Potter, Lawrence, Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran

International Society for Iranian Studies
Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran

Author(s): Lawrence G. Potter
Source: Iranian Studies, Vol. 27, No. 1/4, Religion and Society in Islamic Iran during the Pre-
Modern Era (1994), pp. 77-102
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of International Society for Iranian Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4310887 .
Accessed: 06/07/2011 11:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=isis. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
International Society for Iranian Studies and Taylor & Francis, Ltd. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Iranian Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
Iranian Studies, volume 27, numbers 1-4, 1994
LawrenceG. Potter
Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran*
One of the least-studied eras of Iranianhistory is that between the invasion of

Changiz Khan (Genghis Khan) in the early 13th centuryand the establishmentof
the Safavid Empireearly in the 16th. This was a time of unprecedentedpolitical
upheaval when much of the Iranianworld became subject to rule by Mongols
and Turks. The period between the collapse of the (Mongol) Il-Khandynasty in
1335, however, and the consolidationof the empire of Timur (Tamerlane)in the
1380s was an age of regionalism par excellence and one of culturalflorescence.
The most importantof the minor dynasties that flourished at this time were the
Muzaffaridsin Fars, Iraq-i 'Ajam and Kirman(1314-93), the Jalayiridsin Iraq,
Kurdistanand Azarbaijan (1336-1432), and, in Khurasan,the Karts at Herat
(1245-1389) and the Sarbidarsat Sabzavar(1336-81).
The period between approximately1200 and 1500 was also crucial for Iran's re-
ligious identity.' The Mongol invasions ushered in an age of religious transi-
tion duringwhich tensions between Sunni and Shi'i subsidedand differences be-
tween schools of law became less important. The Mongols' destructionof the
Isma'ilis or Assassins was greeted with relief by Sunnis. But their murderof the
caliph was a catastrophe,at least on the theoretical level. Henceforth, political
legitimacy would be grantednot by caliphal approvalbut throughdescent from
Changiz Khan.
The Mongols themselves were not initially partial to a particularreligious per-

suasion. If anything,the earlierMongol age "was a period of co-existence of the
various Muslim religious views. This co-existence amounted almost to a
*This article is based on a chapter in my doctoral dissertation, "The Kart Dynasty of

Herat: Religion and Politics in Medieval Iran" (Columbia University, 1992). I am
most grateful to Profs. Richard W. Bulliet, Jo-Ann Gross, Carl W. Ernst and Simon
Digby for comments on earlier drafts, and to Haideh Sahim for invaluable assistance.
1. For overviews, see A. Bausani, "Religion Under the Mongols," in J. A. Boyle,
ed., The Cambridge History of Iran (hereafter CHI), vol. 5, The Saljuq and Mongol
Periods (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), 538-49; B. S. Amoretti,
"Religion in the Timurid and Safavid Periods," in CHI vol. 6, The Timuridand Safavid
Periods (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1986), 610-55; Michel M. Mazza-
oui, The Origins of the Safawids: St'ism, Sufism, and the Gulat (Wiesbaden: Franz
Steiner Verlag, 1972); and Said Amir Arjomand, The Shadow of God and the Hidden
Imam: Religion, Political Order, and Societal Change in Shi'ite Iran from the Begin-
ning to 1890, Center for Middle Eastern Studies publication No. 17 (Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 1984), 66-84.
78 Potter
freedom of religious beliefs and reciprocaltoleration."2Several of the Il-Khans
were probablyBuddhists and there were many Buddhist shrines in Iran. Chris-
tians and Jews also were able to gain high positions in government. The con-
version of the seventh Il-Khanidruler, Ghazan, in 1295 to (Sunni) Islam was a
key development, although he was also favorably disposed toward the Shi'is.
His successor and brother,Oljeitu (Persian:Uljaytu), was in succession a Chris-
tian, a Buddhist, and finally a Muslim (first a Hanafi, then a Shafi'i, and finally
a Shi'ite). The last Il-Khan,Abu Sa'id, was a Sunni.3
The most significantreligious developmentof the Il-Khanidperiod (1256-1335)

was the rapid spreadof Sufi orders.4 At an earlierstage, Sufis had tended to be
individual ascetics loosely grouped arounda master. By the time of the Mon-
gols, Sufism became a mass movement with organized brotherhoods. Sufism
was undoubtedlyappealing at a time of widespreadinsecuritywhen Islam itself
was perceived to be in danger. Sufis, especially in ruralareas, increasingly at-
tractedpeople to a more personal and emotional form of the faith, as opposed to
the urban-centered "official"Islamrepresentedby the ulama.
The foci of mystical activity were the Sufi masters who, based in their
kha-neqachsor hospices, taught adepts the inner natureof Islam and impartedto
them properrules of conduct. After he died, the saint's holiness or baraka was
transmittedthrougha chain (silsila) of spiritualheirs who often kept the succes-
sion within their own family.5 Eventuallyhis tomb became the focus of venera-
tion and a powerful local institution, supportedby waqf or inalienable endow-
ment.
In the post-Mongol period, shrines increasinglysupplantedmosques as the main

centers of religious activity. Between approximately1305 and 1365, a number
of importantshrineswere erectedin Iranaroundthe graves of Sufi saints, includ-
ing those at Jam, Natanz, Pir-e Bakran, Ardebil and Bastam.6 In most cases,
2. Mazzaoui, Origins of the Safawids, 38.

3. Bausani, "Religion Under the Mongols," 543. Ghazan, dressed in a woolen cloak
(suJ) was converted by a Kubravishaykh from Khorasan(Charles Melville, "Pa-dshaih-
i Islacm:The Conversion of Sultan Mahmud Ghazan Khan," in Pembroke Papers 1
[1990], Persian and Islamic Studies in honour of P. W. Avery, ed. Charles Melville
[Cambridge:Centre of Middle Eastern Studies, University of Cambridge, 1990], 159-
77).
4. See further:Mohsen Kiyani (Mira), T&rikh-ekhdneqahdar Irdn, Zaban va Farhang-
e Iran 122 (Tehran: Tahuri, 1369 Sh./1990); Manuchehr Mortazavi, "Tasavvof dar
dawreh-ye ilkhanan," Nashriyeh-ye ddneshkadeh-ye adabtyat-e Tabriiz 9 (1336
Sh./1958): 297-337; Annemarie Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam (Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1975); J. Spencer Trimingham, The Sufi
Orders in Islam (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971); and Abdol-Hosein Zarrinkoob,
"Persian Sufism in Historical Perspective," Iranian Studies 3 (1970): 136-220.
5. Such was the case at Ardebil. See A. H. Morton, "The Ardabil Shrine in the Reign
of Shah Tahmasp I," Iran 12 (1974): 34.
6. Lisa Golombek, "The Cult of Saints and Shrine Architecture in the Fourteenth
Century,"in D. K. Kouymjian, ed., Near Eastern Numismatics, Iconography, Epigra-
Sufis and Sultans 79
representativesof the Il-Khanidgovernmentcooperatedwith the Sufi community
in building them.7 These shrines played an importantrole in the life of the local
community: their domes were landmarksfor travelers and pilgrims seeking the
saint's intercession to solve their problems, and they became the venues of reli-
gious festivals, especially on the 'urs, or anniversaryof the saint's death.
The increased attractionof Sufism is reflected in changing tastes in religious ar-

