Sharaf
al-Dn Muammad Rm Tabrz in the early years of Shaykh Uvayss
reign. Rm dedicated his work to Shaykh Uvays, whom he described in
134
his dedication as a defender and supporter of religion (fi-i bild allh;

nir-i ibd allh; muayyad min al-sam).23 Such epithets do not nec-
essarily connect the Jalayirids to the Ilkhanids, but they do suggest that
Shaykh Uvayss identity as a Muslim ruler was another important aspect
of the official legitimising ideology of the post-Ilkhanid period.
Among the inscriptions of the Mirjniyya madrasa in Baghdad, we
find an expression of Shaykh Uvayss role as protector of the Muslim
community as well. Thus, in the entrance inscription, Shaykh Uvays is
he who aids the world and religion, the helper of Islam and the Muslims
(ghiyth al-duny wa-al-dn mughth al-islm wa-al-muslimn),24 and in
the mirb inscription he is the renewer of the customs of the Muslims
(muy marsim al-milal al-mutafwiyya).25 These inscriptions, alongside
the references to Chinggis Qanid fortune as discussed above, reveal that
Jalayirid authority was understood as derived from the dynastys identity
as both Mongol and Muslim.
Shaykh Uvays and the Ideal of Royal Justice

Finally, those who served and wrote in honour of Shaykh Uvays also
worked to construct an image of their ruler as an eminently just monarch.
The Jalayirid sultan was the perfect ruler because of his attention to
matters of justice and the balancing of the interests and needs of all of his
subjects. Shaykh Uvayss adherence to justice is expressed by Nakhjivn
when he refers to him as diffuser of the standards of equity (nshir-i
alwiya-yi nasfat),26 most just of the greatest of sultans (adal-i aim al-
saln), and custodian of approved action (vl-yi vilyat-i pasandda-
kirdar).27 Alongside these are several descriptions in the Dastr al-Ktib
of the mercy and benevolence Shaykh Uvays shows to his subjects. He is
the spreader of the carpet of mercy (bsi-i bis-i ramat), the dissolver
of the difficulties of worldly creatures (alll-i mushklat-i jahnyn),
succor of the distressed (ghiyth-i malhfn), aider of theoppressed
(mughth al-malmn), and the fortifier of the weak and the poor
(muqaww al-zuaf wa-al-maskn).28 The Mongols were heirs to both
Islamic and pre-Islamic notions of justice in Iran and Mesopotamia. Their
predecessors the Abbasids had looked to both sacred law and royal law
as part of their political ideology. In their articulation of this ideology,
the caliphs had drawn on much older roots, in pre-Islamic Iranian and
Hellenic traditions whereby the ruler served as dispenser and upholder
of the law. Said Amir Arjomand has described this aspect of Abbasid
ideology as Sasanian patrimonialism, which emphasised protection of
the weak from the strong, removal of oppression, and administration of
135
The Jalayirids
punishment for wrongdoing and for contraventions of customary norms of

fairness.29 It is this vision of justice upheld by the ruler that is expressed
in these examples from Nakhjivn.
The Jalayirid sultan is praised for his justice in other examples as well.
In his Ans al-Ushshq, Rm describes Shaykh Uvays as a spreader of
security, justice and beneficence (bsi al-amn wa-al-amn; nshir al-adl
wa-al-isn), and the shadow of God on Earth (ill allh f al-ar).30 The
musician Abd al-Qdir Margh, who was a renowned fixture at Jalayirid
and Timurid courts, began his career in the service of Shaykh Uvays. In
his autobiography, Margh referred to Shaykh Uvays as the ib-qirn,
and a pdishh who dispenses justice, beneficence and generosity to the
world.31 The Mirjniyya madrasa also displays expressions similar to those
found in the works of Nakhjivn, Rm and Margh. On the madrasas
entrance inscription is a testament to Shaykh Uvayss role as the spreader
of justice in the world (nshir al-adl f al-lam).32 On the left side of
the mirb is another inscription which characterises Shaykh Uvays as he
who draws the hem of mercy upon the Arabs and the Turks (sib dhayl
al-rama al al-arb wa-al-atrk).33 Such a specific reference to both
of these groups was not only poetically elegant but also reflective of the
diversity of the ethnic and linguistic population in Baghdad. This was a
city that was home to a largely Arabic-speaking population, alongside the
mostly Turkish amirs, a situation that had existed since the early Abbasid
period.
Synthesis of Ideological Traditions:

The Panegyric Poetry of Salmn Svaj
The aspects of the political ideology developed by the supporters and serv-
ants of Shaykh Uvays dealt with above were part of an attempt to present
the Jalayirid sultan as the heir to the legacy of the Ilkhanate, through his
connections to the Ilkhanid royal house, who upheld Islam and justice in
his realm. All of these aspects are brought together in the work of the poet
Salmn Svaj, who composed many verses praising the Jalayirids. In the
section that follows, the life and work of Salmn Svaj are briefly exam-
ined in order to illustrate the way in which all of the ideological traditions
discussed above were included in the writings of a single individual who
received the patronage of the Jalayirids for helping to construct an image
of legitimate rulership through elegant language.
Salmn Svaj was born around the year 709/130910 in Svah in
Persian Iraq, to a family that had served the Ilkhan viziers in the business
of accounting (istf).34 In his entry for Salmn, the biographer of poets
136
Dawlatshh Samarqand wrote that his family was always honoured by the
sultans.35 The career of Salmns father benefited from the fact that it coin-
cided with that of the most prominent native of Svah of the period, Sad
al-Dn Svaj, who served as vizier with Rashd al-Dn during the reigns
of Ghazan and ljeyt.36 Salmn himself was trained in the business of
the dvn and chancery script (ilm-i siyq va qf),37 but also began to
gain notoriety as a poet at the end of Ab Sads reign. His patron was
the vizier Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad, for whom he composed a qada
known as Badi al-Asr (or Abr).38
After Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad was killed in his conflict with Al
Pdshh and the Oyrats in 736/1336, Salmn sought the patronage of
Shaykh asan and his newly appointed vizier Shams al-Dn Muammad
Zakary. After Shaykh asan was forced to abandon Azarbayjan in 740/
1340 and settle permanently in Baghdad, Salmn followed him there, and
soon became poet laureate (malik al-shuar) of the Jalayirid court.39
According to Dawlatshh, Salmn was discovered by Shaykh asan
Jalayir while the poet was making his way to Baghdad from his home
town of Svah. Salmn composed a spontaneous verse about the amir
and his slave who was fetching the arrows that he was shooting. Pleased
with his work, Shaykh asan promoted Salmn, who became the darling
(qurrat al-ayn) of the Jalayirid family, and whose prestige reached the
highest level during the reign of Shaykh Uvays.40
The vast majority of Salmns odes (qaid, sing. qada) that survive
are dedicated to prominent members of the Jalayirid dynasty and their
ministers. In the following discussion of these qadas, attention has been
paid to the attributes, titles and qualities ascribed specifically to the sultan,
while less emphasis has been placed on the literary qualities of the odes.
In other words, what is considered here are aspects of the official image
and persona of Shaykh Uvays as expressed by the Jalayirid court poet, as a
way of understanding what elements went into the creation of the Jalayirid
dynastic image. Aspects relating to the artistic qualities of Salmns work
are not of primary concern here.
The panegyric of Salmn was probably not intended for a wide public
audience; it is assumed here that his work was intended for the ears of
the sultan and his entourage. However, it is likely that Salmns odes
were recited aloud in the restricted public forum of the royal court, which
included members of the royal family, administrative officials, religious
figures, and foreign travellers and envoys. What is suggested here is that
given the dearth of narrative historical sources representing an official
Jalayirid view of their own place in history and their relationship to the
Ilkhanid past, the poetry written for the Jalayirid court, about the sultan,
137
The Jalayirids
might help us to gauge more accurately what the Jalayirid view of their
relationship to the Mongol political past might have been.
One of the most prevalent images in Salmns qadas dedicated to
Shaykh Uvays is that of the sun. The sultan is commonly referred to as
the sun of the sultanate (ftb-i salanat),41 or a similar variation, such
as sun of the sky of the sultanate/power/rule (ftb-i smn-i salanat42
or ftb-i smn-i mulk43). Salmn employs other variations on this solar
imagery, referring to Shaykh Uvays as lord of the sun of (royal) glory
(dvar-i khrshd-i farr)44 and the noble sun (khrshd-i karam).45 The
sultan is also called the sun of justice protection (ftb-i adl-parvar),46
suggesting that his ability to dispense and enforce justice spread like the
rays of the sun throughout the kingdom. More will be said about Shaykh
Uvays and the issue of justice in Salmns qadas below.
Another major theme in Salmns praise of Shaykh Uvays is frequent
comparison to the historical and legendary pre-Islamic kings of Iran. In
these comparisons, Salmn claims that Shaykh Uvays is equal to or sur-
passes these great rulers in whatever attribute they are most famous for.
For example, Shaykh Uvays is likened to Anshirvn in justice, Ardashr
in bravery, and Jamshd in glory.47
Justice is a third major theme in Salmns odes to Shaykh Uvays.
The role of the ruler as a just and disinterested arbiter of the various
competing interests in society was central to the concept of legitimate
political authority in many pre-modern societies. Shaykh Uvays was not
a lawgiver, in that he did not introduce a new code of justice as part of
his political programme. Instead, he sought to uphold the Ilkhanid legal
tradition, which had come to involve a combination of Islamic (shara)
and Mongol dynastic law (ys). The Islamic legal tradition involved
more than just the theological debates and rulings of religious scholars and
jurisconsults. The tradition of dynastic decree or arbitration, often referred
to as malim, was also part of the legal tradition in Islamic societies in the
region ruled by the Ilkhanids.
Another common theme in Salmns praise and characterisation of
Shaykh Uvays is the sultan as the shadow of God (sya-yi khud,48
sya-yi aqq,49 ill-i aqq,50 sya-yi parvardagr 51). This was a common
title used by Islamic rulers since the time of the early Abbasid caliphs. It
placed Shaykh Uvays well within the caliphal tradition, as a ruler whose
right to rule depended on his role as a representative of Gods will on
earth. Variations on this title included shadow of Gods grace (sya-yi
luf-i khudvand 52 or sya-yi luf-i ilah 53) and divine shadow (sya-yi
khud).54
In his verse in praise of Shaykh Uvays, Salmn made reference to
138
Shaykh Uvayss role as defender and supporter of Islam. These refer-

ences range from the general upholder of religion (bar-dr-yi dn)55
and religion-protecting king (shh-i dn-parvar)56 to more specific refer-
ences to Islamic tradition, such as supporter of the religion of the Prophet
(nir-i dn-i nab).57 In one instance, Salmn suggests that Shaykh Uvays
draws upon both Shii and Sunni religious heritage to support his rule.
Thus, he is the knower of the knowledge of Al (lim-i ilm-i al) and
equal in justice to [Caliph] Umar (adl-i adl-i umar).58 This reference
to Al among the attributes of the sultan illustrates the significance of
Shii and Alid loyalties in the eighth/fourteenth century, particularly in
the Jalayirids domains in Arab Iraq. Shaykh Uvayss inheritance from his
father included the cities of Najaf and Karbala, important centres of Shii
veneration as the sites of the tombs of Al and his son usayn. Shaykh
Uvayss father and mother were both buried in Najaf, perhaps suggest-
ing a personal devotion to Al on the part of Shaykh asan and Dilshd
Khtn. In addition, the eighth/fourteenth century saw the rise of a number
of Sufi arqas demonstrating allegiance with, or at least sympathy for,
the family of Al and the Shii imamate. One of these was the urfiyya,
whose founder, Fazl Allh Astarbd, discussed briefly in the previous
chapter, claimed descent from the seventh Shii imam, Ms al-Kim.
The afaviyya of Ardabil, although active in the mid-eighth/fourteenth
century under Shaykh adr al-Dn, had not yet taken on the overtly Shii
aspects it would display in the ninth/fifteenth century.
The cultivation of an identity for Shaykh Uvays as a supporter and
defender of Islam was not unique, but part of a general trend in the
eighth/fourteenth century throughout the regions that had been con-
quered by the Mongols. In the Jochid uls, or Golden Horde, as well as
in theChaghatayid central Asia (the Ulus Chaghatay and Moghulistan),
the political elite had converted to Islam by the mid-fourteenth century.
Only in China did the Mongol rulers not become Muslims, but instead
Sons of Heaven in the model of previous Chinese dynasties. The specifi-
cally Islamic symbols and language of authority found in the post-Ilkhanid
period in Iran were thus part of a more general pattern of the Islamisation
of Mongol khanates across Eurasia in the fourteenth century.
In addition to verses dedicated to Shaykh Uvays, Salmn also praised
Shaykh Uvayss father, Shaykh asan, as well as his mother, Dilshd
Khtn (or Dilshd Shh). An examination of Salmns qadas in praise
of these other two Jalayirid patrons, the parents of Shaykh Uvays, reveals
similar language that combines claims to universal rule, references to
famous Iranian kings of the historical and mythical past, and emphasis on
the religious aspect of Jalayirid rule in Arab Iraq.
139
The Jalayirids
Shaykh asan is praised, like his son, as a conqueror (khidv-i jahn-

gush)59 and lord of the age (dr-yi ahd,60 dr-yi zamn,61 khudvand-i
zamn,62 suln-i zamn 63). As with Shaykh Uvays, Salmn employs
imagery of the sun, describing Shaykh asan as ftb-i mulk,64 ftb-i
salanat 65 and shh-i khurshd-maall.66 Salmn also evokes the image
of the person of Shaykh asan at the centre of the circle of kingship
(nuqa-yi dira-yi pdishh)67 and at the centre of the turning circle of
heaven.68 In addition, Shaykh asan is compared to the great kings of
the past. He exhibits the traces of Jamshd ( jamshd-sr),69 and is a
lord of the lineage of Fardn (dr-yi afrdn-nasab)70 and Jamshd
worthy of Alexander ( jamshd-i iskandar-asab).71 Such rhetoric placed
Shaykh asan and his family in the tradition of the kings and heroes of
the Shh-nma.
The pre-Islamic past is blended with the religious obligations of a
Muslim ruler, who embodies all the best qualities of the Abrahamic-
Quranic tradition. Thus, Shaykh asan is a ruler with the heart of aydar
(Al) (aydar-dil), the sunna of the most praised (Muammad) (amad-
sunan), the blood of Jesus (s-dam) and the manner of Joseph (ysuf-
shiyam).72 Here we see a blend of Shii and Sunni references, along with
the pre-Islamic prophets Jesus and Joseph. Salmn seems to stress Shaykh
asans Shii leanings in one characterisation of the amir as a lord asan
by name, usayn by lineage and origin (dr-yi asan-nm usayn-yi
nasab va al).73 Such a line evokes not only the Jalayirid family lineage
(Shaykh asan and his father Amr usayn), but also the names of the
two sons of Al ibn Ab lib, the second and third Shii imams, asan
and usayn. Perhaps this allusion appealed to elements among the Shii
ulam present at the court in Baghdad.74 Salmns play on these names
connected the Jalayirid ruling family with Shii religious tradition as they
found themselves ruling over two of the most important Shii holy sites of
Najaf and Karbala.75
In addition to his praise of Shaykh Uvays and Shaykh asan, Salmn
also wrote in honour of Dilshd Khtn, the wife of Shaykh asan and
mother of Shaykh Uvays. She was a descendant of the Chubanid amir
Dimashq Khwja, son of Amr Chpn and Trsun Khtn, the grand-
daughter of Amad Tegder Khan. As such, Dilshd represented the
Ilkhanid royal house, as well as the Chubanid Sulduz family that had ruled
the state de facto under Amr Chpn in the first years of Ab Sads
reign. The union of Shaykh asan and Dilshd Khtn produced Shaykh
Uvays, progeny of all three major political families of the later Ilkhanate:
the Jalayirids, Chubanids and Hlegids. However, it was not just
Dilshds role as the mother of a future sultan that made her an important
140
political figure. She also took an active role in the administration of the
government in Baghdad.76
The image of Dilshd as a political leader, and not just the wife of
Shaykh asan, is reflected in Salmn Svajs qadas dedicated to her.
She is the head and chief of the kings of the world (sar va sarvar-i
shhn-i jahn;77 also sar-i saln78) and lord of the sultans of the sea
and plain (khudygn-i saln-i bar va barr).79 Salmn even casts
Dilshd in the role of a conqueror, praising Dilshd Shh, a ruler veiled
by the glory of the king, seized the kingdom of Sanjar and broke the crown
of Heraclius (dilshd shh shh kaz farr-i malik muqanna bi-girift
mulk-i sanjar bi-shikast tj-i hirqil).80 In addition, just as Shaykh Uvays
and Shaykh asan are compared to the great pre-Islamic kings of Iran,
so Dilshd is compared to former queens, including Bilqs, the Queen
of Sheba, Qaydfa, Queen of Barda, and Drb, the eldest daughter of
Bahman in the Shh-nma.81
Finally, like her husband and son, Dilshd Khtn is portrayed by
Salmn as a supporter and defender of Islam. Thus, she is the supporter of
prophetic law (nir-i shar-i payambar) and guardian of the world and
religion (imat-i duny va dn).82 Salmn also describes Dilshd as the
kaba of the men of the state, [and] qibla of the lords of religion (kaba-
yi arkn-i dawlat qibla-yi arbb-i dn).83 Here, as with Shaykh asan, the
axis around which the heavens and circle of kingship turn, Dilshd too is
imagined as a fixed central focus (kaba) around which turn the affairs of
both the state and religion.
Salmn Svaj personally benefited from his close association with the
Jalayirids, and acquired a vast amount of land and property from Dilshd
Khtn and Shaykh Uvays. However, Salmns undoing was his unwill-
ingness to continue his loyalty to the Jalayirids after Shaykh Uvayss son
and successor, Suln usayn, was driven out of Tabriz by the Muzaffarid
prince Shh Shuj in 776/1375. Although Muzaffarid occupation in
Tabriz was short-lived, Salmns qadas in praise of Shh Shuj earned
him the ire of Suln usayn when he returned and restored Azarbayjan
to Jalayirid control.
The preceding overview of the relationship of Salmn Svaj to the
Jalayirid ruling family is intended to help understand the ideological foun-
dations of their rule in the former Ilkhanid domains in the period after Ab
Sad, and especially during the reign of Shaykh Uvays. Praise for Shaykh
Uvays and his parents, Shaykh asan and Dilshd Khtn, emphasised the
new dynastys image as conquerors, world rulers and preservers of past
traditions of both pre-Islamic Iranian kingship and Islam. The Jalayirids
patronised Salmn not only for his talents as a poet, but also for the ways
141
The Jalayirids
in which his verse reinforced the notion of Shaykh Uvays as a ruler very
much in line with the legacy of Ab Sad and the Ilkhanid state. While
Salmns verse was not necessarily for public consumption, its more
narrow focus on the ruler and his court was designed to establish a political
identity for the Jalayirids among the ruling class, and perhaps also among
the literary and administrative elites who had served the Ilkhans, and could
now hope to continue their livelihoods in the service of rulers who sought
to present themselves as the rightful heirs to the Ilkhanid regime.
The preceding discussion has been an attempt to identify and analyse the
ways in which legitimate political authority was conceived and expressed
in the post-Ilkhanid Islamic world in the eighth/fourteenth century through
an examination of the literary and material production of the court of the
Jalayirid sultan Shaykh Uvays. The Jalayirid dynasty was descended from
a Mongol tribal group that established itself among the ruling elite of the
Ilkhanate from the earliest days of that states existence. Although they
were not patrilineal descendants of Chinggis Qan, their privileged place
within the Ilkhan state, along with their matrilineal descent from two
Ilkhanid rulers, seems to have allowed Shaykh Uvays to claim to uphold,
if not the direct Chinggisid bloodline, then at least a more general notion
of Mongol heritage. At the same time, an image of Shaykh Uvays as the
dispenser and defender of justice in the name of Islam was also cultivated
by those who produced literature at his court in Tabriz. Such an image had
a long history in the Islamic world, and was one taken up by the Ilkhans,
particularly Ghazan and Ab Sad. The continuation of the rhetoric of a
ruler who upheld Islamic and Chinggisid traditions indicates a conscious
attempt on the part of the Jalayirid court, particularly after the re-conquest
of the Ilkhanid heartland of Azarbayjan, to re-establish the Ilkhanate,
albeit only in its western provinces and without a true prince of the blood.
In an age when the symbolic authority of both the caliph and Chinggis
Qans family were no longer viable bases on which to arrange the political
order, the expressions of the Jalayirid court under Shaykh Uvays represent
an ongoing attempt to reformulate the meaning of legitimate authority
among a ruling class which drew on both the glories of the conquests of
Chinggis Qan and the expectations of the Muslim community to fashion
its image and maintain its position.
The reign of Shaykh Uvays represented the height of royal authority
in the years after Ab Sads death. The Jalayirid sultan seemed to have
successfully established a dynastic state, founded on the principles upheld
by the Ilkhans. The survival of this state would be challenged in the years
following the death of Shaykh Uvays, first by a succession struggle among
his sons, and then by the Chaghatayid amir and conqueror Tmr. As will
142
be discussed in the following chapter, these challenges weakened the

Jalayirid hold over Azarbayjan, Diyarbakr and Arab Iraq, and eventually
led to the end of the dynasty in the early ninth/fifteenth century, as well as
the end of the Ilkhanate as a compelling political concept.
Notes
4. Nakhjivn/Dastr, 25.
7. Nakhjivn was a member of the Ilkhanid financial administration in the
mid-eighth/fourteenth century. He was a close associate of the grand vizier
Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad, who urged him to write a book of composi-
tion and correspondence protocol (insh) during the reign of Ab Sad.
However, he did not complete his Dastr al-Ktib until many years after
Ab Sads death, during the reign of Shaykh Uvays. See Nakhjivn/
Dastr, ix, xi, 245.
8. Nr al-Dn Azhdar, Ghzn-nma-yi Manm, ed. Mamd Mudabbir
(Tehran: Bunyd-i Mawqft-i Duktur Mamd Afshr, 1380 [2001]),
19.
9. During the reign of Shaykh Uvays, coins were struck in his name through-
out the Jalayirid sultanate, in provinces that were directly under his rule
(Baghdad, Wasit, Khuy, Tabriz, Ardabil, Nakhjivan, Shirvan), as well as in
Persian Iraq and Fars (Kashan, Isfahan, Shiraz). See Shrn Bayn, Trkh-i
l-i Jalyir (Tehran: Intishrt-i Dnishgh-i Tihrn, 1962), 49.
10. Stephen Album, Studies in Ilkhanid History and Numismatics I: A Late
Ilkhanid Hoard (743/1342), Iranian Studies 13 (1984): 706, 847.
11. H. L. Rabino, Coins of the Jalir, ara oynl, Mushasha, and A
oynl Dynasties, Numismatic Chronicle 6:10 (1950): 101.
12. Rabino, Coins of the Jalir, 105; Bayn, Trkh-i l-i Jalyir, 49.
13. Sheila Blair, The Coins of the Later Ilkhanids: A Typological Analysis,
JESHO 26 (1983): 300.
14. Blair, The Coins of the Later Ilkhanids, 299.
15. Ilkhanid coins, and those struck after 736/1335, would often exhibit the
name of the ruler in Uyghur script. For example, coins struck in the name of
the Chubanid puppet Sulaymn Khan, as well as those struck in the name of
Shaykh Uvays, gave the rulers name in this form. See Rabino, Coins of the
Jalir, 105; Norman D. Nicol, Raafat el-Nabarawy and Jere L. Bacharach,
Catalog of the Islamic Coins, Glass Weights, Dies and Medals in the
Egyptian National Library, Cairo (Malibu, CA: Undena, 1982), no. 4,712.
There are also examples of coins struck in the name of Ghazan in which this
143
The Jalayirids
pattern is reversed, that is, the rulers name is written in Arabic script, while
the formula is in Uyghur script. See Blair, The Coins of the Later Ilkhanids,
296.
16. Y. A. Godard, Bassin de cuivre au nom de Shaikh Uwais, Athr- rn:
Annales du service archaeologique de rn 1 (1936): 371.
18. Tariq Jawad al-Janabi, Studies in Medieval Iraqi Architecture (Baghdad:
Republic of Iraq, Ministry of Culture and Information, 1982), 114.
19. Al-Janabi, Studies in Medieval Iraqi Architecture, 114.
22. See Charles Melville, Pdishh-i Islm: The Conversion of Sultan Mamd
Ghzn Khn, Pembroke Papers 1 (1990): 15977.
23. Sharaf al-Dn Muammad b. asan Rm, Ans al-Ushshq, ed. Musin
Kiyn (Tehran: Intishrt-i Rawzna, 1376 [199798]), 39.
24. Vincenzo Strika and Jbir Khall, The Islamic Architecture of Baghdad:
The Results of a Joint Italian-Iraqi Survey (Naples: Istituto Universitario
Orientale, 1987), 48. Arabic text taken from Nir al-Naqshband, al-
Madrasa al-Mirjniyya, Sumer 2 (1946): 48.
29. Said Amir Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion,
Political Order, and Societal Change in Shiite Iran from the Beginning to
1890 (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 96.
30. Rm, Ans al-Ushshq, 39.
31. Murat Bardak, Maragal Abdlkadir: XV. yy. bestecisi ve mzik
nazariyatsnn hayat hika yesiyle eserleri zerine bir alsma (Istanbul:
Pan Yaynclk, 1986), 154.
32. Strika and Khall, The Islamic Architecture of Baghdad, 48.
34. Svaj/Kullyt (Vafs introduction), vivii.
35. Dawlatshh/Tazkira, 286.
36. Svaj/Kullyt (Vafs introduction), viii.
38. Svaj/Kullyt (Vafs introduction), xi.
39. Svaj/Kullyt (Vafs introduction), xii.
41. Svaj/Kullyt, 89, 92, 198.
42. Svaj/Kullyt, 174.
144

