• 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

• 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

• 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).

• 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).

• 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

• 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