chitecture, with the popularityof the khdneqahat its height in the 14th century.
From around the year 1300, following the precedent of Ghazan Khan and his
vizier Rashid al-Din at Tabriz and Yazd, when madrasas or theological schools
were built for the ulama they were often paired with khaneqahs.8 When Ibn
Battuta traveled through Iran in the 1330s, he could depend on finding
khacneqachs everywhere for accommodation.9 Ibn Yamin Faryumadi(d. 1368),
the eulogist of several small Khorasani rulers, even criticizes the excessive
spending to embellish khaneqa-hsin a poem.'0 For Heratunderthe Karts,Allen
has documentedthe existence of 12 khacneqdhsand 4 madrasas, whereas in the
15th century under the Timurids he has identified 14 khaneqa-hs and 38
madrasas."I A similar situation prevailed in Yazd, where fourteen kha-neqahs
were built in the 14th century, as opposed to only four in the 15th century.'2
The increased popularityof the madrasa in the 15th century seems to indicate
that the ulama by then had overtakenthe Sufis as the objects of patronage.
What did it mean to be a Sufi at this time? To answer this question, it is help-
ful to investigate the social roles they played. An importantcorrective to the
earlier emphasis on Sufis as reclusive mystics is provided by RichardEaton in
his study of Sufis in medieval Bijapur,India. He found that Sufis there included
warriors,reformists, scholars, landed proprietorsand dervishes-in short, Sufis
defy easy categorization.'3 As this paper seeks to demonstrate,his conclusions
phy and History: Studies in Honor of George C. Miles (Beirut: American University
of Beirut, 1974), 419-30.
7. Ibid., 427.
8. Lisa Golombek and Donald Wilber, The TimuridArchitecture of Iran and Turan,
vol. 1: Text. Princeton Monographs in Art and Archaeology, 46 (Princeton: Prince-
ton University Press, 1988), 48.
9. For example, he stayed at khdneqahs in Bokhara, Termez, Balkh and Nishapur
(Ibn Battuta, The Travels of Ibn Battuta, A.D. 1325-1354, trans. H. A. R. Gibb
[Cambridge:Cambridge University Press for the Hakluyt Society, 1971], 3:554, 570,
573 and 584).
10. E. H. Rodwell, Ibn Yamin: 100 Short Poems, The Persian Text with Paraphrase
(London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner& Co., 1933), 44, "The Craze for Building."
11. Terry Allen, Timurid Herat, Beihefte zum Tubinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients:
Reihe B (Geisteswissenschaften) Nr. 56 (Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag,
1983), 47 fn. 99; 73-75. Allen, however, regards the Kart kha-neqachsas "the func-
tional equivalents of Saljuq or Timurid madrasas; they were simply large religious
foundations with royal support" (p. 47).
12. Isabel A. M. Miller, "The Social and Economic History of Yazd (c. A.H. 736/A.D.
1335-c. A.H. 906/A.D. 1500," (Ph.D. diss., U. of London, 1990), 292.
13. Richard M. Eaton, Sufis of Bijapur, 1300-1700: Social Roles of Sufis in Me-
dieval India (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978).
80 Potter
are also applicableto medieval Khorasan.
One of the importantissues debatedby Sufis themselves at this time was the ex-
tent to which they should cooperate, or collaborate, with state authorities.'4
Some of the most prominentSufis were noted for consortingwith rulers,includ-
ing Jalal al-Din Rumi (d. 1273) at Konya and 'Ala' al-Dawleh Semnani (d.
1336), who served the Il-KhanArghun. In 14th-centuryShiraz,the Sufi masters
"were not persons withdrawnfrom the world. On the contrary,they were mem-
bers of the most powerful and wealthy families of Shiraz. They consortedwith
the rulersand controlleda great deal of wealth in the endowmentsof the dervish
lodges (khlneqah)."15 Ties with ruling princes ultimatelybecame crucial to the
success of the most powerfulorders(witness the Naqshbandisand Safavids). The
Naqshbandi shaykh, KhwajaAhrar(1404-90), maintainedthat in order to help
the oppressedhe had to mingle with kings to obtain influence with them.'6
Some Sufi shaykhsbecame very rich and accustomedto receiving regulardona-

tions from rulers. It was also evidently normal for political authoritiesto con-
firm in power the head of the kha-neqaih.Thus we have decrees of the Il-Khanid
Abu Sa'id deciding the succession of the shaykh at Ardebil,'7 and the Timurid
Abu Sa'id acknowledgingthe authorityof the custodianof the Jam shrine.'8
Another school of thoughtheld that close contact with the government,and ac-
cepting gifts from it, was corrupting. Sufi shaykhs should not be too closely
identified with political rulers,lest they lose power. The Kobraviorderdeclined
in CentralAsia after making the mistake of supportingTimur's opponents.'9 In
India, the early Chishtis were noted for refusing government service, avoiding
the company of kings, and declining to accept land grants (jdg-rs).20 Their
"certificateof succession"(kheldfat-niameh) forbadethem to accept royal gifts,21
and they only acceptedfotuTh,that is, charity that was unsolicited. It is related
that ShaykhNezam al-Din Awliya repeatedlyrefused to receive Sultan 'Ala' al-
14. On this subject see Kiyani, Tirikh-e khdneqah, 502-10.

15. John W. Limbert, "Shiraz in the,Age of Hafez" (Ph.D. diss., HarvardUniversity,
1973), 197.
16. Jurgen Paul, "Forminga Faction: The Himayat System of Khwaja Ahrar,"Inter-
national Journal of Middle East Studies 23 (1991): 542.
17. V. Minorsky, "A Mongol Decree of 720/1320 to the Family of Shaykh Zahid,"
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 16 (1954): 515-27.
18. "(Letter)of Sultan Abu Sa'id Mirza Concerningthe khaneqah of Shaykh al-Islam
KhWajaRazi al-Din Ahmad al-Jami, composed by 'Abd al-Hayy," in 'Abd al-Hosayn
Nava'i, Asnad va mokatebat-e tdrikhl-ye Irdn, vol. 1, Az Taymu-rta Shah Esma&ll,in
series Entesharat-e Bongah-e Tarjomeh va Nashr-e Ketab, no. 145 (Tehran, 1341
Sh./1962), 314-15.
19. Devin DeWeese, "The Eclipse of the Kubraviyah in CentralAsia," Iranian Stud-
ies 21 (1988): 61 and 79.
20. On the Chishti attitude toward the state, see Khaliq Ahmad Nizami, Some As-
pects of Religion and Politics in India During the ThirteenthCentury,2nd ed. (Delhi:
Idarah-i Adabiyat-i Delli, 1974; repr. 1978), 240-48.
21. Aziz Ahmad, "The Sufi and the Sultan in Pre-MughalMuslim India,"Der Islam 38
(1962): 143.
Din Khalji (1296-1316), saying, "My house has two doors. If the Sultan enters
by one, I will make my exit by the other."22
This contrast between sacred and secular claims to authorityshould not, how-
ever, be overdrawn. As Ernstremindsus,
In medievalIslamicsociety,Sufismandthe courtwerenevertotallyseparate
fromone another.For all thatthe earlyChishtismay have refusedlanden-
dowmentsfrom sultans,they nonetheless,reliedon gifts (futzh) from all
classes of society, especiallythe wealthierclasses. ManyleadingChishti
discipleswere membersof the courtor the administration.Farfrombeing
anarchistsor even democrats,the Chishtimastersclearlyregardedthe royal
institution,with appropriate Islamicorientation,as the normalformof reg-
ulating society.23
Although most orders were Sunni, the incorporationinto some orders of ideas
associated with Shi'ism, such as veneration of 'Ali and expectation of the
Mahdi, was an importantphenomenonof the 14th and 15th centuries. Arjomand
suggests two factors which help account for the profusion of heterodox move-
ments at this time: in a period of political decentralization,religion could mobi-
lize the masses for political action, and at a time of widespreadmillenarianex-
pectationscharismaticindividualscould easily establish a following.24
After the collapse of Il-Khanidauthority,some militant Shi'ite Sufi orders went

on to form small states, such as the Sarbedarsin Sabzavarand the Mar'ashis in
Tabarestan. Some Sunni orders, such as the Kobraviyehand the Ne'matollahi,
even became transformedinto Shi'ite ones.25 In the most dramaticcase, the
successors of Shaykh Safi al-Din (d. 1334) transformedtheir tarzqa into a rmili-
tant movement supported by Turkic tribesmen from Anatolia in which the
Safavid leaders asserted their own divinity. It is important to point out,
however, that this transformationfrom Sunni to Shi'i was a sudden, not a grad-
ual, one that occuredin the mid-lSth centuryin the case of both the Safavids and
the Kobraviyeh. The Ne'matollahi evidently changed allegiance after the acces-
sion of Shah Esma'il in the early 16th century. In all of these changes political
22. Sayyed Mohammad b. Mobarak b. Mohammad 'Alavi Kermani (Mir Khword),

