Navigation – Plan du site
Channels of Islamisation

From Mongolia to Khwārazm: The Qonggirad Migrations in the Jochid Ulus (13th.-15th. c.)1

De la Mongolie au Khwārazm : les migrations des Qonggirad dans l’ulus jochide (xiiie-xve s.)
Ishayahu Landa
p. vol. 143

Résumés

Résumé : De la Mongolie au Khwārazm : les migrations des Qonggirad dans l’ulus jochide (Xiiie-Xve s.). Cet article est une étude de la migration des Qonggirad vers l’ulus de Jochi, au lendemain des conquêtes mongoles du xiiie siècle, et du rôle que jouèrent les élites Qonggirad dans l’histoire politique jochide et khwārazmienne entre la fin du xiiie et le début du xve siècle. L’auteur se fonde sur une analyse généalogique et numismatique pour mieux saisir, d’une part, la formation et les développements d’un pouvoir Qonggirad autonome dans le Khwārazm dans la seconde moitié du xive siècle ; d’autre part, il montre que l’entrée dans l’Islam permit à l’élite tribale mongole de s’adapter à la nouvelle situation régionale et géopolitique durant la période d’instabilité de l’ulus de Jochi – période allant de 1359 aux années 1380.

Haut de page

Dédicace

Dedicated to Prof. Yuri Bregel (1925-2016)

Texte intégral

  • 1 This research leading to these results was made possible by the European Research Council under the (...)
  • 2 The late Prof. Yuri Bregel was one of the important exceptions (Bregel, 1961, 1981, 1982).
  • 3 The history of the Qonggirads in Khwārazm was analysed by Russian scholars starting with Veselovsky (...)

1The Mongol rule in Eurasia caused multiple changes in the conquered territories. Two intriguing developments that took place during this period are the cross-continental migrations of tribal groups and their subsequent assimilation and conversion to Islam. These movements laid the foundation for the ethnogenesis of modern Central Asian populations and ethnic groups. Hitherto few attempts have been made to investigate the long-lasting sociopolitical influences of the Chinggisid conquests in Central Asia (Bregel, 1980; McChesney, 1983; Golden, 1992, 2000). Even less attention has been paid to the role of the Qonggirad tribe in these processes.2 By analysing the Qonggirad migration to the Jochid ulus (mainly Khwārazm), this paper discusses the tribe’s role in the Jochid ulus’ crisis during the second half of the 14th c. and highlights the importance of the Qonggirad’s conversion to Islam, which enabled tribal leaders to assimilate to and partake in local Islamic sociopolitical frameworks.3

Early Jochid-Qonggirad relations (13th c.)

  • 4 The term “Jochid ulus” is preferable to the terms “Kök Orda” and “Aq Orda” as these can be misleadi (...)
  • 5 Most of the Qonggirad wives of the Jochids seem to have come from the side lineages of the Bosqur.

2Since the beginning of Temüjin’s rise to power, a Qonggirad lineage of the Bosqur clan of Dei Sechen from south-eastern Mongolia provided him with military support (SH, 1: 13-16; JT, 1: 77-78; cf. YS, 114: 2869, 118: 2915). As part of the inner circle of Chinggis Khan, the Qonggirads established themselves as one of the main marriage partners of the Golden urugh(lineage), becoming güregens or Chinggisid sons-in-law (SH, 1: 134; Landa, 2016: 163-164). Following the Chinggisid conquests, most of the güregens left Mongolia and dispersed throughout Eurasia. Their importance mainly derived from the amount of troops that they were able to provide to the khans. It seems that the güregens usually maintained control of their units when they incorporated their armies into the Mongol military (Landa, 2016: 164). Not much is known about the güregens’ military presence in the Jochid ulus following the first decades of its formation (JT, 2: 276-278; Mustakimov, 2011: 231; cf. Klyashtorny and Sultanov, 2010: 256). The available information on matrimonial connections between the two sides only partially compensates for the dearth of sources. Qonggirad women had a significant presence in the Jochid ulus (Landa, 2016: 170-171, esp. n. 48 and passim),4 but it remains difficult to reconstruct their genealogical connections or to trace the military forces that their brothers or fathers were in charge of.5

  • 6 Northern Khwārazm, including Urgench, was part of the Jochid ulus, while southern Khwārazm, includi (...)
  • 7 Note how the later Qonggirad historian Mūnīs, writing for the Qonggirad Khivian dynasty in the earl (...)
  • 8 According to Rashīd al-Dīn, the conflict was fueled by Qiyan’s conversion to Islam and the resultin (...)

3Of particular importance amongst the güregens was Salji’üdai, a descendant of Daritai, brother of Dei Sechen, whose yurt was in Khwārazm (JT, 1: 86).6 Through his wife Kelmish Aqa, Salji’üdai was related to the Toluids (JT, 1: 86; cf. JT, 2: 352, 382, 461). However, he was also related directly to the Jochids through his daughters: Öljei Khatun, a wife of the Jochid khan Möngke Temür and mother of Khan Toqta (JT, 2: 352; MA: 41), and another, unknown daughter. Moreover, his son Yaylaq married Qiyan, daughter of Nogay (JT, 2: 364).7 The position of Salji’üdai in the Right Wing of the Jochid ulus was so high, and his military power apparently so significant, that Toqta supported Salji’üdai in his conflict with Nogay, and even risked his own status as Khan in this confrontation (JT, 2: 364-366, 382).8

Qonggirads in Khwārazm (13th c.-mid 14th c.)

  • 9 Qutluq Temür became the ruler of Khwārazm as early as summer 1315 (cf. Qāshānī, 1968 : 151).

4Salji’üdai passed away around 1301-1302 (JT, 2: 382). It is not clear whether he was in control of the Khwārazmian cities or whether he was dwelling in the steppe areas only. In general, Khwārazm seems to have been a rather special area in the Jochid ulus, as its administrative level was similar to Crimea and the Volga areas (Egorov, 2010: 164). However, it seems to never have been controlled by a direct representative of the Golden urugh. Its earliest rulers under the Jochids are not known, though it is possible that since the mid of the second half of the 13th c. leadership was in the hands of Sälji’üdai. In the early years of Özbek, the ruler of Khwārazm was Bay Temür, brother of Khatun Bayalun, one of Özbek’s wives (Tiesenhausen, 1884: 516 [al-‘Aynī]). After Bay Temür, this position was occupied by Qutluq Temür, one of Özbek’s main tümen commanders, son of Özbek’s maternal aunt and his father-in-law (his son married Özbek’s daughter), during most of Özbek’s rule (Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, 1971: 544; cf. DeWeese, 1994: 108-120).9 There is no clear information about who was in control of Khwārazm after Özbek’s death in 1341. However, it seems that it was around that time that another person of importance rose in Khwārazm, Amīr Nanguday.

  • 10 Scholars variously relate Nanguday to Yaylaq (Sabitov, 2014 : 128), Nogay (Iskhakov and Izmaylov, 2 (...)
  • 11 Some claim Nanguday to be a Qonggirad, which is not based on any historical data (Iskhakov and Izma (...)
  • 12 According to Mūnīs (1999 : 88-89), Nanguday was deeply religious and moved to Khwārazm together wit (...)
  • 13 ʿAbbās Wālī was a Khwārazmian saint, whose tomb was located at Kath. The tomb no longer existed by (...)
  • 14 The sources mention three brothers : Ḥusayn, Yūsuf and Aq Ṣūfīs (ḤS, 3 : 421-422 ; ẒNS : 66-67 ; ẒN (...)
  • 15 One of the reasons Yanina (1971 : 46) claimed the non-existence of the dynasty was that none of the (...)

