Timurid political thought was shaped by an ideal combining Aristotelian ethics with the pre-Islamic “circle of justice.” According to this the ruler depends on the army, which requires revenue; revenue is provided by the subjects, who depend on justice; justice is ensured by the ruler. The Timurids also honored the imperial ideologies of the Islamic caliphate and the Mongol Empire. Order in society was provided by an absolute ruler, sanctioned by God, governing through an administration divided into separate spheres—the men of the sword, largely Turco-Mongolian, and the men of the pen, mostly Persian bureaucrats. In practice the division between military and civilian, Persian and Turco-Mongolian, was less clear.
In his treatise Akhlaq-i Muhsin (The ethics of Muhsin; 1501–2) the Timurid scholar Husayn al-Wa‘iz al-Kashifi, building on Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, presented the function of the ruler as the maintenance of justice—here meaning social order—keeping men in their proper places and curbing natural aggression. In practice, for city populations, a ruler’s justice meant the promotion of economic welfare and security in return for taxation. Suffering under an oppressive or unsuccessful ruler, city notables might switch allegiance, and historians describe such action as reasonable.
When the Timurid founder Timur (Tamerlane, r. 1370–1405) rose to power, Chingizid rule had ended in Transoxiana and Iran, but in most regions power remained with Turco-Mongolian commanders loyal to both Islamic and Mongol traditions. Since Timur was not descended from Chingiz Khan, Mongol tradition did not permit him to assume the sovereign title “khan.” He used the title amir (commander), ruled through a puppet khan, and increased his status by marrying into the Chingizid house. At the same time he gathered prominent ‘ulama’ at his court, honored Sufi shaykhs, and justified many campaigns as protection of the shari‘a.
The end of the Abbasid caliphate and then of Chingizid rule encouraged experimentation with new ideologies and the rise of messianic movements like the Hurufis and the Nurbakhshis, which challenged existing rulers. Perhaps partly in response, the Timurids developed charismatic and religious claims. Timur emphasized his personal charisma, adopting the title ṣāḥib-qirān (Lord of the Auspicious Conjunction) and encouraging stories about his spiritual power. By the end of Timur’s reign, the force of Chingizid legal tradition was declining and Timur did not replace his second puppet khan when he died circa 1402–3. His successor Shahrukh (1409–47) ruled without a khan and announced in some quarters that he was abrogating the Mongol dynastic code. Some of Shahrukh’s historians referred to him as mujaddid, or centennial renewer of religion.
During the same period the Timurids elaborated their Chingizid genealogical ties, developing a new myth that increased the dynasty’s separate prestige. Timur’s ancestor Qarachar Barlas, a relative of Chingiz Khan, had been chief commander to Chingiz’s son Chaghatay; he was now reported to have been Chaghatay’s chief advisor and to have passed his position to his descendants. This myth reached its full development under Shahrukh. He and later Timurid rulers could now assume Islamic and Mongol sovereign titles previously reserved for the puppet khan, most notably that of sultan (sovereign ruler). Shahrukh was also referred to as khaghan (great khan) in contemporary histories, and used the term khilāfat (caliphate) on some coins. The Timurid synthesis of Islamic and Mongol traditions was appealing to later dynasties such as the Mughals, Safavids, and Uzbeks, and a number adopted elements of Timurid legitimation.
See also Mongols; Tamerlane (1336–1405); al-Tusi, Nasir al-Din (1201–74)
Further Reading
Shahzad Bashir, Messianic Hopes and Mystical Visions: The Nūrbakhshīya between Medieval and Modern Islam, 2003; Anne Broadbridge, Kingship and Ideology in the Islamic and Mongol Worlds, 2008; Beatrice Forbes Manz, Power, Politics and Religion in Timurid Iran, 2007; Maria Subtelny, “A Late Medieval Persian Summa on Ethics: Kashifi’s Akhlāq-i Muḥsinī,” Iranian Studies 36 no. 4 (2003); John E. Woods, “Tīmūr’s Genealogy,” in Intellectual Studies on Islam: Essays Written in Honor of Martin B. Dickson, Professor of Persian Studies, Princeton University, edited by Michel M. Mazzaoui and Vera B. Moreen, 1990.
BEATRICE FORBES MANZ