Siyar al-awliyd' (Delhi: Chirangi Lal ed., 1302/1885), 135, cited in Khaliq Ahmad
Nizami's "Introduction"to Nizam ad-din Awliya: morals for the heart: conversations
of Shaykh Nizam al-din Awliya recorded by Amir Hasan Sijzi, trans. Bruce B.
Lawrence, The Classics of Western Spirituality series (New York: Paulist Press,
1992), 35.
23. Carl W. Ernst, Eternal Garden: Mysticism, History, and Politics at a South Asian
Sufi Center, Muslim Spirituality in South Asia series, ed. Annemarie Schimmel
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992), 88-9.
24. Arjomand, Shadow of God, 82.
25. DeWeese, "Eclipse of the Kubravlyah," 45-83; Terry Graham, "Shah
Ni'matullah Wall: Founder of the Ni'matullahi Sufi Order,"in L. Lewisohn, ed., The
Legacy of Medicval Persian Sufism (London and New York: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi
Publications, 1992), 173-90. See also Jean Aubin, "De Kfuhbanana Bidar: la famille
Ni'matullahil,"Studia Iranica 20 (1991): 233-61.
82 Potter
considerationsmay have been paramount.
To explore some of the dimensions of Sufism in this period, this article will in-
vestigate two shrine communities in the eastern province of Khorasan,at Jam
and Chisht, both of which grew up aroundthe graves of mystics who lived in
the pre-Mongol period. It will focus in particularon their relations with the
Kartdynasty,26who ruled at the nearbycity of Heratostensibly as vassals of the
Mongols. The Kartswere a native Persian or Tajik dynasty which was respon-
sible for rebuilding and reinvigoratingHerat after the Mongols destroyed it in
1222. They played an important,if neglected, role in laying the groundworkfor
the achievements of the Timurids (1381-1500), in whose time the name Herat
became synonymouswith the heights of artisticexpression.
Sufis on the Frontier:Jam and Chisht
The city of Jam, known in pre-Mongol times as Buzjan27and at presentas Tor-

bat-e Jam or Torbat-e Shaykh-e Jam, is roughly equidistant from Herat and
Mashhad. With an elevation of 2,300 feet, Jam is situated on a plain between
two mountainranges in a semi-desert region watered by the Jam river and nu-
merous qanats. There are extensive pastures and meadows.28 In the medieval
period Jam was considered a medium-sized town, with around 200 villages
counted as its dependencies.29 Jam has long been importantfor its strategiclo-
26. For more information on this neglected dynasty see my dissertation. Secondary
sources include E. G. Browne, A Literary History of Persia, vol.3, The TartarDomin-
ion (1265-1502) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902; repr. 1976), 173-
80; Bertold Spuler, Die Mongolen in Iran: Politik, Verwaltung und Kultur der
Ilchanzeit 1220-1350, 4th ed. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985), 129-33; V. M. Masson'
and V. A. Romodin, Istoriia Afganistana: s drevneishikhvremen do nachala 16 veka,
(Moscow: Nauka Publishers, 1964), 1:295-327; and 'Abbas Eqbal, Tartkh-e
mofassal-e Iran: az esttld-ye Moghol ta e'ldn-e mashru-ttyat,vol. 1, Tdrikh-e Moghol
az hamleh-ye Changiz ta tashkil-e dawlat-e Taymurt,4th impression (Tehran: Amir
Kabir, 2536/1977), 366-79.
27. G. Le Strange, The Lands of the Eastern Caliphate: Mesopotamia, Persia, and
Central Asia from the Moslem Conquest to the Time of Timur(Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1905; repr. Lahore: Al-biruni, 1977), 356.
28. On the geography of the region see Naval Intelligence Division, British Admi-
ralty, Persia, Geographical Handbook Series, B.R. 525 (Oxford: Oxford University
Press[?],1945), 39-47. Also see two standard Persian geographies: 'Ali Razmara,
Farhang-e joghrdfiya't-ye Iran, vol. 9, OstSn-e nohom: Khora-san(Tehran: Dayere-ye
Joghrafiya'i-ye Setad-e Artesh, Esfand 1329/March 1951), 84-5; and 'Abd al-Reza
Faraji, ed., Joghrdfiyd-ye kamel-e lrdn, (Tehran: Sherkat-e Chap va Nashr-e Iran,
1366 Sh./1987), 1:625.
29. The 10th-century Arab geographers counted 180 villages as dependencies (Le
Strange, Lands of the Eastern Caliphate, 356-57); in the early 13th century Yaqut
counted 200 (Yaqut b. 'Abd Allah al-Hamawi,Mu'jam al-bulddn, trans.C. B. de Mey-
nard,Dictionnaire g6ographique, historique et litteraire de la Perse et des contr&esad-
jacentes [Paris, 1861; repr. Amsterdam: Philo Press, 1970], 150); and in the early
14th century Mostawfi counted 200 (The Geographical Part of the Nuzhat-al-Qulub
cation on the transitroutes and its agriculturalwealth-the areaproducedconsid-
erable quantities of silk.30 Like similar towns that boasted an importantlocal
Sufi saint, Jam benefited from a steady stream of pilgrims to the shrine of
Shaykh Ahmad (440-536/1049-1141). The district also producedscholars, the
most notable being Mawlana 'Abd al-RahmanJami, the great scholar, poet and
Sufi (817-898/1414-1492).
Chisht3l is located in the Harirudvalley, some 95 miles east and seven days'
journey from Herat. Situated at an altitude of 4,970 feet, Chisht was the last
major town in the valley and here one entered into the region of Ghur.32
Mostawfi, writing at the time of the Karts, describes it as a medium-sized town
where the governor of the province, whose district included 50 villages, lived.
Mostawfi commented on its abundantcrops and excellent fruit.33 Geographers
have little else to say about it, other than rhapsodizing about its setting-as
Hafez Abruputs it, "like a gardenof paradise."34
It was no coincidence that the khaneqahs at Jam and Chisht were located away
from centers of secular authority. The spirituallocus of power could not be-at
least at this time-the same as that of secular power, if it were to remain effec-
tive. Thus some of the most influential orders, such as the Safavids at Ardebil,
the Chishtis at Ajudhan and later the Ne'matollahis.at Mahan, were located in
cities far from political capitals. These cities, however, were all importantsta-
tions on caravanrouteswhich regularlyreceived news of the wider world.
This situationis similar to the frontierSufis in North Africa describedby Ernest

Gellner.35 He found that in the CentralAtlas mountainsof Morocco there were
settlementsruled by hereditarysaints ("hagiarchies,"to use his term) focused on
an ancestral shrine. Such settlements were physically located on important
boundariesbetween tribes. Theirpresenceguaranteedthe boundariesthemselves,
composed by Hamd-Allah Mustawfi of Qazwln in 740 [1340], trans. G. Le Strange, E.

J. W. Gibb Memorial Series, 23, part 2 LLeiden:E. J. Brill and London: Luzac, 1919],
151).
30. Ibn Battuta, Travels 3:580.
31. Known to the 10th-century Arab geographers as Khasht, to Mostawfi as Jasht
and at present as KhwajaChisht or Chisht-e Sharif, it was originally known as Karzul,
but was renamedChisht by Abu Eshaq (the founder of the kha-neqa-h) after a town in his
native Syria (Abu'l-Qasem b. Ahmad Jayhani, Ashkdl-e 'alam, ed.. 'Ali b. 'Abd al-
Salam Kateb [Mashhad:Astan-e Qods-e Razavi, 1368 Sh./1989], 174). I am indebted
to Dr. MehrdadIzady for this reference.
32. Le Strange, Lands of the Eastern Caliphate, 410 ("Khasht").
33. Mostawfi, Nuzhat-al-Quluib,152. Refer to the Persian version of this text for the
correct spelling of the name (Gibb Memorial Series, 23, part 1 [1915]: 154).
34. Hafez Abru, Joghrafiya-ye Hdfez Abru: qesmat-e rob'-e Khordsan, Harat, ed.
Mayel Haravi, Manabe'-e tarikh va joghrafiya-ye Iran, 28 (Tehran: Entesharat-e
Bonyad-e Farhang-e Iran, 1349 Sh./1970), 92.
35. Ernest Gellner, Saints of the Atlas, The Nature of Human Society series (London:
Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1969); also idem, "Doctor and Saint," chap. in his Muslim
Society, Cambridge Studies in Social Anthropology 32 (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1981; repr. 1985), 114-30.
84 Potter
and their settlements were zones of peace where trade could be conducted,dis-
putes arbitratedand political leaders elected. The saints of the Atlas provided
stabilitywhereassecularrulerswere temporary.
Despite the differencein time and space, this system bears a strikingresemblance
to the functions of the shrine at Jam, which formed the effective boundarybe-
tween the Kartsand the Sarbedars,and that of Chisht, which delineatedareasof
Kart from Chaghatayinfluence. It suggests that the location of kha-neqahsin
borderareasshouldbe emphasizedas an importantaspectof Sufism.
The Shrine Communities36
Shaykh Ahmad Jam (440-536/1049-1141), nicknamedZhandapil(the colossal