54. Svaj/Kullyt, 21, 203.
68. The turning of heaven is like a circle round his grace (kih hast gardan-i
gardn zbar-i minnatash chn chanbar): Svaj/Kullyt, 205.
74. Shaykh asans supposed Alid loyalties have been noted by Roemer, due
to the fact that he was buried in Najaf, site of the tomb of Al. See H. R.
Roemer, The Jalayirids, Muzaffarids and Sarbadrs, in Peter Jackson and
Laurence Lockhart (eds), The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 6: The
Timurid and Safavid Periods (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1986), 6, 9.
75. Sheila Blair has interpreted Shaykh Uvayss repair of the shrine of Al
in Najaf as both a memorial to his father, who was buried there, and an
affirmation of his Alid loyalties. See Sheila Blair, Artists and Patronage
in Late Fourteenth-Century Iran in the Light of Two Catalogues of Islamic
Metalwork, BSOAS 48:1 (1985): 55.
76. See afad/Ayn, 2:355.
145
The Jalayirids
80. Svaj/Kullyt, 137. The references here are to the Saljq sultan Sanjar
(d.552/1157) and the Byzantine emperor Heraclius (d. 20/641).
81. Svaj/Kullyt, 6.
82. Svaj/Kullyt, 6.
83. Svaj/Kullyt, 6. In another example, Dilshd Khtn is that lofty kaba
and that qibla of excellence (n kba-yi al vn qibla-yi mal). See
Svaj/Kullyt, 137.
146
8
Challenges to the Jalayirid Order
The period following the death of Sultan Shaykh Uvays was one of dis-
ruption of the central authority he had attempted to establish in Tabriz.
Between 776/1374 and 788/1386 the rule of the Jalayirid sultans was chal-
lenged by the power of the amirs, who rallied support around alternative
Jalayirid princes. The most powerful amir in this period was Amr dil
q, who enjoyed support from the Oyrat tribesmen, and whose author-
ity in Sultaniyya was confirmed by Tmr. Power in the sultanate became
divided between Tabriz, Baghdad and Sultaniyya, each home to a Jalayirid
contender for the throne. In addition, this period saw the rise in influence
of the Qarquynl Turkmans on the northwestern frontier, and the begin-
ning of their at times friendly, at times hostile relations with the Jalayirids.
The political situation was turned upside down after 788/1386, with
the first campaigns of Tmr in Iran, which fundamentally altered the
balance of power and challenged the Ilkhanid legacy as promoted by
the Jalayirids. Tmrs arrival was not immediately devastating for the
Jalayirid dynasty, however, and in fact Tmrs conquests served to
restore the authority of the sultan by eliminating his rivals. The long reign
of Suln Amad (r. 784/1382813/1410) was characterised by a seriesof
flights from Tmrs armies and subsequent attempts to regain control of
Tabriz and Baghdad. Although Suln Amad was severely weakened
by the Timurid campaigns, between 788/1386 and 813/1410 Jalayirid
sovereignty remained important for political actors who sought to oppose
or resist the Timurids. The Mamluk sultanate, the Ottoman beylik and
the Qarquynl confederation all looked to the Jalayirid sultan as the
embodiment of an alternative to Tmr in the late fourteenth century. For
the Qarquynl leader Qar Ysuf in particular, Suln Amad became
a link to the Ilkhanid legacy, which served as ideological capital with
which to make claims to legitimate authority in Azarbayjan and Iraq
in the early fifteenth century. Although the Jalayirid dynasty continued
until the demise of Suln Amads grandson, Suln usayn, in 835/
1432, the Qarquynl seizure of Tabriz following Suln Amads death
147
The Jalayirids
in 813/1410 signalled the end of the symbolic significance of Jalayirid

sovereignty in the former Ilkhanid lands.
Breakdown of Central Authority (776/1374788/1386)

The period from the death of Shaykh Uvays in 776/1374 until Suln
Amad was driven from Tabriz by Tmrs forces in 788/1386 was one of
political decentralisation, the growth of power of the amirs, and a weak-
ening of the sultans authority. Suln usayn (r. 776/1374784/1382)
depended on his chief amir, dil q, who held effective power in Tabriz
and Sultaniyya. At the same time, Suln usayns brothers became ral-
lying points for other amirs who opposed Amr dil. In a sense, this was
an indication that the notion of Jalayirid dynastic authority continued to be
strong among the ruling elite after Shaykh Uvayss death. Any amir who
wanted to establish himself sought the ideological cover of a Jalayirid
prince to lend him legitimacy. At the same time, however, the Jalayirid
state seemed on the verge of disintegration from within, particularly after
Suln usayn was killed by his brother, Suln Amad, in 1382, even
while his other brothers Byazd and Shaykh Al maintained separate
courts at Sultaniyya and Baghdad respectively. Amid the internal strug-
gles for power among the Jalayirids was the steady growth in power of
the Qarquynl Turkmans, led by Bayrm Khwja, and subsequently
by Qar Ysuf. The expansion of the territory and prestige enjoyed by
the Qarquynl was linked to events in the Jalayirid sultanate in these
years, as Amr dil, and later Suln Amad, called on the Turkmans for
military support in order to tip the balance of power to themselves in the
struggles with the other amirs and princes.
Amr dil q (sometimes called Sriq; yellow, blond) began his
rise to power at the end of the reign of Shaykh Uvays. In approximately
772/137071, Shaykh Uvays assigned him to the province of Rayy,1
and it was here and in Sultaniyya that he would establish the base of
his support. Although his assignment to Rayy is the first mention of
Amr dil in the sources, it seems that he quickly rose to prominence
thereafter among the amirs of the Jalayirid realm. When Shaykh Uvays
died in 776/1374, several amirs supported Suln usayn in opposition
to Amr dil and another of Shaykh Uvayss sons, Shaykh Al.2 At the
time of the sultans death, both Amr dil and Shaykh Al were away
from Tabriz, unable to assert themselves in the question of succession,
and were obliged to offer their allegiance to Suln usayn.3 Although
several important amirs were hostile to Amr dil, he maintained his
position of prominence. Amr dil acted as Suln usayns protector
148
when the Muzaffarid Shh Shuj occupied Tabriz in 777/1375, escorting

the new sultan to Baghdad. This act allowed Amr dil to keep Suln
usayn at a distance from those amirs who were hostile to himself. After
the Muzaffarid threat had passed, however, and Amr dil returned to
his post in Sultaniyya, a group of conspirators attempted to move against
him.
The timing of the conspiracy may have been prompted by Suln
usayns bestowal of the city of Rayy to Amr Val, who, as discussed in
Chapter 6, had served there as military governor under Shaykh Uvays.4
Rayy had been under the authority of Amr dil, and the reassignment of
the city to Amr Val may have been perceived as a sign that Suln usayn
was willing to limit the scope of Amr dils authority. In 779/1378, a
group of amirs gathered around Suln usayn at his camp in Ujan. When
Amr dil arrived and presented himself at the royal pavilion, the amirs
voiced their dissatisfaction with him, and announced that they no longer
accepted his leadership.5 Amr dil was forced to return to Sultaniyya,
and the amirs momentarily had their major rival out of the way. The role
of Suln usayn in these events is unclear. fi Abr seems to indicate
that he initially accepted the amirs attempt to marginalise Amr dil;
however, he was soon forced to call on Amr dils aid after his treasury
and possessions were plundered by the amirs.6
It thus became apparent that Amr dil was the real power that held
the sultanate together, and that the Jalayirid sultans position in the royal
capital at Tabriz could only be maintained by his backing and protection.
This was due in part to the fact that Amr dil commanded the loyalty of
the Oyrats, one of the few autonomous Mongol tribal groups in the former
Ilkhanid realm. Leading his own forces from Sultaniyya, and calling on the
Oyrat army to the west, Amr dil was able to overwhelm the rebellious
amirs from two fronts. In his message to the Oyrats, he promised abundant
property grants (suyrghls)7 to all who joined with Suln usayn.8 After
the rebels were defeated, Suln usayn sent his own letter to Amr dil,
assuring him that he had been opposed to the rebels, and that they should
be punished.9 Amr dil executed four of the leaders of the uprising, while
those who had remained loyal to the sultan were generously rewarded.10
After this incident, there was no question that Amr dil was the supreme
authority behind the Jalayirid throne.11
Amr dils power increased even more following his successful
defence against a second Muzaffarid invasion, led by Shh Shuj in 783/
1381.12 Based on fi Abrs account, Shh Shuj this time seemed
certain that he would be successful thanks to an alliance with Amr
dil. The Jalayirid commander had made overtures of friendship to the
149
The Jalayirids
Muzaffarids, sending gifts from Baghdad to Shiraz. Shh Shuj sent an

envoy to Amr dil at Sultaniyya with the message:
I have set out to subdue Tabriz. Now, if dil q is in agreement with me, and
if his outward show of friendship is sincere, he must join with me and become
obedient. If he has feigned the appearance of friendship, there must be war.13
However, the historian of the Muzaffarids, Mamd Kutub, does not

suggest that there was any perceived alliance between Amr dil and
the Muzaffarids, and writes only that Shh Shuj sought to punish Amr
dil for exerting his own total authority over the region of Sultaniyya.14
The battle that ensued outside Sultaniyya resulted in a Muzaffarid with-
drawal, and Shh Shuj returned to Shiraz.15 For Amr dil, his success-
ful defence of the country against the Muzaffarids seems to have helped
him even further in the consolidation of his own power. fi Abr writes
that Amr dil had achieved such a victory, and dealt with a matter of
such difficulty, that his power (tasallu) in the country increased.16 Suln
usayn, on the other hand, had not faced the Muzaffarid attack. He had
delayed in coming from Tabriz, and although he did take part in the
main battle, he left Sultaniyya during the siege to meet his brother Suln
Amad.17 This situation reflected the relationship between the sultan and
Amr dil throughout Suln usayns reign: authority in the Jalayirid
realm was exerted by Amr dil through his control of the military, while
Suln usayn remained largely a symbolic figure.
Amr dils military power was mirrored in the urban milieu by the
influence of certain notable families, particularly the Kujuj shaykhs
in Tabriz. Christoph Werner, Daniel Zakrzewski and Hans- Thomas
Tillschneider have traced the close ties between the Kujuj family and
the Jalayirid sultans, beginning with Shaykh Uvays, and have described
Khwja Shaykh Kujuj as both an urban notable and a representative of the
Jalayirid dynasty.18 In the conflict within the Jalayirid family after Shaykh
Uvayss death, Khwja Shaykh Kujuj sought to secure his prominence in
Tabriz and provide some measure of stability for his family in the midst of
the uncertain political situation by founding a mosque-madrasa-khnqh
complex in the city.19 The endowment document, dated 782/1380, was
witnessed by three of Shaykh Uvayss sons, including Suln usayn,
who referred to Kujuj in the document as my father (padaram) and the
sultan of shaykhs of both worlds (suln al-mashyikh f alamayn).20
According to Werner et al., Kujuj was a largely independent ruler in
Tabriz, and portrayed himself in the tradition of a princely founder of
the complex.21 Between the power of Amr dil among the army, and
Khwja Shaykh Kujuj in Tabriz, the Jalayirid dynasty seemed to be
150
more of an irrelevant or even destabilising element in the political life of

Azarbayjan after Shaykh Uvays.
Little changed in this balance of power after Suln usayn was mur-
dered by his brother, Suln Amad, in Tabriz in 1382. Shaykh Uvays had
made Suln Amad responsible for the region around Ardabil, a region
closely tied to the afaviyya Sufi order under the leadership of Shaykh
adr al-Dn (d. 794/1392).22 After a disagreement with his brother Suln
usayn, Suln Amad left Tabriz for Ardabil, and then went on to Arran
and Mughan, where he prepared a military force. He then returned to attack
Tabriz, a task made easier by the fact that Amr dil and all the Jalayirid
forces were away from Azarbayjan, engaged in operations against Amr
Val in Rayy.23 Suln Amad entered Tabriz and the palace unopposed,
and took the place of his brother on the royal throne. Suln usayn
managed to escape from the palace into the city, where he attempted to
hide among the populace. However, he was quickly seized and executed.
Initially, Suln Amad seems not to have had the support of many of
the amirs, who remained loyal to Amr dil. Instead, Suln Amads fol-
lowers were among the lower strata of society. According to Astarbd,
who served Suln Amad in Baghdad before joining the court of the ruler
of Sivas, Q Burhn al-Dn, Suln Amad systematically eliminated
the great amirs and renowned chiefs (andd-i nmdr), who were the
step-sons of favor (rabb-i nimat) and the product of the dynasty (an-i
tarbiyat-i n khndn), and gathered to himself a faction (ifa) from
among the followers of the army (dhanb-i mutajanda) and the rabble of
the people (awbsh al-ns) who were marked by weakness of origin and
ignorance of lineage, and who lacked intellect and bravery.24 Of course,
Astarbd was clearly hostile to his former patron Suln Amad, and
would not have been interested in glorifying his rise to power. However,
it does seem likely that Suln Amad would have had to rely on non-
elite supporters from among the population of Tabriz, considering that
Amr dil commanded the loyalty of many of the Jalayirid amirs, and
at the same time controlled Suln usayn. Suln Amad could not have
expected much enthusiastic support after killing his brother the sultan, and
disrupting the political dynamic that put power back into the hands of the
amirs in the period after Shaykh Uvays.
Suln Amad fled Tabriz when Amr dil marched against him fol-
lowing his assassination of Suln usayn.25 It was at this point that he
attempted to appeal to his royal heritage in order to win some of the amirs
to his side. He sent a message to Muammad Davt, who was leading
Amr dils forces near the Aras river, and another to Abbs q and
Misfir radj, the amirs whom Amr dil had deputised to occupy
151
The Jalayirids
Tabriz.26 According to the Timurid historian Mrkhvnd, Suln Amad

asked, you are the nkers of my father, why do you serve dil?27 His
appeal to their loyalty to Shaykh Uvays, and thus the Jalayirid dynastic
authority which had now devolved upon Suln Amad himself, con-
vinced these amirs to turn against Amr dil. They made their opposition
known to Amr dil, who was forced to leave Azarbayjan and return to
Sultaniyya.28 Suln Amad was able to return to Tabriz, but not before
his own followers killed Abbs and Misfir, out of fear that they would
acquire privileged positions under Suln Amad.29
Amr dils supremacy among the amirs continued not only after
Suln Amad came to power, but also even after Tmrs armies came
to Iran. Details of Tmrs campaigns will be discussed below. At this
point it is useful to note that initially Amr dil was the beneficiary of
Tmrs arrival. In 787/1385, Tmr captured Sultaniyya, and summoned
Amr dil, who had fled to Shiraz.30 When Amr dil complied, Tmr
rewarded his obedience with suyrghl grants and confirmed his authority
in Sultaniyya and Tabriz.31 Tmr sought to incorporate Amr dil into
his own expanding military elite and marginalise the Jalayirid sultan in the
process. Thus, the initial contact between Tmr and the Jalayirid realm
continued the process of decentralisation and weakening of Jalayirid
authority that had begun after Shaykh Uvayss death.
Despite the weakness of the sultanate in the period 776/1374788/1386,
the notion that legitimate authority resided in the Jalayirid dynasty per-
sisted. Amr dil did not attempt to seize the throne for himself, but
executed his power in the name of Suln usayn. The durability of the
idea of Jalayirid sovereignty combined with a decentralisation of power
meant that Jalayirid princes became rallying points of political conflict
after the reign of Shaykh Uvays. In fact, this pattern reflected that of the
Ilkhanid period, which was characterised by a balance between the cen-
tralising aspirations of the royal court and administrative authorities on
the one hand, and the tendency for military power to be distributed among
theamirs in the provinces on the other. Thus, the sons of Shaykh Uvays,
as the Chinggisids had previously, all represented potential foci for the
political aspirations of the military elite.
Suln usayn was an attractive rallying point for the amirs when faced
with the threat of invasion by the Muzaffarid Shh Shuj on two occa-
sions. From all of our Timurid accounts, Suln usayn was little more
than a puppet of Amr dil. According to Naanz, he was desperately
in love with his own image, and would cover his head, stare at his beauti-
ful face in the mirror, and weep.32 Yet, Suln usayns personality was
preferable to the Muzaffarid invaders, and the amirs were ready to accept
152
the nominal authority of the Jalayirid sultan, who could be more easily
controlled and manipulated. Once the Muzaffarid threat had passed, other
princes also offered opportunities for those opposed to the authority of
Amr dil. Suln usayns brothers Shaykh Al, Suln Amad and
Byazd were all potential candidates for the Jalayirid throne.
Shaykh Uvays had assigned his son Shaykh Al to govern Baghdad
before he died in 776/1374.33 He was not chosen to succeed as sultan,
despite the fact that he was older than Suln usayn. Following the
revolt of Khwja Mirjn in the 760s/1360s, it is likely that Shaykh Uvays
intended to prevent such uprisings in the future by leaving both Iraq and
Azarbayjan in the hands of his two sons. Iraq had regained its political
importance under the Jalayirids, after having become a secondary Ilkhanid
province. Iraq had been the base of Shaykh asans authority in the 740s/
1340s and 750s/1350s when Azarbayjan was under Chubanid control.
Under Shaykh Uvays and his successors, Baghdad remained the second
city in the Jalayirid realm, after Tabriz. By appointing Shaykh Al to
the government of Iraq, he ensured that this province would remain under
theauthority of the Jalayirid royal house.
Shaykh Al seems to have governed Baghdad quietly during the first
years of the reign of his brother Suln usayn. However, he became the
focus of an uprising in the year 780/1379,34 directed against the son of the
vizier Shams al-Dn Zakary, Vajh al-Dn Isml.35 The conspirators
were from among the entourage of Shaykh Al and Vajh al-Dn Isml
and had the backing of the prince, who had come into conflict with
Isml.36 They ambushed and killed Vajh al-Dn Isml, sending the city
of Baghdad into an uproar.37
The murder of the son of the vizier in Baghdad in the name of a
Jalayirid prince posed a challenge to the established order of Suln
usayn, Shams al-Dn Zakary and Amr dil. When the sultan got
word of the disorder in Baghdad, he appealed to his brother to remember
that Iraq had been their familys original stronghold, from where they
drew much of their power and support, and that he held his authority by
virtue of royal mandate (vayat-i pdishh) and was not dependent on
the amirs.38 Essentially, Suln usayn was urging his brother Shaykh
Al to bring the situation in Baghdad under control before the violence
spread.
However, the sultans message was not enough to bring order to the
region. Until the end of Suln usayns reign, the province of Arab Iraq
remained in the hands of a rebel governor named Pr Al Bdk (or Bvk),
who ruled in the name of prince Shaykh Al. Iraq and Azarbayjan, which
had been united by Shaykh Uvays, and which constituted the foundation
153
The Jalayirids
of the independent Jalayirid realm, were by 783/1381 divided between

two branches of the Jalayirid house.
Amr dil also appealed to the authority of prince Shaykh Al in
Baghdad following Suln Amads coup in Tabriz in 784/1382. Amr
dil sent envoys to Shaykh Als court, urging him to march against
his brother, Suln Amad.39 Shaykh Al was more than just a symbolic
challenge to Suln Amad, for he did lead an army to Azarbayjan, and
when one of Suln Amads amirs and his men defected to Shaykh Al,
Suln Amad fled the field.40 Shaykh Al thus was a rallying point for
the military power of amirs such as Pr Al Bdk and Amr dil, as well
as a formidable leader in his own right, who controlled the resources of
Baghdad, long a Jalayirid stronghold.41
Finally, mention should be made of yet another Jalayirid prince, Shaykh
Uvayss son Byazd. Following Suln Amads seizure of power in
784/1382, Byazd escaped Tabriz and took refuge with Amr dil in
Sultaniyya. Here, he served to replace Suln usayn as Amr dils
Jalayirid puppet. Amr dil enthroned him as sultan in Sultaniyya,42
inopposition to Suln Amad in Tabriz.
Thus, on the eve of Tmrs first campaigns in Iran, the Jalayirid
dynasty was characterised by division among three main princely factions,
corresponding to three geographical regions. Suln Amad claimed the
sultanate in Tabriz, Amr dil acted as protector to Byazd, who also had
a claim to royal authority in Sultaniyya, and Shaykh Al continued to rule
unopposed in Baghdad. The political unity achieved by Shaykh Uvays had
split among his sons, who all shared in the claim to dynastic succession.
The disputes internal to the Jalayirid royal family were soon overshad-
owed by much larger external threat from the Ulus Chaghatay in the east,
in the form of Tmr. Before dealing with the consequences of Tmrs
invasions for the Jalayirids, however, mention should be made of another
significant development to the west in the period between Shaykh Uvayss
death in 776/1374 and Tmrs first Iranian campaign in 787/138586.
This development was the growing power of the Qarquynl Turkmans,
who became ever more involved in Jalayirid dynastic politics. In fact, the
growth of Qarquynl power in this period was tied closely to the role
they played in Jalayirid political conflict.
As discussed in the previous chapter, Shaykh Uvays had led a cam-
paign against the Qarquynl chief Bayrm Khwja in 767/1366. At the
Battle of Mus, the Jalayirid forces defeated the Turkmans and required
Bayrm Khwja to pay tribute to the sultan.43 However, just three years
after his defeat at Mus, Bayrm Khwja had taken Mosul.44 After Shaykh
Uvayss death, as the Jalayirid sultanate faced more immediate threats
154
from the Muzaffarids, Bayrm Khwja took the cities of Srmel, Ala-
Kilise, Khuy and Nakhjivan, effectively severing the agreement he was
forced to accept in 767/1366.45
Suln usayn and Amr dil were able to turn their attention to
the west after Shh Shuj abandoned Tabriz in 777/1376. At a quril-
tay at Ujan that year, the Jalayirid amirs pushed for a campaign against
Bayrm Khwja.46 The army, led by Amr dil, headed first to Ercis,
where Bayrm Khwjas nephew Qar Muammad had taken possession
of the citadel. After securing a two-week truce with the Jalayirids, Qar
Muammad began digging a trench and fortifying the walls of his fortress.
He also used this opportunity to send for aid from Bayrm Khwja in
Erzurum. However, when the Qarquynl reinforcements arrived, fifty
of them were taken prisoner, and Qar Muammad was forced to submit
to the Jalayirid sultan.47
What is striking about this brief campaign is the leniency shown to
the Qarquynl at every stage. Amr dil held back from besieging
Qar Muammad, even though he must have realised such a delay would
enable him to seek help from Bayrm Khwja. The fifty Turkmans who
were captured and sent to the Jalayirid camp were not only spared, but
also assigned patents and grants (marsm va suyrghl) by the sultan.48
Finally, even Qar Muammad and Bayrm Khwja were rewarded for
their eventual submission, being assigned grants (suyrghl) after Qar
Muammad presented himself in Tabriz twenty days later.49 Amr dil
clearly did not want to direct too much energy to Anatolia, and was
content with nominal vassalage from the Qarquynl. The autonomy
enjoyed by the Qarquynl enabled Qar Muammad to consolidate his
power from Nakhjivan to Erzurum and around Lake Van, and eventually
played a decisive role in the succession to the Jalayirid throne after Suln
usayns death in 784/1382.
After Suln Amad seized the throne in Tabriz, he faced opposition
from Amr dil, as well as from his brother, prince Shaykh Al, and his
amir, Pr Al Bdk. As mentioned above, Suln Amad was routed by the
army of Baghdad led by Shaykh Al. In need of military support, Suln
Amad approached Qar Muammad and the Qarquynl near Nakhjivan.
According to Mrkhvnd, the Qarquynl leader agreed to help Suln
Amad on two conditions. The first was that Suln Amad and his men
not interfere and allow the Turkmans to fight in their own way (bi-arq-i
dat-i khvaysh). The second was that the Qarquynl would retain the
spoils taken in battle.50 Suln Amad had little choice but to agree to Qar
Muammads conditions. In the short term, Suln Amads alliance proved
successful. The Qarquynl defeated the army of Baghdad and killed
155
The Jalayirids
prince Shaykh Al and Pr Al Bdk, and Suln Amad took control of

both Tabriz and Baghdad.51 At the same time, the Qarquynl confedera-
tion, and in particular its chief Qar Muammad, achieved unprecedented
status. In addition to the abundant plunder taken by the Turkmans in the
battle, the ties between the Qarquynl and the Jalayirids were formal-
ised through marriage. Suln Amad gave his aunt Vaf Qutlugh to Qar
Muammad, while Suln Amad married Qar Muammads daughter.52
The close ties between Suln Amad and the Qarquynl, and especially
Qar Muammads son Qar Ysuf, would continue throughout the period
of Tmrs campaigns in Iran, Iraq and Anatolia. We turn now to these cam-
paigns and their impact on the Jalayirid realm.
Tmr was a product of the Ulus Chaghatay, half of the former
Chaghatay khanate of central Asia, formed as the inheritance of Chinggis
Qans second son, Chaghatay. By 771/1370 the amir Tmr of the Barlas
tribe had consolidated his power among the tribes of the Ulus, and ruled in
the name of his own Chinggisid puppet khan. Tmrs vision for conquest
extended beyond the Ulus Chaghatay, however, and in fact he sought
to reconstitute the former Mongol empire of Chinggis Qan, encompass-
ing not only central Asia, but also the Qipchaq steppe, Iran and China.
Tmrs campaigns in the Jalayirid lands of western Iran and Iraq began
in 786/1384, and would continue throughout the rest of his life. These
years of war were devastating for the region, particularly for agriculture
and for urban life in Baghdad. The Timurid invasions and conquests also
disrupted the post-Ilkhanid political order that the Jalayirids had tried to
control and create. As will be discussed in the following section, Tmrs
conquests inadvertently restored the authority of the Jalayirid sultan
against his internal rivals, but at the same time aimed to make the former
Ilkhanid lands subject to Tmrs larger imperial project. Although the
Jalayirid Suln Amad spent much of his reign on the run from Tmr,
trying to win back Tabriz and Baghdad, Jalayirid sovereignty became a
useful ideological tool for those opposed to Timurid power. Suln Amad
and his family thus had a symbolic significance far greater than their actual
power in the period between 788/1386 and 813/1410, when Suln Amad
was killed by his Qarquynl rival Qar Ysuf.
One of the immediate impacts of Tmrs invasion of Iran was the
appearance of a large number of amirs and soldiers from outside the region.
This wave of new Chaghatayid amirs expected to share in the wealth of
the territory they helped conquer, as part of their reward for service in
Tmrs army of conquest. The Chaghatayid amirs also represented a new
political force within the Jalayirid sultanate, as demonstrated by the events
surrounding the downfall of Amr dil. In the summer of 788/1386, Amr
156
dil was summoned by Chaghatayid envoys who informed him that

Tmr was returning to Iran after spending the winter in Samarqand. The
day after Amr dil reached Tmrs camp near Nihavand, Muammad
Sulnshh, the leading Chaghatayid amir in Tabriz, also joined the royal
entourage. According to fi Abr, Muammad Sulnshh repeatedly
condemned the conduct of Amr dil to Tmr, who became troubled
about him.53 Things got worse for Amr dil when Tmrs forces occu-
pied Tabriz. Tmr came to Tabriz personally and demanded an inquiry
into the finances of Azarbayjan. When it became clear that little remained
in the treasury there, the blame fell to Amr dil and his amirs, who
were tortured and killed in Raman 788/September 1386.54 Amr dils
power in the Jalayirid lands was seen as a threat by the Chaghatayid amirs,
who took the opportunity to undermine his authority when they could. The
dynamics of power had changed rapidly following the arrival of Tmr
and his men. Amr dil was no longer the most powerful military leader
in Iran, but instead one of many amirs, who needed to demonstrate his
loyalty to Tmr in order to maintain his position. When he lost Tmrs
confidence, he was easily removed. Amr dils downfall represents
a major early indication that Tmr and his forces from outside the old
Ilkhanid structure would have a significant transformative impact on
the political landscape by altering the balance of power and channels of
authority that the Jalayirids had inherited from the Ilkhanate and sought
to preserve.
The dynamics of power changed particularly in Azarbayjan, the centre
of royal authority for the Ilkhans as well as the Jalayirids. Tmrs incur-
sions into Iran resulted in a new status for Azarbayjan. The former seat
of Ilkhanid authority was important symbolically for Tmr, who saw the
former uls of Hleg as integral to his imperial vision. Yet, for Tmr
and his successors, Azarbayjan was always difficult to control, and was
never fully integrated into the Timurid realm, despite Tmrs success
in driving Suln Amad Jalayir from the province. Thus, in the period
from 788/1386 to 795/1393, while Tmr was not in Iran, and Suln
Amad was in Baghdad, Azarbayjan was dominated by the local strong-
man Aghachk (or Ajak), who claimed to serve Tmr in the province.55
However, Aghachk was only one among several local amirs and ayn
who were left to manoeuvre among themselves in this period. It seems
that Suln Amad was content in these years to remain in Baghdad, and
did not make any attempts to claim Azarbayjan for himself. Azarbayjan
became the setting for more local political struggles, and cannot be con-
sidered to have been under either Jalayirid or Timurid control in this
period.
157
The Jalayirids
Other Jalayirid provinces were more directly ruled by the Timurids,

and were eventually divided formally by Tmr among members of his
family. In 805/1403 Tmr entrusted the province of Arab Iraq, and the
responsibility for its restoration after so many years of devastation from
his own campaigns, to his grandson, Ab Bakr.56 In Sharaf al-Dn Al
Yazds account of this occasion, Tmr addressed the other princes and
amirs, and identified the independent action of the people of Baghdad as
the cause of the regions ruin:
Before this, the people of Baghdad gave themselves and their country over to
the wind, as a consequence of raising their own army in opposition. On account
of the discord and our revenge, the country declined once again. Because of
the fact that in Iraq knowledge of the shara has spread from Baghdad, and
the schools of law from there became famous, one understands that the country
should return to a state of flourishing, and that it should again become a seat of
equity and justice.57
Tmr assigned Arab Iraq, Kurdistan and Diyarbakr, including authority

over the Oyrat tribe, to Ab Bakr.58 To his grandson Umar b. Mrnshh,
he left the uls of Hleg Khan, including Azarbayjan, Anatolia and
Syria.59 Thus, by 805/ 1403, the Jalayirid lands had become divided
between two Timurid princes, and incorporated into a new imperial struc-
ture, ruled from Samarqand.
Closely connected to Tmrs redistribution of Jalayirid territory among
his grandsons was the ideological abrogation of the notion of Ilkhanid
prestige, which had been central to Jalayirid claims to legitimate sov-
ereignty. The descendants of Tmr comprised a new dynastic family,
in the same way that Chinggis Qans family provided the basis for the
Mongol imperial dynasty of the seventh/thirteenth century. When Tmrs
symbolic Chinggisid puppet khan Suln Mamd died in 805/1402, a
successor was not enthroned, an omission suggesting that a representative
of the Chinggisid royal family was no longer necessary to lend prestige
and legitimacy to Tmrs imperial undertaking. Like Chinggis Qans,
Tmrs conquests were evidence of the fortune of his own family, who
after his death would provide the source of legitimate political authority.
A corollary to this notion is that the old Chinggisid royal lines, including
that which ruled the Ilkhanate, were no longer viable sources of legitimate
authority. For the Jalayirids, who strove after 736/1335 to establish them-
selves as the heirs to the Ilkhans as defenders of Islam and continuators of
Chinggisid tradition, such a transformation in ideology was a threat to all
of their political claims.
158
Suln Amads Reign in the Period of Tmrs Campaigns