5Nanguday was a Qonggirad (ẒNY: 173), but of unclear origin.10 Despite some scholars’ attempts to connect him to Qutluq Temür, there are still no conclusive data in this regard.11 What is known is that Nanguday was one of the major commanders of Özbek and his father-in-law, as Kebek, Özbek’s second wife, was Nanguday’s daughter (Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, 1959: 487). He continued to be important under Janibek (Grigor’ev and Grigor’ev, 2002: 68-70) and was murdered during the turmoil of Keldibek’s reign (1361-1362), when the new khan eliminated members of the older elite (Naṭanzī, 1957: 85-86). According to the later (19th c.) historian Mūnīs (Bregel 1999: 89; cf. Naṭanzī, 1957: 85-86), Nanguday was a follower of Sayyid Atā, a Yasavi Sufi shaykh.12 He died in Kath and was buried in a mausoleum next to the tomb of Shaykh ʿAbbās, a local Muslim saint.13 He had a daughter and two or three sons,14 who became rulers of the so-called “Ṣūfī-Qonggirad” dynasty (1360s-1389?)15 in Khwārazm. One of them (exact identity unclear) married Shaqar Bek, Özbek’s daughter (ẒNS: 67; ẒNY: 180), and had a daughter with her, Sevin Bek, who is known in the sources as Khānzādeh (ẒNS: 67; ẒNY: 180; Woods, 1990: 29).

The “Ṣūfī-Qonggirads” of Khwārazm (1360s-1389)

6In the turmoil following the death of Berdibek (1357-1359), Khwārazm appears to have tried to acquire independency from Saray (cf. Vásáry, 2009: 373). In the early 1360s, possibly after Nanguday’s death, his descendants established control of northern Khwārazm (i.e. Urgench and its surroundings). In the chronicles the Nangudayids appear as the rulers of Khwārazm in connection with their attempt to collect taxes from Khiva and Kath in southern Khwārazm around 1366-1367 (ḤS, 3: 421; ẒNS: 65, ẒNY: 173). By then the ruler of northern Khwārazm was Ḥusayn Ṣūfī (d. 1372), Nanguday’s elder son. This collection was mainly a provocation to the Chagatayids, who claimed a historical right to control Khiva and Kath. Before 1370, the Chagatayids were too weak to control Khwārazm (Biran, 2009: 58-60), but in 1370 Temür installed his Ögödeid puppet Soyūrghātmīsh on the Chagatayid throne and intended to expand his rule northward (ẒNS: 13-14, 57-59; Manz, 2009: 184).

  • 16 Yazdī uses dārūga (ẒNY : 176).

7Temür initiated five campaigns against Khwārazm before both the southern and northern parts of the area finally came under his control in 1389. The first campaign took place in 1371-1372, when Temür demanded the return of Khiva and Kath to the Chagatayids. Ḥusayn declined, stating, according to ʿAbd al-Razzāq Samarqandī: “your country (ulus Chagatay – I.L.) is dār al-ḥarb, and the obligation of the Muslims is to fight you” (Samarqandī, 2004, I.2 : 457 ; cf. Barthold, 1964: 53, n. 119). Temür started his first campaign against Khwārazm in early 1372 (ẒNY: 175; cf. ḤS, 3: 422). His first destination was Kath, where Ḥusayn had already appointed his own shahna16 and qadi, Bayrām Khwāja Yasawul and Shaykh Muḥammad Muwayyad, who refused to submit (ḤS, 3: 422; ẒNS: 66; ẒNY: 176). After a short siege the city was taken, after which Temür proceeded towards Urgench (ẒNS: 66; ẒNY: 177). In the following battle Ḥusayn had to retreat and after his sudden death shortly afterwards his brother Yūsuf (r. 1373-1380) became the ruler of Khwārazm (ḤS, 3: 422; ẒNS: 66-67; ẒNY: 178-180).

  • 17 Ḥusayn Bek, the de facto ruler of parts of the Chagatayid ulus in the 1340s-1360s, also intended to (...)
  • 18 Cf. the claim of Muʿizz al-ansāb, that Tughdi Beg, daughter of Aq Ṣūfī, was a wife of Temür (MA: 11 (...)
  • 19 Sources ascribe this change in Yūsuf’s actions to the bad influence of Sultan Maḥmūd, a son of Kay (...)

8Following Ḥusayn Ṣūfī’s death, Temür proposed to bring peace by marrying out his son Mīrzā Jahāngīr to Khānzādeh (ḤS, 3: 422; ẒNS: 67; ẒNY: 180).17 Temür’s main motivation for this was probably the need to extend his legitimacy by extending his matrimonial relations with the Chinggisids (Manz, 1988: 110, 1998: 23). The marriage with Özbek’s direct granddaughter, whose father was also Berdibek’s brother-in-law, served this aim perfectly.18 Yūsuf agreed to the marriage, after which Temür withdrew his forces (ẒNY: 180-181; cf. ẒNS: 67). It seems that Yūsuf agreed to withdraw his own forces from southern Khwārazm also, but when Yūsuf started “plundering” (kharāb kard) the Kath areas in 1373, Temür came back in the spring of 1374 (ẒNS: 68; ẒNY: 181-182).19 Finally, the marriage took place in mid-1374 (ẒNY: 188). Two years later, Mīrzā Jahāngīr passed away at the age of 20 (ẒNY, 1957: 201), leaving a son, Muḥammad Sulṭān (ẒNY: 201), and a daughter, Yādgar Sulṭān (Woods, 1990: 32). Probably due to her “Chinggisid” origin, Khānzādeh was given to Mīrān Shāh, another son of Temür (Woods, 1990: 33, ẒNY: 274), whom she bore a son and a daughter (MA: 142; Woods, 1990: 34).

  • 20 Temürid historians claim that Temür tried to settle this conflict in a peaceful manner (ẒNY : 218).
  • 21 Cf. a description of the same events by Ghiyāth al-Dīn ‘Alī from Yazd, whose work was published as (...)

9In the spring of 1376, Temür again moved his armies to Khwārazm (ẒNS: 71, cf. ẒNY: 194). No reason for this is given, but Temür probably wanted to extend his control to the northern areas of Khwārazm (cf. Weinberg, 1960: 106). The campaign had to be stopped for various reasons (ḤS, 3: 424; ẒNS: 71; ẒNY: 194-196). During 1376, Temür was mainly involved in battles against Urus Khan (d. 1377/1378, cf. Grigor’ev, 1983: 44-46) of the Jochid Left Wing (ẒNY: 204-209). During one of these campaigns (late 1376-early 1377), Yūsuf Ṣūfī attacked Bukhara. Twice Temür sent messengers to Yūsuf demanding the end of the invasion, but to no avail. Temür started his fourth campaign against Khwārazm in the winter or spring of 1379 (ḤS, 3: 428; ẒNS: 79; ẒNY: 214-215). It seems that Temür prepared for a long siege (ẒNS: 79, ẒNY: 215-216). All the roads leading to the city were blocked and a small fortress was built against the walls of Urgench. Following talks between Yūsuf and Temür,20 and a siege of more than three months, Yūsuf died in the fortress due to illness in October 1379 (ẒNS: 80-81; ẒNY: 216-220). Following his death, the Ṣūfī clan broke into two parts, one supporting Amīr Khwāja Laq, the (designated?) successor of Yūsuf, and Baynaq Ṣūfī (another member of the clan?). After Baynaq’s supporters came out victorious, Khwāja Laq left the city and surrendered to Temür. The soldiers of Temür broke the walls and plundered the city, while its artisans, ʿulamā’ and knowledgeable people, including Qur’an readers, were transferred to Kesh (ḤS, 3: 429; ẒNY: 220).21

  • 22 Akhmedov (1965 : 113-114) claims that a khuṭba was read in the mosques of Urgench in the name of Te (...)
  • 23 Note the remark of Naṭanzī (1957 : 96) that the mother of Toqtamish, Kūtun ( ?) Kūnchek, was a Qong (...)
  • 24 Yazdī also mentions ʿAlī Beq Qonggirad, who was one of the greatest amīrs of the Jochids at that ti (...)
  • 25 Another name mentioned by Yazdī is Il Igmish Oghlan, a Jochid, who was present in Khwārazm during t (...)