elephant), lived his entire life in the vicinity of Jam, where he established a
mosque and khaneqah.37Ahmad did not study undera noted masternor was he
associated with any order,althougha later spurioustraditionhad him inheriting
the kherqehor frock of the noted mystic Abu Sa'id b. Abi'l-Khayr(d. 1049). A
strict follower of the shart'a, Ahmad apparentlyhad little contact with poets or
other prominent Sufis. For example, Farid al-Din 'Attar (d. 1220), who lived
nearby at Nishapur, does not mention him. But the Saljuq sultan, Sanjar,who
36. The sources at our disposal to study the orders at Jam and Chisht, unfortunately,
are limited. The political chroniclers-notably Hafez Abru-almost completely ig-
nore them. Utilized here is a biography of Shaykh Ahmad and his descendants enti-
tled Rawzat al-raydh1in, written in 1523 by a disciple, Darvish 'Ali Buzjani (ed.
Heshmat Mo'ayyad, Persian Texts Series, 29; ed. E. Yarshater [Tehran:Entesharat-e
Bongah-e Tarjomehva Nashr-e Ketab, 1345 Sh./1966]). Also useful is the Fara ed-e
Ghiyasi, a collection of correspondence assembled by Jalal al-Din Yusef Ahl around
836/1433 and presented to Shahrokh's vizier, KhwajaGhiyas al-Din Pir Ahmad (ed.
Heshmat Mo'ayyad, 2 vols, Zaban va adabiyat-e Farsi series, nos. 50 and 53 [Tehran:
Entesharat-e Bonyad-e Farhang-e Iran, no. 260, 2536/1977 and no. 297, 1358
Sh./1979]).
Investigating the history of Chisht is even more problematic. The Chishtiyeh be-
came one of the most influential orders in medieval India, and as such have received
considerable attention, notably by the Indian scholar Khaliq Ahmad Nizami. See his
Some Aspects of Religion and Politics; also idem, "Cishtiyya," in El2. For a different
viewpoint see GerhardBbwering, "Ceitlya," in Encyclopaedia Iranica (hereafterElr).
However, virtually all research has focused on the subcontinent; no sources are
known which would throw light on the order in Ghur. Historians, including Juzjani
who exhaustively chronicles the Ghurids, do not mention Chisht or the Chishtis. In
India, the early Chishti shaykhs chose not to record their own history, which has
frustratedmodern historians. The most importantearly hagiographical source, com-
posed between 1350 and 1380, is Mir Khword,Siyar al-awliyd', Mo'assaseh-ye Ente-
sharat-e Eslami, no. 21 (Lahore: Markaz-e Tahqiqat-e Farsi-ye Iran va Pakestan,
1398/1978). The Siyar al-awliya' is partially based on one of the classic works on
Indian Sufism, Fawa'id al-fu'ad, composed in the 1320s. The most significant later
account is Mawlana 'Abd al-RahmanJami's Nafahdt al-uns min hazardt al-quds, an au-
thoritative biographical dictionary of over 600 Sufi saints (ed. M. Towhidi-Pur [Teh-
ran: Ketabforushi-ye Sa'di, 1336 Sh./1958]).
37. On Shaykh Ahmad see H. Moayyad, "Ahmad-eJam," Elr (full bibliography).
ruled easternPersia from 1097 to 1157, was one of his disciples (morids),38and
this common tie reinforcedthe links between Ahmad's descendantsand the Kart
rulers.
Almost a centurypassed afterthe deathof ShaykhAhmadbefore any buildingac-

tivities commenced at the site. Jam evidently submittedpeacefully to the Mon-
gol advance in 1220-it could hardlydo otherwise.39The fact that the Jam area
was not molested by the Mongols is reflected in the same number of villages
reporteddependentupon it before and afterthe invasion. The majorcities in the
province of Khorasan,however, were devastated,and it was not until 634/1236-
37 that the Great Khan Ogedei (Persian:Oktai) orderedthe rebuilding of Herat
and surroundingareas.40 It was in this year that the oldest existing structureof
the shrine was built, a dome chamber,or gonbad, which today stands at the cen-
ter of the complex.41
The shrinecomplex of Shaykh Ahmad was built between the mid-13th and mid-
15th centuries and became an importantcenter of pilgrimage in eastern Iran.42
Ahmad's family-he had 14 sons-retained controlof the shrineand proliferated
to the extent that in 840/1436 about a thousandof his descendantswere living in
Jam, Nishapur,Heratand neighboringareas.43The shaykhs of Jam laterbecame
linked to the Mughal emperors:Mahim Begum, the wife of Babur,the dynasty's
founder,was descendedfrom ShaykhAhmad,44as was HamidehBegum, the wife
of Humayunand the motherof Akbar.45
Jean Aubin first drew attention to the importanthistorical role played by the
shaykhsof Jam. He observed,
38. Ibid.
39. 'Ala' al-Din 'Ata Malek Jovayni, Tdrikh-e jahan-goshd, trans. John Andrew
Boyle as The History of the World-Conqueror(Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 1958), 1:145.
40. Sayf b. Muhammadb. Ya'qub al-Harawi, The Ta'rikhNama-i-Harat (The History
of Hardt), ed. MuhammadZubayr as-Siddiqi (Calcutta: Baptist Mission Press, 1944;
repr. Tehran: Khayyam, 1352 Sh./1973), 102-7 (hereafter, Tdrikh-e Hardt).
41. Lisa Golombek, "The Chronology of Turbat-i Shaikh Jam," Iran 9 (1971): 27-
44. By examining the extant buildings and epigraphic and literary evidence,
Golombek has attempted to reconstruct the complex structuralhistory of the shrine.
See also Bernard O'Kane, "Taybad, Turbat-i Jam and Timurid Vaulting," Iran 17
(1979): 87-104.
42. The chief place of pilgrimage in Khorasan around the year 1400 was Mashhad.
(Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo, Embassy to Tamerlane, 1403-1406, trans. G. Le Strange,
The Broadway Travellers series [London: George Routledge & Sons, 1928], 185).
43. Moayyad, "Ahmad-e Jam." At the time of Buzjani's writing, almost four cen-
turies after the death of Shaykh Ahmad, there had been an unbroken chain of leaders
from among his descendants (Rawlat al-raydhin, 110).
44. Moayyad, "Ahmad-eJam";also Zahir al-Din MohammadBabur, The Bdbur-ndma
in English, trans. Annette Susannah Beveridge (London: Luzac, 1922; repr. 1969),
711, 714 and 776. She was marriedto Babur in 912/1506 and died in 940/1534.
45. Moayyad, "Ahmad-e Jam."
86 Potter
Stronger than all other of these religious lines of the Mongol epoch in their
position as territorial landowners and a hereditary cult, more than the
sayyids of Termez in Transoxiana,the Jami [shaykhs of Jam] stretched over
Khorasan a political influence of the first order.46
The shrine's prosperitywas closely linked to thatof the Kartsand helped provide
religious legitimacy for their rule. The shaykhs were connected by marriageto
the Kartsand repeatedlyplayed an importantmediatingrole duringconflicts be-
tween the Karts and 1l-Khans,usually negotiating on the Karts' behalf. Yet in
the end they abandonedthem to ensuretheirown survival.
The Khw4jegin of Chisht
The khaneqah at Chisht was founded by Abu Eshaq, a Sufi who migratedfrom
Syria around 260I874.47 At the time of its founding, the khaineqahwas out of
the reach of political authorities, in a region that was not yet Islamic. This
probablyperfectly suited the Sufis there, whose majorpreceptin latertimes was
to avoid contact with secular rulers. By around 1100, however, the Shansabani
family had assertedcontrolover Ghurand made it the capitalof a short-livedem-
pire.48 Chisht was right in the middle of this empire, close to the capital of
Firuzkuh. The Ghuridsultan Ghiyas al-Din Mohammad(1163-1202) extended
his patronageto Chisht,buildinga mosque and madrasa.49
The high point of the shrine came underKhwajaMawdudChishti (d. 527/1133),

the fourth successor to its founder.50 By the early 1200s, following a disputed
succession at the khaneqdh and the downfall of the Ghurids, the main seat of
Chishti power was transferredto India by Khwaja Mo'in al-Din Chishti (d.
46. Jean Aubin, "Le Khanat de Cagatai et le Khorassan (1334-1380)," Turcica 8