(795/1393807/1405)
The period from Tmrs occupation of Tabriz in 788/1386 until his
death in 807/1405 was one of great instability for Suln Amads rule
in Azarbayjan and Arab Iraq. After establishing himself at Baghdad, the
Jalayirid sultan was driven out of the city several times between 795/1393
and 806/1403, and was forced to seek alliances with other rulers, includ-
ing the Mamluk sultan al-hir Barqq, the Ottoman sultan Byezd I,
and the Qarquynl Turkman leader Qar Ysuf. The details of Suln
Amads activities in this tumultuous period are sometimes difficult to
piece together due to the fact that they are not the main focus of most of
the available sources. However, an examination of Mamluk, Ottoman and
Timurid sources reveals that although Suln Amads power in Baghdad
was weakened considerably by attacks from Tmr, as well as opposition
from the local elite, the Jalayirid sultan represented a powerful symbol
of opposition to Tmr, and thus a potential ally for several rulers in
regions threatened by him. In the following section, Suln Amads rela-
tions with the Mamluks, Ottomans and Qarquynl are examined in an
attempt to provide a clear narrative of events in this period, and to situate
the Jalayirid sultanate within the larger context of the changing political
dynamics of the Nile-to-Oxus region at the end of the eighth/fourteenth
century.
Although in the long term Tmrs conquests undermined the founda-
tions of Jalayirid authority, they in fact also had the immediate effect of
restoring the authority of the Jalayirid sultanate under Suln Amad.
As has been mentioned above, after Shaykh Uvayss death, power had
become dispersed among the amirs and several of Shaykh Uvayss
sons. However, Tmrs execution of Amr dil in 788/1386 removed
the largest obstacle to royal authority within the Jalayirid realm. Suln
Amad was able to act freely, and although he was driven out of Tabriz
by the Timurids, he established himself in Baghdad as the sole claimant to
the Jalayirid throne.60 Between 788/1386 and 795/139361 Suln Amad
ruled in Baghdad without any interference from Tmr. In this time, he
acquired the reputation of a negligent and oppressive ruler. While we
might expect such a characterisation as natural in the Timurid sources, this
view is also shared by historians hostile to Tmr. Astarbd records that
during these years, Suln Amad was occupied with music and revelry,
and did not give any attention to matters of state. As a result, economic
life in Baghdad suffered.62 Ibn Arabshh, another writer hostile to Tmr,
nonetheless also described Suln Amads evil ways:
159
The Jalayirids
When the sultan [Suln Amad] took over the kingdom of Iraq, he extended
the hand of his wickedness and withdrew the wing of compassion and courtesy.
He began to behave unjustly himself and tyrannize his subjects, and spend his
days and nights in deviation and depravity.63
Aside from these general characterisations, we know little about the

details of Suln Amads period in Baghdad in these years. Our main
sources for the period are the Timurid histories, which focus on Tmrs
activities in Khwarazm, Moghulistan, and especially with Tuqtmsh Khan
on the Qipchaq steppe. The culmination of these operations was Tmrs
victory over the Jochid army at Qundurcha on the steppe in the summer of
793/1391. The Timurid sources leave a similar lacuna for Suln Amads
activities between the years 797/1395 and 802/1400, when Tmr was
occupied elsewhere, most notably in Delhi. The years between these two
periods of relative calm were marked by Tmrs second Iranian cam-
paign, aimed at chastising the rulers there who had begun to assert their
autonomy in his absence. Tmr set out from Samarqand in the summer
of 794/1392, and reached Persian Iraq in early 795/1393. He proceeded to
Luristan, Shiraz and Isfahan, defeating the Muzaffarid ruler Shh Manr,
and ordering the execution of the entire Muzaffarid house.64
Attention fell next to Suln Amad in Baghdad. According to Nim
al-Dn Shm, Tmr attacked Suln Amad because he failed to show the
proper signs of submission, and did not strike coins and give the khuba in
Tmrs name.65 However, according to the Mamluk historian al-Maqrz,
whose account is followed by Ibn Taghr Bird, Suln Amad did in fact
show the proper signs of submission, but was betrayed by the ayn of
Baghdad, who sent a message to Tmr inviting him to take the city.66
They cited Suln Amads killing of his amirs, his oppression of the
general populace, and his tendency to drink and debauchery as the reasons
why he was not an acceptable ruler.67 Suln Amad fled Baghdad on 14
Shawwl 795/23 August 1393 when Tmrs armies attacked.68 Tmrs
forces overtook Suln Amad at Karbala and routed them, taking his
harem captive and plundering his baggage.69 His son, Al al-Dawla, was
captured and sent to Samarqand.70 Suln Amad managed to escape with
a group of his followers and fled toward Mamluk Syria.71
Suln Amad was honoured at al-Rahba by the amir Nuayr, chief of
the l Fal bedouins on the Mamluk sultanates Syrian frontier.72 He then
travelled on to Aleppo, where he was met by the Mamluk governor, Julbn
Qarsaqal, who accommodated him at the maydn.73 Sultan Barqq
ordered Julbn to honour Suln Amad, and to put the royal dwn at his
disposal for whatever he needed.74 Suln Amad also wrote a message to
160
Barqq, putting in a good word for both Nuayr and Julbn, and request-
ing permission to come to Cairo. Barqq took counsel from his amirs, who
agreed that Suln Amad should be allowed to come.75
On 17 Rab I 796/20 January 1394, Suln Amad arrived at al-
Raydaniyya outside Cairo, and he spent the next month and a half as
Barqqs honoured guest. The hospitality shown to Suln Amad was
accompanied by grand public spectacles and ceremonies designed to
demonstrate Suln Amads dignity as a sovereign Muslim ruler, as well
as to illustrate Barqqs own majesty and beneficence as Suln Amads
protector against the threat from Tmr.
Upon Suln Amads arrival at al-Raydaniyya, the highest-ranking
amirs of Egypt greeted him before Barqq came down from his throne
(masaba) to receive him.76 He did not allow Suln Amad to kiss
his hand, but instead embraced him. According to al-Maqrz, they
wept together, and Barqq offered encouraging words, promising Suln
Amad that he would someday regain his throne. As they sat together,
Suln Amad was presented with several fine gifts, including a cloak and
a horse from Barqqs stable.77 They then rode in procession toward the
citadel, accompanied by the amirs and army.78 Suln Amad proceeded
to a residence that Barqq had prepared for him at Birkat al-Fil, where
the ustdr laid out a banquet, attended by all the amirs. After the amirs
had departed, Barqq sent 200,000 silver dirhams, 200 pieces of Skandari
cloth, three horses, twenty mamluks and twenty slave girls.79
Suln Amad was thus introduced to the Mamluk political elite as the
equal to Barqq as a fellow Muslim sovereign. Such a diplomatic choice
on the part of the Mamluk sultan served to elevate not only the status
of Suln Amad, but Barqqs own as well. Barqq used the occasion
of Suln Amads arrival to illustrate his distinction, not merely as the
most powerful member of the Mamluk military elite, but as a dynastic
founder, whose authority transcended the Mamluk political order, and
was on the same level as other dynastic rulers. The ceremonies that fol-
lowed Suln Amads initial reception provided further opportunity
for Barqq to distinguish both his guest and himself. On 19 Rab I/22
January, Suln Amad attended Barqqs khidma at the wn of the
dar al-adl.80 Suln Amad was seated directly to the right of Barqq, a
place of honour normally reserved for the amr kabr.81 Later in the week,
Barqq continued to show hospitality to Suln Amad by taking him on a
hunting trip outside of Cairo.82
During Suln Amads stay in Cairo, Tmrs envoy, Shaykh Svah,
arrived in Cairo. The message he delivered, as presented by Yazd, offered
a new interpretation of the balance of political power from Egypt to Iran:
161
The Jalayirids
Before this, the powerful rulers were from the lineage of Jingz Khn [Chinggis
Qan]. They contended with the rulers of these countries. Because of that,
trouble came to the people of Syria, and the inhabitants of that region. In the
end, successive messengers and messages were sent from them, and the situ-
ation turned out well. That matter required the security and trust of the world
and the people. When Ab Sad died, and from the lineage of Jingz Khn
there was no ruler who had the power to implement his authority in Iran, rulers
of various factions appeared. The world was thrown into confusion. Now,
since the precedent of endless favor, the mlik-i mulk, may he be glorified and
exalted, made all of the countries of Iran, as far as Arab Iraq, which neighbors
that country, submitted to our command, sound thought and good wishes of the
people require that, in accordance with neighborliness, the gates of correspond-
ence and diplomacy be opened, and envoys from both sides come and go, so
that the roads are secure and merchants of both sides are able to move in safety
and security. This could certainly be the cause for flourishing in the country and
tranquility for the subjects.83
In this Timurid view of Ilkhanid history, good relations with the Mamluks
were only established when the Ilkhanid rulers opened up diplomatic
channels with Syria and allowed merchants and envoys to pass freely.
However, after Ab Sad, the lack of a single strong ruler in Iran had led to
disorder of the kind experienced in the first years of Mongol rule. Now that
Tmr had established the singularity of his rule, the opportunity existed
for a new opening of communication, as well as the free and secure flow
of merchants between Iran, Syria and Egypt. Implied here is that Barqqs
protection of Suln Amad would be of little benefit to him, since the
Jalayirids were only one of the many post-Ab Sad factions that had upset
the previously established balance. Indeed, Tmrs diplomatic overtures
were probably aimed at eventually convincing Barqq to turn over Suln
Amad, who was now openly a rebel against Tmr. Barqq had different
ideas, however. When Tmrs envoy arrived in Cairo, Barqq convinced
Suln Amad to murder the shaykh. Yazd compares this killing of an
envoy which, he writes, is not permitted on the bases of religious or
common law (az qawid-i shar va siys), nor by royal or communal
custom (rusm-i mulk va mill) to the murder of Chinggis Qans envoys
by agents of Sultan Muammad Khwrazmshh in 615/1218.84
The dynastic charisma represented by the Jalayirid house and embod-
ied by Suln Amad was demonstrated by Barqqs marriage on 9 Rab
II/11 February to Tnd Khtn, daughter of Suln usayn b. Shaykh
Uvays.85 As Ann Broadbridge has pointed out, this was the first time a
Mamluk sultan had married a royal princess from an established dynasty
since al-Nir Muammad.86 The marriage created closer ties between
162
Barqq and Suln Amad, while also emphasising the significance of

dynastic sovereignty to the nature of both of their identities as rulers.
Following his marriage to Tnd Khtn, Barqq held a large military
parade at al-Rumayla, which Suln Amad attended. After the review,
Barqq visited the tombs of al-Shfi and Sayyida Nafsa, and distributed
alms to the poor. They rode back together to al-Rumayla, and then to al-
Raydaniyya. The following day they set out for Damascus, on a campaign
to confront Tmr.87
The campaign was soon cut short, however. On the road, they received
news that Tmr had returned to his own country.88 After spending more
than a month in Damascus, Suln Amad departed for Baghdad, on 1
Shabn 796/1 June 1394. Barqq presented Suln Amad with 500,000
dirhams, a horse, camels, armaments and a ceremonial sword. These gifts
were accompanied by a taqld confirming Suln Amad as Barqqs
nib in Baghdad.89 The taqld signalled a change in the diplomatic rela-
tionship between the Mamluk and Jalayirid sultans. The protection and
generosity that Suln Amad had found at the Mamluk court came at the
price of submission to the ultimate authority of al-hir Barqq. In fact,
however, there is little evidence that Suln Amad showed any regard for
Barqqs authority in Baghdad after he returned.
We know little about Suln Amads rule in Baghdad in the period
from 797/1395, when he returned from Mamluk Cairo, until 802/1400,
when he abandoned the city a second time. Early Ottoman as well as
Mamluk historical writing deal with this episode, yet differ on the specific
reasons for Suln Amads flight. According to several early Ottoman
histories, Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf left their homeland because of
the wickedness of Tmr,90 and made their way to Egypt. They were held
captive by the Mamluk sultan, but managed to escape through trickery and
take refuge with Byezd.91
While the Ottoman chroniclers cite the wickedness of Tmr as the
reason for Suln Amads departure from Baghdad, the Mamluk histori-
ans al-Maqrz and Ibn Taghr Bird write that the ayn of Baghdad had
written to Tmrs governor at Shiraz that Suln Amad was oppressing
the populace and had killed amirs,92 and that Tmr should come and take
the city.93 Suln Amad fled again from Baghdad,94 this time seeking
assistance from Qar Ysuf, who was ruling Mosul. However, their
combined forces were routed at Baghdad, and both of them headed for
Syria.95
The Timurid account of these events is itself different from the
Ottoman and Mamluk accounts. According to the Timurid historians, who
among themselves differ on the details,96 Suln Amads departure from
163
The Jalayirids
Baghdad was prompted by his discovery of a conspiracy among his amirs

and relatives, initiated by an amir named Shirvn. When Suln Amad
learned of the conspiracy, he methodically had 2,000 of his amirs, inti-
mates and relatives killed. In a state of paranoia, he slipped out of Baghdad
and joined Qar Ysuf, chief of the Qarquynl Turkmans, and urged
him to attack the city. However, apparently fearing further confrontation
with Tmr in Iraq, Suln Amad instead left Baghdad again and accom-
panied Qar Ysuf to Syria.97
Mamluk histories provide the best account of events after Suln
Amad and Qar Ysuf arrived in Syria. As they approached Aleppo with
a large group of Turkman followers, they were confronted at al-Sajur
by Damurdsh (or Tmurtsh) al-Muammad, governor of Aleppo, and
Dqmq, governor of Hama.98 A battle took place on 24 Shawwl 802
(18 June 1400),99 and the army of Aleppo was defeated by the Turkmans.
Dqmq and a group of other amirs were captured,100 and Dqmq later
had to ransom himself for 100,000 dirhams.101 Suln Amad and Qar
Ysuf sent a message to the Mamluk sultan al-Nir Faraj that they had
not come to make war. Rather, they sought refuge and aid, such as had
been previously offered to Suln Amad by his father Barqq. Their
message was ignored, and Faraj ordered the governor of Damascus to
capture them and send them to Cairo.102 Unable to find sanctuary in Syria,
Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf went north to Anatolia,103 where they were
defeated by the Mamluk governor of Bahasna.104
Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf apparently parted ways after the battle
at Bahasna,105 and Suln Amad soon encountered Tmrs forces, who
intercepted his baggage train (aghrq). Although Suln Amad escaped,
his older sister, Suln Dilshd, as well as his wives and daughters, were
captured and taken prisoner.106 Suln Amad continued west into the
Ottoman domains, until he joined Sultan Byezd at Aqsaray. Byezd
granted the revenue from Ktahya as tmr to Suln Amad and he settled
there.107 Later, Qar Ysuf also arrived in Anatolia, and was also given
refuge by Byezd.108
As Tmr drove south from Sivas to Ayntab (Antep), Aleppo and
Damascus in 803/1400, Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf urged Byezd
to extend his control east of the Euphrates in Anatolia.109 They laid
siege to the city of Erzincan,110 which was under the control of the amir
Muahhartan, who had pledged his allegiance to Tmr.111 The Ottoman
forces took the city, and Suln Amad acted as intermediary between
Byezd and Muahhartan. He left the amir in control of Erzincan, but
sent his wives and children to Ottoman Bursa to ensure that Muahhartan
would remain loyal.112
164
The accounts of this incident illustrate why the protection afforded to

Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf by Byezd became a major diplomatic issue
between Tmr and the Ottoman sultan. In the correspondence between
them, Tmr demanded that Byezd desist from giving refuge to them,
while Byezd staunchly refused.113 Here again Suln Amad Jalayir was
valuable to a regional ruler as a symbol of opposition to Timurid claims to
the former Ilkhanid lands. The Jalayirid sultan lent Byezd prestige as the
protector of the rightful heir to authority in Tabriz.
Suln Amad Returns to Baghdad, and Returns Again to

Byezd (80304/140102)
Despite his value to Byezd, Suln Amad was not content to remain
an honoured addition at the Ottoman court. In the spring of 803/1401,
as Tmr began to pull out of Syria and return to the east, Suln Amad
requested leave from the Ottoman sultan to return to Iraq. Byezd granted
his request, and sent him home loaded with gifts.114 In Dh al-Qada/July,
Tmr began a month-long siege of Baghdad. Suln Amad had left a
fellow Jalayir tribesman named Faraj in charge of the city.115 When he
refused to give up the city to Tmrs men, saying he had explicit orders
from Suln Amad to turn the city over to no one but Tmr himself,
Tmr came to Baghdad and attacked. After a long siege in the blazing July
heat, Tmrs forces finally breached the walls and poured into Baghdad.
The city would pay for its resistance. Tmr ordered a massacre of the
population, and for all the buildings, except the mosques, madrasas and
khnqhs, to be razed. The Bavarian knight Johannes Schiltberger, who
was in the service of the Ottoman Sultan Byezd I in 803/1401, recorded
that Tmr not only burned the city, but also had the land ploughed and
barley planted, so that no one would know that any houses had ever stood
there.116
Suln Amad returned to Baghdad in the winter of 804/140102.
The sources report that although the city was completely ruined, Suln
Amad attempted to rebuild and encourage repopulation. Yazd wrote
that those who had scattered out of fear began to return and gather around
Suln Amad.117 Although Tmr had destroyed the city of Baghdad,
Suln Amad continued to provide a focus of organisation for those who
suffered from Tmrs punitive operations. Without a steady presence of
Tmrs amirs in Baghdad, and as long as Suln Amad stayed alive, the
potential for independent action and resistance to Tmr remained in Arab
Iraq. At the same time, Suln Amad could offer no active military resist-
ance to Tmr if he chose to attack.
165
The Jalayirids
In mid- 804/
early 1402, when he learned that the Jalayirid sultan
had returned, Tmr did indeed attack. Tmrs grandson Ab Bakr b.
Mrnshh and the amir Jahnshh were sent to Baghdad and took Suln
Amad by such surprise that, according to one account, he jumped into
a boat dressed in only his shirt and fled down the Tigris. He met his
son Suln hir and a number of nkers, and together they travelled to
Hilla.118 Driven out of Baghdad for the second time in two years, Suln
Amad returned to the protection of Sultan Byezd, although it seems that
he left his son Suln hir in Hilla.
However, by the summer of 804/1402, the Ottoman sultan could no
longer offer any protection to Suln Amad. According to the histories
of spszde and Nesr, Tmr was urged to invade Anatolia by
several of the beys whose territories had been conquered by Byezd.119 In
late Dh al-ijja 804/July 1402, Tmrs army defeated the Ottomans at
ubukovas, outside Ankara.120 Byezd was taken prisoner,121 and Tmr
sent expeditions across western Anatolia to stamp out any remaining
resistance. One of these expeditions was led by prince Mamd Suln,
who proceeded to Bursa. Here he captured Byezds son Muaf and
the daughter of Suln Amad Jalayir.122 The Ottoman defeat at Ankara
marked the end of Byezds efforts to bring Anatolia under his control,
and in the twenty-year period after the battle, the regional beyliks that he
had attempted to eliminate returned, as Ottoman princes struggled among
themselves.123 For Suln Amad, the Ottoman defeat meant that he no
longer had an ally in Anatolia to look to for protection when he was threat-
ened in Iraq.
Suln Amad Returns to Baghdad, Faces Uprising by

Sulnhir, Driven Out by Qar Ysuf (80506/1403)
After returning to Baghdad from Anatolia, Suln Amad went on to Hilla
to meet Suln hir. He seized Suln hirs main advisor, gh Frz,
causing Suln hir to become suspicious of his fathers intentions. After
conspiring with others among Suln Amads amirs, Suln hir led a
revolt against his father.124 This is the version of the incident recorded
by Sharaf al-Dn Al Yazd. It seems possible also that the amirs in Iraq
had lost confidence in Suln Amad and were already plotting with the
Jalayirid prince to turn against him. In any case, both Suln Amad
and the amirs had good reason to believe that Suln hirs loyalty to
his father was less than total. It should be recalled that Suln Amad
had imprisoned him at Alinjaq fortress for eleven years and, as Naanz
reported, because of what his father had done to him, he became savage
166
in his nature. At the seduction of a group of pernicious people, he attacked

his father.125
Faced with the insurrection of Suln hir and his amirs, Suln
Amad once again called on the aid of Qar Ysuf, who carried him across
the Euphrates to safety, and provided an army to confront Suln hir. In
the ensuing battle, the Turkman forces were victorious. As Suln hir
retreated, he attempted to jump a stream ( jy)126 with his horse, but he fell
and drowned under the weight of his horse and his armour.127
Suln Amad had survived the conspiracy from within his own family,
but now he faced a different problem. He had invited the Qarquynl
into Arab Iraq, and urged them to attack his son and top amirs. There was
little to keep Qar Ysuf from taking Arab Iraq and Baghdad for himself.
Qar Ysuf followed Suln Amad from Hilla to Baghdad, and took the
city.128 Suln Amad was driven out of Baghdad for the third time in as
many years, this time by his former ally Qar Ysuf. According to the
Timurid tradition, Suln Amad hid in the city, fearing for his life. He
was found by a certain Qar asan, who sneaked him out of Baghdad
at night, carrying him on his shoulders. On the road, they came across a
domestic servant (asham) who had a cow. Suln Amad mounted the
cow and Qar asan led him to Tikrit, where an Oyrat tribesman supplied
Suln Amad with horses, money, weapons and clothing. At Tikrit, he
was joined by several of his nkers, who accompanied him on to Syria.129
Thus, Suln Amad made a third journey seeking refuge and protection
in the Mamluk sultanate. Much had changed since he had been welcomed
with open arms by Sultan Barqq ten years earlier. In the aftermath of
Tmrs invasion of Syria, the Mamluk military elite was in upheaval.
Sultan Barqqs young son, al-Nir Faraj, sat on the throne in Cairo,
while in Syria several factions led by rival amirs competed for supremacy.
Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf, who soon followed him in exile after
being expelled himself from Baghdad by the Timurids in the autumn of
806/1403, thus found themselves in a precarious political situation in
Syria. On the one hand, they represented a danger as rebels against Tmr;
their presence might have provoked another devastating invasion. On the
other hand, they also represented potential allies to the Syian amirs bat-
tling each other in this period.
Suln Amad arrived in Aleppo on 15 afar 806/3 September 1403.130
He was initially ordered to be detained there by the sultan, but was later
summoned to Cairo. As he proceeded to Egypt, Suln Amad was
received in Damascus by its governor, amir Shaykh al-Mamd (the
future Sultan al-Muayyad Shaykh).131 Shaykh had already received Qar
Ysuf, who had arrived in Damascus after being driven out of Baghdad
167
The Jalayirids
himself by the Timurids.132 Shaykh had made Qar Ysuf one of his own
amirs, no doubt pleased to count Qar Ysufs Turkman followers among
his own military forces. At the end of Jumd II 806/January 1404, Shaykh
received orders from Cairo to imprison both Suln Amad and Qar
Ysuf.133 Later, in Shabn/FebruaryMarch, he was directed to execute
them both. Shaykh did not comply, and instead requested verification of
the order.134 In opposition to the sultans command, Shaykh kept Suln
Amad and Qar Ysuf imprisoned in Damascus. It was here, according
to Timurid sources, that they made a pact to divide Azarbayjan and Arab
Iraq between themselves when they were released.135
Shaykh kept them incarcerated until events in Cairo drew him into
conflict with the sultan, and prompted him to mobilise his forces in Syria.
This confrontation was set in motion when the amir Yashbak al-Shabn,
who controlled most of the political affairs in Cairo, came into conflict
with Sultan Faraj, when he attempted to remove Farajs brother- in-
law,136 nl By b. Qajms, from his position as amr khr.137 In afar
807/August 1404, Yashbaks faction was defeated in battle by the sup-
porters of the sultan. Yashbak fled to Syria, and was received by Shaykh
in Damascus.138 Before Yashbaks arrival, Shaykh had already released
Qar Ysuf from prison, perhaps anticipating that his Turkman followers
would prove useful in any future hostilities. After his arrival in Damascus,
Yashbak convinced Shaykh to release Suln Amad as well,139 a signal
that the Mamluk sultans authority no longer extended to Syria. Shaykh
bestowed 100,000 silver dirhams and 300 horses upon each of them.140
Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf were no longer the sultans prisoners, but
members of Shaykhs own retinue.
Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf accompanied Shaykh on his campaign
against the Mamluk governor of Safad in Shabn 807/February 1405.141
However, when Shaykh went on campaign against Sultan Faraj in Egypt
in support of the amir Jakam, who declared himself sultan in Syria, Suln
Amad stayed behind in Damascus. He took the opportunity to leave
Damascus, on 16 Dh al-ijja 807/15 June 1405, and returned yet again
to Baghdad.142
Suln Amads refusal to fully submit to Tmr meant that parties
threatened by the spread of Timurid domination at the end of the eighth/
fourteenth century found him a symbol of opposition. Offering protection
to the heir to the Ilkhanate positioned Barqq, Byezd and Qar Ysuf
against Tmr and the Chaghatayid amirs. The fact that Suln Amad was
often a refugee from his home in Baghdad between 795/1393 and 806/
1403 meant that he was dependent on his protectors; when they removed
their protection, or were defeated, Suln Amad had to seek another
168
patron. Yet, despite Tmrs multiple campaigns into the former Ilkhanid
lands, the western Ilkhanate proved harder for the Timurids to rule than
Khurasan or Fars. The Qarquynl Turkmans, led by Qar Ysuf, and
not the Timurids, became the successors to the Jalayirids in Azarbayjan
and Arab Iraq. To understand how this occurred, we must examine two
historical developments. The first is how Qar Ysuf became the closest
ally of Suln Amad and acquired power and prestige on the basis of their
relationship. The second is the conversion of this relationship into ideo-
logical capital used by Qar Ysuf to present his family as the rightful
heirs to the Jalayirid house, and thus, ultimately, to the Ilkhanate.
The Qarquynl Turkmans as Heirs to the