10If the status of Khiva and Kath might have been disputed before 1379, this time Temür finally secured his position in the south. His ambitions also included northern Khwārazm as a coin minted in Urgench in 1380 suggests (Savel’ev, 1958: 301-302; Akhmedov, 1965: 113-114).22 However, this coin does not mean that Temür de facto controlled Urgench. One not only finds the typical Ṣūfīd coins minted in Khwārazm during 1380s (Markov, 1896: 505, 860), it is also possible to trace a continued Ṣūfī presence in Urgench. In 1387, while Temür was campaigning in Iran, Toqtamish (r. 1380-1395), his ex-supporter, initiated a series of attacks on Transoxiana (ẒNY: 298-301, 317-320). It seems that this time northern Khwārazm supported Toqtamish.23 One of the signs of this (at least nominal) support are the coins minted in Khwārazm in the name of Toqtamish during the 1380s (Savel’ev, 1857: 118-120; Masson, 1929: 56; Sagdeeva, 2005: 50), which were issued in parallel with anonymous Ṣūfīd coins that were similar to those of the previous decades (below).24 This double policy was adopted by a representative of the Qonggirads, Süleyman Ṣūfī, who appears to have been in charge of Khwārazm at least in the late 1380s. In 1388, Temür again initiated a campaign against Urgench (ẒNS: 107, ẒNY: 322). When Temür arrived, most of the nobility, including Süleyman Ṣūfī, had fled the city (ẒNS: 108; ẒNY: 323).25 This time Temür ordered to transfer the population of Urgench to Samarkand and sow the city with barley (ẒNS: 108; ẒNY: 323).

  • 26 During Temür’s campaign in Desht-i Qipchaq in 1391, there was a battle between the two armies on Ju (...)
  • 27 As suggested by Weinberg (1960 : 108), these coins could not have been minted in Urgench itself, bu (...)

11Urgench was partly reconstructed by Temür himself only three years after. When returning from his campaign against Toqtamish in the end of 1391, Temür ordered to reconstruct one quarter of Khwārazm, called the “Qa’an quarter”, which was included “by Chinggis Khan together with Kath and Khiva in the ulus of Chagatay Khan” (ẒNY, 1957: 324). This was probably done in order to claim the right of the Chagatayids (and Temür) to control northern Khwārazm. One of the reasons why this might have been important is that Süleyman Ṣūfī was still alive (and thus presented a threat to Temür’s ambitions in Khwārazm).26 Additionally, and possibly more threatening, were the ambitions of Toqtamish. A silver coin of 792AH/1389-1390 bearing Toqtamish’s name and inscribed with “mint Khwārazm” shows that the Jochids were not ready to give up such an important area (Markov, 1896: 487).27 Still, for the time being, Khwārazm remained under the military control of Temür. After Temür’s demise both sides continued to fight for this area. The destruction of the city and the wars of the previous decades had weakened Urgench. Starting with the mid-15th c., but even more after the Amu-Darya had changed its course towards the second half of the 16th c., northern Khwārazm continuously lost its importance (Glukhovskoy, 1893: 31-37; Barthold, 1965: 87-89). Finally, Khiva became the main city of Khwārazm and starting with the 17th c. another Qonggirad lineage began using it as its centre (Barthold, 1965: 89-90).

The Islamic character of the “Ṣūfī-Qonggirad” rule

  • 28 For a discussion of Jochid numismatics see Fedorov-Davydov, 2003.

12The first who formulated the way that most of the scholars deal with the Ṣūfīds was Barthold (1963a: 154-155, 1963b: 265-266), who claimed that this dynasty tried to create a theocratic Islamic rule in united Khwārazm, taking advantage of the weakness of the central powers in both Saray and Samarkand. This claim is partly based on the above-mentioned answer of Ḥusayn Ṣūfī to Temür and the Chagatayids, given by Samarqandī (Barthold, 1964: 53). In this context the Khwārazmians arguably saw themselves as an Islamic power that stood up to the “infidel” Chagatayids (Barthold, 1963a: 155). Barthold’s (1963a: 155, 1963b: 265-266) claim was also based on specific anonymous (mainly golden) coinage with the legend mulk li-llāh (“the rule is for God”) and its variations, which was continuously minted in Khwārazm under the Qonggirads from the early 1360s onwards.28 Soviet scholars (Weinberg, 1960; Fedorov-Davydov, 1965) followed this interpretation until Yanina (1971) completely rejected the Ṣūfī Qonggirad dynasty’s existence.

  • 29 For examples of anonymous Khwārazmian coins see Masson, 1929 : 56 ; Weinberg, 1960 : 110-111, 114 ; (...)
  • 30 There is a remark in the later Chingiz Name, which describes the enthronement of Khizr Khān by Aq-Ḥ (...)

13Due to the space limitations of this paper I am unable to review both these claims in extenso.29 However, based on the historical evidence it seems plausible to divide the two and a half decades of Qonggirad autonomous and semi-autonomous rule in Khwārazm into two periods, the first including the early 1360s-1374 and the second extending from 1374 to the destruction of the city in 1389. What is important with regard to the first period is that there is clearly an attempt by Ḥusayn to establish autonomous rule in Urgench. Most of the anonymous coins with the legend mulk li-llāh were minted in Khwārazm between 765AH (1363/1364) and 775AH (1373/1374), the years of Ḥusayn’s rule and the first two years of Yūsuf’s reign. Even if the remark of Samarqandī is an invention, the fact that Urgench minted its own coins with only an Islamic legend is an indication of the attempts to preserve the notion of independence during the turmoil period. The suggestion that the Ṣūfīds were unfamiliar with the names of the quickly-changing khans and decided to leave their coins anonymous (Yanina, 1971: 47) as a result does not seem grounded, as Qūlnā, Nawrūz, and Khizr, three khans of the first years of the turmoil period, did get their own coins in Khwārazm (Savelyev, 1858: 301-302; Sagdeeva, 2005: 32-33).30

  • 31 Cf. #161749 in the zeno.ru catalogue (http://www.zeno.ru, accessed 31 March, 2017).
  • 32 See the relevant collection on http://www.zeno.ru/showgallery.php?cat=1260, accessed 31 March, 2017
  • 33 This claim of Barthold (1963a : 154-155 and above) concerning the appearance of the Islamic anonymo (...)

14If the first period of Qonggirad rule in Khwārazm was characterised by the attempt to establish autonomous rule, in the second phase the Nangadayids adopted a more complicated policy. The mint of anonymous coins continued until very late, at least until 786AH (1384/1385) (Markov, 1896: 860).31 Not only gold, but also silver and copper were in use, all of them with the same patterns.32 As shown, coins of Temür and Toqtamish were also minted in Urgench. The mint of anonymous coins thus continued during the periods in which Temür was reportedly in control of the area, and during the cooperation between the Ṣūfīds and Toqtamish. The long use of the anonymous Islamic pattern, when seen against the historical records, indicates an attempt of the Qonggirads to pursue an independent agenda, both vis-à-vis Temür and the Jochids.33

  • 34 The appearance of Islamic names among Nanguday’s sons suggests that the conversion of the clan to I (...)
  • 35 One can also find persons with the second name Ṣūfī amongst the Jochids, but mainly in the later pe (...)
  • 36 One such case is Da’ūd Ṣūfī, who is called the son-in-law of Toqtamish (dāmād-e Tūqtemish) and appe (...)
  • 37 The sources include some military elites with the second name Ṣūfī, who were either related to Khwā (...)
  • 38 If the reports about the tomb of Nanguday in Khiva are true, then the question arises whether the w (...)