(1976): 34. This article is of fundamentalimportancefor an understandingof this pe-
riod.
47. Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi, A History of Sufism in India, vol.1, Early Sufism and
its History in India to A.D. 1600 (New Delhi: MunshiramManoharlal Publishers Pvt.
Ltd., 1978, repr. 1986), 114-15.
48. C. E. Bosworth, "The early Islamic history of Ghiur,"Central Asiatic Journal 6
(1961): 116-33; idem, "The Political and Dynastic History of the IranianWorld (A.D.
1000-1217)," in CHI 5:157-66; idem, "Ghurids," in EI2. See also Gaston Wiet,
"Commentairehistorique,"in Andre Maricq and Gaston Wiet, Le Minaret de Djam: Ia
Decouverte de la capitale des sultans ghorides (XII-XIII siecles), M6moires de la
Delegation Arch6ologique Franqaise en Afghanistan, 16 (Paris: Librairie C. Klinck-
sieck, 1959), 31-54.
49. Wiet, "Les Coupoles de Tshisht," in Maricq and Wiet, Le Minaret de Djam, Ap-
pendice 1, 69-70.
50. Jami, Nafahat al-uns, 326-9. KhWajaMawdud Chishti is today considered one of
the four great Sufis buried in Afghanistan (L. Dupree, "Saint Cults in Afghanistan,"in
American Universities Field Staff Reports, South Asia Series, vol. 20, no. 1 [May
1976]: 9).
633/1236).51 Significantly, at this time the city he settled in, Ajmer, did not
have an appreciableMuslim population.52At Ajudhan(today Pakpattan)on the
Sutlej River in the Punjab,one of Mo'in al-Din's disciples, Farid al-Din Ganj-e
Shekar (d. 644/1265), founded the first Chishti khacneqah.53The apogee of
Chishti influence came at the time of his successor, Shaykh Nezam al-Din
Awliya' of Delhi (d. 726/1325). Close ties were evidently maintainedbetween
the Sufis at Chisht and theirbrethrenat Ajudhanand Delhi, and in Indiansources
thereis occasional referenceto the importanceof the khwajega-nat Chisht.54
What was the natureof relationsbetween the ordersat Jam and Chisht,located to
the east and west of Herat? Although Golombek has stated that "the rivalrybe-
tween the shaykhs of Jam and Chisht was proverbial,"55this cannot be accepted
as a characterizationfor the Kart period. It seems mostly based on an incident
between Shaykh Ahmad of Jam and the head of the order at Chisht, Khwaja
Mawdud Chishti, in the early 1lOOs,a time when Sufis were carving out their
own spiritual veldyats or areas of authority throughout Khorasan.56 These
velayats could be precisely delimited, as in north India where a hierarchy of
saints was established and political terminology employed to describe it (thus,
Nezam al-Din Awliya' was called soltain al-mashayekh).57 Generally the
khaneqahsdid not develop as rivals,58but there was competitionfor morids.
It was then that ShaykhAhmadhad come from Jamto Herat,where he succeeded

in winning many followers. KhwajaMawdud, however, considered Herat to be
within his sphereof influence, and when Ahmadheaded for Chisht, Mawdudled
a band of 2,000 armed morids to throw him out of the velayat. Nevertheless,
Shaykh Ahmad continuedto performmiracles along the way (such as levitating
his disciples across the swollen Harirud). Mawdud's morzds plotted to
assassinate Shaykh Ahmad while he was napping, but he surprised them and
chased them away. Mawdud then repentedand, at Ahmad's direction, rehabili-
tated himself in order to vindicate his family's name. Aside from this incident,
however, no real hostility between the two khaneqahs comes through in the
51. P. M. Currie, The Shrine and Cult of Mu'i-n al-Din Chishti of Ajmer, Oxford
University South Asian Studies Series (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989).
52. IqtidarHusain Siddiqui, "The Early Chishti Dargahs,"in C. W. Troll, ed., Muslim
Shrines in India: Their Character, History and Significance, in series Islam in India:
Studies and Commentaries,IV (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989), 4-7.
53. Khaliq Ahmad Nizami, The Life and Times of Shaikh Farid-u'd-Din Ganj-i-Shakar
(Aligarh: Muslim University, 1955).
54. I am indebted to Mr. Simon Digby for calling several such sources to my atten-
tion. See also Fawd'id al-fu'ad, trans. Lawrence, 180.
55. Lisa Golombek, The TimuridShrine at Gazur Gah, Art and Archaeology Occa-
sional Paper 15 (Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum, 1969), 81.
56. Jami, Nafahat al-uns, 326-9, is the main source for this incident. A Chishti ver-
sion of the encounter is contained in Ilah-diyah Chishti's Siyar al-aqta-b, completed
in 1056/1646. See Simon Digby, "To Ride a Tiger or a Wall," in Winand M. Calle-
waert and RupertSnell, eds., According to Tradition:Hagiographical Writingin India
(Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994).
57. Nizami, Some Aspects of Religion and Politics, 175-7.
58. Rizvi, History of Sufism in India, 98; Ahmad, "The Sufi and the Sultan," 147.
88 Potter
sources. On the contrary,around 1300 both were on friendly terms with each
otherand with the Karts.
PopularAppeal
A study of the two orders discussed in this article illustratesthe great variety of
Sufi beliefs and practices and the different ways orders evolved. As Schimmel
has noted, "most of the Sufi orders are identified with certainstrataof the popu-
lation."59 For example, the Naqshbandisin TimuridHerat were closely associ-
ated with the ruling house; the Khalvatis, who were popularwith the common
people, were not.60 What was the ideology and natureof popularappeal of the
Sufis at Jam and Chisht? Although their practices await detailed study, they ap-
pear to representopposite ends of the Sufi spectrum:one, at Jam, was an elite
group closely tied to the state; the other, at Chisht, was a more "saintly"group
that shunnedstate involvement.
The biographerof Ahmad Jam presentedhim as the successor to the great Kho-
rasani Sufi, Abu Sa'id b. Abi'l-Khayr.6' But, as Schimmel remarks,
Ahmad-iJamwas a Persiansaintwho was the oppositeof Abu Sa'id in al-

most every respect:stern,proudof his mysticalpower,drawingpeople to
repentance,not to love, and often using his spiritualstrengthfor revenge
and punishment.62
Shaykh Ahmad was regardedas a conservative Sufi who strongly promotedthe

shari 'a, and his successors probablyfollowed his example. Shaykh Shehab al-
Din Esma'il, his great-grandsonand head of the orderfor half a centuryuntil his
death in the 1330s, once referredto the shaykhsof Jam as "lordsof the exoteric"
(arbab-e zdher), as opposed to disciples of the esoteric (ashab-e baten).63
The Sufis at Jam never became a mass movement, perhapsbecause they were
too elitist. They did not found a number of "daughtershrines," as did the
Chishtis in north India, nor do they appearto have been active in conversion.
Jam was, after all, not on the frontier of Islam, and the shrine was in a settled
agriculturalarea. Probablytheir most illustrious disciple was Shaykh Zayn al-
Din (d. 791/1389) in Tayebad, 60 kilometers south of Jam, who was honored
with his own monument in 848/1444. The shaykhs of Jam, in a manner
analagous to the Karts themselves, had a sense of their own territoriallimita-
tions.
59. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam, 241.