Jalayirid-Ilkhanid Legacy
Suln Amads alliance with Qar Ysuf began shortly after his seizure of
the throne in 784/1382, when he faced opposition from his brother Shaykh
Al. Turkman military support helped Suln Amad defeat Shaykh Al
and take Baghdad for himself. However, Baghdads loyalty to Suln
Amad remained in question. Opposition among the ayn of the city
may account for Suln Amads seemingly irrational purge of hundreds
of amirs and members of his own household in 802/1400. According to
Yazd, a representative of Tmr had come to Baghdad and began secretly
paying a number of Suln Amads amirs and dependants. Suln Amad
joined six of his loyal attendants across the Tigris under cover of darkness,
and rode to join Qar Ysuf.143 Suln Amad at first urged the Turkmans
to attack Baghdad, but in the end he had a change of heart and paid them
off handsomely not to carry it out.144 It was at this time that Suln Amad
made his second flight to Mamluk Syria, this time together with Qar
Ysuf. As discussed above, they found that they were not welcome in
Syria, and thus went to Byezds court in Anatolia instead.
Suln Amad was obliged to call on the help of the Qarquynl again
in 805/1403 when, after returning from Anatolia, he faced Suln hirs
uprising in Baghdad. As mentioned above, Qar Ysuf helped to put down
the rebellion around Suln hir, but then took Baghdad for himself.
Suln Amad fled to Syria for a third time, and Qar Ysuf followed at
his heels, threatened himself by Tmr. Both came into the service of the
Mamluk governor of Damascus, Shaykh al-Mamd, as discussed above.
Tmrs death emboldened Suln Amad to leave Damascus and return
to Baghdad in 807/1405. Qar Ysuf also took the opportunity to expand
his authority through a combination of military power and promotion of
an ideological programme that presented his family as the rightful heirs to
169
The Jalayirids
the Jalayirids in Azarbayjan and Iraq. His close relationship with Suln
Amad over the preceding years formed the basis of these claims. Later
Timurid historians Mrkhvnd and Khvndamr emphasise the importance
of the relationship between Qar Ysuf and Suln Amad to the eventual
Qarquynl assertion of authority over the Jalayirid realm. According to
Mrkhvnd, while they were confined together in Cairo, Qar Ysuf and
Suln Amad had contact with each other (miyn-i shn ikhtil-i mad
va shud vqi m-shud).145 During their period in Cairo, Qar Ysufs
son Pr Budq was born. Suln Amad reportedly accepted Pr Budq
as his own son ( r bi-farzand qabl kard), providing the nurse of his
own son for him and looking after them (dya-yi farzand nazd-i khd
nigh dshta bi-taahhud-i shn mashghl shud). Suln Amad seems
to have assumed the role of godfather or uncle to Pr Budq. Qar Ysuf
later exploited this relationship to achieve a legalistic appropriation of the
Jalayirid sultanate for his own family.
In addition, Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf made a pact of friendship
and an agreement on spheres of influence each would maintain once they
left Egypt. They agreed that if they did manage to escape confinement,
they would not attack each other (agar az n vara khal yband qad-i
yakdgar nakunand), and that they would be united (muddath b ham
muttaid bshand). Tabriz would belong to Qar Ysuf and Baghdad
would belong to Suln Amad, and neither one would interfere in the
others land (tabrz az qar ysuf va baghdd az Suln Amad bshad va
hchyak mutaarriz-i mamlakat-i dgar nashavand).146 Suln Amad rec-
ognised the importance of maintaining an alliance with Qar Ysuf, and
probably saw his concession of Azarbayjan as a necessary expedient to
this end. He later attempted to regain Azarbayjan, in violation of this oath.
The relationship of Suln Amad to Pr Budq and the pact made with
Qar Ysuf provide the basis for the explanation by the Timurid historians
for why Qar Ysuf was subsequently justified in establishing Pr Budq
as a legitimate ruler (khn) in Azarbayjan, and for eventually killing Suln
Amad in 813/1410. First, Pr Budqs close relationship to Suln Amad,
a virtual father-son relationship, was given by Qar Ysuf as the justifica-
tion for enthroning Pr Budq as khan. Second, Suln Amads violation
of the pact he had made with Qar Ysuf made Qar Ysufs defeat of
the Jalayirid sultan, his appropriation of his patrimony and his execution a
legitimate act as well. In the Timurid narrative of these events, the period of
exile and captivity in Egypt of Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf was signifi-
cant for later attempts by Qar Ysuf to assert his own familys authority in
a way that recognised Jalayirid claims, while at the same time rationalising
the transferal of authority to the new Qarquynl dispensation.
170
Although Suln Amad supposedly agreed that Qar Ysuf should

rule in Azarbayjan, the Turkmans still had to take it from the Timurids.
Qar Ysuf prevailed in this after defeating Ab Bakr Mrz in two major
battles. The second decisive victory came in 810/1408, and Ab Bakr
was driven into Sistan, where he was killed.147 Before Ab Bakrs death
Qar Ysuf was reluctant to take a royal title for himself. We are told that
support for Qar Ysuf came not only from the Qarquynl Turkmans
but also from the amirs of Iraq, those forces that had been attached to
the Timurid princes Ab Bakr and Umar (Mrnshh). According to
Mrkhvnd, the amirs insisted on supporting Qar Ysuf, even after he
disavowed any claims to the sultanate in Azarbayjan and Iraq:
I am from the Turkman people, my summer residence is Alataq and my winter
residence is Diyarbakr and the banks of the Euphrates. The throne of the sultan-
ate does not belong to us (takht-i salanat nisbat bi-m nadrad).148
Although the amirs agreed that they had an obligation to Ab Bakr,

they also faulted him for driving his own brother (Umar Mrz) from
Azarbayjan, which Tmr had expressly willed to him.149 With the support
of the amirs of Iraq, Qar Ysuf was able to resist Ab Bakrs attempt
to establish his authority in Azarbayjan and Arab Iraq. As Mrkhvnd
framed the issue, Ab Bakr may have been the grandson of the ib-
qirn, but this dynastic connection was not sufficient for him to rule. The
Qarquynl chief and the military elite of Iraq were in a position to take
power for themselves. Such a pattern echoes the rise to power of Shaykh
asan Jalayir and the Oyrat tribesmen of Iraq in the 730s/1330s, when
central authority was breaking down in the Ilkhanate. Azarbayjan, Arab
Iraq and the region between Mosul and Erzincan would remain a coherent
political unit under the Qarquynl as it had been under the Jalayirids.
The reluctance of Qar Ysuf to challenge a descendant of Tmr, the
ib-qirn, can be read as part of Mrkhvnds narrative in the service
of a descendant of another branch of the Timurid house, Suln usayn
Byqar of Herat. From this perspective, the branch of Tmrs family
descended from his son Mrnshh including Ab Bakr, who had inher-
ited the western Ilkhanid provinces could be denigrated in the service of
glorifying an alternative Timurid princely line.
After the defeat of Ab Bakr, Qar Ysuf was faced with the issue
of legitimising his own political authority. He had defeated the Timurid
prince, but Qar Ysuf had little in the way of lineage or family connec-
tions that could bolster his ideological claims to the former seat of the
Ilkhanate. However, the symbolic significance of Azarbayjan as the former
capital of the Ilkhanate had faded, along with the memory of the Ilkhanate
171
The Jalayirids
itself. The period of Tmrs campaigns, through which he attempted to

construct his own version of the Mongol world empire, had accelerated
even further the trend toward regionalisation among the former Ilkhanid
provinces that had begun after 736/1335. The Jalayirid sultans had been
supported by those elites in Tabriz that had benefited from the Ilkhanid
imperial system; however, for the twenty years or so between c. 790/1388
and 810/1408, Tabriz had been forced to carry on rather independently
of any one dynastic authority. While this dynastic ambiguity existed, the
notion of Tabriz as an imperial centre had less appeal, for it was doubt-
ful whether it would play the role of imperial capital as an appanage in a
larger Timurid empire. For those reasons, it seems as if Qar Ysuf did
not feel compelled to connect his family and lineage to the Ilkhans the
way the Jalayirids had done; rather, he sought to publicly demonstrate
that his family members were the rightful heirs to the Jalayirid dynasty
itself through Suln Amads formal recognition of Qar Ysufs son,
Pr Budq.
These ideological considerations began shortly after Qar Ysufs
victory over Ab Bakr Mrz in 810/1408, when Qar Ysuf and his
men returned to the summer pasture around Alataq and considered the
matter of the khuba and sikka (dar bb-i khuba va sikka andshh
namdand).150 Qar Ysuf was reluctant to recognise his own son as
sultan,151 and instead took a more indirect approach. In the course of
sending fat-nmas and benedictions to the governors of neighbouring
provinces after his victory, Qar Ysuf also sent a delegation to Suln
Amad in Baghdad, which included gifts and a letter directly from
Pr Budq. Suln Amad honoured the Qarquynl delegation and
responded to Pr Budqs letter with affection, again referring to him as
his son.152 Suln Amad also sent Pr Budq a parasol and other royal
items (chatr va dgar-i asbb-i salanat).153 When the Qarquynl
envoys returned to Tabriz, Qar Ysuf immediately seated Pr Budq
on the throne. The khuba, royal decrees and coins were all issued in his
name.154 Local rulers acknowledged the authority of Pr Budq Khan.
However, the most important acknowledgement for Qar Ysuf would
have to come from Suln Amad. Qar Ysuf sent a messenger to
explain the situation:
Since his majesty [Suln Amad] called Pr Budq his son anew, and sent a
parasol and other royal articles for him, by virtue of the necessity of obedience,
we consigned the government of Azarbayjan to him.155
Qar Ysuf used the letter of congratulations sent by Suln Amad

to Pr Budq, in which he called him his son, along with the royal
172
parasol he sent as a gift, as evidence of a formal transfer of authority

from Suln Amad to Pr Budq, and thus the replacement of Jalayirid
authority in Azarbayjan with that of a new dynastic dispensation, that of
the Qarquynl Turkmans. If we accept the account of the pact made
between Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf in Damascus, the enthronement
of Pr Budq in Azarbayjan accords with that arrangement. The former
Jalayirid provinces, which Tmr had bequeathed to the descendants of
Mrnshh, were divided between a Qarquynl sphere in Azarbayjan
and a Jalayirid sphere in Arab Iraq. The Turkmans loyal to Qar Ysuf
held the Diyarbakr and Lake Van regions, also once claimed by Sultan
Shaykh Uvays Jalayir.
Suln Amads Death and the Demise of the Jalayirids

As long as Suln Amad remained in Baghdad, Qar Ysuf was content
to honour the division between their sultanates. Suln Amad spent a
great deal of money and effort rebuilding the fortifications of the city,
which had been the target of a brutal siege and sacking by Tmr in 803/
1401.156 However, Suln Amad was not the only member of the Jalayirid
house who could potentially challenge Qar Ysufs newly laid claims to
Azarbayjan. Suln Amads son Al al-Dawla had been captured by
Tmr and confined in Samarqand until Tmrs death in 807/1405. By
808/1406, a group of amirs from Iraq who were also in Samarqand pro-
moted Al al-Dawla as their leader, and headed back to Azarbayjan.157
While Naanz reports that Al al-Dawla challenged his father, similar
to his brother Suln hir,158 a later tradition related by Mrkhvnd and
Khvndamr holds that Al al-Dawla went straight to Azarbayjan, where
he ran afoul of Qar Ysuf. Both traditions record that Qar Ysuf impris-
oned Al al-Dawla in the castle at Adilceviz.159
In the autumn of 812/1409, Suln Amad set out from Hamadan to
attack Sultaniyya, presumably as a first operation in an attempt to conquer
Azarbayjan. Although Qar Ysuf had conquered Tabriz and installed
young Pr Budq on the throne there, he himself continued to follow the
traditional Qarquynl migration between Alataq and Diyarbakr. Thus,
Suln Amad calculated that an attack on Sultaniyya, to the south and
east of Tabriz, could be carried out without an immediate reaction from
Qar Ysuf and the Turkmans, and might provide him with a stronghold
outside of Arab Iraq.
Suln Amad was forced to give up his siege of Sultaniyya, however,
when he learned that an individual named Uvays, who claimed to be his
son, was stirring up rebellion back in Baghdad. Suln Amad returned to
173
The Jalayirids
put down the rebellion and spent the winter of 812/140910 in Baghdad.
The next spring, Qar Ysuf was drawn even further away to the west,
in order to quell an insurrection in Erzincan led by the local governor
Muahhartan and the qquynl chief Qar Usmn.160 The result of
Qar Ysufs campaign was that Mardin and Erzincan were both incor-
porated into the Qarquynl domains, as the rule of the Artuqids and
Muahhartan came to an end.
With Qar Ysufs attention in the west, Suln Amad made another
attempt to capture Azarbayjan in the summer of 813/1410. He made an alli-
ance with Shhrukh and his brothers Iskandar Suln and Khall Suln,161
as well as with the Shrvnshh Ibrhm al-Darband.162 Meeting no resist-
ance, the Jalayirid sultan made a triumphal entrance into Tabriz in August
of that year.163 Qar Ysuf had left his son Shh Muammad to defend
Azarbayjan, but he fled to Khuy when Suln Amads forces approached.
Qar Ysuf quickly set off back to Tabriz from Erzincan and faced off
against the Jalayirid army in late Rab II 813/August 1410. According
to al-Maqrz, the Jalayirid sultan commanded a force of 60,000 horse-
men.164 However, Suln Amads army was routed by the Qarquynl
near Shanba-yi Ghzn, the suburb founded by Ghazan Khan outside
Tabriz.165 Suln Amad was knocked from his horse during the battle,
and his weapons and clothes were taken by one of the Turkmans. Helpless,
Suln Amad crawled into a drainage ditch in a nearby garden (suln bi-
srkh-i bgh kih b az nj brn m-mad khazd).166
Samarqand reports that one of the lowly men (liym) of Tabriz named
Bah al-Dn Jlh revealed him to Qar Ysuf.167 Mrkhvnd recounts
a more colourful story of an old shoemaker (pr kafsh-dz) who had
climbed into a tree to watch the battle and had seen Suln Amad crawl
into the ditch. When the shoemaker called out to the sultan, he told him
to be quiet and not to give him up. That night he would make his escape
and reward the shoemakers silence with a suyrghl in the district of
Yaqbiyya. When the shoemaker went home and told his wife, she told
him that Yaqbiyya was too far away, and that they should report the
sultans whereabouts to Qar Ysuf. The shoemaker did so, and Qar
Ysufs men pulled Suln Amad out of the ditch. Wearing the clothes
of a beggar, he was taken to Qar Ysufs court. Here he was reminded
by his old ally Qar Ysuf that he had made an oath not to attack him.
Because he had broken the oath, Qar Ysuf forced Suln Amad to
sign an order (nshn) to the effect that the remaining Jalayirid princes in
Baghdad had to relinquish their claims there, and that henceforth Baghdad
would be ruled by Qar Ysufs son Shh Muammad.168
For the second time, Qar Ysuf had employed legalistic means to
174
transfer authority from the Jalayirids to his own family, this time forcing
Suln Amad to write the order with his own hand.169 The Jalayirid ter-
ritories had passed to Pr Budq and Shh Muammad, the sons of Qar
Ysuf Qarquynl. Mrkhvnd and Khvndamr report that Qar Ysuf
did not want to kill Suln Amad, but that the amirs of Iraq, led by Bism
Jgr, wanted him executed. To make their case, the amirs addressed
Suln Amad:
You brought ruin to the dynasty of Shaykh Uvays (khnidn-i suln uvays)
and you killed those who were left after his reign (dawlat). No suitable deed
has come from you, [and] we do not want to allow you to deceive Amr Qar
Ysuf.170
Qar Ysuf was convinced to allow Suln Amad to be killed. Even after
the execution,171 the amir Bism reported to Qar Ysuf that the common
people were insisting Suln Amad was still alive. In order to quell these
rumours, Suln Amads body was displayed to the public for three
days at a madrasa in Tabriz. Suln Amad was buried next to his brother
Suln usayn in the Dimashqiyya complex in Tabriz.172
Following Suln Amads execution, a purge began of the remain-
ing princes. Al al-Dawla was dispatched at the Adilceviz castle, and a
campaign was carried out by Shh Muammad in Arab Iraq to eliminate
the other surviving Jalayirids. Prince Mamd b. Walad b. Shaykh Al
b. Shaykh Uvays held out in Baghdad against the Qarquynl until 814/
1411, when Shh Muammads forces finally drove him out, and he took
refuge in Khuzistan. Mamd was eventually driven out of Khuzistan by
supporters of his brother Uvays, a child who was under the control of his
mother, Tnd Suln. This Shaykh Alid branch of the Jalayirid dynasty
was thus marginalised in Khuzistan, and was essentially overrun by the
Qarquynl. In fact, the defeat of Suln Amad in 813/1410 signalled
the end of effective Jalayirid claims to the old centres of Tabriz and
Baghdad. The Turkmans had inherited the traditional Jalayirid territories.
Notes
2. fi Abr/ZJT, 198.
3. fi Abr/ZJT, 198.
4. Shaykh Uvays had gone to war with Amr Val in 772/137071 after he
rebelled. Shaykh Uvays eventually assigned Rayy to Amr dil. After
Suln usayn came to the throne, Amr Val sent him one of his daughters
as a sign of friendship. However, when Suln usayn saw her and did not
175
The Jalayirids
find her appealing, he refused to marry her. However, he gave Rayy back to
Amr Val as compensation; see fi Abr/ZJT, 204.
5. fi Abr/ZJT, 205.
6. fi Abr/ZJT, 206.
7. The suyrghl (soyurghal) in the Ilkhanid context has been charac-
terised most recently by Halil nalck as a grant guaranteeing absolute
proprietorship, total exemptions and immunities on land revenue and

peasant labour within a well-defined area, freed from the control of the state
and its agents. See Halil nalck, Autonomous Enclaves in Islamic States:
Temlks, Soyurghals, Yurdlu-Ocals, Mlikne-Muaas and Awqf ,
in Judith Pfeiffer and Sholeh A. Quinn (eds), in collaboration with Ernest
Tucker, History and Historiography of Post-Mongol Central Asia and the
Middle East: Studies in Honor of John E. Woods (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz,
2006), 112.
8. fi Abr/ZJT, 207.
9. fi Abr/ZJT, 209.
11. Following the conspiracy of the amirs, Amr dil took up residence at
Sultaniyya, while Suln usayn remained in Tabriz.
12. fi Abr gives the date 783/138182. See fi Abr/ZJT, 218. Mamd
Kutub gives the year for the start of this campaign as 781/137980. See
Kutub/TAM, 96.
14. Kutub/TAM, 96.
15. fi Abr portrays this episode as a victory for Amr dil, explaining
that Shh Shuj sought a truce due to pressure from his own troops, who
were low on equipment and provisions. See fi Abr/ZJT, 219. However,
Mamd Kutub writes that it was Amr dil who asked for peace from
Shh Shuj, and that he paid off the Muzaffarids handsomely to go back
to Fars. See Kutub/TAM, 97. Perhaps realising that he could not count on
assistance from Amr dil, Shh Shuj concluded it would be futile to try
to take Tabriz, and that he would have to be content only with a share of the
treasure from Sultaniyya.
17. fi Abr/ZJT, 21819.
18. Christoph Werner, Daniel Zakrzewski and Hans-Thomas Tillschneider, Die
Kuu-Stiftungen in Tabrz: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der elyiriden
(Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2013), 35.
19. Werner et al., Die Kuu-Stiftungen in Tabrz, 16.
22. According to the eleventh/seventeenth-century Safavid genealogical history
Silsilat al-Nasab-i afaviyya, Shaykh adr al-Dn was responsible for the
construction of a complex known as the Safavid khara in Ardabil during
176
his time as head of the order in the eighth/fourteenth century. Although the
afaviyya was still a local religious order, and would not emerge as the
ruling dynasty of Iran until the turn of the tenth/sixteenth century, under
the leadership of Shaykh adr al-Dn it was an influential organisation in
Ardabil at the time when Suln Amad had his hereditary appanage there.
See usayn ibn Abdl Zhid, Silsilat al-Nasab-i afaviyya, Nasabnma-yi
Pdishhn b Uzmat-i afav (Berlin: Chpkhna-yi rnshahr, 1343
[1924]), 39. Gottfried Herrmann has edited a decree from Suln usayn
to his brother Suln Amad in 780/1378, instructing Suln Amad and
a certain Sharaf al-Dn Mamd not to demand taxes from shops outside
a afaviyya zviya in Ardabil. The prestige of Shaykh adr al-Dn is rec-
ognised in this decree, which refers to the shaykh as the spiritual guide of
the general populace (murshid-i avif al-amm). See Gottfried Herrmann,
Ein Erla des alyeriden Soln oseyn aus dem Jahr 780/1378,
in Erkenntnisse und Meinungen I herausgegeben von Gernot Wiener
(Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1973), 13563.
24. Astarbd/Bazm, 1617.
25. Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:588.
29. When Suln Amads men, including amza, Ygh Bst and Ab Sad,
reached Tabriz, Abbs, Misfir and the ayn of Tabriz came out of the
city to formally receive them (rasm-i istiqbl). amza told his men that
since these individuals had submitted to Suln Amad, they would acquire
authority (ib-i ikhtiyr khvhand shud), and so it was in their best inter-
ests to kill them. See Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:588.
30. Shm/Tauer, 97; Shm/Lugal, 117.
31. Shm/Tauer, 97; Shm/Lugal, 117.
33. Shabnkra/Majma, 313. See also John Masson Smith, Jr, Al b.
Oways, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London and New
York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983), 1:8534. A decree issued by
prince Shaykh Al has been edited by Gottfried Herrmann. The order,
which confers three villages in the Ardabil region on the disciples of Shaykh
adr al-Dn afav, was issued from Qarabagh in 766/1365, during the
reign of Shaykh Uvays. See Gottfried Herrmann, Persische Urkunden der
Mongolenzeit (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2004), 1625.
34. fi Abr and Mrkhvnd give the year 780/137879 for the start of the
uprising, while Zayn al-Dn Qazvn gives the year 781/137980. See
Qazvn/ZTG, 101; fi Abr/ZJT, 209; Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:582.
35. Vajh al-Dn Isml had been given authority in Baghdad in 776/1374 by
Shaykh Uvays following the death of the previous governor, Khwja Sarvar
177
The Jalayirids
Khzin, from grief (az ghua ranjr shud va namnd) after the city was
devastated by a flood. See fi Abr/ZJT, 197; Fa Khvf/Mujmal, 108.
Zayn al-Dn Qazvn describes Vajh al-Dn Isml as ib-qirn of the
time; see Qazvn/ZTG, 101.
37. fi Abr/ZJT, 211; Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:583.
41. In his autobiography, court musician Abd al-Qdir Margh referred to
Shaykh Al as shh-i lam, or king of the world. The use of this title
seems to indicate both that Margh was in the entourage of Shaykh Al
during the succession struggles following Suln usayns death, and that
Shaykh Al had pretensions to leadership of the Jalayirid house as the suc-
cessor to Shaykh Uvays. See Murat Bardak, Maragal Abdlkadir: XV. yy.
bestecisi ve mzik nazariyatsnn hayat hika yesiyle eserleri zerine bir
alsma (Istanbul: Pan Yaynclk, 1986), 28, 155.
44. Smer, Kara Koyunlular, 42.
45. Smer, Kara Koyunlular, 43.
46. fi Abr gives two dates for possibly two different quriltays, in spring
of 777/1376 and spring of 779/1378; he writes that the matter of Bayrm
Khwja was discussed at both. See fi Abr/ZJT, 203. Mrkhvnd gives
only 777/1376 for the quriltay. See Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:579.
47. fi Abr/ZJT, 204; Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 5:579.
55. Qazvn/ZTG, 148.
56. Beatrice Forbes Manz, The Rise and Rule of Tamerlane (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1989), 142.
57. Yazd/afar-nma, 2:368.
60. Shaykh Al, who had been proclaimed sultan by the elites of Baghdad
when Suln Amad killed Suln usayn, was killed in battle with Suln
Amads forces in 786/138485. See Ghiyth/Tarkh, 1023.
61. Astarbd/Bazm, 17.
178
62. According to Astarbd, bills of exchange became worthless (naqd-i hunar

kshid shud) and a mockery was made of the market (bzr-i nafq nifq
yft). It was these difficult conditions that, Astarbd writes, prompted him
to leave Baghdad and go to Anatolia, where he entered the service of Q
Burhn al-Dn in Sivas. See Astarbd/Bazm, 1718. This account, which
Astarbd gives about his own journey from the court of Suln Amad in
Baghdad to Sivas, differs from the account given by Ibn Arabshh, who
writes that Q Burhn al-Dn had heard of Astarbds talents, and had
requested that Suln Amad give him leave to join his court. When Suln
Amad refused, Astarbd escaped and came to Sivas on his own. See
Ibn Arabshh/Ajib, 1212. See also the discussion by Mehmed Fuad
Kprl in his introduction to his 1928 edition of Bazm u Razm.
63. Ibn Arabshh/Ajib, 68.
64. Khvndamr/Hum, 3:455; Khvndamr/Thackston, 257.
65. Shm/Tauer, 138.
66. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:788; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:249.
67. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:788; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:249; Ibn ajar/Inb,
3:156.
70. Yazd/afar-nma, 1:456; Naanz/Aubin, 169.
71. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:788; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:250; Yazd/afar-
nma, 1:455; Astarbd/Bazm, 223.
72. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:788.
74. Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:250.
86. Ann F. Broadbridge, Kingship and Ideology in the Islamic and Mongol
Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 181.
90. A section from Shukr Allhs Bahjat al-Tavrkh, with a German transla-
tion, can be found in Theodor Seif, Der Abschnitt ber die Osmanen in
179
The Jalayirids
krllhs persischer Universalgeschichte, Mitteilungen zur Osmanischen