15Some questions remain unanswered. Firstly, the conversion of the Qonggirads to Islam seems to have happened long before the events of the early 1360s.34 But what does the term Ṣūfī compounding the names of most of the known members of the family imply? Yanina (1971: 47-48) claims that it does not necessarily have any religious bearing and was not unique to the Qonggirads.35 However, the compound was in actuality very rare amongst Jochid names in the period preceding the end of the 14th c., and in the period under discussion the second name Ṣūfī in Khwārazm or in Toqtamish’s army usually had some Qonggirad connection.36 Thus, it seems that in the second half of the 14th c. the title (?) Ṣūfī was characteristic for the lineage of the Qonggirads. More complicated is the question whether the use of this component implied any special Islamic affiliation. Already before the Mongols came to Khwārazm, and especially since the early 13th c., the area was known for having deep Sufi links (Snesarev, 1983: 142-156; DeWeese, 1988: 45-52; cf. Snesarev, 1969: 266-306). As discussed, Nanguday was later recorded as having had connections with the Sufis of southern Khwārazm. Weinberg (1960: 110) suggests that Ṣūfī was a title signifying the elders of the tribe, similar to the later title inaq.37 Most probably, if the Qonggirads indeed intended to establish autonomous rule, their self-identification as Ṣūfī could have been used primarily as a title to give them Islamic legitimacy to rule in Khwārazm. It is possible that that they were simultaneously part of a Sufi ṭarīqa.38

16Secondly, few archaeological remains from Urgench dating to the 14th c. are known and none of these can be clearly attributed to the Ṣūfīds. Only one building, the Türabeq Khanum Mausoleum (Yakubovsky, 1930), located near the minaret of Qutluq Temür in the centre of old Urgench, was suggested by Soviet scholars to be a Ṣūfīs mausoleum (Pilyavsky, 1974: 41-55). Recently, Golombek (2011) questioned the dating of this monument to Özbek’s times and proposed a later date in the 1390s. Leaving this issue to the specialists, I would only remark that (as Golombek [2011: 153] herself acknowledges) even if the current monument was built (or reconstructed) on Temür’s order, there could have been a mausoleum for Türabeq Khanum built on the same site. One cannot confirm that the Ṣūfīds “reused” the building as a mausoleum, but this possibility remains, especially as some tombs found at the centre of the site have not been analysed. Following the destruction of the city by Temür, it is also quite possible that the previous building(s) were destroyed, together with their inscriptions on tombs or walls.

The Qonggirads after 1389: a brief outlook (15th c.)

  • 39 Almost certainly this Khwāja Laq is the one mentioned above.
  • 40 DeWeese (1994: 102, n. 75) suggested that Aq Ṣūfī was the son of Nanguday. However, Bakhtī Bī Khātū (...)
  • 41 Yūsuf Ṣūfī’s son, Nadar, became one of the keepers of the great seal of Ḥusayn Bāyqarā (MA: 192), a (...)
  • 42 Note, for example, Chīn Ṣūfī (d. 1505), a ruler of Adak, who occupied Urgench in the early 16th c. (...)

17Textual sources indicate that close marriage connections existed between the Qonggirads and the Temürids during the 15th c. In all known cases the marriage partners of the Temürids were directly or indirectly related to the Ṣūfīs of Khwārazm. Saʿādat Sulṭān, daughter of Mīrān Shāh, son of Temür (the one who remarried Khānzādeh), married Muḥammad Khwāja, son of Khwāja Laq of the Qonggirad (MA: 143).39 Additionally, Ulugh Beq’s wife Bakhtī Bī Khātūn was a daughter of Aq Ṣūfī Qonggirad (Woods, 1990: 44).40 Also, one of the wives of Ḥusayn Bāyqarā, Tūlak Begum, is recorded to have been a “daughter of Ḥusayn Ṣūfī, sister of Yūsuf Ṣūfī Jāndār, of Azāq beys” (Woods, 1990: 25, MA: 187). This is an extremely interesting remark, firstly since Adaq (Azāq), an area to the east of Lake Sariqamish, is the westernmost part of Khwārazm, about seventy miles from Old Urgench (Barthold, 1965: 67-68; Bregel, 2003: 36a), and secondly since during Ḥusayn Bāyqarā’s exile in Khwārazm in 1460-1461, at least eight Qonggirad commanders related to Adaq entered his service (Ando, 1992: 196-197, 216). The Muʿizz al-ansāb lists Aq Ṣūfī and his three sons (Shāh Ṣūfī, Muḥammad Ṣūfī and Dawlat Ṣūfī), Yūsuf Ṣūfī Salar (or possibly Jāndār), Artuq Ṣūfī, Ḥasan Ṣūfī, brother of Aq Ṣūfī, and Iskandar Qonggirad (MA: 188; cf. Ando 196).41 It seems feasible that Ḥusayn Ṣūfī, father of Tūlak Begum, is Ḥasan, brother of Aq Ṣūfī, who is mentioned amongst the Qonggirad Adaq commanders. If so, it seems that after the destruction of Urgench the lineage of the Ṣūfīds did not leave Khwārazm, but moved to Adaq (or returned to its previous homeland).42

  • 43 This discussion, which goes beyond the limits of this paper, revolves around the question whether t (...)
  • 44 Starting from the 15th c., sources mention Qonggirads being employed in the Uzbek (particularly She (...)

18One may wonder what the military backbone of the Qonggirad amīrs in Khwārazm and Adaq was. Was it formed by Qonggirad tribal troops that had migrated from Mongolia? The Qonggirad military units are not explicitly mentioned in the contemporary sources. The continuous intermarriage of the Qonggirads with the Jochids and later the Temürids does imply a significant military power, but as for now the continuous presence of the Qonggirad tribal masses in Khwārazm since the 13c. cannot be confirmed.43 The continuity of the Qonggirad elites related to Khwārazm elite is, however, rather clear. If the later Ṣūfī rulers of Adaq were indeed of Qonggirad origin, it is possible that they and the Qonggirads in the Uzbek armies had originally been part of the same group, who after the fall of the Ṣūfīds in the 1380s were dispersed amongst the Temürids and the Jochids. Due to the elite bias of contemporary sources this question remains open.44

Conclusion

19Concentrating on the history of the Qonggirad elite families, this paper discussed the Qonggirad migrations from Mongolia to Khwārazm, their subsequent adoption of Islam, and their relations with the superpowers of the time – the Jochids and, starting with the 1370s, the Temürids. The Qonggirads were one of the main players in the Jochid ulus in general and in Khwārazm in particular long before the crisis of the mid-14th c. The case of the Qonggirads stresses the importance of the güregen institution for the Jochids, as the imperial sons-in-law served not only as one of the nodes of the Jochid power network, but also as the providers of military support and in some cases even as kingmakers. Within this sociopolitical context, the Qonggirads’ conversion to Islam proved to be a fundamental assimilation mechanism. Islamisation affected tribal elites in important ways and led to their rapid incorporation into the local, Islamic landscape. When the central power in Saray weakened, the Qonggirad lineage in Khwārazm had mustered sufficient sociopolitical support to take control of the region. However, they remained committed to the “Chinggisid principle” and never tried to proclaim themselves as Khans. When the Jochids (Toqtamish) strove to re-establish central control, the Qonggirads in Khwārazm reverted to serving their in-laws. Following the demise of Toqtamish and the destruction of Urgench, the Qonggirad elites seem to have lost their influence at the central courts, but they maintained control of the Adaq areas in north-western Khwārazm.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

References

Primary Sources

ANDO Shiro, 1992, Timuridische Emire nach dem Muʿizz al-ansāb : Untersuchung zur Stammesaristokratie Zentralasiens im 14. und 15. Jahrhundert, Berlin, Klaus Schwarz Verlag.

