BOOK III.
FROM THE DEATH OF TÍMÚR TO THE
RISE OF THE ṢAFAWÍ DYNASTY
(A.H. 807-907 = A.D. 1405-1502).

CHAPTER VI.
HISTORY OF THE LATER TÍMÚRID PERIOD.

The century which we are now about to consider is in its latter part one of those chaotic and anarchical periods which,

Character of the century which forms the subject of the remainder of this volume in Persian history, commonly follow the death of a great conqueror and empire-builder. It in­cludes the rise of the Uzbek power in Trans-oxiana; the gradual decay and disruption of the vast empire built up by Tímúr at so great a cost of blood and suffering; the successive domination of two Turkmán dynasties known as the “Black” and “White Sheep” (Qára-qoyúnlú and Áq-qoyúnlú); and the appearance and triumph of the Ṣafawís, the greatest of modern Persian dynasties, who may be regarded in a certain sense as the creators, or at least the restorers, of Persian national sentiment in modern times. It begins with the death of Tímúr in 807/ 1405, and ends with the Battle of Shurúr, in 907/1501-2, in which Sháh Isma'íl the Ṣafawí utterly defeated the “White Sheep” Turkmáns, made Tabríz his capital, and was crowned king of Persia; though it took him some years to extend his sway over the whole country, until, as Stanley Lane-Poole says, “his dominions stretched from the Oxus to the Persian Gulf, from Afghánistán to the Euphrates.”

When examined more closely, this period of a century is seen to fall naturally into two unequal halves, divided by The death of Sháh-rukh in 1446 divides this period into two dissimilar parts the death of Tímúr's third son Sháh-rukh in 850/1446-7. As long as he lived and reigned, he succeeded, in spite of numerous revolts on the part of his kinsmen, in maintaining almost in its integrity the empire conquered by his father, which, however, after his death underwent rapid disintegration at the hands first of the “Black” and then of the “White Sheep” Turkmáns, and lastly of the Uzbeks, until these in their turn, together with the remnants of the House of Tímúr, were swept aside by the victorious Sháh Isma'íl the Ṣafawí. But though the House of Tímúr was driven out of Persia,

The Tímúrids, after their expul­sion from Persia, play a brilliant part in India it was still destined to play a splendid part in India, where Ẓahíru'd-Dín Muḥammad Bábur, the great-great-great-grandson of Tímúr, driven out by the Uzbeks from his own principality of Farghána, founded the dynasty commonly known in Europe as the “Great Moguls,” which endured there for more than three centuries and finally disappeared in the great Mutiny of 1857. With the “Great Moguls” of India we are not directly concerned in this book, save in so far as they came into relations with the Persian Ṣafawís; but though the political importance of the later Tímúrids in Persia con­tinually decreased after the death of Sháh-rukh, the courts of their diminished realms continued to be a centre of literary activity, enriched by the presence of numerous cele­brated poets and men of letters, while several princes of this House, notably Sulṭán Abu'l-Ghází Ḥusayn b. Manṣúr b. Bayqará, Ulugh Beg, Báysunqur and the great Bábur him­self, made notable contributions to literature or science, and Mír 'Alí Shír Nawá'í, Minister of Sulṭán Abú'l-Ghází Ḥusayn, was at once a notable poet (especially in the Turkí tongue) and a generous patron of men of letters, so that the literary splendour of Herát under the later Tímúrids is comparable to that of Ghazua under Sulṭán Maḥmúd.

From the political point of view the most important representatives of the dynasties mentioned above were Sháh-rukh of the House of Tímúr; Qára Yúsuf of the “Black Sheep” Turkmáns; Úzún Ḥasan of the “White Sheep” Turkmáns; Shaybání Khán of the Uzbeks; and, chief of all, Sháh Isma'íl the founder of the great Ṣafawí

Venetian envoys to Úzún Ḥasan dynasty. Of Úzún (“Tall” or “Long”) Ḥasan we possess contemporary European accounts in the narratives of Caterino Zeno, Josafa Barbaro and Ambrosio Contarini, ambassadors from Venice to this great ruler (whom they variously call “Ussun Cassano” and “Assambei”), whose assistance against the increasingly formidable power of the Ottoman Turks they desired to gain. They successively visited Persia for this purpose between the years A.D. 1471 and 1478, and their narratives, full of interest and life-like touches seldom found in the pages of Persian historians of this period, have been published in English by the Hakluyt Society in a volume entitled Six Narratives of Travel in Persia by Italians in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.*