60. Jean Aubin, "Un Santon Quhist-anide 1'epoque timouride,"Revue des Etudes Is-
lamiques 35 (1967): 207.
61. Moayyad, "Ahmad-e Jam."
62. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam, 244.
63. Buzjani, Rawzat al-raydhin, 100.
Unlike Safavids such as Jonayd and Haydar,who marriedinto the Aq-Quyunlu
tribal federation, the Jam Sufis did not have marriage ties with surrounding
tribes. As is evident, at the time the ChaghatayraiderYasur attackedJam, the
city was fortified and the shaykh was protected by armed morids.64 But they
never became a conquering army like the Safavids. The Jam Sufis appearas a
wealthy, sober orderdeeply involved in governing their locality. And as Shaykh
Ahmad was tied to the Saljuq Soltan Sanjar, so were his descendants on close
terms with the Kartmaleks.
If the shaykhs of Jam were "Sufi aristocrats,"the Sufis at Chisht seem the exact
opposite. The Chishtis appear as a "saintly"group more typical of an earlier,
pre-Mongol form of Sufism. The location of their khaneqa-hin deepest Ghur
helped insulate them from contact with political authorities. The area surround-
ing Chisht-in contrast to Jam, which was on the main road-was a sparsely
populated region that, after the Mongol conquest, had increasingly become a
backwater. There was no population or resource base to support a large and
powerful khaneqah. In short, it was much easier for the Sufis at Chisht than
for the Sufis at Jam to remain non-political.
In the post-Mongol period the khdneqa-hplayed an importantrole as the source

of inspiration and legitimation for Chishti offshoots in the subcontinent. Two
incidents illustratethe potency of its spiritualauthorityin the late 13th century.
In the first, envoys from the khdneqdhat Chisht were visiting Shaykh Farid al-
Din, the most prominentChishti of his time, at Ajudhan. At his request, they
placed the "cap of devotion" (kolah-e erddat) on the heads of the shaykh's two
sons, thus legitimating their succession. When the envoys protested that they
were not worthy to carryout such a task in front of the famous Farid al-Din, he
deferentiallyreplied,"We have this fortune(ne'mat)from your family."65
Another anecdote is even more telling. Mir Khwordreportsthat aroundthe year

1300 his grandfathervisited Chisht and became a deputy (khalifeh) of Qotb al-
Din.66 For his returnto Ajudhan,Qotb al-Din gave him his own special riding
horse with his personal brandon it. At this time the Chaghatayarmy had been
defeated in one of its attacks on Delhi, and troops were straggling back to
64. Mo'in al-Din Mohammad Zamchi Esfezari, RawzMtal-janndt fi awsdf madinat

al-Harat, ed. Sayyed Mohammad Kazem Imam (Tehran: Entesharat-e Daneshgah-e
Tehran, Part 1 (1338 Sh./1959), 475, cited by Moayyad in comments to Buzjani,
Rawzat al-rayacin, 143.
65. Mir Khword,Siyar al-awliya-', 199. Also discussed in Simon Digby, "Tabarrukdt
and Succession among the Great Chishti Shaykhs of the Dehli Sultanate," in R. E.
Frykenberg, ed., Delhi Through the Ages: Essays in Urban History (Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 1986), 68-9.
66. Mir Khword,Siyar al-awliyd', 221. The approximate date may be deduced in
light of the fact that the most serious Chaghatay attacks on India took place between
1300 and 1305 (Aziz Ahmad, "Mongol Pressure in an Alien Land," Central Asiatic
Journal 6 [1961]: 187). This fits in with the fact that Mir Khword's grandfatherdied
in 1311 (C. A. Storey, Persian Literature: A Bio-Bibliographical Survey, vol. 1, part
2 [London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1953, repr. 1972], 942).
90 Potter
Transoxianain groups of one or two thousand. Several times, Mongol bands
approachedhis grandfatherintendingto rob him and steal his horse and boghcheh
(his clothing-bundle,in which was the robe the Khwajahad given him). When
they saw the brandof the Khwajaof Chisht on his horse, however, they kissed
its hooves and told him that, because of the saint's baraka, "you will go safely."
Considering that these Mongols were not even Muslims but an army of
unbelievers(lashgarhac-yekofftir),they showed greatrespectfor KhwajaQotb al-
Din.
Chishti doctrine and practice in the Indian environmentis well attested to, and
can provide clues as to the natureof Sufism at Chisht. The Chishtis were par-
ticularly famous for sama', or listening to musical recitationof poetry;this dis-
tinguished them from their main rivals, the Sohravardis,as well as the ulama.67
Nezam al-Din Awliya' permitted Hindus to take part in sama' and readily in-
ducted them into the order. The Chishtiswere toleranttowardnon-believersand
flexible in their outwardforms of religious observance.68 Although in the past
Chishtis in India have been characterizedas very active in conversion,recentre-
searchhas refutedthis view.69
Wealthand Asceticism
The apparentcontradictionin the acquisition of wealth by a Sufi shaykh who

preachedpovertyhas been addressedby Gross in referenceto the great 15th-cen-
turyNaqshbandileader,KhwajaAhrar.70She concludes that no conflict was per-
ceived by Ahrarand his followers, who regardedwealth as a sign of God's favor,
not greed, and in any case spent much of it on charitableactivities.
The Sufis' cooperationwith the state could-and did-make the shrinecommu-

nities very rich.71 Thus, the Safavid shrine at Ardebil enjoyed the protectionof
the Il-Khans, who gave it land in waqf and, it appears, immunity from taxa-
tion.72 Timur, likewise, gave lands and villages as waqf to the Ardebil shrine.73
67. On sama' see Bruce B. Lawrence, "The Early Chishti Approachto Sama'," in M.
Israel and N. K. Wagle, eds., Islamic Society and Culture:Essays in Honour of Profes-
sor Aziz Ahmad (New Delhi: Manohar, 1983), 69-93; Ernst, Eternal Garden, 147-54.
68. Currie, Shrine and Cult, 52-3.
69. Ernst, Eternal Garden, 155-68; also Bruce B. Lawrence, "Early Indo-Muslim
Saints and Conversion," in Yohanan Friedmann, ed., Islam in Asia, vol. 1, South
Asia (Jerusalem:The Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1984), 109-45.
70. Jo-Ann Gross, "The Economic Status of a TimuridSufi Shaykh:A Matterof Con-
flict or Perception?,"Iranian Studies 21 (1988): 84-104.
71. See furtherKiyani, Tdriikh-ekh&neqdh,310-28.
72. Ann K. S. Lambton, Continuity and Change in Medieval Persia: Aspects of Ad-
ministrative, Economic and Social History, 11th-14th Century, Columbia Lectures
on IranianStudies, no. 2, ed. Ehsan Yarshater(Albany: State University of New York
Press for Bibliotheca Persica, 1988), 322-3; Roger Savory, Iran Under the Safavids
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 12.
73. Savory, Iran Under the Safavids, 14.
In India Sultan Muhammadb. Tughluq (1325-51) assigned the revenues of the
city of Ajudhanto the shrineof Faridal-Din.74
The shaykhs of Jam appearto be in a similar category. According to Buzjani,

Shehab al-Din Esma'il "hada great position and great wealth and extensive cul-
tivatedlands and innumerablelivestock. He had such immeasurablewealth [that]
he had no account of it." For the khaneqahs arndtomb of Shaykh Ahmad, She-
hab al-Din personally endowed 1,000 kharvars of high-yield (aksar), good-
quality cropseeds in the velayat of Jam.75 Buzjani also includes an ominous
anecdote about Sufis who had doubted whether his wealth was lawful and died
mysterious deaths.76 The shaykh was carriedaroundby his morids in a covered
palanquin(mehaffeh),which must have made quite an impression.77
The basis of the shrine's wealth was probably waqf land, and the extent of its
holdings are revealedin an anecdoteof Buzjani. Once when Shehabal-Din asked
in jest what his young son, Shams al-Din Motahhar,would like as a present, he
cited as examples the estates (asba-b) in the velayat of Khwafto the south, in
Zia' (of Jam) and the property(amlak) of Zurabad(nearbyJam to the north),all
of which must have belonged to the shrine at the time.78 Buzjani specifically
mentions that KhwajaRazi al-Din Ahmad (d. 767/1366), the shrine's administra-
tor (motavalli) and the son of Shehab al-Din, endowed much property to the
shrine.79
Like the Sufis at Ardebil,whose agriculturalwork is mentionedfrequentlyin the