Geschichte 2 (192325): 63128. Here is cited p. 96: az sharr-i tmr vaan
tark karda va bi-araf-i shm rafta bdand. For the history of R, see the
modern Turkish transcription published by Halil Erdoan Cengiz and Yasar
Ycel, in Belgeler. Trk Tarih Belgeleri Dergisi, 14/18 (198992). Here is
cited p. 397: temr serrinden b ikis terk-i vaan db sm diyrna vrb
(transcription from Ottoman Turkish text). See also Memed Nesr, Kitb-i
Cihan-nm: Nesr Tarihi, ed. Faik Resit Unat and Mehmed A. Kymen
91. Seif, Der Abschnitt ber die Osmanen in krllhs persischer
Universalgeschichte, 96; R, Rh Trhi, ed. Cengiz and Ycel, 397;
armnl Nisnc Memed Ps, Tevr al-Salin al-Osmniyye,
trans. Konyal brahim Hakk, in Osmanl tarihleri: Osmanl tarihinin
anakaynaklar olan eserlerin, mtehassslar tarafndan hazrlanan metin,
tercme veya sadelestirilmis sekilleri klliyat (Istanbul: Trkiye Yaynevi,
1949), 348; spszde, Tevr-i l-i Osmn, ed. H. Nihal Atsz,
in Osmanl tarihleri: Osmanl tarihinin anakaynaklar olan eserlerin,
mtehassslar tarafndan hazrlanan metin, tercme veya sadelestirilmis
sekilleri klliyat (Istanbul: Trkiye Yaynevi, 1949), 143; Necdet ztrk
(ed.), Anonim Osmanl Kronii (12991512) (Istanbul: Trk Dnyas
Arastrmalar Vakf, 2000), (Ottoman Turkish text), 28a; (modern Turkish
transcription), 50; Nesr, Kitb-i Cihan-nm, 3345.
93. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,020; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:254; Ibn Taghr Bird/
Nujm, 6:44.
94. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,020; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:254.
95. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,020; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:254; Ibn Taghr Bird/
Nujm, 6:44.
96. According to fi Abr, Shirvn b. Shaykh Barq Manr was one of
Suln Amads most esteemed amirs, who turned against him after a
failed siege of Shushtar, and instigated a conspiracy against Suln Amad
in Baghdad. See fi Abr/Zubda, 880. Sharaf al-Dn Al Yazd writes
that in fact Shirvn was Tmrs appointed governor of Khuzistan, but that
he rebelled and went to Baghdad to offer his services to Suln Amad,
after which he began to distribute money to the amirs in order to turn
them against Suln Amad. See Yazd/afar-nma, 168. According to al-
Tarkh al-Ghiyth, which represents a combination of both Mamluk and
Timurid historiography, Tmr himself had sent Shirvn to Suln Amad
as an agent by which to gain influence at the Jalayirid court and turn the
sultans trusted amirs and intimates against him. See Ghiyth/Tarkh, 119.
97. Yazd/afar-nma, 2:16970; Ghiyth/Tarkh, 1223.
98. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,020; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:2545; Ibn Taghr
Bird/Nujm, 6:44.
99. Ibn Taghr Bird has 22 Shawwl in the Manhal al-f, and 24 Shawwl in
180
the Nujm al-Zhira. See Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:255; Ibn Taghr Bird/
Nujm, 6:44. Maqrz has 2 Shawwl. See Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,020.
100. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,020; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:255.
101. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,020; Ibn Taghr Bird/Nujm, 6:44.
104. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,023.
105. According to fi Abr, Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf began to quarrel
at Bahasna, after which Qar Ysuf stayed behind and Suln Amad pro-
ceeded to Anatolia. See fi Abr/Zubda, 893.
107. fi Abr/Zubda, 894; spszde, Tevr-i l-i Osmn, ed. l Bey
(Istanbul: Mabaa-yi mire, 1332 [191314]), 249.
108. fi Abr/Zubda, 894.
110. Although Yazd writes that both Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf were
with Byezd at Erzincan, Shukr Allh reports that Suln Amad had
already returned to Baghdad by this time, and that Byezd originally
turned the city over to Qar Ysuf. However, Muahhartan was returned
to power only sixteen days later, because Qar Ysuf could not get along
with the people of Erzincan (bi-qawm-i arzinjn sz-kr natavnist
kard). See Seif, Der Abschnitt ber die Osmanen in krllhs per-
sischer Universalgeschichte, 96. Nesr provides an identical account
(erzincn alle mumele demeyb). See Nesr, Kitb-i Cihan-nm,
3345.
111. Yazd/afar-nma, 2:268. Little is known about Muahhartan before he
became the amir of Erzincan in 781/1379. In the Timurid-era histories of
Shm, Yazd, Ibn Arabshh and fi Abr, as well as in the Ottoman
sources written by Nesr and spszde, his name is written as
ahartan (or ahirtan). However, Yasar Ycel has argued that the
version used by Astarbd in Bazm u Razm (Muahhartan) is probably
more proper, since Astarbd, as the historian of Q Burhn al-Dn in
Sivas, would have been the source closest to the events in Erzincan in this
period. In addition, in the contemporary tavm written in Erzincan, the
amirs name is also given as Muahhartan. See Yasar Ycel, Anadolu
Beylikleri hakknda Arastrmalar: Eretna Devleti, Kad Burhaneddin
Ahmed ve Devleti, Mutahharten ve Erzincan Emirlii, II (Ankara: Trk
Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1989), 2534.
112. Yazd/afar-nma 2:268; Nesr, Kitb-i Cihan-nm, 3345.
113. A series of four missives and responses between Tmr and Byezd are
preserved in Ferdn Amed Bey, Mecma-yi Mnset-i Seln (Istanbul:
Dr al-iba al-mira, 1848), 11819, 1236, 12630, 1303. On the
correspondence preserved by Ferdn Amed Bey between Tmr and
Byezd, Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf, see Edward Granville Browne, A
181
The Jalayirids
Literary History of Persia, Volume 3: The Tartar Dominion (12651502)

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956), 2:2046. R wrote that
Tmr sent an envoy to Byezd, demanding that he turn over Suln Amad
and Qar Ysuf. When Byezd ignored the envoy, Tmr sent an army to
attack Sivas. See R, Rh Trhi, ed. Cengiz and Ycel, 397. In addi-
tion, Ibn Arabshh refers to a letter sent by Tmr, urging Byezd not to
give refuge to Suln Amad and Qar Ysuf. See Ibn Arabshh/Ajib,
1845.
114. R, Rh Trhi, ed. Cengiz and Ycel, 397; Seif, Der Abschnitt ber
die Osmanen in krllhs persischer Universalgeschichte, 96. According
to l Beys edition of spszdes history, Suln Amad received the
city of Ktahya as a tmr from Byezd. See spszde, Tevr-i l-i
Osmn, ed. l Bey, 249.
115. Yazd/afar-nma, 2:257; Ibn Arabshh/Ajib, 182.
London: Hakluyt Society, 1879), 24.
119. spszde, Tevr-i l-i Osmn, ed. Atsz, 1423; Nesr, Kitb-i
Cihan-nm, 3423.
120. Halil nalck, Byazd I, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill,
1960), 1:1,11719.
121. In an account of Byezds captivity found in an anonymous Tevr-i l-i
Osmn, and repeated by Luf Ps, Tmr and Byezd discuss the fortune-
telling skills (reml ilmi) of Suln Amad Jalayir. See ztrk (ed.), Anonim
Osmanl Kronii (12991512), 49; cf. Luf Ps, Tevr-i l-i Osmn
(Istanbul: Mabaa-yi mire, 1341 [192223]), 58.
123. For the period following the defeat of Byezd at Ankara, see Dimitris J.
Katstritsis, The Sons of Bayezid: Empire Building and Representation in the
Ottoman Civil War of 14021413 (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2007).
126. Maqrz reported that it was the Tigris river. See Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,107.
131. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,118. The date of Suln Amads arrival in Damascus
is given by Maqrz as 6 Jumd I 806/21 November 1403 (Maqrz/Ashr,
3:1,119), and by Ibn ajar as 26 Jumd I/11 December (Ibn ajar/Inb,
5:145).
182
132. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,118; Ibn ajar/Inb, 5:1456.

134. Ibn ajar/Inb, 5:145.
135. According to the Rawzat al-af of Mrkhvnd, Suln Amad and Qar
Ysuf were imprisoned together not in Damascus but in Cairo, where they
swore to each other that, should they ever be free, they would not attack
each other, but would be united. Qar Ysuf would take Tabriz and Suln
Amad would take Baghdad, and they would not interfere in each others
affairs. See Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 6:549. See also Khvndamr/Thackston,
2:31415.
136. nl By was married to Barqqs daughter Khawand Bayrm. See Maqrz/
Ashr, 3:1,136; Ibn Taghr Bird/Nujm, 6:111.
141. Maqrz/Ashr, 3:1,147.
147. Khvndamr/Hum, 3:571; Khvndamr/Thackston, 31617.
154. Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 6:560; Khvndamr/Hum, 3:576; Khvndamr/
Thackston, 319.
157. Tj al-Salmn, ams al-usn: Eine Chronik vom Tode Timurs bis zum
Jahre 1409, ed. Hans Robert Roemer (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag,
1956), 96.
159. Naanz/Aubin, 169; Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 6:578; Khvndamr/Hum, 3:576;
Khvndamr/Thackston, 319. Fa Khvf writes that Al al-Dawla went
to Baghdad, but does not report that he rebelled against his father. See Fa
Khvf/Mujmal, 170.
160. Vladimir Minorsky, Thomas of Metsop on the Timurid-Turkman Wars,
in The Turks, Iran and the Caucasus in the Middle Ages (London: Variorum
Reprints, 1978), XI, 7; Tovma Metsobetsi, History of Tamerlane and His
183
The Jalayirids
Successors, trans. Robert Bedrosian (New York: Sources of the Armenian

Tradition, 1987), 59. Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 6:579; Maqrz/Ashr, 4:133; Ibn
ajar/Inb, 6:226. Qar Ysuf was summoned by the Artuqid malik of
Mardin. See John E. Woods, The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire
(Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1999), 46.
161. Maqrz/Ashr, 4:137.
162. Maqrz and Ibn ajar give his name as Ibn al-Shaykh Ibrhm, while Ibn
Taghr Bird has al-Shaykh Ibrhm. See Maqrz/Ashr, 4:140; Ibn ajar/
Inb, 6:226; Ibn Taghr Bird/Manhal, 1:256.
163. Samarqand/Mala, 2:114; Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 6:579; Khvndamr/Hum,
3:577; Khvndamr/Thackston, 320.
164. Maqrz/Ashr, 4:140.
166. Mrkhvnd/Rawza, 6:580; Maqrz/Ashr, 4:140.
167. Samarqand/Mala, 2:115.
171. According to Thomas of Metsop, Suln Amad was strangled. See
Vladimir Minorsky, Thomas of Metsop on the Timurid-Turkman Wars,
8; Metsobetsi, History of Tamerlane and His Successors, 60.
184
9
Conclusions and the Legacy of the Jalayirids
The period of Jalayirid rule lasted only about seventy-five years in

Baghdad, while Jalayirid rule in Tabriz was considerably less. The dynasty
comprised only four rulers who held any considerable power, and perhaps
can be understood as an irrelevant footnote to the fourteenth century,
between the eras of the far more significant Ilkhanids and Timurids. Yet,
an examination of the history of the Jalayirid dynasty requires an assess-
ment of several of the most significant social and political changes in the
central Islamic lands in the late medieval period. Tracing the origins of the
Jalayirids and their emergence as the heirs to the Ilkhanate in the middle
of the fourteenth century illuminates the complex process of politics in
the context of the Mongol empire, and the relationship between the socio-
political identities of tribe, uls and princely household.
Despite the significance of the Jalayirid period for the development of
post-Mongol political identity, the legacy of the Jalayirids is perhaps most
closely associated with cultural developments, particularly in the field of
manuscript painting. Some of the most important changes in this distinctly
Persian art form took place under the Jalayirids, bridging the masterpiece
known as the Great Mongol Shh-nma, produced in the late Ilkhanid
period, with fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Timurid and Safavid paint-
ing, commonly considered the pinnacle of the Persian miniature form.
Although this study is primarily concerned with political history, consid-
ering the historical legacy of the Jalayirids without touching on their role
as artistic patrons would be to ignore a central aspect of their contribution
to the cultural history of Persianate society.
The fourteenth century has been characterised as the formative period
of Persian painting, when the principal elements that formed later exam-
ples of painting were developed.1 A fundamental feature of Persian manu-
script illustrations in this period was the influence from Chinese painting.2
In particular, Chinese-inspired landscape settings were adapted to Persian
figure drawing in examples of paintings produced in Jalayirid workshops.3
Certainly, the Jalayirid period was important for the development of
185
The Jalayirids
manuscript painting and the art of the book. Yet, is it accurate to speak of
Jalayirid painting, and, if so, what does it mean?
Jalayirid Tabriz and Baghdad were indeed important centres of book pro-
duction,4 although there is some scholarly debate about the extent to which
we can refer to a definitive Jalayirid school of painting. Several scholars
have argued that the Jalayirid workshops at Tabriz and Baghdad produced
works with a distinctive style, which were influential on Timurid painting in
the fifteenth century.5 In a 1939 article, Eric Schroeder surmised that when
Muammad b. Muaffar occupied Tabriz for two months in 760/1359, he
may have acquired some illustrated manuscripts, which he then would have
taken back to Shiraz. The appearance of such manuscripts in Fars would help
to explain the inspiration of a Shh-nma, produced in Shiraz in 772/1370
71, which resembled Jalayirid works but was quite different from earlier Inju
and Muzaffarid paintings.6 Schroeder described the Jalayirid style as charac-
terised by an innovative representation of nature, stylised as a large system,
in contrast to earlier paintings in which nature was not a subject for the
artist.7 Ernst Grube identified Jalayirid painting as the source of modern
Persian-Islamic painting, through the Jalayirid influence on Timurid paint-
ing.8 For Grube, the difference between Muzaffarid and Jalayirid painting
was quite distinct, with very few points of comparison between them.9
Furthermore, works done under Inju or Muzaffarid patrons were of only
local importance.10 Stefano Carboni has written that the Jalayirid style of
painting was characterised by lyrical scenes, with many graceful small
figures set in lavish interiors or in gardens in full bloom.11 Jalayirid paint-
ings feature pastel colours, integrate lines of text into the painting itself, and
tend to take as their subjects romantic Persian poetry, rather than epic works.
Deborah Klimburg-Salter has also identified the extension of the painting
into the margins of the page, as well as the use of drawings in the margins, as
among the major innovations of Jalayirid painting.12
Other scholars have been more cautious about identifying a particularly
Jalayirid school of painting, suggesting that dynastic patronage had little
to do with the choices artists were making in the fourteenth century. As
Sheila Blair has pointed out, artists of the period moved from city to city
in search of patronage and according to changing political circumstances,
making it difficult to assign dynastic labels to artistic schools.13 Christiane
Gruber has followed this way of thinking, arguing that artistic schools
were still forming during the fourteenth century, and that when scholars
have discussed schools, they are often referring to the work of one or two
individuals who served a particular dynastic patron. In addition, artistic
styles may have been more determined by a works subject, rather than a
particular school.14
186
A closer examination of what we actually know about painting under

the Jalayirids suggests that such caution against discussing fully devel-
oped artistic schools is warranted. The evidence we have about artists
and works patronised by the Jalayirids is scanty, and can offer only a
glimpse of artistic life in Tabriz and Baghdad under their rule. For the
artists working under the Jalayirid patronage our most important source
is the preface from an album of calligraphy and painting written by Dst
Muammad (fl. 153164), prepared for the Safavid prince Bahrm Mrz,
brother of Shh Tahmsp (r. 152476). The album is today in the Topkap
Palace Museum in Istanbul, and its preface has been translated by Wheeler
Thackston.15 Dst Muammad traces a chain of transmission of artistic
knowledge from master to student from the end of the Ilkhanid period to
the Timurids, beginning with the painter Ustd Amad Ms. According
to Dst Muammad, Amad Ms lifted the veil from the face of depic-
tion, and the style of depiction that is now current was invented by him.16
In other words, the painting of the sixteenth century could be traced
back to innovations made by a single artist in the service of Ab Sad
Bahdur Khan. Amad Ms was responsible for illustrations in an Ab-
Sad-nma, a copy of Kalla wa-Dimna, a Mirj-nma, and a Trkh-i
Chngz.17 Figure 9.1 is an example of a painting from the Mirj-nma
attributed to Amad Ms, which exists today in the Bahrm Mrz
album. If we trust Dst Muammad, it was painted during the reign of
Ab Sad (131735), although there is some scholarly debate about this.18
More important for the purposes of examining painting under the
Jalayirids, Dst Muammad identifies Amad Mss students and their
legacy in connecting Ilkhanid painting to that of the Safavid period.
However, Dst Muammads account is cursory, and does not provide any
information about Amad Ms after Ab Sads death in 736/1335,19 nor
any account of artists in the service of Shaykh asan Jalayir at Baghdad.
It is generally assumed that Amad Ms continued to work and train stu-
dents during this period, since his students ended up in the service of the
Jalayirids,20 although there is no direct evidence of this. What we know
is that one of his students, named Shams al-Dn, worked in the service of
Shaykh Uvays, presumably at Tabriz. It is likely that Shams al-Dn was
responsible for the paintings in a Shh-nma manuscript produced at Tabriz
around 1370.21 An example from this work is provided below in Figure 9.2.
However, it is not until the period of Suln Amad that we have any
definitive dates or attribution of works to any particular artist.22 Dst
Muammad tells us that Shams al-Dn did not enter the service of any
other patron after Shaykh Uvayss death in 776/1374, devoting himself to
teaching.23 One of his students, Khwja Abd al-ayy, provided Shams
187
The Jalayirids
Figure 9.1 Mirj-nma attributed to Amad Ms, Tabriz, 131735. Topkap Palace
Museum ms. H.2154, fol. 107r.
188
Figure 9.2 Abduction of Zal by the Simurgh, from a Shh-nma manuscript, Tabriz,
c.1370. Topkap Palace Museum ms. H.2153, fol. 23a.
189
The Jalayirids
Figure 9.3 Dvn of Suln Amad, Baghdad, 1403. Freer and Sackler Galleries,
Smithsonian Institution.
190
al-Dn with a place to stay in his house and the necessities of life in
return for the masters teaching.24 Abd al-ayy went on to become the
most prominent painter during the reign of Suln Amad, and became
the Jalayirid sultans teacher.25 When Tmr conquered Baghdad in 795/
1393, Abd al-ayy was captured and sent back to Tmrs capital at
Samarqand, where he remained for the rest of his life.26 We know little of
Abd al-ayys work, beyond the fact that he specialised in ink drawings
such as those illustrating the dvn of Suln Amad.27 Figure 9.3 shows a
page from the dvn, with the illustrations in the margins depicting human
figures, animals and landscape features.
This dvn manuscript is noteworthy for its marginal pen and ink
illustrations (in a style known as qalamsiyh), consisting not of minia-
ture illumination, but of decorative scenes not always connected with the
poetic text.28 Klimburg-Salter has argued that these illustrations fall within
a period of experimental transition that saw the movement of the graphic
image from the centre of the page to the margin.29 Klimburg-Salter also
contends that the prevalence of images of birds in the dvn represents a
conscious visual reference to the work of the Sufi poet Fard al-Dn Ar
(d. 627/1230), the Conference of the Birds (Maniq al-ayr).30
Suln Amad was a connoisseur and active patron of painting. His
workshops in Baghdad were active until Tmrs attack on the city in
803/1401, and produced several well-known works of art.31 Following the
death of Tmr in 807/1405, Suln Amad attempted to regain control of
Tabriz, and in the process continued to patronise painters in the city. After
the fall of Tabriz to the Qarquynl in 813/1410, artists who had worked
in the Jalayirid ateliers there tended to migrate to Shiraz, where they
sought the patronage of the Timurid prince Iskandar b. Umar Shaykh.32
Other works of visual art produced during the reign of Suln Amad
have been the subject of art historians. Stefano Carboni has described a
late eighth/fourteenth-century illustrated astrological treatise, also attrib-
uted to the workshop of Suln Amad. This treatise features illustrations
of the mansions of the moon, lunar-planetary conjunctions, and a treatise
on the zodiac, a so-called Book of Nativities (Kitb al-Mawlid).33
A more recent study has focused on illustrations contained in a Book
ofMarvels copied for Suln Amad in 790/1388.34
One of the finest examples of book illustration during the reign of
Suln Amad can be found in a manuscript of Khwj Kirmns Khamsa,
produced in Baghdad in 1396.35 The paintings are attributed to one of
Shams al-Dns students named Junayd. The illustration of the wedding
day of Humy and Humyn (Figure 9.4) bears his signature, the earli-
est recorded signed Persian miniature painting.36 We know nothing about
191
The Jalayirids
Figure 9.4 Wedding day of Humy and Humyn, from the Khamsa of Khwj
Kirmn, Baghdad, 1396, with the signature of the painter Junayd. British Library
Add. 18113, fol. 45v.
192
Junayd beyond his works in the Khamsa manuscript; Dst Muammad

says only that he was a student of Shams al-Dn.37 In general, it is difficult
to connect particular works to individual artists, given the rarity of signed
paintings; Junayds work is certainly exceptional in this regard.38
Although the Jalayirid influence on Timurid painting has been empha-
sised, the example of what we know about Abd al-ayy and Junayd
illustrates the difficulty in tracing definitively the influence of individual
artists between royal courts. While we know that Abd al-ayy was taken
to Tmrs Samarqand, we do not have any confirmed examples of his
work. On the other hand, while we do have an example of Junayds work
in the 1396 Baghdad Khamsa of Khwj Kirmn, we have no evidence
that he was taken to or travelled himself to any Timurid court, making his
influence on later artists uncertain. We do have an example of a Timurid
manuscript, produced in Herat in the fifteenth century by a certain Khwja
Al Tabrz. Zeren Tannd has argued that Khwja Al probably did his
apprenticeship in Jalayirid Tabriz or Baghdad,39 thus offering an example
of a more direct transmission of artistic training and production from the
Jalayirid to the Timurid period.
In addition to painting, calligraphy and metalwork were also forms
of artistic expression under the Jalayirids. According to the Gulistn-i
Hunar, a treatise on calligraphers and painters written in 1005/159697
for the Safavid Shh Abbs (r. 15871629) by Q Amad Mr Munsh
al-usayn, one of the outstanding calligraphers of Shaykh Uvayss time
was a certain Mubrak Shh, known as Zarn-Qalam, or golden pen.40
Sheila Blair has dealt extensively with the career of Zarn-Qalam, and has
pointed out that Q Amad confused him with another individual named
Mubrak Shh b. Qub, and that in fact the Zarn-Qalam in the service of
Shaykh Uvays was actually named Amad Shh.41 According to Q
Amads treatise, Shaykh Uvays had a dream in which Al b. Ab lib
commanded him to direct (Amad) Shh to make calligraphic inscriptions
on the buildings of Najaf, the site of the tombs of both Al and Shaykh
Uvayss father Shaykh asan. It was for his work in Najaf that Amad
Shh earned the nickname Zarn-Qalam.42 Amad Shh also left his mark
in Jalayirid Baghdad, designing epigraphic decorations for the Mirjniyya
mosque-madrasa complex, founded by Khwja Mirjn in 758/1357.43
Another calligrapher, identified as a pupil of Zarn-Qalam, was Pr Yay
f, who served Jalayirid, Chubanid and Ilkhanid patrons, and who also
left inscriptions on many buildings in Najaf.44 A third master of calligra-
phy, as well as of poetry, in Jalayirid Iraq was Mawln Marf-i Khat-i
Baghdd. Q Amad writes that he turned away from Suln Amad in
Baghdad and went to the court of the Timurid prince Iskandar b. Umar
193
The Jalayirids
Shaykh in Isfahan, and was later taken to Herat by Shhrukh.45 Like the
painters Abd al-ayy and Khwja Al, Khat-i Baghdd began his
career in the service of the Jalayirids and finished it under the Timurids.
We know little about individuals who produced metalwork for the
Jalayirids, such as the copper basin from Ardabil bearing the name of
Sultan Shaykh Uvays.46 However, Linda Komaroff has identified simi-
larities between this vessel and contemporary metalware produced in
Mamluk Syria.47 Alison Ohta has identified Jalayirid influence on Mamluk
filigree bookbinding as well,48 which seems to indicate a general pattern of
artistic exchange and interaction between artists and craftsmen on either
side of the Euphrates by the fifteenth century. Doris Behrens-Abouseif has
suggested that contact between the Jalayirid and Mamluk courts, and the
growing number of Iranians in Cairo in the fifteenth century, may account
for artistic exchange between Iran and Syria in the period.49
How, then, can we sum up the artistic legacy of the Jalayirids? Given
the available evidence, it seems that when we talk about Jalayirid paint-
ing in particular, we refer to a handful of artists working in Tabriz and
Baghdad, continually developing and innovating a style of painting that
emerged toward the late Ilkhanid period, inspired by Chinese influences,
available due to the intensive cross-cultural interactions made possible
and encouraged by the Mongols. Given the paucity of examples, and
ongoing debates among historians, it seems best to consider painting done
under Jalayirid patronage not as a distinct school of painting, but as part
of an ongoing process of experimentation and creativity among artists
who moved between cities and dynastic courts, and whose work would
continue to influence painters of the Timurid and Safavid periods. What
must be kept in mind as we consider the artistic legacy of the Jalayirids is
that even as we focus on a single dynasty and courtly patronage, the reality
of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries was that artists, as well as schol-
ars and holy men, moved in circles not constrained by the political power
of any one ruling family. The Jalayirid sultans, like their contemporary
rulers in Cairo, Shiraz and Samarqand, offered material reward for artists
works, but in a cultural context in which the religious, literary and visual
forms of their work were common to a community much larger than the
frontiers of any single polity.
The complete history of artistic production, patronage and stylistic
influences under the rule of the Jalayirids demands its own thorough
study. The brief preceding summary can only highlight some of the most
important points in a growing literature on manuscript painting and artistic
culture in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The purpose of the present
study has been to trace the processes of dynastic state formation and
194
ideological legitimation in the period in which such cultural developments

were taking place. To summarise, this study has offered a chronologi-
cal narrative of the relationship between the Chinggisid Ilkhans and the
Jalayir tribe, particularly the Ilgayid Jalayirs whose descendants became
sultans in the eighth/fourteenth century. However, the methodology has
been one of working backwards, from the Jalayirid sultans themselves
to their ancestors roles in the enterprise of the Ilkhanate and the Mongol
empire as a whole. By doing so, it is hoped that some new insight into the
relationship between the tribal amirs and the institutions of the Mongol
dynastic state has emerged.
As we have seen, the Jalayirid sultans were descended in part from the
Mongolian Jalayir tribe, whose members participated in the great trans-
formations of Mongolian society that accompanied the rise of Chinggis
Qans empire in the early seventh/thirteenth century. Pre-Chinggisid tribal
identities, which were primarily (though not completely) political identi-
ties, changed as political allegiances were primarily directed to Chinggisid
princes, to whose patrimonial inheritance (uls) the Jalayir, and other
tribal groups, were sublimated. The social and political meaning that such
tribal identities had before Chinggis Qan was diminished in the process
of the redistribution of land and human resources among the family of the
great qan. What mattered by the middle of the seventh/thirteenth century
was not so much what tribe one belonged to, but which Chinggisid prince
one served.
The Jalayirid sultans ancestor lg Noyan played a central role in the
establishment of the Ilkhanate in the middle of the thirteenth century.
The Ilkhanate became the uls of Hleg and his descendants and was, at
least originally, an extension of the authority of the Toluid branch of the
Chinggisid family into the Oxus-to-Euphrates region. lg Noyan was one
of several Jalayir amirs among the elite of the early Ilkhanate. However,
these amirs did not act as a group with a single purpose or leader. As the
events of the internal struggles between 1282 and 1295 illustrate, tribal
identity or allegiance did not define the conflicts between different amiral
factions. Instead, the royal princes, the descendants of Hleg, were the
rallying points for these factional struggles. The Jalayirs did not fight the
Sulduz or Oyrat in this period; rather, Jalayir fought Jalayir and Sulduz
fought Sulduz, according to each individuals loyalty and obligations to a
particular prince of the blood.
The reign of Ghazan Khan (12951304) was a major turning point
in the course of Ilkhanid history. This period witnessed a decline in the
power of the amirs and a centralisation of power in the hands of the khan.
Amirs who had opposed Ghazan in 1295 and did not have an alternative
195
The Jalayirids
Chinggisid prince around whom to organise failed in attempts at rebel-