BABUR Zahiru’d-din Muhammad, 1969, The Babur-nama in English, transl. Anette S. Beveridge, London, Luzac and Company.

BINĀĪ Kamāl al-Dīn Shir ʿAli, 1969, Sheybānī Nāme, in Ibragimov, S. K et al. (eds), Materialy po istorii Kazakhskikh khanstv 15-18 vv., Alma-Ata, Nauka, p. 91-127.

BREGEL Yuri, 1999, Shir Muhammad Mirab Munis and Muhammad Riza Mirab Agahi, Firdaws al-Iqbāl : History of Khorezm, Leiden, Brill.

DE RATCHEWILTZ Igor, 2004-2013, The Secret History of the Mongols: A Mongolian Epic Chronicle of the Thirteenth Century, 3 vols [SH], Leiden, Brill.

DŪGHLĀT Mīrzā Muammad Haidar, 1970. A History of the Moghuls of Central Asia (Tarikh-i Rashidi), transl. Edward Denison Ross, ed. Norbert Elias, New York, Washington, London, Praeger Publishers.

GHIYĀTH AL-DĪN ʿALI, 1958. Dnevnik pokhoda Timura v Indiyu, transl. Aleksander A. Semenov, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostochnoy literatury.

GRIGOR’EV Arkadiy P. and Grigoryev, Vadim P., 2002, Kollekziya zolotoordynskikh dokumentov 14v. is Venezii : Istochnikovedcheskoye issledovanie, Saint-Petersburg, Izd. SPbGU.

IBN BAṬṬŪTA Muḥammad Ibn ʿAbd Allāh, 1959, The Travels of Ibn Baṭṭûṭa, vol. 1, transl. with rev. and notes from the Arabic text by Charles Defrémery and Beniamino R. Sanguinetti by Hamilton A. R. Gibb, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

, 1971, The Travels of Ibn Baṭṭûṭa, vol. 3, transl. with rev. and notes from the Arabic text by Charles Defrémery and Beniamino R. Sanguinetti by Hamilton A. R. Gibb, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

KHWĀNDAMĪR, Ghiyāth ad-Dīn Muḥammad, 1954, Tārīkh-i ḥabīb as-siyar fī akhbār afrād-i bashar, 4 vols [ḤS], Teheran, Kitabhāne-i Ḥayyām.

Muʽizz al-ansāb [MA], 2006, transl. and ed. Shodmon Kh. Vohidov, Almaty, Dayik Press.

NAṬANZĪ Muʿīn al-Dīn, 1957, Muntakhab al-tawārīkh-i Muʿīnī, Tehran, Ḥayyām.

PARVISI-BERGER Maryam, 1968, Die Chronik des Qashani über den Ilchan Ölgäitü (1304-1316) : Edition und kommertierte Übersetzung, written under the supervision of Prof. W. Hinz, Göttingen, Göttingen University.

RASHIDUDDIN Fazlullah (1998) : Jami’u’t-Tawarikh : Compendium of Chronicles : A History of Mongols, 3 vols. Translated and annotated by Wheeler M. Thackston. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University.

SAMARQANDĪ ʿAbd al-Razzāq, 2004, Maṭlaʿ-i saʿdayn va majmaʿ-i baḥrayn, ed. ʿAbd al-usayn Navāʾī, Teheran, Kitābkhāne-i ahūrī.

SHĀMĪ Niẓām al-Dīn, 1937, Ẓafarnāma [ẒNS], ed. Felix Tauer, Prague, Oriental Institute.

SONG Lian et al., 1976, Yuanshi [YS], Beijing, Zhonghua shuju.

Tārīkh Abū al-Khayr Khānī, 2007, transl. Buri A. Akhmedov., in Abuseitova Meruert Kh. (ed), Istoriya Kazachstana v persidskikh istochnikakh, vol. 5, Almaty, Daik-Press, p. 236-240.

Tārīkh-I Guzide-I Nusrat Nāme [TGNN], 1969, transl.S.K. Ibragimov in Ibragimov, S.K. et al. (eds), in Materialy po istorii kazakhskikh khanstv 15-18 vekov, Alma-Ata, Nauka, , pp. 9-43.

TIESENHAUSEN Vladimir G., 1884, Sbornik materialov otnosyatschichsya k istorii Zolotoy Ordy (I), Saint-Petersburg.

, 1941, Sbornik materialov otnosyatschichsya k istorii Zolotoy Ordy (II), Aleksandr A. Romaskevitch and Semen L. Volin (eds), Moscow and Leningrad, Izdatel’stvo AN SSSR.

VÁMBÉRY Hermann, 1885a, Die Scheibaniade, ein özbegisches Heldengedicht in 76 Gesängen von Prinz Mohammed Salih aus Charezm. Text und Übersetzung, Wien, Die K.K. Hof und Staatsdruckerei in Commission bei Friedrich Kilian.

AL-YAZDĪ Sharaf al-Dīn, 1957, Ẓafarnāma, vol. 1 [ẒNY], ed. Muḥammad ʿAbbāsī, Tehran, Amir Kabīr.

YUDIN Veniamin P., 1992, Chingiz Name [CN], comm. Meruert Kh. Abuseitova, Alma-Ata, Gylym.

ZIMIN Lev A. and BARTHOLD Vasiliy V., 1915, Dnevnik pokhoda Timura v Indiyu Giyas-ad-dina Ali, s prilozheniem sootvetstvuyutschikh otryvkov is “Zafer-name” Nizam-ad-dina Shami, Teksty po istorii Sredney Asii 1, Petrograd, Imperatorskaya akademiya nauk.

Studies

ALLSEN Thomas T., 1985, “The princes of the left hand : an introduction to the history of the ulus of Orda in the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries”, AEMA 5, Wiesbaden, Harrasowitz Verlag, p. 5-40.

AKHMEDOV Buri A., 1965, Gosudarstvo kochevykh uzbekov, Moscow, Nauka.

BARTHOLD Vasily V., 1963a, Istoriya Turkestana, Sochineniya, vol. 2, part 1, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostochnoy literatury, p. 109-166.

, 1963b, Istoriya kultornoy zhizni Turkestana, Sochineniya, vol. 2, part 1, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostochnoy literatury, p. 167-433.

, 1964, Ulughbek i ego vremya, Sochineniya, vol. 2, part 2, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostochnoy literatury, p. 23-196.

, 1965, Svedeniya ob Aralskom More i Nizovyakh Amu-Daryi s Drevneyshikh Vremen do 17 veka, Sochineniya, vol. 3, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostochnoy literatury, p. 11-94.

, 1973, Predisloviye redaktora k knige ‘Dnevnik pokhoda Timura v Indiyu Giyas-ad-dina Ali’, Sochineniya, vol. 8, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostochnoy literatury, p. 328-335.

BIRAN Michal, 2009, “The Mongols in Central Asia from Chinggis Khan’s invasion to the rise of Temür : the Ögödeid and Chaghadaid realms”, in Di Cosmo, Nicola et al. (eds), The Cambridge History of Inner Asia, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 46-66.