Safvat al-Safa, the hagiographical account of the early Safavids,80 and Shah
Ne'matollah Vali,8' the Sufis at Jam were deeply involved in farming. Evi-
dently much landholding was in the velayat of Bakharz, to the south of Jam.
Once the army of Amir Choban, a top military commanderunder the last three
Il-Khans,mistakenlyraideda granarythere at the fort (hesar) of Barghand,82for
which Choban apologized profusely.83 At a time of famine in Bakharz,Shehab
74. Richard M. Eaton, "The Political and Religious Authority of the Shrine of Baba
Farid," in B. D. Metcalf, ed., Moral Conduct and Authority: The Place of Adab in
South Asian Islam (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 339.
75. Buzjani, Rawzat al-raydhin, 102. One kharvar or "ass-load" equalled approxi-
mately 300 kg.
76. Ibid., 101.
77. Ibid., 103.
78. Ibid., 104-5.
79. Ibid., 107.
80. B. Nikitine, "Essai d'Analyse du Safvat-us-Safa," Journal Asiatique 245 (1957):
392.
81. Graham, "Shah Ni'matullah Wall," 187.
82. The exact location is unclear. On place names consult D. Krawulsky, Hordsan
zur Timuridenzeitnach dem Tdrih-e H4fez-e Abru (verfi 817-823 h.), Beihefte zum
Tubinger Atlas des VorderenOrients Reihe B Nr. 46/1, Edition und Einleitung, and Nr.
46/2, Ubersetzung und Ortsnamenkommentar(Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Ver-
lag, 1982 and 1984). See here "Baghand"in 1:38 (Persian) and 2:35 (German).
83. Buzjani, Rawzat al-raydhin, 102-3. On his family see Charles Melville and
'Abbas Zaryab, "Chobanids,"in EIr.
92 Potter
al-Din orderedhis deputiesto distributegrainto all those who needed it.84
The fact that Jam was famous for its orchardsand silk productionindicates that
the shaykhs probablyhad a substantialcash income.85 And aside from its own
agriculturalwealth, Jam was "exemptedfrom paying taxes to the sultan, and [the
membersof the shaykh's house] live there in well-being and opulence."86Both
Ibn Battutaand Buzjani emphasize the wealth of the khaneqah, which was re-
flected in its hospitality. In a typical example, once when Amir Choban ap-
peared on short notice, the shaykh prepareda fabulous feast for him and his
army, killing so many cows and sheep that they could not be counted and heap-
ing up bread so that it reachedthe roof of the kha-neqah.87
Sufis as Mediators
What kind of interactiondid the Karts have with the two shrine communities?
In the early fourteenthcentury, leading Sufis from both Jam and Chisht acted as
mediatorson the Karts'behalf when the maleks in Heratwere threatenedby out-
side powers. After around 1330, the Chishtis disappearfrom view as the Jam
Sufis, their loyalty proven, began to exert a preponderantinfluence. They ad-
vanced from the status of mediatorsto virtual collaboratorsin governance with
the Karts, intermarrying with them and providing top aides. In return the
shaykhs of Jam were grantedpatronageand tax exemptions, and acquiredgreat
wealth. Eventually, however, loyalty to the Karts was eclipsed by pragmatism
about the dynasty's prospects, and the shaykhs threw in their lot with invading
Turkictribesmen. The Kartdynasty was destroyed,but the shrinecommunityat
Jamremained.
One of the most importantroles played by Sufis in medieval Iran was that of
mediator,especially between political adversariesand between triballeadersand
state authorities. The interventionof prominentSufis to save a city when it was
underattack seems to have ample precedent. For example, when Malek Shams
al-Din (1245-78), the founderof the Kartdynasty, capturedMultanon behalf of
the Mongol armies in 644/1246, it was the eminent Sohravardishaykh, Baha'
al-Din Zakariyeh,who negotiated the city's surrender. He brought 100,000 di-
nars in cash to Shams al-Din's "minder,"the Mongol commanderSali Noyan,
sparing the lives and propertyof the city.88 The interventionof Shaykh 'Ala'
al-Dawleh Semnanisecuredthe release from prison of Malek Ghiyas al-Din Kart
84. Buzjani, Raw'at al-raydhin, 101.

85. In the case of the Juybari shaykhs of Bokhara in the 16th century, rent on or-
chards and vineyards was collected in cash (E. A. Davidovich, "Some Social and Eco-
nomic Aspects of 16th Century Central Asia," Central Asian Review 12 [1964]: 267).
86. Ibn Battuta, Travels 3:581. This possibly only dates from the 1320s. A decree
of the Il-Khan Abu Sa'id likewise grantedthe Safavid shrine at Ardebil immunity from
taxes (Minorsky, "Mongol Decree," 516).
87. Buzjani, Rawzat al-rayahin, 103.
88. Sayf al-Harawi, Thrikh-eHarat, 157-8.
in 1315, enabling his returnto power in Herat.89
In 693/1294, when the Il-Khanidgeneral Nowruz was unable to persuadeMalek

Rokn al-Din Kart to release his son, Fakhr al-Din, from imprisonment at the
fortress of Khaysarto restoreorder at Herat,he sent the two most prominentlo-
cal Sufis, Shehab al-Din Esma'il of Jam and Qotb al-Din of Chisht, to mediate.
Fakhral-Din was soon released and ruled in Herat from 695 to 706/1307. This
incident is notable in demonstratingthe cooperation of the top Sufis from both
Jam and Chisht. At that time Shehab al-Din, called shaykh al-Eslam,90clearly
outrankedhis Chishti counterpart,who was referred to as "the noble shaykh"
(shaykh-ebozorgvar).91Laterhe is referredto as shaykhal-Eslam.92
Another instance of mediation occured in 696/1297 when Nowruz, accused of

sedition, fled to Herat for protection. Qotlogh Shah, the head of the Il-Khanid
army, prevailedupon Shehab al-Din to write a letter to Fakhral-Din urging him
to give Nowruz up. Despite his personal debt to Nowruz, the Kartmalek com-
plied and Nowruz was speedily put to death.93 This incident helped give the
Karts a reputation for treachery in the eyes of some historians. Later, in
698/1299, Ghazan sent his army to besiege Herat to punish Fakhr al-Din for
harboringthe Nikudaris,a warlike clan that carriedout raids in Khorasan. After
some 10,000 men on both sides were reportedlykilled, Shehab al-Din came to
Herat and persuaded the Il-Khan to lift the siege in returnfor payment by the
89. Fasih Khwafi,, Mujmal al-tavarikh, ed. Mahmud Farrokh (Mashhad: Ketabfo-
rushi-ye Bastan, 1339 Sh./1960), 3:23-4, cited in Lambton, Continuity and Change,
321.
90. This raises the problem of defining the office of shaykh al-Eslam at this time.
Bulliet suggests that the term originated in the Saljuq period for a person at the head
of a city's educational system who had the power to certify teachers' credentials
(Richard W. Bulliet, "The Shaikh al-Islam and the Evolution of Islamic Society," Stu-
dia Islamica 35 [19721: 53-67). Limbert found that by the Muzaffaridperiod this was
not the case in Shiraz. However, aside from observing that it was held by the most
pious and learned Sufi shaykhs, perhaps second only to the king in power, he could
not give a more specific explanation (Limbert, "Shiraz in the Age of Hafez," 133 and
160). During the period covered by this study, the term shaykh al-Eslam was obvi-
ously a high title reserved for the most eminent shaykhs. In the writing of Buzjani,
of the descendants of Shaykh Ahmad it was given alone to the great Shehab al-Din.
The others-even those who headed the khaneqdh-are simply referred to as
"khwaja.7"
91. Sayf al-Harawi, Tdrikh-eHardt, 396-8.
92. Ibid., 466. Earlier, in 688/1289, Qotb al-Din had advised the people of Herat to
close the city gates when Amir Ayachi, a Nikudariraider, arrivedat Herat while Malek
Rokn al-Din Kart was absent at Khaysar (ibid., 381).
93. A well-known incident. See, for example, Boyle, "Dynastic and Political Histo-
ry," 383-4 (evidently from Rashid al-Din); also Barbier de Meynard, "Extraitsde la
chronique persane d'Herat" (translation of Esfezari's RawzMtal-janndt) in Journal
Asiatique, 5th series, vol.17 (April-May 1861): 478, hereafter Esfezari/de Meynard,
"Extraits".
94 Potter
Heratisof a ransomof 100,000 dinarsin cash and goods.94
When Malek Fakhral-Din precipitatedthe greatestcrisis that was to befall Kart-