Before considering in greater detail these Turkmán dynasties of the “Black” and “White Sheep,” the history Tímúr's sons of the House of Tímúr, so far as its connection with Persia is concerned, must be briefly traced. Tímúr had four sons and a daughter. Of his sons the eldest, Jahángír, predeceased his father by thirty years; and the second, 'Umar Shaykh Mírzá, by ten years. The third, Mírán-sháh, survived him by three years, but fell into disgrace and appears to have become affected in his reason. The fourth was Sháh-rukh, who practically succeeded his father, and had a long and prosperous reign of forty-three years (807-850/1404-1447). Tímúr's intention was that Jahángír's son Pír Muḥammad should succeed him, but he was defeated by his cousin Khalíl Sulṭán, son of Míránsháh, who succeeded Brief reign of Khalíl Sulṭán in taking possession of Samarqand and gaining the support of several powerful nobles, and was finally murdered two years after his grandfather's death by his trusted minister 'Alí Táz or Pír 'Alí. Khalíl Sulṭán, though not without parts, was undone by his infatua­tion for the courtesan Shád Malak, whose extravagant whims he was ever ready to gratify, to the disgust of his nobles and officers, who, headed by the two Khudá-dáds and Bardí Beg, presently rose against him, deposed him, and banished him to Káshghar. Thereupon his uncle Sháh-rukh marched in and took possession, but had sufficient kindliness to re­unite the unhappy Khalíl to his beloved Shád Malak, who showed her appreciation of his devotion by stabbing herself with a poniard when he died. The two were buried together in the same tomb at Ray. * Khalíl Sulṭán was not only a generous patron of poets but himself wrote verse, of which several specimens are recorded by Dawlatsháh.*

Sháh-rukh, who now succeeded to the throne, was born in 779/1377, and was therefore 28 years of age at the time Sháh-rukh (reigned A. D. 1404-1447) of his accession. He had been made governor of Khurásán in his twentieth year (799/1396-7), and was already practically absolute in that province and struck coins in his own name. His dominions were successively enlarged by the addition of Mázandarán (809/1406-7), Transoxiana (811/1408-9), Fárs (817/1414-5), Kirmán (819/1416-7) and Ádharbáyján (823/1420). The attempt on his life by Aḥmad-i-Lur, alluded to in the last chapter, * was made in 830/1427, and he finally died at Ray in 850/1447, after a reign of 43 years at the age of 72. He waged successful wars against the rulers of the “Black Sheep” dynasty, Qára Yúsuf and his son Iskandar, but on the whole, as Sir John Malcolm says, * “he desired not to extend, but to repair, the ravages committed by his father. He rebuilt the walls of the cities of Herát and Merv, and restored almost every town and province in his dominions to prosperity. This Prince also encouraged men of science and learning, and his Court was very splendid. He culti­vated the friendship of contemporary monarchs, and we read in the pages of his historian a very curious account of some

<graphic>

SHÁH-RUKH
Add. 7468 (Brit. Mus.), f. 44
To face p. 382

embassies which passed between him and the Emperor of China.”*

With this estimate of Sháh-rukh's character the most recent native historian of Persia, Mírzá Muḥammad Ḥusayn Sháh-rukh's character as depicted by Furúghí Khán Zuká'u'l-Mulk, poetically surnamed Fu­rúghí , is in complete agreement. * “After Tímúr,” he says, “his son Mírzá Sháh-rukh sat in the place of his father. He was a successor who was the exact opposite of his predecessor, a peaceful and placable man, never prone to war and contention, save with seditious rebels and such as sought means to create dis­turbances in the empire, whom he deemed it necessary to suppress. In brief, the Empire founded by Tímúr was refined by the efforts of Mírzá Sháh-rukh, who during a long period busied himself in repairing the devastation wrought by his father, and in informing himself as to the condition of his subjects and compassing their happiness. It is an extraordinary fact that the son of one so hard­hearted should be so kindly, amiable, gracious and friendly to learning, showing favour and courtesy to all, especially to scholars and men of parts. Ogotáy Khán, the son of Chingíz Khán, had a somewhat similar disposition and practice, and in particular he has left on the page of history a great reputation for generosity, so that he has been entitled ‘the Ḥátim * of later days’; and we have met with many anecdotes concerning his liberality and tenderness of heart in the pages of former writers.”