lion. Jalayir amirs took part in uprisings in Anatolia around the turn of the
seventheighth/thirteenthfourteenth century. These rebellions were put
down, and as a consequence the fortunes of the Ilgayid Jalayirs, who by
this time had close ties to the royal households of Ghazan and his brother
ljeyt, greatly improved in the early fourteenth century. lg Noyans
grandson, Amr usayn (whose name indicates a new communal com-
mitment to Islam in the generation of Ghazan), held the title of gregen,
or royal son-in-law, by virtue of his marriage to ljetey Sultan, the sister
of ljeyt. The status of gregen not only gave Amr usayn and his
son Shaykh asan access to the Ilkhanid court, but also ensured that
they would survive and emerge stronger in the period of royal centralisa-
tion and attempts to limit the influence of the amirs during the reigns of
Ghazan and ljeyt. Although the Sulduz Amr Chpn took control of
the Ilkhanate in the first part of Ab Sads reign, Shaykh asan became
the prime beneficiary of his fall and the swing of the pendulum of power
back to the khan-sultan after 1327. Shaykh asan was the highest-ranking
Ilkhanid amir until Ab Sads death. His duties in this capacity were
centred in Anatolia, a fact that gave him a distinct advantage when the
Ilkhanid order collapsed in 1335. Shaykh asans power in Rm and the
upper Tigris enabled him to win the support of the Oyrat tribesmen and
take control of both eastern Anatolia and Baghdad in the chaotic years
after Ab Sads death.
Thus, the emergence of Shaykh asan Jalayir as one of several con-
tenders for power in post-Ilkhanid Iran was not the consequence of a
retribalisation of Mongol society in the Middle East after a century, and
the falling away of the formidable, but temporary, Chinggisid imperial
order. In fact, Shaykh asan owed his fortune and power to the Ilkhanid
order itself. He was not a tribal leader, but someone intimately connected
to the Ilkhanid court. If he commanded the allegiance of any tribal ele-
ments, it was not the Jalayirs but the Oyrats, after the defeat of their chief
Al Pdshh. In the absence of a Chinggisid prince to succeed Ab Sad,
Shaykh asan attempted to take control of the Ilkhanid uls in the name
of a powerless Chinggisid puppet. For the amirs who competed for control
of the Ilkhanate, including the Jalayirids, Chubanids and Muzaffarids, the
Ilkhanid uls remained the framework for political action.
Shaykh asans son and successor, Shaykh Uvays, was able to build
upon his fathers military gains in Arab Iraq and take advantage of the
upheaval in Azarbayjan in the late 1350s to capture Tabriz, the seat of
Ilkhanid authority, as well as considerable commercial wealth. Shaykh
Uvayss conquest of Tabriz not only brought the prestige and wealth
196
of the former Ilkhanate under the control of the Jalayirid house, it also
brought a number of administrators, littrateurs and others who had for-
merly served the Ilkhanate into the service of the Jalayirids. The men of
the pen who became associated with the court of Shaykh Uvays, and who
benefited from Jalayirid patronage, had an interest in the continuity of
central sultanic authority in Tabriz on the pattern of the later Ilkhanate. It
seems that for this reason, those in the service of Shaykh Uvays helped to
construct an ideological foundation for the authority of the Jalayirids in
the former Ilkhanid uls. The contemporary texts and material artifacts
tend to present Shaykh Uvays as the inheritor of what we can call the
Ilkhanid legacy. This ideology was based on the Jalayirid sultans genea-
logical relationship to members of the Hlegid house, and a rhetorical
presentation of Shaykh Uvays as a dispenser of royal justice in the name
of Islam, similar to how the later Ilkhans, such as Ghazan and Ab Sad,
had been. For the military and urban elites of Azarbayjan, the uls of
Hleg continued to provide the framework in which legitimate, Muslim
royal authority was conceived. It was not important if the sultan was not a
Chinggisid prince of the blood; the ideology was flexible enough to adapt
to the political reality. Shaykh Uvays could be made a rightful Mongol
khan and Muslim sultan, as long as the patterns of patronage and courtly
life around Tabriz were maintained. However, once the notion of Jalayirid
royalty was established during the reign of Shaykh Uvays, the doors were
opened to challenges to dynastic authority by the amirs, who could organ-
ise opposition around one of several Jalayirid princes. Thus, the sultanate
that Shaykh Uvays had established was, on the eve of Tmrs campaigns,
divided between amiral power at Tabriz, Baghdad and Sultaniyya.
The campaigns of Timur in Iran fundamentally altered the balance of
power in the uls of Hleg, and challenged the Ilkhanid legacy as pro-
moted by the Jalayirids. The reign of Suln Amad b. Shaykh Uvays was
defined by the threat from Tmr, not just to Jalayirid rule, but also to the
political order from Oxus to Nile. The Mamluk sultanate, the Ottoman sul-
tanate and the Qarquynl Turkman confederation all suffered to varying
degrees from Tmrs campaigns. Suln Amad sought protection from
the rulers of each of these polities. On the occasions when he found refuge
(with Barqq in 1394, with Byezd in 140002 on two separate occa-
sions, with Qar Ysuf on several occasions), Suln Amad was accom-
modated because of what he represented in symbolic terms, more so than
any material advantage he could provide for his host: he was the rightful
heir to the uls of Hleg, and had not submitted to Tmr. In the period
of the Timurid campaigns, Suln Amad was an alternative, a symbol of
opposition and commitment to the Ilkhanid tradition, as opposed to the
197
The Jalayirids
violent upheavals of the armies of Tmr. Furthermore, for Qar Ysuf,

association with Suln Amad offered ideological capital upon which to
make claims to authority in the Jalayirid lands in the early ninth/fifteenth
century. The Ilkhanate still provided the framework for imagining the
meaning of political power in Iran, Iraq and Anatolia by this time, and for
the Qarquynl, the Jalayirid sultan was the link between themselves and
the charisma of the Ilkhans.
Notes
1. Ernst J. Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century: A Research
Report (Naples: Istituto Orientale di Napoli, 1978), 1.
2. Basil Gray, A Timurid Copy of a Chinese Buddhist Picture, in Richard
Ettinghausen (ed.), Islamic Art in The Metropolitan Museum of Art (New
York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1972), 35.
3. Gray, A Timurid Copy of a Chinese Buddhist Picture, 36. The ink draw-
ings found in the dvn of Suln Amad are often cited as clear examples of
Chinese influence in the Jalayirid period. See David J. Roxburgh, Persian
Drawing, ca. 14001450: Materials and Creative Procedures, Muqarnas 19
(2002): 55; Sheila R. Canby, Persian Painting (Northampton, MA: Interlink,
1993), 48.
4. Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century, 22. We actually know
very little about the activity that went on at the ateliers and libraries of
Tabriz and Baghdad. In the case of Tabriz, it has been suggested that book
production at Rashd al-Dns library may have continued to function into
the Jalayirid period, despite the fact that the Rab-i Rashd was plundered
twice in the first half of the fourteenth century. See Thomas W. Lentz and
Glenn D. Lowry, Timur and the Princely Vision: Persian Art and Culture
in the Fifteenth Century (Los Angeles and Washington, DC: Los Angeles
County Museum of Art, Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution
and Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989), 51.
5. Eric Schroeder, Ahmed Musa and Shams al-Dn: A Review of Fourteenth
Century Painting, Ars Islamica 6:2 (1939): 115; Grube, Persian Painting in
the Fourteenth Century, 23.
6. Schroeder, Ahmed Musa and Shams al-Dn, 11618.
8. Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century, 46. According to Grube,
the elements of Timurid painting developed from a distinctively Jalayirid
school of painting. See Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century,
23.
9. Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century, 23.
11. Stefano Carboni, Synthesis: Continuity and Innovation in Ilkhanid Art,
198
in The Legacy of Genghis Khan: Courtly Art and Culture in Western Asia,
12561353 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2002), 223.
12. Deborah E. Klimburg-Salter, A Sufi Theme in Persian Painting: The Diwan
of Sultan Ahmad Galair in the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.,
Kunst des Orients 11 (197677): 579.
13. Sheila Blair, Artists and Patronage in Late Fourteenth-Century Iran in the
Light of Two Catalogues of Islamic Metalwork, BSOAS 48:1 (1985): 589.
14. Christiane Gruber, The Ilkhanid Book of Ascension: A Persian-Sunni
Devotional Tale (London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 2010), 25.
15. Wheeler M. Thackston, Album Prefaces and Other Documents on the
History of Calligraphers and Painters (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 4; Gruber, The
Ilkhanid Book of Ascension, 24.
16. Thackston, Album Prefaces, 12.
17. Thackston, Album Prefaces, 1213; Priscilla P. Soucek, Amad Ms,
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1984), 1:6523; Filiz aman and Zeren Tannd,
The Topkap Saray Museum: The Albums and Illustrated Manuscripts, ed.
and trans. J. M. Rogers (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1986), 70;
Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century, 33.
18. For the provenance of the Bahrm Mrz album Mirj-nma paintings,
I follow Gruber in her The Ilkhanid Book of Ascension. On the scholarly
debate surrounding the dating of these paintings, see Gruber, The Ilkhanid
Book of Ascension, 25 and notes 1478.
19. Canby, Persian Painting, 41; Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth
Century, 312, 34.
20. Schroeder, Ahmed Musa and Shams al-Dn, 132. Schroeder wrote that
it was highly probable that Amad Ms, along with the contents of the
Tabriz library, were transferred to Baghdad when Shaykh asan Jalayir
moved his court there in 1340.
21. aman and Tannd, The Topkap Saray Museum, 70.
23. Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century, 33; Schroeder, Ahmed
Musa and Shams al-Dn, 129; Priscilla P. Soucek, Abd-al-ayy, Kvj,
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1982), 1:115.
26. Thackston, Album Prefaces, 13; Soucek, Abd-al-ayy, Kvj, 115.
27. Soucek, Abd-al-ayy, Kvj, 115; Lentz and Lowry, Timur and the
Princely Vision, 52. Deborah Klimburg-Salter has argued that Abd al-ayy
was the likely artist for the illustrations from the dvn found in the Freer
Gallery. See Klimburg-Salter, A Sufi Theme in Persian Painting, 769.
28. Bernard OKane has pointed to the similarities between the pen and inkdraw-
ings in the dvn of Suln Amad and the mysterious so-called siyh-qalam
199
The Jalayirids
paintings, featuring distinctive depictions of demons, dervishes and scenes

of everyday life. OKane suggests that these paintings have their origins in
Jalayirid Tabriz during the reign of Shaykh Uvays. See Bernard OKane,
Siyah Qalam: The Jalayirid Connections, Oriental Art 49:2 (2003): 218.
31. Works produced at Baghdad under Suln Amad Jalayir include Ajib
al-Makhlqt (1388), Kalla wa Dimna (1392), the dvn of Khvj Kirmn
(1396), and Kitb al-Buldan (1399). See Klimburg-Salter, A Sufi Theme in
Persian Painting, 703.
33. Stefano Carboni, Two Fragments of a Jalayirid Astrological Treatise in
the Keir Collection and in the Oriental Institute in Sarajevo, Islamic Art 2
(1987): 14950.
34. Anna Caiozzo, Une conception originale des cieux: planets et zodiaque
dune cosmographie jalayride, Annales Islamologiques 37 (2003): 5978.
Caiozzo examines a copy of the work Ajib al-Makhlqt wa-Gharib
al-Mawjdt by a certain s Salmn, consisting of an illustrated cosmog-
raphy, inspired by a seventh/thirteenth-century ajib work. Caiozzo argues
that Salmns illustrations are unlike the illustrations in earlier versions.
35. Barbara Brend, Jonayd-e Naqq, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
Yarshater (London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 2009), 15:5;
Schroeder, Ahmed Musa and Shams al-Dn, 129.
36. Bernard OKane, Early Persian Painting: Kalila and Dimna Manuscripts of
the Late Fourteenth Century (London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 2003), 34;
Soucek, Abd-al-ayy, Kvj, 115; Canby, Persian Painting, 44.
38. For example, an illustrated manuscript of the Khamsa of Nim was
produced in Baghdad between 1386 and 1388, during the reign of Suln
Amad. However, we do not know who the artist was. See Norah M. Titley,
A 14th-Century Nim Manuscript in Tehran, Kunst des Orients 8 (1972):
120; Grube, Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century, 22; Canby, Persian
Painting, 42; OKane, Early Persian Painting, 34.
39. Zeren Tannd, Additions to Illustrated Manuscripts in Ottoman Workshops,
Muqarnas 17 (2000): 151.
40. Amad b. Mr Munsh al-usayn, Calligraphers and Painters: A Treatise
by Q Amad, Son of Mr-Munsh (circa a.h. 1015/a.d. 1606), trans.
V.Minorsky (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1959), 61.
41. Blair, Artists and Patronage in Late Fourteenth-Century Iran, 55; Jonathan
M. Bloom, Paper: The Transformative Medium in Ilkhanid Art, in Linda
Komaroff (ed.), Beyond the Legacy of Genghis Khan (Leiden and Boston:
Brill, 2006), 2912.
42. Amad b. Mr Munsh al-usayn, Calligraphers and Painters, 61.
43. Blair, Artists and Patronage in Late Fourteenth-Century Iran, 534.
200
44. Amad b. Mr Munsh al-usayn, Calligraphers and Painters, 62.

45. Amad b. Mr Munsh al-usayn, Calligraphers and Painters, 65; Priscilla
P. Soucek, Eskandar b. Omar ayx b. Timur: A Biography, Oriente
Moderno 15:2 (1996): 84.
46. This example of Jalayirid metalwork was brought to light by Yedda Godard,
and is discussed in Chapter 7. See Y. A. Godard, Bassin de cuivre au nom
de Shaikh Uwais, Athr- rn: Annales du service archaeologique de rn
1 (1936): 3713.
47. Linda Komaroff, The Golden Disk of Heaven: Metalwork of Timurid Iran
(Costa Mesa and New York: Mazda, 1992), 40, n. 112.
48. Alison Ohta, Filigree Bindings of the Mamluk Period, Muqarnas 21
(2004), 26776.
49. Doris Behrens-Abouseif, The Jalayirid Connection in Mamluk Metalware,
Muqarnas 26 (2009): 1578.
201
Map 1 Jalayirid dynasty.
Map 2 Jalayirid dynasty, c. 1353.
Map 3 Jalayirid dynasty, c. 1400.
Kinship relationship
Marriage relationship
lg Noyan (d. after 1265) Abaqa Khan (d. 1282)
q B q (d. 1295) Arghun Khan (d. 1291)
Am r usayn (d. 1322) ljetey Sultan Am r Ch p n (d. 1327) ljeyt (d. 1316)
Baghd d Kh t n (d. 1335) Dimashq Khw ja (d. 1327) Ab Sa d (d. 1335)

Shaykh asan (d. 1356)
Dilsh d Kh t n (d. 1351)
Shaykh Uvays (d. 1374)
Shaykh asan (d. 1374) Sul n A mad (d. 1410) B yaz d (d. 1384) Shaykh Al (d. 1382) Sul n usayn (d. 1382)
Sul n hir (d. 1403) Al al-Dawla (d. 1410) Sul n Walad (d. 1411) T nd Barq q
asan usayn (d. 1431) Mu ammad Uvays Ma m d
Genealogy of the Jalayirid dynasty.

Bibliography
Primary Sources
Ab al-Fid, Isml b. Al, al-Mukhtasar f Akhbr al-Bashar, ed. Muammad
Zaynahum Muammad Azab (Cairo: Dr al-Marif, 1998).
Amad b. Mr Munsh al-usayn, Calligraphers and Painters: A Treatise
by Q Amad, Son of Mr-Munsh (circa a.h. 1015/a.d. 1606), trans.
V.Minorsky (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1959).
Ahr, Ab Bakr al-Qub, Tarkh-i Shaikh Uwais (A History of Shaikh Uwais):
An Important Source for the History of dharbaijn in the Fourteenth Century,
trans. J. B. Van Loon (The Hague: Mouton & Co., 1954).
qsary, Karm al-Dn Mamd, Musmarat al-Akhbr va Musyarat al-
Akhyr, ed. Osman Turan (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu, 1993).
skpszde, skpasaolu Tarihi, ed. H. Nihal Atsz (Istanbul: Milli Eitim
Bakanl Yaynlar, 1992).
Tevr-i l-i Osmn, ed. l Bey (Istanbul: Mabaa-yi mire, 1332
[191314]).
Tevr-i l-i Osmn, ed. H. Nihal Atsz, in Osmanl tarihleri: Osmanl
tarihinin anakaynaklar olan eserlerin, mtehassslar tarafndan hazrlanan
metin, tercme veya sadelestirilmis sekilleri klliyat (Istanbul: Trkiye
Yaynevi, 1949), 77318.
Astarbd, Azz b. rdashr, Bazm u Razm, intro. Kprlzde Memed Fud
Bey [Mehmed Fuad Kprl] (Istanbul: Evf Mabaas, 1928).
Azhdar, Nr al-Dn, Ghzn-nma-yi Manm, ed. Mamd Mudabbir (Tehran:
Bunyd-i Mawqft-i Duktur Mamd Afshr, 1380 [2001]).
Bankat, Dvd ibn Muammad, Trkh-i Bankat: Rawzat l al-Albb
f Marifat al-Tavrkh wa-al-Ansb, ed. Jafar Shir (Tehran, 1348
[1969]).
Bar Hebraeus, The Chronography of Gregory Abl Faraj, the Son of Aaron, the
Hebrew Physician Commonly Known as Bar Hebraeus Being the First Part
of his Political History of the World, trans. Ernest A. Wallis Budge (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1932).
Clavijo, Ruy Gonzalez de, Embassy to Tamerlane, 14031406, trans. Guy Le
Strange (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1928).
Cleaves, Francis Woodman (ed. and trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982).
209
The Jalayirids
De Rachewiltz, Igor (trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols: A Mongolian

Epic Chronicle of the Thirteenth Century (Leiden: Brill, 2004).
Fa Khvf, Fa al-Dn Amad, Mujmal-i Fa, ed. Mamd Farrukh
(Mashhad: Kitbfursh-yi Bstn, 1339 [1961]).
Ferdn Amed Bey, Mecma-yi Mnset-i Seln (Istanbul: Dr al-iba al-
mira, 1848).
Ghiyth, Abd Allh b. Fat Allh, al-Tarkh al-Ghiyth, ed. riq Nfi al-
amdn (Baghdad: Mabaat Asad, 1975).
Grigor of Akanc, History of the Nation of Archers, trans. Robert P. Blake and
Richard N. Frye, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 12:3/4 (1949): 269399.
Abr, Cinq opuscules de -i Abr concernant lhistoire de lIran au
temps de Tamerlan, ed. Felix Tauer (Prague: LAcadmie Tchcoslovaque des
sciences, 1959).
Zayl-i Jmi al-Tavrkh, ed. Khnbb Bayn (Tehran: Ilm, 1317
[1939]).
Zubdat al-Tavrkh, ed. Sayyid Kaml jj-i Sayyid Javd (Tehran:
Vizrat-i Farhang va Irshd-i Islm, 1380 [2001]).
Ibn Arabshh, Muammad ibn Amad, Ajib al-Maqdr f Nawib Tmr, ed.
Al Muammad Umar (Cairo: Maktabat al-Anjil al-Miriyya, 1399 [1979]).
Ibn Baa, Rilat Ibn Baa: al-Musamm Tufat al-Nur f Gharib al-
Amr wa-Ajib al-Asfr (Mir: al-Maktaba al-Tijriyya al-Kubr, 1964).
The Travels of Ibn Baa, a.d. 13251354, trans. H. A. R. Gibb
(Cambridge: Hakluyt Society at the University Press, 1971).
Ibn Bb, El-Evmirl-Aliyye fl-Umril-Aliyye, ed. Adnan Sadk Erzi
(Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1956).
Histoire des Seldjoucides dAsie Mineure daprs lAbrg du Seldjouknmeh
dIbn-Bb, ed. M. Th. Houtsma (Leiden: Brill, 1902).
Ibn ajar al-Asqaln, Amad ibn Al, Durar al-Kmina f Ayn al-Mia
al-Thmina, ed. Abd al-Writh Muammad Al (Beirut: Dr al-Kutub al-
Ilmiyya, 1977).
Inb al-Ghumr bi-Abn al-Umr (Hyderabad: Mabaat Majlis Dirat
al-Marif al-Uthmniyya, 1967).
Inb al-Ghumr bi-Anb al-Umr f al-Tarkh (Beirut: Dr al-Kutub al-
Ilmiyya, 1986).
Ibn Taghr Bird, Ab al-Masin Ysuf, al-Manhal al-f wa al-Mustawf bad
al-Wf, ed. Muammad Amn (Cairo: al-Haya al-Miriyya al-mma lil-
Kitb, 1984).
al-Nujm al-Zhira f Mulk Mir wa-al-Qhira (Cairo: Mabaat Dr al-
Kutub al-Miriyya, 192972).
al-Nujm al-Zhira f Mulk Mir wa-al-Qhira, ed. William Popper
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1960).
Juvayn, Al al-Dn A Malik, Genghis Khan: The History of the World
Conqueror, trans. J. A. Boyle (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997).
Trkh-i Jahn-gushy, ed. Muammad ibn Abd al-Wahhb Qazvn, 4th
210
Bibliography
edn (Tehran: Intishrt-i Arghavn, 1370 [1991]); originally published in E. J.

W. Gibb Memorial Series 16 (Leiden: Brill, 1912).
armnl Nisnc Memed Ps, Tevr al-Saln al-Osmniyye (Osmanl
Sultanlar Tarihi), trans. Konyal brahim Hakk, in Osmanl tarihleri:
Osmanl tarihinin anakaynaklar olan eserlerin, mtehassslar tarafndan
hazrlanan metin, tercme veya sadelestirilmis sekilleri klliyat (Istanbul:
Trkiye Yaynevi, 1949), 32169.
Khvndamr, Ghiys al-Dn b. Humm al-Dn, Habibus-siyar, Tome Three,
The Reign of the Mongol and the Turk, ed. and trans. Wheeler Thackston
(Cambridge, MA: Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations,
Harvard University, 1994).
Trkh-i Habb al-Siyar f Akhbr-i Afrd-i Bashar, ed. Jall al-Dn Hum
(Tehran: Kitb-khna-yi Khayyam, 1954).
Kirakos Gandzaketsis, History of the Armenians, trans. Robert Bedrosian (New
York: Sources of the Armenian Tradition, 1986).
Kutub, Mamd, Trkh-i l-i Muaffar, ed. Abd al-usayn Nav (Tehran:
Kitbfursh-yi Ibn Sn, 1956).
Luf Ps, Tevr-i l-i Osmn (Istanbul: Mabaa-yi mire, 1341 [192223]).
Maqrz, Taq al-Dn Amad b. Al, Kitb al-Sulk li-Marifat Duwal al-Mulk,
ed. Muammad Muaf Ziyda (Cairo: Lajnat al-Talif wa-al-Tarjama wa-al-
Nashr, 1934).
Kitb al-Sulk li-Marifat Duwal al-Mulk, ed. Abd al-Fatt Ashr
(Cairo, 1972).
Mzandarn, Abd Allh ibn Muammad ibn Kiy, Die Resl-ye Falakiyy des
Abdollh Ibn Moammad Ibn Kiy al-Mzandarn: Ein persischer Leitfaden
des staatlichen Rechnungswesens (um 1363), ed. Walther Hinz (Wiesbaden:
Franz Steiner Verlag, 1952).
Metsobetsi, Tovma, History of Tamerlane and His Successors, trans. Robert
Bedrosian (New York: Sources of the Armenian Tradition, 1987).
Mrkhvnd, Muammad b. Khvndshh, Trkh-i Rawzat al-af (Tehran:
Markaz-yi Khayyam Prz, 195960).
Nakhjivn, Muammad bin Hindshh, Dastr al-Ktib f Tayn al-Martib,
ed. Abd al-Karm Alghl Alzda (Moscow: Izd-vo Nauka, Glav. red.
vostochno lit-ry, 196476).
Naanz, Mun al-Dn, Extraits du Muntakhab al-tavrkh-i Mun (Anonyme
dIskandar), ed. Jean Aubin (Tehran: Librairie Khayyam, 1957).
Muntakhab al-Tavrkh-i Mun, ed. Parvn Istakhr (Tehran: Intishrt-i
Asr, 2004).
Nesr, Memed, Kitb-i Cihan-nm: Nesr Tarihi, ed. Faik Resit Unat and
Mehmed A. Kymen (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1995).
Onon, Urgunge (trans.), The Secret History of the Mongols: The Life and Times of
Chinggis Khan (Richmond: Curzon, 2001).
ztrk, Necdet (ed.), Anonim Osmanl Kronii (12991512) (Istanbul: Trk
Dnyas Arastrmalar Vakf, 2000).
211
The Jalayirids
Qshn, Ab al-Qsim, Trkh-i ljyt, ed. Mahin Hambly (Tehran, 1969).