BREGEL Yuri, 1961, Khorezmskiye turkmeny v 19 veke, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo vostochnoy literatury.

, 1980, The Role of Central Asia in the History of the Muslim East, New York, The Asia Society.

, 1981, “Nomadic and sedentary elements amongst the Turkmens”, Central Asiatic Journal 25, p. 3-37.

, 1982, “Tribal tradition and dynastic history : the early rulers of the Qongrats according to Mûnîs”, Asian and African Studies 16, p. 357-398.

, 2003, A Historical Atlas of Central Asia, Leiden, Brill.

DEWEESE Devin A., 1994, Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde : Baba Tükles and Conversion to Islam in Historical and Epic Tradition, University Park, PA, Pennsylvania State University Press.

EGOROV Vladimir L., 2010, Istoricheskaya geographiya Zolotoy Ordy v 13-14 vv., 3d edition, Moscow, URSS.

FEDOROV-DAVYDOV German A., 1965, “Numismatika Khorezma zolotoordynskogo period”, Numismatika i epigraphiya 5, p. 179-224.

, 2003, Denezhnoye delo Zolotoy Ordy, Moscow, Paleograph.

GLUKHOVSKY Alexandr I., 1893, The Passage of the Water of the Amu-Darya by its Old Bed into the Caspian Sea, Saint-Petersburg, Tipographiya M.M. Stasyulevicha.

GOLDEN Peter B., 1992, An Introduction to the History of the Turkic Peoples : Ethnogenesis and State-formation in Medieval and Early Modern Eurasia and the Middle East, Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz.

, 2000, “I will five the people unto thee : the Chinggisid conquests and their Aftermath in the Turkic world”, JRAS 3(10), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 21-41.

GOLOMBEK Lisa, 2009, “The so-called ‘Turabeg Khanom’ Mausoleum in Kunya Urgench : problems of attribution”, Muqarnas 28, Leiden, Brill, p. 133-156.

GRIGOR’EV Arkadiy P., 1983, “Zolotoordynskiye khany 60-70kh godov 14v. : khronologiya pravleniya”, Istoriographiya i istochnikovedeniye istorii stran Asii i Afriki 7, p. 9-54.

GULYAMOV Yakhya G., 1957, Istoriya orosheniya Khorezma sdrevneyshikh vremen do nashikh dney, Tashkent, Izdatel’stvo AN Uzbekskoy SSR.

ILKHAMOV Alisher et al, 2002, Etnicheskiy atlas Uzbekistana, Tashkent, Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation Uzbekistan.

ISKHAKOV Damir M. and IZMAYLOV Iskander L., 2007, Etnopoliticheskaya istoriya tatar (3-seredina 16 vv.), Kazan, Shkola.

KARMYSHEVA Belkis Kh., 1976, Ocherki etnicheskoy istorii yuzhnykh rayonov Tadjikistana i Uzbekistana (po etnographicheskim dannym), Moscow, Nauka.

KAWAGUCHI Takushi and NAGAMINE Hiroyuki, 2016, “Rethinking the political system of the Jöchid”, AOASH 69(2), Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó, pp. 165-181.

KEREYITOV Ramazan Kh., 2009, Nogayzy. Osobennosti etnicheskoy istorii i bytovoy kultury, Stavropol, Servisshkola.

KLYASHTORNY Sergey G. and SULTANOV Tursun I., 2010, Gosudarstva i narody evraziyskikh stepey : ot drevnosti k novomu vremeny, Saint-Petersburg, Peterburgskoye vostokovedeniye.

LANDA Ishayahu, 2016, “Imperial sons-in-law on the move : Oyirad and Qonggirad dispersion in Mongol Eurasia”, AEMA 22, p. 161-198.

MANZ Beatrice F., 1988, “Tamerlane and the symbolism of sovereignty”, Iranian Studies 21(1-2), p. 105-122.

, 1998, “Temür and the problem of a conqueror’s legacy”, JRAS, Third Series 8(1), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 21-41.

, 2009, “Temür and the early Timurids”, in Di Cosmo, Nicola et al. (eds), The Cambridge History of Inner Asia, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 182-217.

MARKOV Aleksey K., 1896, Inventarny katalog musulmanskikh monet Imperatorskogo Ermitazha, Saint-Petersburg.

MASSON Mikhail E., 1929, “Monetny klad 14 veka is Termesa”, Bulletin Sredneasiatskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta - Bulletin de l’université de l’Asie centrale 18(7), Tashkent, Sredneasiatskiy gosudarstvenny universitet, p. 53-66.

MCCHESNEY Robert D., 1983, “The amirs of Muslim Central Asia in the XVIIth century”, JESHO 26(1), Leiden, Brill, p. 33-70.

MUSTAKIMOV Ilyas A., 2011, “Svedeniya “Tawarikh-i guzida – Nusrat name” o vladeniyakh nekotorykh dzhuchidov”, Tyurkologicheskiy sbornik 2009-2010, Saint-Petersburg, Vostochnaya literatura, p. 228-248.

POTAPOV Leonid P., 1930, “Materialy po semeyno-rodovomu stroyu uzbekov-kungrad”, Nauchnaya Mysl’ 1, p. 37-52.

, 1995, Leonid Pavlovič Potapovs Materialien zur Kulturgeschichte der Usbeken aus den Jahren 1928-1930, ed. Jakob Taube, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz Verlag.

PETROV Pavel N. and ALEXANDROV Andrei S., 2011, “Chaghadaid dirhems with the name of amir Nawruz minted in Badachshan”, Numismatika 1, Moscow, Numismaticheskaya literatura, p. 8-9.

PILYAVSKY Vladimir I., 1974, Kunya-Urgench, Leningrad, Stroyizdat.

SABITOV Zhaxylyk M., 2012, Kungiraty v vostochnom Desht-i Kipchake v 13-14 vekakh, Khabarshy-Vestnik ENU im. Gumileva 3, p. 121-124.

, 2014, Emiry Özbeg-Khana i Zhanibek-Khana, Zoloordynskoe obozrenie 2, p. 120-134.

SAGDEEVA Roza Z., 2005, Serebryanye monety khanov Zolotoy Ordy, Moscow, Goryachaya liniya-Telekom.

SAVEL’EV, P S. 1857, Monety Dzhuchidov, Dzhagaitov, Dzhelayiridov, i drugiya, obratschavshiyasiya v Zolotoy Orde v epokhu Tokhtamysha, vypusk I, Saint-Petersburg.

, 1858, Monety Dzhuchidov, Dzhagaitov, Dzhelayiridov, i drugiya, obratschavshiyasiya v Zolotoy Orde v epokhu Tokhtamysha, vypusk II, Saint-Petersburg, Tipographiya ekspedizii zagotovleniya Gosudarstvennykh bumag.

SNESAREV Gleb P., 1969, Relikty domusulmanskikh verovaniy i obryadov u uzbekov Khorezma, Moscow, Nauka.

, 1983, Khorezmskiye legendy kak istochnik po istorii relegioznykh kultov Sredney Asii, Moscow, Nauka.

VÁMBÉRY Hermann, 1885b, Das Türkenvolk in seinen ethnologischen und ethnographischen Beziehungen, Leipzig, Brockhaus.

VÁSÁRY István, 2009, “The beginnings of coinage in the Blue Horde”, AOASH 62(4) (2009), Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó, p. 371-385.

VESELOVSKIY Nikolai I., 1877, Ocherk Istoriko-geographicheskikh Svedeniy o Khivinskom Khanstve, Saint-Petersburg, Tipographiya brat’yev Panteleevykh.