Qazvn, amd Allh Mustawf, The Geographical Part of the Nuzhat-al-Qulb,
ed. Guy Le Strange (Leiden: Brill; London: Luzac & Co., 191519).
Trkh-i Guzda, ed. Abd al-usayn Nav (Tehran: Amr Kabr, 1362
[1983]).
Qazvn, Zayn al-Dn b. amd Allh Mustawf, Zayl-i Trkh-i Guzda, ed. raj
Afshr (Tehran: Naqsh-i Jahn, 1372 [1993]).
Rm, Sharaf al-Dn Muammad b. asan, Ans al-Ushshq, ed. Musin Kiyn
(Tehran: Intishrt-i Rawzna, 1376 [199798]).
Rashd al-Dn Fazl Allh Hamadn, Jmi al-Tavrkh, ed. Muammad Rawshan
and Muaf Msav (Tehran: Nashr-i Alburz, 1373 [1994]).
Muktabt-i Rashd, ed. Muammad Abarqh and Muammad Shaf
(Lahore: University of the Punjab Oriental Publications, 1945).
Shuab-i Panjgna (Istanbul: Topkap Saray Mzesi Ktphanesi, Ahmet
III ms. 2937).
R, Rh Trhi, ed. Halil Erdoan Cengiz and Yasar Ycel, in Belgeler. Trk
Tarih Belgeleri Dergisi, 14/18 (198992).
afad, Khall ibn Aybak, Ayn al-Ar wa-Awn al-Nar (Beirut: Dr al-Fikr
al-Muir and Damascus: Dr al-Fikr, 1998).
Samarqand, Dawlatshh, Tazkirat al-Shuar-yi Dawlatshh Samarqand, ed.
Muammad Abbs (Tehran: Kitb-fursh-yi Brn, 1337 [1958]).
Samarqand, Kaml al-Dn Abd al-Razzq, Mala-i Sadayn va Majma-i
Barayn, ed. Abd al-usayn Nav (Tehran: Shh Riz Muqbil Dnishgh,
1353 [1975]).
Svaj, Salmn, Kullyt-i Salmn-i Svaj, ed. Abbs Al Vaf (Tehran:
Anjuman-i sr va Mafkhir-i Farhang, 1382 [2004]).
Schiltberger, Johannes, The Bondage and Travels of Johann Schiltberger: A
Native of Bavaria, in Europe, Asia, and Africa, 13961427, ed. P. Bruun, trans.
J. Buchan Telfer (New York: Burt Franklin, 1970; reprinted from London:
Hakluyt Society, 1879).
Shabnkra, Muammad bin Al bin Muammad, Majma al-Ansb, ed.
Mr Hshim Muaddis (Tehran: Muassasa-yi Intishrt-i Amr Kabr, 1363
[1985]).
Shm, Nim al-Dn, Histoire des conqutes de Tamerlan intitule afar-nma,
par Nimuddn m, avec des additions empruntes au Zubdatu-t-Tawri-i
Bysunur de fi-i Abr, ed. Felix Tauer (Prague: Orientln stav/Oriental
Institute, 1937).
Zafernme, ed. Necati Lugal (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1949).
Shuj, Shams al-Dn, Trkh al-Malik al-Nir Muammad ibn Qalawn al-
li wa-Awlduhu, ed. Barbara Schfer (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1978
85).
Tj al-Salmn, ams al-usn: Eine Chronik vom Tode Timurs bis zum Jahre
1409, ed. Hans Robert Roemer (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1956).
Umar, Amad b. Yay b. Fal Allh, Das Mongolische Weltreich: Al-Umars
212
Bibliography
Darstellung der mongolischen Reiche in seinem Werk Maslik al-Abr f

Mamlik al-Amr, ed. and trans. Klaus Lech (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz,
1968).
Vaf, Abd Allh b. Fazl Allh, Tarr-i Trkh-i Vaf, ed. Abd al-
Muammad yat (Tehran: Muassasa-yi Mulaat va Taqqt-i Farhang
[Pizhhishgh], 1372 [1993]).
Trkh-i Vaf [Lithograph ed. Bombay, 1269 (1853); reprint] (Tehran:
Ibn-i Sn, 1338 [1959]).
Yazd, Sharaf al-Dn Al, afar-nma, ed. Muammad Abbs (Tehran: Amr
Kabr, 1336 [195758]).
Zhid, usayn ibn Abdl, Silsilat al-Nasab-i afaviyya, Nasabnma-yi
Pdishhn b Uzmat-i afav (Berlin: Chpkhna-yi rnshahr, 1343 [1924]).
Secondary Literature
Abu-Lughod, Janet L., Before European Hegemony: The World System a.d.
12501350 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989).
Aigle, Denise, Le Frs sous la domination mongole: Politique et fiscalit (XIIIe
XIVe s.), Studia Iranica, Cahier 31 (Paris: Association pour lAvancement des
tudes Iraniennes, 2005).
Mythico-Legendary Figures and History Between East and West, in The
Mongol Empire Between Myth and Realities (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 2342.
Aka, ., Ahar, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London and New
York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983), 1:634.
Album, Stephen, Checklist of Islamic Coins, 2nd edn (Santa Rosa: S. Album,
1998).
Studies in Ilkhanid History and Numismatics I: A Late Ilkhanid Hoard
(743/1342), Iranian Studies 13 (1984): 49116.
Algar, H., Astarbd, Fazlallh, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater
(London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1987), 2:8414.
Allsen, Thomas T., Changing Forms of Legitimation in Mongol Iran, in Gary
Seaman and Daniel Marks (eds), Rulers from the Steppe: State Formation
on the Eurasian Periphery (Los Angeles: Ethnographics Press, University of
Southern California, 1991), 22341.
Culture and Conquest in Mongol Eurasia (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2001).
Guard and Government in the Reign of the Grand Qan Mngke, 125159,
Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 46:2 (1986): 495521.
Mongol Imperialism: The Politics of the Great Qan Mngke in China,
Russia, and the Islamic Lands, 12511259 (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1987).
Notes on Chinese Titles in Mongol Iran, Mongolian Studies 14 (1991):
2739.
Sharing Out the Empire: Apportioning Lands under the Mongols, in
213
The Jalayirids
Anatoly M. Khazanov and Andr Wink (eds), Nomads in the Sedentary World
(Richmond: Curzon, 2001), 17290.
Amitai-Preiss, Reuven, Evidence for the Early Use of the Title lkhn among the
Mongols, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 3:1 (1991): 35361.
New Material from the Mamluk Sources for the Biography of Rashid al-
Din, in Julian Raby and Teresa Fitzherbert (eds), The Court of the Il-khans,
n, Nr Abd al-amd, Al-Irq f al-Ahd al-Jalir: 738814 h/13371411
M: Dirsa f Awihi al-Idriyya wa-al-Iqtidiyya (Baghdad: Dr al-Shun
al-Thaqfiyya al-mma, 1986).
Arioli, Angelo, Su una Fonte di Mustawf Qazvn, in La Bisaccia dello Sheikh:
Omaggio ad Alessandro Bausani, Islamista nel Sessantesimo Compleanno
(Venice: Universit degli Studi di Venezia, 1981), 2941.
Arjomand, Said Amir, The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion,
Political Order, and Societal Change in Shiite Iran from the Beginning to
1890 (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1984).
Atsz, H. Nihal, Hicri 858 Ylna Ait Takvim, Seluklu Arastrmalar Dergisi 4
(1975): 22383.
Aubin, Jean, Aux origins dun movement populaire medieval le cheykhisme du
Bayhaq et du Nichpour, Studia Iranica 5 (1976): 21324.
Un chroniqueur mconnu: abankarai, Studia Iranica 10 (1981): 21324.
mirs Mongols et vizirs Persans dans les remous de lacculturation (Paris:
Association pour lAvancement des tudes Iraniennes, 1995).
LEthnognse de qaraunas, Turcica 1 (1969): 6994.
La fin de ltat Sarbadr du Khorassan, Journal Asiatique (1974): 95118.
zhand, Yaqb, urfiyya dar Trkh (Tehran: Nashr-i Nay, 1369 [1990]).
Babinger, Franz, Die Geschichtesschreiber der Osmanen und ihre Werke
(Leipzig: O. Harrassowitz, 1927).
R, trans. Christine Woodhead, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn
(Leiden: Brill, 1994), 8:594.
Balard, Michel, Les Gnois en Asie centrale et en extrme-orient au XIVe sicle:
un cas exceptionnel?, in conomies et socits au moyen age: mlanges offerts
Eduoard Perroy (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne 5, 1973), 6819.
Bardak, Murat, Maragal Abdlkadir: XV. yy. bestecisi ve mzik nazariyatsnn
hayat hika yesiyle eserleri zerine bir alsma (Istanbul: Pan Yaynclk, 1986).
Bareld, Thomas J., The Perilous Frontier (Cambridge: Blackwell, 1989).
Barthold, V. V., Turkestan Down to the Mongol Invasion, trans. H. A. R. Gibb
(London: Luzac, 1928).
Bashir, Shahzad, Deciphering the Cosmos from Creation to Apocalypse: The
Hurufiyya Movement and Medieval Muslim Esotericism, in Abbas Amanat
and Magnus Bernhardsson (eds), Imagining the End: Visions of Apocalypse
from the Ancient Middle East to Modern America (London: I. B. Tauris, 2002),
16884.
Fazlallah Astarabadi and the Hurufis (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005).
214
Bibliography
Bauer, Thomas, Mamluk Literature as a Means of Communication, in Stephan

Conermann (ed.), Ubi sumus? Quo vademus? Mamluk Studies State of the
Art, (Gttingen: V&R Unipress, Bonn University Press, 2013), 2356.
Mamluk Literature: Misunderstandings and New Approaches, Mamlk
Studies Review 9:2 (2005): 10532.
Bayn, Shrn, Trkh-i l-i Jalyir (Tehran: Intishrt-i Dnishgh-i Tihrn,
1962).
Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, The Jalayirid Connection in Mamluk Metalware,
Muqarnas 26 (2009): 14959.
Bernardini, Michele, Genoa, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater
Bese, Lajos, Some Turkic Personal Names in the Secret History of the Mongols,
Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 32:3 (1978): 35369.
Biran, Michal, Qaidu and the Rise of the Independent Mongol State in Central
Asia (Richmond: Curzon, 1997).
Blair, Sheila, Artists and Patronage in Late Fourteenth-Century Iran in the Light
of Two Catalogues of Islamic Metalwork, Bulletin of the School of Oriental
and African Studies 48:1 (1985): 539.
The Coins of the Later Ilkhanids: A Typological Analysis, Journal of the
Economic and Social History of the Orient 26 (1983): 295317.
Bloom, Jonathan M., Paper: The Transformative Medium in Ilkhanid Art,
in Linda Komaroff (ed.), Beyond the Legacy of Genghis Khan (Leiden and
Boston: Brill, 2006), 289302.
Boyle, J. A., ndj, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1971),
3:1,208.
Iru and Maru in the Secret History of the Mongols, Harvard Journal of
The Journey of Hetum I, King of Little Armenia, to the Court of the Great
Khan Mngke, Central Asiatic Journal 9 (1964): 17589.
Juvayn and Rashd al-Dn as Sources on the History of the Mongols, in
Bernard Lewis and P. M. Holt (eds), Historians of the Middle East (London:
Oxford University Press, 1962), 1337.
Kirakos of Ganjak on the Mongols, Central Asiatic Journal 7 (1962):
199214.
Rashd al-Dn: The First World Historian, Iran 9 (1971): 1926.
Brend, Barbara, Jonayd-e Naqq, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater
Broadbridge, Ann F., Kingship and Ideology in the Islamic and Mongol Worlds
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008).
Brockelmann, Carl, Geschichte der Arabischen Literatur (Leiden: Brill, 1949).
Browne, Edward Granville, A Literary History of Persia, Volume 3: The Tartar
Dominion (12651502) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956).
The Mujmal or Compendium of History and Biography of Fa of
Khwf, Le Muson ser. 3, 1:1 (1915): 4878.
215
The Jalayirids
Buell, Paul D., Early Mongol Expansion in Western Siberia and Turkestan
(12071219): A Reconstruction, Central Asiatic Journal 36 (1992): 132.
Historical Dictionary of the Mongol World Empire (Lanham, MD, and
Oxford: The Scarecrow Press, 2003).
Tribe, Qan, and Ulus in Early Mongol China: Some Prolegomena to Yan
History, PhD dissertation, University of Washington, 1977.
aman, Filiz and Zeren Tannd, Selections from Jalayirid Books in the
Libraries of Istanbul, Muqarnas 28 (2011): 22164.
The Topkap Saray Museum: The Albums and Illustrated Manuscripts, ed.
and trans. J. M. Rogers (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1986).
Cahen, Claude, Contribution lhistoire du Diyr Bakr au quatorzime sicle,
Journal Asiatique 243 (1955): 65100.
Pre-Ottoman Turkey: A General Survey of the Material and Spiritual
Culture and History c. 10711330, trans. J. Jones- Williams (New York:
Taplinger, 1968).
Caiozzo, Anna, Une conception originale des cieux: planets et zodiaque dune
cosmographie jalayride, Annales Islamologiques 37 (2003): 5978.
Canby, Sheila R., Persian Painting (Northampton, MA: Interlink, 1993).
Carboni, Stefano, Synthesis: Continuity and Innovation in Ilkhanid Art, in The
Legacy of Genghis Khan: Courtly Art and Culture in Western Asia, 12561353
(New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2002), 197225.
Two Fragments of a Jalayirid Astrological Treatise in the Keir Collection
and in the Oriental Institute in Sarajevo, Islamic Art 2 (1987): 14986.
Cleaves, Francis Woodman, DARUA and GEREGE, Harvard Journal of
The Mongolian Names and Terms in the History of the Nation of Archers
by Grigor of Akanc, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 12:3/4 (1949):
40043.
Dawson, Christopher (ed.), Mission to Asia (Toronto: Toronto University Press,
1998).
De Rachewiltz, Igor, Hok-lam Chan, Hsiao Chi-ching and Peter W. Geier (eds),
In the Service of the Khan: Eminent Personalities of the Early Mongol-Yan
Period (12001300) (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1993).
DeWeese, Devin, Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde
(University Park: Penn State Press, 1994).
Di Cosmo, Nicola, State Formation and Periodization in Inner Asian History,
Journal of World History 10 (1999): 140.
Doerfer, Gerhard, l Tam, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater
Trkische und Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen (Wiesbaden: Franz
Steiner Verlag, 1963).
Dols, Michael W., The Black Death in the Middle East (Princeton: Princeton
Drfer, Sven (ed.), Die Geschichte der Mongolen des Hethum von Korykos (1307)
216
Bibliography
in der Rckbersetzung durch Jean le Long, Traitiez des estas des conditions
de quatorze royaumes de Asie (1351) (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1998).
Fleischer, Cornell H., Bureaucrat and Intellectual in the Ottoman Empire: The
Historian Mustafa Ali (15411600) (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1986).
Fletcher, Joseph, The Mongols: Ecological and Social Perspectives, Harvard
Journal of Asiatic Studies 46:1 (1986): 1150.
Godard, Y. A., Bassin de cuivre au nom de Shaikh Uwais, Athr- rn: Annales
du service archaeologique de rn 1 (1936): 3713.
Glpnarl, Abdlbki, Hurflik Metinleri Katalou (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu
Basmevi, 1973).
Gray, Basil, A Timurid Copy of a Chinese Buddhist Picture, in Richard
Ettinghausen (ed.), Islamic Art in The Metropolitan Museum of Art (New York:
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1972), 358.
Grousset, Ren, The Empire of the Steppes: A History of Central Asia, trans.
Naomi Walford (New Brunswick, NJ, and London: Rutgers University Press,
1999).
Grube, Ernst J., Persian Painting in the Fourteenth Century: A Research Report
(Naples: Istituto Orientale di Napoli, 1978).
Gruber, Christiane, The Ilkhanid Book of Ascension: A Persian-Sunni Devotional
Tale (London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 2010).
Guo, Li, Mamluk Historiographic Studies: The State of the Art, Mamlk Studies
Review 1 (1997): 1543.
Herrmann, Gottfried, Ein Erla des alyeriden Soln oseyn aus dem Jahr
780/1378, in Erkenntnisse und Meinungen I herausgegeben von Gernot
Wiener (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1973), 13563.
Persische Urkunden der Mongolenzeit (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag,
2004).
Herrmann, Gottfried and Gerhard Doerfer, Ein persisch-mongolischer Erla des
alyeriden ey Oveys, Central Asiatic Journal 19 (1975): 184.
Hodgson, Marshall G. S., The Venture of Islam, Volume 2: The Expansion
of Islam in the Middle Periods (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1974).
nalck, Halil, Autonomous Enclaves in Islamic States: Temlks, Soyurghals,
Yurdlu-Ocals, Mlikne-Muaas and Awqf , in Judith Pfeiffer and
Sholeh A. Quinn (eds), in collaboration with Ernest Tucker, History and
Historiography of Post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East: Studies in
Honor of John E. Woods (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), 11234.
Byazd I, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1960),
1:1,11719.
The Khan and the Tribal Aristocracy: The Crimean Khanate under Sahib
Giray I, Harvard Ukrainian Studies 3/4 (197980): 44566.
The Question of the Closing of the Black Sea under the Ottomans, in
Essays in Ottoman History (Istanbul: Eren, 1998), 41545.
217
The Jalayirids
Jackson, Peter, The Dissolution of the Mongol Empire, Central Asiatic Journal
22 (1978): 186244.
Muaffarids, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1992),
7:8202.
Jackson, Peter and Charles Melville, t al-Dn Moammad, Encyclopaedia
Paul, 2001), 10:5989.
Jagchid, Sechin and Paul Hyer, Mongolias Culture and Society (Boulder:
Westview, 1979).
Jahn, Karl, ao, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1961), 2:14.
Das iranische Papiergeld, Archiv Orientalni 10 (1938): 30840.
Rashd al-Dn as World Historian, in Ydnma-ye Jan Rypka (The Hague
and Paris: Mouton & Co., 1967), 7987.
The Still Missing Works of Rashd al-Dn, Central Asiatic Journal 9
(1964): 11322.
al-Janabi, Tariq Jawad, Studies in Medieval Iraqi Architecture (Baghdad:
Republic of Iraq, Ministry of Culture and Information, 1982).
Katstritsis, Dimitris J., The Sons of Bayezid: Empire Building and Representation
in the Ottoman Civil War of 14021413 (Leiden and Boston: Brill,
2007).
Kempiners, Jr, Russell G., Vafs Tajziyat al-Amr wa Tazjiyat al-Ar as a
Source for the History of the Chaghadayid Khanate, Journal of Asian History
22 (1988): 16087.
Khazanov, Anatoly M., Nomads and the Outside World (Madison: University of
Wisconsin Press, 1994).
Khoury, Philip S. and Joseph Kostiner, Introduction: Tribes and the Complexities
of State Formation in the Middle East, in Philip S. Khoury and Joseph Kostiner
(eds), Tribes and State Formation in the Middle East (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1990), 122.
Klimburg-Salter, Deborah E., A Su Theme in Persian Painting: The Diwan of
Sultan Ahmad Galair in the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., Kunst
des Orients 11 (197677): 4384.
Kolbas, Judith, The Mongols in Iran: Chingiz Khan to Uljaytu 12201309
(London and New York: Routledge, 2006).
Komaroff, Linda, The Golden Disk of Heaven: Metalwork of Timurid Iran (Costa
Mesa and New York: Mazda, 1992).
Kprl, Mehmed Fuad, Islam in Anatolia after the Turkish Invasion
(Prolegomena), ed. and trans. Gary Leiser (Salt Lake City: University of Utah
Press, 1993).
Krader, Lawrence, The Origin of the State among the Nomads of Asia, in
Pastoral Production and Society: Proceedings of the International Meeting
on Nomadic Pastoralism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979),
22134.
Peoples of Central Asia (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1963).
218
Bibliography
Kwanten, Luc, Imperial Nomads: A History of Central Asia, 5001500

(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979).
Lambton, A. K. S., Early Timurid Theories of State: Abr and Nim
al-Dn m, Bulletin dtudes Orientales 30 (1978): 19.
Ledyard, Gari, The Mongol Campaigns in Korea and the Dating of the Secret
History of the Mongols, Central Asiatic Journal 9 (1964): 122.
Lentz, Thomas W. and Glenn D. Lowry, Timur and the Princely Vision: Persian
Art and Culture in the Fifteenth Century (Los Angeles and Washington, DC:
Los Angeles County Museum of Art, Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian
Institution and Smithsonian Institution Press, 1989).
Levy, Reuben, The Letters of Rashd al-Dn Fal Allh, Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society (1946): 748.
Lindner, Rudi Paul, How Mongol Were the Early Ottomans?, in Reuven
Amitai-Preiss and David O. Morgan (eds), The Mongol Empire and its Legacy
(Leiden: Brill, 1999), 2829.
What Was a Nomadic Tribe?, Comparative Studies in Society and History
24:4 (October 1982): 689711.
Little, Donald P., Historiography of the Ayybid and Mamlk Epochs, in Carl
F. Petry (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, Volume I: Islamic Egypt,
6401517 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 41244.
McChesney, R. D., A Note on the Life and Works of Ibn Arabshh, in Judith
Pfeiffer and Sholeh A. Quinn (eds), in collaboration with Ernest Tucker,
History and Historiography of Post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East:
Studies in Honor of John E. Woods (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), 20549.
Manz, Beatrice Forbes, The Clans of the Crimean Khanate, 14661532,
Harvard Ukrainian Studies 2 (1978): 282309.
Mongol History Rewritten and Relived, Revue des Mondes Musulmans et
de la Mditerrane, Srie Histoire 8990 (2000): 12949.
The Rise and Rule of Tamerlane (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1989).
The Ulus Chaghatay Before and After Temrs Rise to Power: The
Transformation from Tribal Confederation to Army of Conquest, Central
Asiatic Journal 27 (1983): 79100.
Markov, G. E., Problems of Social Change among the Asiatic Nomads, in
Wolfgang Weissleder (ed.), The Nomadic Alternative: Modes and Models of
Interaction in the African-Asian Deserts and Steppes (The Hague: Mouton,
1978), 30511.
Mashkr, Muammad Javd, Trkh-i Tabrz t Pyn-i Qarn-i Nuhum-i Hijr
(Tehran: Anjuman-i sr-i Mill, 1352 [1973]).
May, Timothy, The Mongol Art of War: Chinggis Khan and the Mongol Military
System (Yardley: Westholme, 2007).
Melville, Charles, Ab Sad and the Revolt of the Amirs in 1319, in Denise
Aigle (ed.), LIran face la domination mongole (Tehran: Institut Franais de
Recherche en Iran, 1997), 89120.
219
The Jalayirids
Deld Ktn, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London and

New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1996), 7:255.
The Early Persian Historiography of Anatolia, in Judith Pfeiffer
and Sholeh A. Quinn (eds), in collaboration with Ernest Tucker, History
andHistoriography of Post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East: Studies
in Honor of John E. Woods (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), 13566.
The Fall of Amir Chupan and the Decline of the Ilkhanate, 13271337:
A Decade of Discord in Iran (Bloomington: Indiana University, Research
Institute for Inner Asian Studies, 1999).
amd Allh Mustawfs afarnmah and the Historiography of the Late
Ilkhanid Period, in Kambiz Eslami (ed.), Iran and Iranian Studies: Essays in
Honor of Iraj Afshar (Princeton: Zagros, 1998), 112.
The lkhn ljeits Conquest of Gln (1307): Rumour and Reality, in
Reuven Amitai-Preiss and David O. Morgan (eds), The Mongol Empire and its
Legacy (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 73125.
Pdishh-i Islm: The Conversion of Sultan Mamd Ghzn Khn,
Pembroke Papers 1 (1990): 15977.
Wolf or Shepherd? Amir Chupans Attitude to Government, in Julian
Raby and Teresa Fitzherbert (eds), The Court of the Ilkhans, 12901340
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 7993.
Minorsky, Vladimir, Thomas of Metsop on the Timurid-Turkman Wars, in The
Turks, Iran and the Caucasus in the Middle Ages (London: Variorum Reprints,
1978), XI, 126.
Morton, A. H., The Letters of Rashd al-Dn: lkhnid Fact or Timurid Fiction,
in Reuven Amitai-Preiss and David O. Morgan (eds), The Mongol Empire and
its Legacy (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 15599.
al-Naqshband, Nir, al-Madrasa al-Mirjniyya, Sumer 2 (1946): 3354.
Nicol, Norman D., Raafat el-Nabarawy and Jere L. Bacharach, Catalog of the
Islamic Coins, Glass Weights, Dies and Medals in the Egyptian National
Library, Cairo (Malibu, CA: Undena, 1982).
Ohta, Alison, Filigree Bindings of the Mamluk Period, Muqarnas 21 (2004):
26776.
Okada, Hidehiro, The Secret History of the Mongols, a Pseudo-Historical Novel,
Journal of Asian and African Studies [Tokyo] 5 (1972): 618.
OKane, Bernard, Early Persian Painting: Kalila and Dimna Manuscripts of the
Late Fourteenth Century (London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 2003).
Siyah Qalam: The Jalayirid Connections, Oriental Art 49:2 (2003): 218.
Peacock, A. C. S., The Saljq Campaign against the Crimea and the Expansionist
Policy of the Early Reign of Al al-Dn Kayqubd, Journal of the Royal
Asiatic Society 16:2 (2006): 13349.
Petech, Luciano, Les Marchands Italiens dans lEmpire Mongol, Journal
Asiatique 250 (1962): 54974.
Petrushevsky, I. P., The Socio-Economic Condition of Iran under the Ilkhans,
in J. A. Boyle (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 5: The
220
Bibliography
Saljuq and Mongol Periods (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968),

483537.
Pfeiffer, Judith, Conversion Versions: Sultan ljeyts Conversion to Shiism
(709/ 1309) in Muslim Narrative Sources, Mongolian Studies 22 (1999):
3567.
Reflections on a Double Rapprochement: Conversion to Islam among the
Mongol Elite during the Early Ilkhanate, in Linda Komaroff (ed.), Beyond the
Legacy of Genghis Khan (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 36989.
Poppe, Nicholas, On Some Proper Names in the Secret History, in G. Dcsy
(ed.), Eurasia Nostratica: Festschrift fr Karl Heinrich Menges, Band III
(Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1977), 1617.
Rabino, H. L., Coins of the Jalir, ara oynl, Mushasha, and A oynl
Dynasties, Numismatic Chronicle 6:10 (1950): 94139.
Ratchnevsky, Paul, Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy, ed. and trans. Thomas
Nivison Haining (Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1991).
Riasanovsky, Valentin A., Fundamental Principles of Mongol Law (Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1965).
Richard, Jean, Buscarello de Ghizolfi, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
Yarshater (London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1990), 4:569.
Riwn, Yumn, Al-Dawla al-Jaliriyya: wa-Ahamm Mahir al-ara f
al-Irq wa-Adhirbayjn khilla al-Qarnayn al-Thmin wa-al-Tsi bada al-
Hijra (Cairo: Mabi al-Ahrm, 1993).
Roemer, H. R., The Jalayirids, Muzaffarids and Sarbadrs, in Peter Jackson
and Laurence Lockhart (eds), The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume 6: The
Timurid and Safavid Periods (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986),
141.
Roxburgh, David J., Persian Drawing, ca. 14001450: Materials and Creative
Procedures, Muqarnas 19 (2002): 4477.
Rypka, Jan, History of Iranian Literature (Dordrecht: D. Reidl, 1968).
Sanjian, Avedis K. (ed. and trans.), Colophons of Armenian Manuscripts,
13011480: A Source for Middle Eastern History (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Schamilolu, Uli, Tribal Politics and Social Organization in the Golden Horde,
PhD dissertation, Columbia University, 1986.
Schroeder, Eric, Ahmed Musa and Shams al-Dn: A Review of Fourteenth
Century Painting, Ars Islamica 6:2 (1939): 11342.
Seif, Theodor, Der Abschnitt ber die Osmanen in krllhs persischer
Universalgeschichte, Mitteilungen zur Osmanischen Geschichte 2 (192325):
63128.
Shastina, N. P., Mongol and Turkic Ethnonyms in the Secret History of the
Mongols, in Louis Ligeti (ed.), Researches in Altaic Languages (Budapest:
Akadmia Kiad, 1975), 23144.
Smith, Jr, John Masson, Al b. Oways, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
221
The Jalayirids
Djalayir, Djalayirid, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill,

1962), 2:4012.
The History of the Sarbadr Dynasty, 13361381 a.d. and its Sources (The
Hague: Mouton, 1970).
Sneath, David, The Headless State: Aristocratic Orders, Kinship Society and
Misrepresentations of Nomadic Inner Asia (New York: Columbia University
Press, 2007).
Soucek, Priscilla P., Abd-al-ayy, Kvj, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
Amad Ms, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London and
Art in Iran: vii. Islamic, Pre-Safavid, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan
Eskandar b. Omar ayx b. Timur: A Biography, Oriente Moderno 15:2
(1996): 7387.
Soudavar, Abolala, In Defense of Rad-od-dn and his Letters, Studia Iranica
32 (2003): 77120.
Spuler, Bertold, Die Mongolen in Iran: Politik, Verwaltung, und Kultur der
Ilchanzeit, 12201350 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1955).
Storey, Charles Ambrose, Persian Literature: A Bio-Bibliographical Survey
(London: Luzac & Co., 1927).
Strika, Vincenzo and Jbir Khall, The Islamic Architecture of Baghdad: The
Results of a Joint Italian-Iraqi Survey (Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale,
1987).
Smer, Faruk, Kara Koyunlular (Baslangtan Cihan-Saha kadar), I. Cilt
(Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1962).
Tannd, Zeren, Additions to Illustrated Manuscripts in Ottoman Workshops,
Muqarnas 17 (2000): 14761.
Tapper, Richard, Anthropologists, Historians, and Tribespeople on Tribe and
State Formation in the Midde East, in Philip S. Khoury and Joseph Kostiner
(eds), Tribes and State Formation in the Middle East (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1990), 4873.
Thackston, Wheeler M., Album Prefaces and Other Documents on the History of
Calligraphers and Painters (Leiden: Brill, 2001).
A Century of Princes: Sources on Timurid History and Art (Cambridge,
MA: The Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, 1989).
Titley, Norah M., A 14th-Century Nim Manuscript in Tehran, Kunst des
Orients 8 (1972): 1205.
Togan, senbike, Flexibility and Limitation in Steppe Formations (Leiden: Brill,
1998).
Togan, Zeki Velidi, The Composition of the History of the Mongols by Rashd
al-Dn, Central Asiatic Journal 8 (1963): 6072.
References to Economic and Cultural Life in Anatolia in the Letters of
Rashd al-Dn, trans. Gary Leiser, in Judith Pfeiffer and Sholeh A. Quinn
222
Bibliography
(eds), in collaboration with Ernest Tucker, History and Historiography of Post-

Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East: Studies in Honor of John E. Woods
(Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), 84111.
Turan, Osman, stanbulun Fethinden nce Yazlms Tarih Takvimler (Ankara:
Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1954).
urr, Shabn Rab, Al-Dawla al-Jaliriyya (Cairo: Dr al-Hidya, 1987).
rekli, Muzaffer, Celyirliler, Trkiye Diyanet Vakf slm Ansiklopedisi
(Istanbul: Trkiye Diyanet Vakf Vakf Yaynlar sletmesi, 1993), 7:2645.
Uzunarsl, smail Hakk, Anadolu Beylikleri ve Akkoyunlu, Karakoyunlu
Devletleri (Ankara: Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1988).
Vsry, Istvn, The Origin of the Institution of Basqaqs, Acta Orientalia
Academiae Scientiarum Hung. Tomus 32:2 (1978): 2016.
Vladimirtsov, B. I., The Life of Chingis-Khan, trans. Prince D. S. Mirsky (London:
George Routledge and Sons, 1930).
Werner, Christoph, Daniel Zakrzewski and Hans- Thomas Tillschneider, Die
Kuu-Stiftungen in Tabrz: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der elyiriden
(Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2013).
Wittek, Paul, Nide, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edn (Leiden: Brill, 1993),
8:1516.
Woods, John E., The Aqquyunlu: Clan, Confederation, Empire (Salt Lake City:
University of Utah Press, 1999).
Ebn Arabh, Encyclopaedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London and
The Rise of Timurid Historiography, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 46:2
(1987): 81108.
Ynan, Mkrimin Halil, Celyir, slam Ansiklopedisi (Istanbul: Mill Eitim
Basmevi, 1945), 3:645.
Ycel, Yasar, Anadolu Beylikleri hakknda Arastrmalar: Eretna Devleti, Kad
Burhaneddin Ahmed ve Devleti, Mutahharten ve Erzincan Emirlii, II (Ankara:
Trk Tarih Kurumu Basmevi, 1989).
223
Index
Ab Bakr b. Mrnshh (Timurid), 158, 166, 6970, 7681, 83, 869, 94, 102, 111, 113,
1712 132, 1556, 158, 164, 166, 169, 196, 198
Abaqa Khan, 38, 41, 49, 501, 54, 57, 64, 74, Ankara (battle), 166
102, 104, 208 Anshirvn Khan, 92, 102, 122n
Abbs q, 151 q Bq Jalayir, 6, 17, 51, 53, 558, 62n, 656
Abbasid, 38, 489, 64, 80, 1356, 138 q Khvja (battle), 51, 56
Abd al-ayy see Khwja Abd al-ayy qquynl, 81, 174
(painter) Arab Iraq, 2, 8, 63, 778, 80, 83, 878, 904,
Ab Sad Bahdur Khan, 1, 2, 78, 10, 12, 102, 10911, 113, 139, 143, 153, 1589,
1416, 57, 6770, 746, 78, 801, 83, 86, 162, 165, 1679, 171, 173, 175, 196
91, 93, 104, 107, 113, 115, 119, 1303, Ardabil, 15, 16, 66, 103, 139, 151, 176n, 177n,
137, 1402, 162, 187, 1967 194
Ab Sad b. Muammad, 10 Arghun Khan, 7, 38, 503, 557, 59n, 60n, 66,
Abghn, 42 68, 79, 102, 130, 208
dil q see Amr dil q Arghniyya, 79
gh Frz, 166 Arigh Bke, 37, 42, 75
Aghachk, 157 Arp Khan, 758, 82, 85, 87, 94n, 95n
Amad Ms (painter), 1878 Arran, 35, 667, 72n, 79, 87, 151
Amad Tegder Khan, 38, 503, 557, 101, Arq, 512
130, 140 al-Ashraf Shabn (Mamluk sultan), 109
Ahr, Ab Bakr al-Qub, 8, 16, 67, 90, 1037, Assassins see Nizr Ismls
1303 atabeg, 41, 124n
Akh Jq, 1046, 108, 116 yna Beg, 567
Akrunj, 77, 85 Azarbayjan, 23, 89, 11, 1416, 35, 39, 48, 51,
Al al-Dawla b. Suln Amad Jalayir, 160, 53, 57, 66, 745, 7981, 83, 8594, 1018,
173, 175 11016, 118, 121, 129, 132, 137, 1413,
ldgh, 83, 85 147, 1514, 1579, 16874, 1967
Aleppo, 1314, 89, 160, 164, 167 Azhdar, Khwja Nr al-Dn, 8, 1313
Al Pdshh, 768, 814, 88, 111, 137, 196
Al Pltan, 106, 108 Baghdad, 3, 1011, 13, 16, 1820, 39, 489,
Al Shh, Khwja Tj al-Dn, 67 523, 56, 70, 72n, 768, 8094, 95n,
altan urugh, 36, 37, 77 10513, 117, 121, 122n, 124n, 125n, 126n,
Amr dil q, 113, 115, 14757, 159 1337, 1401, 14751, 15360, 16370,
Amr Chpn, 7, 57, 6670, 75, 789, 867, 1725, 177n, 178n, 179n, 180n, 181n,
912, 94, 103, 1056, 120, 140, 196 183n, 1857, 1904, 1967, 198n, 199n,
Amr usayn Grgn, 4, 6, 17, 65, 66, 67, 71n, 200n
72n, 94, 140, 196 Baghdd Khtn, 67, 6970, 80, 83
Amr Muammad Pltan, 108 Bah al-Dn Jlh, 174
Amr Qsim, 118 Bahrm Mrz, 187
Amr Val, 10, 11315, 118, 149, 151, 175n, Bala, 40
176n Blt, 567
Amr Zhid, 118, 126n Barq Khan, 42, 50
amr-i uls, 824, 86, 94 Bard, Q Muy al-Dn, 103
Anatolia, 57, 9, 1112, 17, 50, 537, 63, 67, Barhashn b. j aghy, 89
224
Index
Barqq (Mamluk sultan), 15964, 1678, 183n, Euphrates, 1, 3, 7, 35, 389, 48, 53, 90, 164,
197 167, 171, 1945
Batu Khan, 37
Byazd b. Shaykh Uvays Jalayir, 148, 1534 Faraj, al-Nir (Mamluk sultan), 164, 1678
Baybars (Mamluk sultan), 6, 54, 61n Faraj Jalayir, 165
Baydu Khan, 38, 557, 61n, 62n, 65, 76, 95n Fars, 8, 73n, 103, 116, 143n, 169, 176n, 187
Byezd I (Ottoman sultan), 1112, 1516, 159, Fazl Allh Astarbd, 116, 117, 139
165, 182n, 197
Byezd II (Ottoman sultan), 1112 Genoa, 11820, 127n
Byj Noyan, 53 Geykhatu Khan, 38, 52, 557, 65, 71n, 88
Bayrm Beg, 112, 118, 125n Ghazan Khan, 5, 78, 38, 52, 558, 62n, 636,
Bayrm Khwja, 11012, 114, 148, 1545, 178n 71n, 74, 7881, 99n, 104, 1312, 134, 137,
Bysunqur Mrz, 10 142, 143n, 174, 1957
Bird Beg Khan, 104 Ghzniyya, 79, 81
Bird Khwja, 111 Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad Alshh, 87
Bism Jgr, 175 Ghiyth al-Dn Muammad Rashd, 8, 14, 72n,
btikch, 54 747, 80, 94n, 95n, 97n, 131, 137, 143n
Brte, 36 Golden Horde, 22n, 49, 64, 85, 103, 139
Bq Jalayir, 503, 557, 60n, 634 Great Mongol Shh-nma, 185
Burhn al-Dn, Q, 11, 13, 151, 179n, 181n grgn (gregen), 63, 667, 71n, 105, 196
Bursa, 120, 164, 166 Gyk Qan, 37, 42, 99n
Caffa, 119 fi Shrz, 1, 15, 19

Cairo, 13, 53, 68, 923, 1614, 1678, 170, fi Abr, 6, 910, 16, 23n, 745, 77, 823,
183n, 194 86, 90, 96n, 101, 10710, 11214, 14950,
Chaghatay Khan, 378, 42, 47n, 156 157
Chaghatayids, 3, 37, 413, 4950, 67, 107, 139, j Khtn, 73n, 75, 95n
1567, 168 j Mm Khtn, 119
chao, 55 j aghy, 78, 8991, 96n
China, 23, 356, 3840, 423, 45n, 52, 67, Hama, 12, 165
119, 139, 156 Harqay, 40
Chinggis Qan, 35, 10, 29, 3243, 45n, 51, 64, hazra, 402
76, 82, 845, 113, 121, 1334, 142, 156, Herat, 910, 20, 68, 81, 171
158, 162, 195 Hilla, 99n, 1667
chngsng, 42, 52, 60n Hindqr Noyan, 42
Chubanids, 1214, 18, 23n, 55, 61n, 6770, 80, ukumdr Al Beg, 11
8593, 99n, 1012, 1048, 114, 11619, Hleg Khan, 47, 1718, 379, 43, 4851, 53,
122n, 127n, 129, 140, 143n, 153, 193, 55, 58n, 65, 7475, 79, 82, 84, 88, 93, 99n,
196 1023, 105, 108, 110, 133, 1578, 195, 197
Clavijo, Ruy Gonzalez de, 16, 81, 11920 Hlegids, 48, 50, 63, 65, 768, 923, 140, 197
urfiyya, 117, 126n, 139
Damascus, 13, 58n, 68, 126n, 1634, 1679, Hshang (Shrvnshh), 112, 125n
173, 182n, 183n
Dnishmand, 41 Ibn Arabshh, 13, 159
Davt, Muammad, 151 Ibn Baa, 16, 72n, 79, 81
Dilshd Khtn, 15, 19, 757, 83, 923, 101, Ibrhm al-Darband (Shrvnshh), 174
105, 130, 13941, 146n Ibrhm Shh, 8991
Dimashq Khwja, 679, 72n, 75, 80, 92, 1012, Ikeres, 32
105, 140, 208 lchdy, 412
Dimashqiyya, 80, 175 lg Noyan, 2, 17, 4851, 548, 60n, 63, 65,
Diyarbakr, 2, 17, 49, 53, 74, 76, 78, 8893, 95n, 1956
102, 10911, 11314, 143, 158, 171, 173 Ilgayids, 7, 48, 53, 56, 63, 65, 678, 94, 1956
Da Khan, 42 lg, 41, 42
Dst Muammad, 187, 193 nq, 501
nl By b. Qajms, 168, 183n
Eretna, 11, 78 nch, 49, 52, 54
Erzincan, 54, 164, 171, 174, 181n Injuids, 73n, 75, 79, 103
Erzurum, 54, 56, 155 Iqbl, 57
225
The Jalayirids
san Qutlugh, 85, 98n Masd Beg, 49

Ishk Tughl, 56 Mazandaran, 910, 113, 115, 118
Iskandar Suln Mrz, 19, 174, 191, 193 Mehmed II (Ottoman sultan), 11
Merkit, 30, 34
Jahn Tmr Khan, 88, 91 Mingsr Noyan, 42, 47n
Jahnshh Qarquynl, 81 Mirjn see Khwja Mirjn
Jahnshh (Timurid amir), 166 Mirjniyya madrasa, 133, 135, 136, 193
Jakam, 168 Misfir radj, 151, 152, 177n
Jalayirid style of painting, 19, 186 Mngke Qaan, 5, 379, 412, 48, 50, 99n
Jaml j b. Tj al-Dn Al Shrvn, 77 Morosini, Marco, 119
Jngq Krgn, 42 Mosul, 78, 89, 93, 111, 154, 163, 171
Jn Beg Khan, 1034, 106, 116, 122n Mubriz al-Dn Muammad (Muzaffarid), 103,
Jochi Khan, 37 106, 11516
Jochids, 37, 39, 49, 66, 1034, 1067, 112, 116, Mughan, 35, 79, 98n, 151
11920, 139, 160 Muammad Khan, 8, 837, 98n
Julbn Qarsaqal, 160 Muammad Sulnshh, 157
Mun al-Dn Sulaymn (parvna), 54, 61n
Karbala, 139, 140, 160 Mngka Noyan, 42
Karts, 18, 68, 81 Muql, 40
Ks (Shrvnshh), 104, 108, 11112, 114, Muz, 111, 154
118 Ms Khan, 768, 82, 85, 878, 95n, 98n
Kayseri, 11, 54 Muaf b. Byezd, 166
Kemah fortress, 70 Mustaim bi-llh (caliph), 49
Kereyit, 324, 40 Muahhartan, 11, 164, 174, 181n
keshig, 334, 66 Muzaffarids, 1, 89, 18, 20n, 79, 103, 1067,
Khall Suln, 174 11516, 141, 14950, 1523, 155, 160,
Khizr Shh, 107 176n, 186, 196
Khurasan, 3, 6, 9, 11, 21n, 35, 42, 48, 501,
556, 76, 801, 858, 91, 98n, 99n, 107, Nakhjivan, 106, 143n, 155
113, 115, 169 Nakhjivn, Muammad b. Hindshh, 1416,
Khvj Kirmn, 15, 18, 28n 131, 1336, 143n
Khwja Abd al-ayy (painter), 187, 191, al-Nir asan (Mamluk sultan), 923
1934 al-Nir Muammad (Mamluk sultan), 12, 78,
Khwja Byazd Dmghn, 117 86, 8991, 162
Khwja Mirjn, 10812, 114, 116, 118, 124n, Nav, Al Shr, 10
126n, 134, 153, 193 Nayman, 324, 40, 58n
Khwarazm, 35, 40, 106, 126n, 160 Nim, 19, 200n
Khwrazmshh, 35, 40, 162 Nizr Ismls (Assassins), 48
Kirman, 8, 40, 79, 116 nker, 334, 645, 152, 166, 167
Kuhrgy, 55 noyan, 33
Kujuj, Khwja Shaykh, 150 Nuayr (l Fl), 160, 161
Kujuj shaykhs, 150
Knjak Khtn, 101 Oghul Ghaymish, 42, 47n, 99n
gdey Qaan, 45, 22n, 35, 37, 413, 99n
mahd, 69, 89, 117 ljetey Sultan (Khatun), 6, 658, 70, 94, 102,
Mamd b. Walad b. Shaykh Al Jalayir, 175 130, 134, 196, 208
Mamd Shh, Sharaf al-Dn (Injuid), 73n, 75, ljeyt Khan, 56, 52, 54, 668, 72n, 75, 78,
95n 85, 87, 99n, 134, 137, 196, 208
Mamd Suln, 166 Onon river, 17
al-Mlik al-li (Artuqid), 901, 103, 121n Otchigin (tikn), 85
Malik Ashraf, 69, 87, 913, 1027, 11819, Oxus, 3, 7, 389, 42, 48, 54, 95n, 107, 159,
121n, 122n, 123n, 127n, 129 195, 197
Malik Tmr, 42 Oyrat, 2, 42, 63, 74, 768, 81, 839, 934, 96n,
Mamluks, 67, 1213, 24n, 49, 534, 66, 689, 108, 11011, 123n, 137, 147, 149, 158,
78, 86, 8993, 98n, 105, 1089, 120, 147, 167, 171, 1956
15964, 1679, 180n, 194, 197
Mangqut, 32 pdishh, 52, 82, 87, 104, 136
Margh, Abd al-Qdir, 136, 178n pdishh-i islm, 58, 71n, 132, 134
226
Index
Pdishh Luqmn, 11415 Seche Domoq, 40

parvna see Mun al-Dn Sulaymn Shh Mamd b. Mubriz al-Dn, 116, 126n
Persian Iraq, 8, 79, 89, 102, 106, 114, 116, 136, Shh Manr, 160
143n, 160 Shh Muammad b. Qar Ysuf, 1745
Pr Al Bdk, 1536 Shh Shuj, 116, 141, 14950, 152, 155, 176n
Pr Budq, 170, 1723, 175 Shh-nma, 6, 22n, 92, 131, 1401, 1857,
Pr Suln, 77 189
plague, 923, 117, 127n Shhrukh, 910, 174, 194
Pld Chngsng, 66, 71n Shams al-Dn (painter), 187, 191, 193
Sharaf al-Dn Masd b. Khar, 54, 61n
Qadan, 41 Shaykh Al b. Al Qshch, 85
Qdgch Khtn, 42 Shaykh Al b. Shaykh Uvays Jalayir, 148,
Qar Bq, 49 1536, 169, 175, 178n
Qar asan, 167 Shaykh Al, Q, 116, 124n, 126n
Qar Jur, 869 Shaykh al-Mamd, 167, 169
Qar Muammad Qarquynl, 11, 1556 Shaykh asan Chbn, 83, 8691, 98n, 99n,
Qar Usmn, 174 119
Qar Ysuf Qarquynl, 14, 1478, 156, 159, Shaykh asan Jalayir, 4, 8, 10, 1219, 22n, 63,
16375, 181n, 182n, 183n, 184n, 1978 6770, 73n, 74, 768, 8094, 97n, 98n,
Qaraqorum, 38, 48, 133 99n, 100n, 101, 108, 110, 114, 116, 118,
Qarquynl, 3, 11, 14, 19, 81, 11011, 113, 121, 12930, 132, 134, 137, 13941, 145n,
1478, 1546, 159, 164, 167, 16975, 191, 153, 171, 187, 193, 196, 199n
1978 Shaykh Svah, 161
Qaydu, 41 Shaykh Uvays Jalayir, 24, 8, 1315, 1819, 67,
Qipchaqs, 42 74, 801, 84, 924, 1012, 10521, 122n,
Qipchaq (father of yna Beg), 56 123n, 124n, 125n, 126n, 12942, 143n,
Qipchaq steppe, 103, 112, 156, 160 145n, 14754, 159, 162, 173, 175, 177n,
Qiyat, 34 178n, 187, 1934, 1967, 200n, 208
Qongqirat, 32, 34 Shktr Noyan, 501, 556, 59n, 71n
qorchi, 33 Shrmun, 42
Qubilay Qan, 379, 42, 52, 55, 60n, 99n Shrvn (amir), 164, 180n
Qnqrty, 51 Sivas, 11, 13, 151, 164, 179n, 181n, 182n
quriltay, 37, 40, 51, 82, 87, 155, 178n siyah-qalam (qalamsiyh), 19, 191, 199n
Qshq Noyan, 42, 47n Sorqaqtani Beki, 378, 42, 99n
Qutlughshh, 66, 78 Sulaymn Khan, 88, 91, 143n
Qt, 54 Sulaymn Shh Khzin, 109, 124n
Sulaymish, 57, 62n
Rab-i Rashd, 77, 80, 198n Sulduz, 30, 34, 545, 57, 678, 86, 91, 102,
Rayy, 11415, 1489, 151, 175n, 176n 140, 1956
Rukn al-Dn Shaykh Rashd, 87 Suln Amad Jalayir, 34, 1016, 1920, 108,
1478, 1507, 15975, 177n, 178n, 179n,
Sad al-Dawla (vizier), 55 180n, 181n, 182n, 183n, 184n, 187, 1901,
adr al-Dn Ardabl (afav), 103, 126n, 139, 193, 1978, 199n, 200n
151, 176n, 177n Suln Dilshd, 164
adr al-Dn Zanjn, 52, 55 Suln usayn Byqar, 20, 171
afaviyya, 16, 103, 139, 151, 177n Suln usayn Jalayir, 4, 116, 11920, 124n,
ib-qirn, 129, 136, 171, 178n 126n, 141, 14855, 162, 175, 176n, 177n,
Saljqs, 6, 53, 54, 57, 61n, 79, 146n 178n
Salmn Svaj, 15, 1819, 121n, 125n, Suln Mamd Khan, 158
13642 Suln hir, 13, 1667, 169, 173
Samghar, 55 Sulnbakht, 104, 106
Samarqand, 13, 1578, 160, 173, 191, 1934 Sultaniyya, 16, 54, 60n, 79, 85, 879, 93, 106,
Saray, 1034, 106, 119 110, 114, 11920, 14750, 152, 154, 173,
Sarbadrs, 1, 81, 97n, 114 176n, 197
S Beg, 72n, 75, 85, 878, 99n Sty Akhtj, 78, 89
Svaj, Sad al-Dn, 5, 137 Sutayids, 1213, 8990, 93
Svaj, Salmn see Salmn Svaj suyrghl, 149, 152, 155, 174, 176n
Schiltberger, Johannes, 16, 81, 120, 165 Suyurghatmish, 67
227
The Jalayirids
Tabriz, 23, 16, 1920, 39, 52, 547, 66, 74, Tnd Khtn (Suln), 1623, 175
7781, 83, 8791, 934, 1037, 10910, Tuqtmsh Khan, 160
11220, 121n, 122n, 124n, 126n, 127n, Tq (gh), 546
129, 133, 1412, 143n, 14757, 159, 165, Trsun Khtn, 101, 140
170, 1725, 176n, 177n, 183n, 1859, 191,
1934, 1967, 198n, 199n, 200n Ughan, 40
aghchr, 557 guly Qrch, 50, 56
aghy Tmr Khan, 18, 81, 85, 879, 98n, 99n, Ugulayids, 53, 56
11315 Ujan, 118, 127n, 149, 155
Tahmsp (Safavid shah), 187 uls, 4, 3643, 45n, 489, 55, 70, 79, 824, 86,
tamghch, 501 99n, 1038, 120, 125n, 139, 1578, 185,
Tana, 119 1957
araqy, 38, 55 Ulus Chaghatay, 139, 154, 156
Tatar, 40 Umar b. Mrnshh, 158, 171
Tyj, 56 rght Jalayir, 54, 56
Temjin see Chinggis Qan Uvays (rebel in Baghdad), 173
Tmr, 1, 3, 811, 1317, 19, 22n, 81, 101, Uyghur, 31, 59n, 77, 132, 143n, 144n
1078, 113, 115, 142, 1478, 152, 154,
15669, 1713, 180n, 181n, 182n, 191, Vaf Qutlugh, 156
193, 1978 Vajh al-Dn Isml b. Shams al-Dn, 153,
Tmr Tsh b. Amr Chpn, 7, 689, 869, 91, 177n, 178n
98n, 99n, 1056 Venice, 11820
Timurids, 1, 3, 6, 911, 1314, 1820, 1012,
1078, 11213, 117, 120, 123n, 136, 147, Xiongnu, 31, 345
152, 15660, 1623, 165, 16772, 180n,
181n, 1857, 191, 1934, 197 yrghch, 42, 46n
Tolui Khan, 36, 37, 42, 75, 76, 82, 99n yrlgh, 52, 103
Toluids, 379, 413, 195 Yashbak al-Shabn, 168
Tregene, 37, 99n Yazd, 8, 79, 103, 116
Trabzond, 120 Ysr Noyan, 42
Transoxiana, 3, 9, 11, 356, 38, 40, 45n Yan dynasty, 3, 37, 64, 67, 72n
Tdn Sulduz, 54, 55, 61n
ugh Khtn, 68 al-hir Barqq see Barqq (Mamluk sultan)
ughn, 53, 556, 60n, 61n Zakary, Khwja Shams al-Dn, 83, 97n, 134,
tmen (tmn), 40, 778, 95n 153
228

The Jalayirids (Edinburgh2016)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Jalayirids (Edinburgh2016)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Jalayirids (Edinburgh2016)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE

The Monograph Board

DYNASTIC STATE FORMATION IN THE MONGOL MIDDLE EAST

Patrick Wing, 2016

Edinburgh University Press Ltd

Typeset in 11/13 JaghbUni Regular by

ISBN 978 1 4744 0225 5 (hardback)

The right of Patrick Wing to be identified as author of this

1 Introduction and Sources for the History of the Jalayirids 1

Maps and Genealogical Chart 202

Map 1 Jalayirid dynasty 202

Genealogy of the Jalayirid dynasty 208

It is a pleasure to acknowledge the many colleagues, friends and family

I owe a great deal of thanks to Edinburgh University Press, in particular

Ahr/TSU Ab Bakr al-Qub al-Ahr, Tarkh-i

Kaml jj-i Sayyid Javd (Tehran: Vizrat-i

Thackston (Cambridge, MA: Department of

afad/Ayn Khall ibn Aybak al-afad, Ayn al-Ar wa-

Introduction and Sources for

In his chapter The Jalayirids, Muzaffarids and Sarbadrs in volume six

particular historical circumstances of the role played by their ancestors in

Sources and Secondary Literature for the Jalayirids

and its capital territory in Azarbayjan. These works fall chronologically

in 823/1420 as an addition to a redaction of amd Allh Mustawf

of Amr Val, the independent governor of Mazandaran, and rival of the

Although most of the historical writing in Persian was composed for

format indicative of oral origins, provides a narrative different from

(progeny of Mamluk amirs), and served in the chanceries of Damascus,

Having introduced the relevant narrative historical sources in Persian,

but completed it after Shaykh Uvayss conquest of Azarbayjan in 759

medium after 736/1335.96 However, it is very difficult to establish the

Asia, Thackston includes passages written by the ninth/fifteenth-century

the movement of the centre of artistic life in the late eighth/fourteenth

4. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:718 (no. 106). Scholarship on the life and

15. Storey/Persian Literature, 1:267 (no. 343); 1:410 (no. 580).

512. Afshr characterises this work as one of the important contemporary

49. Uzunarsl, Anadolu Beylikleri ve Akkoyunlu, Karakoyunlu Devletleri,

60. Brockelmann/GAL, 2:557.

90. Shabn Rab urr, Al-Dawla al-Jaliriyya (Cairo: Dr al-Hidya,

109. Deborah E. Klimburg-Salter, A Sufi Theme in Persian Painting: The

Tribes and the Chinggisid Empire

Tribe and State Formation under the Mongols

ones profession, or citizenship is defined by ones national home-

circumstances that necessitated the fusion of multiple tribal groups.7 It is

populations to best take advantage of the pastoral economy and defend

The Tribes of Mongolia on the Eve of the Empire of

concentrated in Temjins hands, while other elite families either trans-

Chinggis Qans time was the establishment of new, decimally organised

Background to Mongol Expansion into the Islamic World

become independent political entities in the form of personal appanages

by any member of that family by successfully keeping his predecessors

Jochi Chaghatay II gedey=Tregene Tolui=Sorqaqtani Beki

Chaghatayid Khans III Gyk

IV Mngke V Qubilay Hleg Arigh Bke

Yan Emperors Ilkhans

Roman numerals indicate succession to the great qanate

Perso-Islamic civilisation, which until that time had been administered

II Abaqa (r. 663/1265680/1282) Taraqay III A mad Tegder (r. 680/1282683/1284)

VI Baydu (r. 694/1295)

IV Arghun (r. 683/1284690/1291) V Geykhatu (r. 690/1291694/1295)