VOSTROV Veniamin V. and MUKANOV Marat S., 1968, Rodoplemennoy sostav i rasseleniye kazakhov (konez 19-nachalo 20 v.), Almaata, Nauka.

WEINBERG Bella I., 1960, “K istorii Kungiratskikh Sufi”, Materialy Khorezmskoy ekspedizii v 1957 g., vol. 4, Moscow, Izdatel’stvo AN SSSR.

WILLIAMS Brian G., 2001, “The ethnogenesis of the Crimean Tatars. An historical reinterpretation”, JRAS, Third Series, 11(3), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p. 329-348.

WOODS John E., 1990, The Timurid Dynasty, Bloomington, Indiana University.

YAKUBOVSKY Aleksander. Yu., 1930, Razvaliny Urgencha, Izvestiya GAIMK 6(2).

, 1946, “Timur (Opyt kratkoy kharakteristiki)”, Voprosy Istorii 8-9, Moscow, Akademiya nauk SSSR, p. 42-74.

YANINA Svetlana A., 1971, “Zolotye anonimnye monety Khorezma 60-70kh gg. 14 veka v sobranii Gosudarstvennogo Istoricheskogo Museya”, Numizmaticheskiy sbornik GIM 4(3), Moscow, Gosudarstvenny istoricheskiy muzey, p. 25-60.

ZAYTSEV Ilya V, 2016, “K istorii zolotoordynskikh kungratov v Khorezme i v Krymu : emir Nangutai”, Tyurkologicheskiy sbornik 2013-2014, Saint-Petersburg, Vostochnaya literatura, p. 238-255.

Haut de page

Notes

1 This research leading to these results was made possible by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement 312397.

2 The late Prof. Yuri Bregel was one of the important exceptions (Bregel, 1961, 1981, 1982).

3 The history of the Qonggirads in Khwārazm was analysed by Russian scholars starting with Veselovsky (1877 : 82-86), but has rarely been touched upon by Western researchers (cf. DeWeese, 1994 : 101-102, n. 75).

4 The term “Jochid ulus” is preferable to the terms “Kök Orda” and “Aq Orda” as these can be misleading (Yudin, 1992 : 24-34, cf. Allsen, 1985 : 5-6 ; Kawaguchi and Nagamine, 2016 : 171-177).

5 Most of the Qonggirad wives of the Jochids seem to have come from the side lineages of the Bosqur.

6 Northern Khwārazm, including Urgench, was part of the Jochid ulus, while southern Khwārazm, including Kath, was given to the Chagatayids (Bartold, 1965 : 61 ; Bregel, 2003 : 41, map 20). Earlier I suggested to identify the “Khwārazm” of Rashīd al-Dīn with Khiva (Landa, 2016 : 171), but this seems to have been a mistake if one considers the close links between Salji’üdai and the Jochids.

7 Note how the later Qonggirad historian Mūnīs, writing for the Qonggirad Khivian dynasty in the early 19th c., deliberately makes Nogay a Qonggirad and Salji’üdai an Uyghur, thus changing the historical narrative to better suit the dynastic needs of his patron (Bregel, 1982 : 365, n. 40, 391).

8 According to Rashīd al-Dīn, the conflict was fueled by Qiyan’s conversion to Islam and the resulting conflicts with her husband, who was of the Nestorian faith (JT, 2 : 364). This conflict was probably used by both parties to solve some broader disagreements, relating to Nogay’s attempts to control Toqta.

9 Qutluq Temür became the ruler of Khwārazm as early as summer 1315 (cf. Qāshānī, 1968 : 151).

10 Scholars variously relate Nanguday to Yaylaq (Sabitov, 2014 : 128), Nogay (Iskhakov and Izmaylov, 2007 : 153-154), or Qutluq Temür (Akhmedov, 1965 : 112, n. 15 ; Zaytsev, 2016 : 244-245).

11 Some claim Nanguday to be a Qonggirad, which is not based on any historical data (Iskhakov and Izmaylov, 2007 : 154 ; Sabitov, 2012 : 122). Zaytsev (2016 : 244-245) recently used an inscription from Crimea, cited by Evliya Çelebi in the 17th c., which in his opinion relates Nanguday to Qutluq Temür. The waqfiyya of the endowment, which was purportedly established by Qutluq Temür, claims that he was the “son of Najm al-Dīn, son of Abnai Turk Tuydi”. This lineage does not have any clearly identifiable Qonggirad origin (Gulyamov, 1957 : 169-170). Note that according to Gulyamov, the waqf was established in 1349, while according to the Mujmal-i Faṣīkhī, Qutluq Temür passed away in 1335 (1980 : 59, cf. Tiesenhausen, 1941 : 93, 221 [Qazwīnī]). However, the waqf could have been established post mortem or there might have been a scribal error. This issue warrants further research.

12 According to Mūnīs (1999 : 88-89), Nanguday was deeply religious and moved to Khwārazm together with Sayyid Atā, settled in Kath and even served as a pīr (Sufi teacher) at Baqirghan, near Kath (cf. DeWeese, 1994 : 101-104).

13 ʿAbbās Wālī was a Khwārazmian saint, whose tomb was located at Kath. The tomb no longer existed by 1955 (Snesarev, 1983 : 125-127).

14 The sources mention three brothers : Ḥusayn, Yūsuf and Aq Ṣūfīs (ḤS, 3 : 421-422 ; ẒNS : 66-67 ; ẒNY : 179-180). The later CN talks about Aq Ḥusayn, possibly merging two names (CN : 113).

15 One of the reasons Yanina (1971 : 46) claimed the non-existence of the dynasty was that none of the contemporary sources used the title “Ṣūfī Qonggirad”. However, at least Khwandamīr used this title with regard to Ḥusayn and Yūsuf (ḤS, 3 : 421, 428), but it does not seem to be the name of the dynasty. I here either follow the terminology of Barthold or call the dynasty “the Nangudayids” (cf. Yanina, 1971 : 48).

16 Yazdī uses dārūga (ẒNY : 176).

17 Ḥusayn Bek, the de facto ruler of parts of the Chagatayid ulus in the 1340s-1360s, also intended to marry his son to a daughter of Ḥusayn in 1366. Irrespective of whether this happened or not, this desire highlights the importance of the Ṣūfīds during the 1360s (ẒNY : 87).

18 Cf. the claim of Muʿizz al-ansāb, that Tughdi Beg, daughter of Aq Ṣūfī, was a wife of Temür (MA: 116, Woods, 1990: 18).

19 Sources ascribe this change in Yūsuf’s actions to the bad influence of Sultan Maḥmūd, a son of Kay Khosrov Khutallani (ḤS, 3: 422-423; ẒNY: 181;).

20 Temürid historians claim that Temür tried to settle this conflict in a peaceful manner (ẒNY : 218).

21 Cf. a description of the same events by Ghiyāth al-Dīn ‘Alī from Yazd, whose work was published as Dnevnik pokhoda Timura v Indiyu by Semenov, and earlier in 1915 in Persian, edited by Zimin and Barthold (Zimin and Barthold, 1915 ; Ghiyāth al-Dīn ʿAlī, 1958 : 31-32, cf. Yakubovskiy, 1946 : 42-43 and Barthold, 1973 : 328-335 on the source). Even though the author wrote about twenty years after the events in question (i.e. still during Temür’s lifetime), he seems to get the facts confused and simply uses Temür’s conquest of Khwārazm as an example of rightful conquest.

22 Akhmedov (1965 : 113-114) claims that a khuṭba was read in the mosques of Urgench in the name of Temür, but no confirmation of this can be found in historical sources.

23 Note the remark of Naṭanzī (1957 : 96) that the mother of Toqtamish, Kūtun ( ?) Kūnchek, was a Qonggirad. If true, one wonders whether this strengthened the cooperation between Toqtamish and the Qonggirads.

24 Yazdī also mentions ʿAlī Beq Qonggirad, who was one of the greatest amīrs of the Jochids at that time. He opposed the campaign against Temür, but his influence weakened during the late 1380s (ẒNY, 1957 : 298). According to TGNN, his ancestor was a nöker and tümen commander of Shiban (Mustakimov, 2010 : 231). One of his descendants, Muḥammad Bek, served Abū al-Khayr Khān (r. 1428-1468), a descendant of Shībān, in the 15th c. (Mustakimov, 2010 : 234, 236, cf. also 235, n. 51). His origin is unclear.

25 Another name mentioned by Yazdī is Il Igmish Oghlan, a Jochid, who was present in Khwārazm during the late 1380s (on behalf of Toqtamish ?) and supported Süleyman (ẒNY : 323).

26 During Temür’s campaign in Desht-i Qipchaq in 1391, there was a battle between the two armies on June 18. Two Qonggirads appear amongst the military commanders of Toqtamish – Süleyman Ṣūfī and Nawrūz. The origin of Nawrūz and his affiliation with Süleyman are unclear (ẒNY, 1957 : 384).

27 As suggested by Weinberg (1960 : 108), these coins could not have been minted in Urgench itself, but were most likely produced in Khwārazm’s northernmost areas.

28 For a discussion of Jochid numismatics see Fedorov-Davydov, 2003.

29 For examples of anonymous Khwārazmian coins see Masson, 1929 : 56 ; Weinberg, 1960 : 110-111, 114 ; cf. Yanina, 1971. The online numismatic portal www.zeno.ru also includes a significant collection of anonymous Khwārazm coins (gold, silver and copper).

30 There is a remark in the later Chingiz Name, which describes the enthronement of Khizr Khān by Aq-Ḥusayn Ṣūfī as a reaction to the policies of Taydula, the widow of Özbek (CN, 1992 : 113). However, the mention of Qonggirad support for Khizr is unique and might indicate a bigger Qonggirad influence on Jochid politics than has been previously assumed during the turmoil period.

31 Cf. #161749 in the zeno.ru catalogue (http://www.zeno.ru, accessed 31 March, 2017).

32 See the relevant collection on http://www.zeno.ru/showgallery.php?cat=1260, accessed 31 March, 2017.

33 This claim of Barthold (1963a : 154-155 and above) concerning the appearance of the Islamic anonymous formula being the sign of the theocratic nature of the Khwārazmian state under the Ṣūfīs was supported by Fedorov-Davydov (2003 : 24-25).

34 The appearance of Islamic names among Nanguday’s sons suggests that the conversion of the clan to Islam occurred at the latest in their father’s lifetime, the first half of the 14th c.

35 One can also find persons with the second name Ṣūfī amongst the Jochids, but mainly in the later periods and not amongst the tribal elite in the period under discussion (cf. TGNN : 36, 38, 42-43). In the 15th c. it appears also in other tribes, such as the Naiman and the Qangli, but not in the context of Khwārazm (cf. TGNN : 16-17 ; Sheybāni Nāme, 1969 : 96, 101-102).

36 One such case is Da’ūd Ṣūfī, who is called the son-in-law of Toqtamish (dāmād-e Tūqtemish) and appears in the sources during the 1390s (ẒNY : 533). One wonders whether this Da’ūd was from the Qonggirad Ṣūfī lineage. There is also B(P)īrim Ṣūfī, son of Yūsuf Ṣūfī, who served Temür in 1393 (ẒNY : 436). It is not clear whether B(P)īrim Ṣūfī was a son of Yūsuf Ṣūfī Qonggirad.

37 The sources include some military elites with the second name Ṣūfī, who were either related to Khwārazm or to the Qonggirad tribe in the following centuries (see below).

38 If the reports about the tomb of Nanguday in Khiva are true, then the question arises whether the wish of Ḥusayn and his clan to expand their rule to Khiva could have been related to this.

39 Almost certainly this Khwāja Laq is the one mentioned above.

40 DeWeese (1994: 102, n. 75) suggested that Aq Ṣūfī was the son of Nanguday. However, Bakhtī Bī Khātūn was possibly related to Aq Ṣūfī Qonggirad of Adaq. The manuscript used by Vokhidov mentions her as a concubine of Ulugh Beq and names “Aq Ṣūfī Barlas” as her father (MA : 161). The other wife of Ulugh Beq was Aka Beki, daughter of Muḥammad Sultan, son of Mīrzā Jahāngīr and Khānzādeh (Woods, 1992 : 30, 43).

41 Yūsuf Ṣūfī’s son, Nadar, became one of the keepers of the great seal of Ḥusayn Bāyqarā (MA: 192), as did one Bukhlul Ṣūfī (MA: 191). One Yūsuf Ṣūfī Jāndār (the bey of Azaq ?) is mentioned as having participated in the conquest of Khwārazm (MA : 189). Also note that ʿUthmān Qonggirad, son of Muḥammad Ṣūfī and Muḥammad-ʿAlī (known as Mīrzā Ayaq/Afaq) Qonggirad, who first supported Muṣṭafā Khan, appears as the rebellious ruler of Wasir in 1461 (ḤS, 4 : 128-129, MA : 188-189).

42 Note, for example, Chīn Ṣūfī (d. 1505), a ruler of Adak, who occupied Urgench in the early 16th c. and supported Ḥusayn Bāyqarā (Muḥammad Salikh/Vasary, 1885: 187-189; Bābur Nāme, 1969: 255-256; Tārīkh-i Rashidi, 1970: 204). Cf. also Sherīf Ṣūfī, who appeared in Khwārazm around 1510 (Barthold, 1965 : 75, n. 2).

43 This discussion, which goes beyond the limits of this paper, revolves around the question whether the Qonggirads of Khwārazm of the 13th-14th c. had any relation to the Qonggirad founders of the Khivian dynasty of the early 19th c. The official chronicler of Eltüser Khan, Mūnīs, was a strong promoter of this idea (Bregel, 1982: 384). Note also that some clans of the modern Uzbeks (including those in the Khwārazm areas), Kazakhs (Vostrov/Mukanov, 1968 : 77), and Karakalpaks have the name “Qonggirad” or relate themselves to this tribe (Vambery, 1885 : 349 ; Potapov, 1930, 1995 : 19, 34, 37 and passim ; Karmysheva, 1976 : 86-95 ; Ilkhamov et al., 2002). “Qonggirads” appear as a clan name also amongst the Nogays, including in Crimea and even in the south of modern Moldova (Williams, 2001 : 340 ; Kereyitov, 2009 : 85-86 ; cf. Mustakimov, 2011 : 235-236, n. 51 ; Zaytsev, 2016 : 249-251). These claims, which are based mainly on later sources, warrant further research.

44 Starting from the 15th c., sources mention Qonggirads being employed in the Uzbek (particularly Sheybanid) armies (TGNN : 16, 22, 28 ; Sheybāni Nāme, 1969 : 97 ; Tārīkh Abū al-Khayr Khānī, 2007 : 238).

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Ishayahu Landa, « From Mongolia to Khwārazm: The Qonggirad Migrations in the Jochid Ulus (13th.-15th. c.) », Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée [En ligne], 143 | octobre 2018, mis en ligne le 12 octobre 2018, consulté le 15 novembre 2018. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/remmm/11105

Haut de page

Auteur

Ishayahu Landa

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Licence Creative Commons
Les contenus de la Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée sont mis à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International.

Haut de page