Il-Khanrelations,KhwajaQotb al-Din Chishtiplayed a vital role as negotiator.95
He is rememberedby Afghan historians as a hero who protectedthe people of
Herat from the wrathof the Mongols.96 The Kartmalek continuedto harborthe
Nikudaris, was slow in sending tribute97and did not congratulateOljeitu after
his succession as sultan. In consequence Oljeitu in 706 sent one of his most ca-
pable commanders, Daneshmand Bahador, to Herat to punish Fakhr al-Din.
Qotb al-Din, who had great influence over the Kartmalek, got him to expel the
Nikudarisand arrangeda compromise which would spare the inhabitantsof the
city a bloody war. Daneshmand was murderedafter being lured to the inner
citadel of Heraton promise of safe-conduct,but Fakhral-Din died in the course
of these events, and anotherarmywas sent thatdid take the city.
During a later crisis between the Karts and the Chaghatays(Mongol tribesmen
descended from a son of Changiz Khan who were active in Transoxiana), a
prominentChishti once again emerged as the key negotiator,this time on behalf
of the Chaghatays.98 In Jumada II 718/August 1318 the Chaghatay military
commanderYasurattemptedto extend his controleastward,to areastraditionally
controlled by Herat. He rendezvoused with his amirs at Chisht (friendly terri-
tory?), to which Malek Ghiyas al-Din Kart was summoned.99 When the Kart
rulerrefused,Yasurproceededto Jam,the other seat of spiritualauthority,where
he hoped to win the shaykhs to his cause. (The shaykhs were warned he was
coming by scouts of the Kart malek, who sent news to Jam by carrier pi-
geon.)100 Shaykh Shehab al-Din, in contrastto the Chishtis, refused him entry
and provisions.'0' After an unsuccessful siege, Yasur was forced to retreat,and
his deaththe following year is attributedby Buzjani to a curse put on him by the
94. Sayf al-Harawi, Tdrikh-eHardt, 437-9; Esfezari, RawMatal-janndt, 435-7; Esfe-

zari/de Meynard, "Extraits,"477-8.
95. This was one of the most famous clashes between the Karts and 1l-Khansand has
been widely recounted. See, for example, Boyle, "Dynastic and Political History,"
401; Hafez Abru, Chronique des rois mongols en Iran [section from his Zayl-e jame'
al-tavdriikh],trans. K. Bayani (Paris: Librairie D'Amerique et d'Orient, 1936), 2:17-
29; Esfezari, Rawzdt al-jannat, 444-52; Esfezari/de Meynard, "Extraits,"481-7; also
Ghiyas al-Din Khwandamir, Habib al-siyar fi akhbdr-e afrdd-e bashar, ed. Jalal
Homa'i (Tehran: Khayyam, 1333 Sh./1954), 3:372-6.
96. For example, Guya E'temadi, "Darbar-e moluik-e Kart," Arydnd 2 (Sawr
1323/May 1944): 50.
97. Malek Fakhr al-Din had earlier agreed to give Oljeitu 1,000 dinars a year in trib-
ute (Eqbal, Tdrikh-e mofassal, 372).
98. On the Chaghatay attacks on Herat see Russell George Kempiners Jr., "The
Struggle for Khurasan:Aspects of Political, Military and Socio-Economic Interaction
in the Early 8th/14th Century" (Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1985), 137-47;
Esfezari/de Meynard, "Extraits,"495-9.
99. Khwandamir,Habib al-siyar, 203-4; Esfezari, Rawzdt al-janndt 1:469.
100. Sayf al-Harawi, Tdrikh-eHardt, 680.
101. KhWandamir, Habib al-siyar, 204; Buzjani, Raw.at al-rayadtin,105.
shaykh.102 By siding with the Karts in their moment of danger, the shaykhs of
Jam cementedthe firm bonds between the two.
Collaborationwith Rulers
The contacts between the Karts and Chishtis were circumspect. As a dynasty
originating in Ghur, the Karts were undoubtedly familiar with the Chishtis,
more so, probably, than with the Sufis at Jam. It is significant that Chisht was
located at a key junction on the route between Herat and the Kart strongholdof
Khaysar. The earliest source on the Chishti saints in India, the Siyar al-awliya',
counts Shams al-Din Kart as a disciple and credits him with solving a major
succession crisis at Chisht around 1265.103 This fact is not mentioned by Sayf
al-Harawior any other "court"historian. The first Kartruler, then at the height
of his power, was thereforeintimately involved with and probablya disciple of
the Sufis at Chisht. Interestinglyenough, however, at his death Shams al-Din's
body was buriedat Jam, the location of a rival kha-neqa-h.104
The Sufis at Chisht, while sometimes acting as mediatorsin the Karts' disputes,
seemed to avoid identification with the city of Herat. Oddly enough, the
Maza-rnt-eHarat, a record of the distinguished people buried at Herat written
around 864/1460, does not mention anyone with the nisba Chishti.105 Was it
because all the prominent Chishti saints were taken home for burial that they
were excluded from the list of Herat'snotables?
Cooperationwith rulersdid not troublethe Sufis at Jam;they welcomed contact

with the Kartsand assisted them in governing their state. This stands in contrast
to the image they sought to promote among themselves. Buzjani tells an anec-
dote that once, when Shehab al-Din was young, his father told him, "Soon,
kings will present you with horses with gilded bridles and you will refrainfrom
accepting them." This predictionlater came true. After he had entertainedAmir
Choban, Choban sent him some horses with golden saddles. "The Khwajasaid
that this ostentation is suitable to them [the rulers, but] it is not appropriateto
the dervishesand he did not accept it."1106
Shehab al-Din, however, set a precedentfor maintaininggood relations with the

dominant political powers. Buzjani reports that Oljeitu (r. 703-17/1304-17)
102. Buzjani, RawMatal-rayahin, 105.

103. Mir Khword,Siyar al-awliya-', 222.
104. Esfezari, RawMital-jannat 1:422. This was at the direction of Abaqa.
105. 'Abd Allah al-Hosayni, Resacleh-yemazarat-e Harat, ed. 'Abd al-Karim Ahrari
(Herat: Matba'eh-ye Danesh, 1310 Sh./1932). For a description and contents of the
index see Iraj Afshar, "Maqsad al-eqbal = Resaleh-ye mazarat-e Harat,"in Majalleh-
ye ddneshkadeh-ye adabiyat va 'oluim-e ensdni (Tehran University), vol. 12, no.. 1
(1343 Sh./1964): 51-65. The newer edition of Fekri Saljuqi (Kabul, 1967) was not
available to me.
96 Potter
was devoted to Shehab al-Din,'07 although considering the Il-Khanid sultan's
well-known religious vacillations, perhaps little credence should be given to
this. According to Sayf al-Harawi,Malek Ghiyas al-Din Kart(r. 707-29/1307-
29) was attachedto Shehab al-Din and often visited Jam for periods of several
days to see him.'08 When Ghiyas al-Din went on the hajj in 720/1320-21,
Shehab al-Din Esma'il accompaniedhim,'09as did their grandsonMo'in al-Din
Jami, who was to become an influential figure in Herat."II The importanceof
the shaykhsof Jam was not restrictedto the Heratarea,for afterthe deathof Abu
Sa'id, Shehabal-Din was one of those summonedto the quriltayat Soltan-May-
dan to choose the new Il-Khan. 'II
The long tenureof Shehab al-Din representsa high point for the shrineat Jam, a
period correspondingto the efflorescence of the shrine at Delhi underhis con-
temporary,the great Chishti saint Nezam al-Din Awliya' (d. 1325). It also pre-
saged, as in India, increasedinterferencein the shrine's activities by the secular
authorities. Shehab al-Din himself cast the die for this. When the Kartmalek,
Ghiyas al-Din, offered to marryhis daughterto any of the shaykh's sons, his el-
dest son and successor, Shams al-Din Motahhar,was duly betrothed.'12 From
then on the Kartsand the Sufis at Jam were intimatelylinked, althoughtheir fu-
tures were not inseparable. The Jam Sufis were thus similar to other powerful
ordersthat became entrenchedin society by extensive marriageties with ruling
houses.
This Shams al-Din Motahharand the Kartprincess had a son, Mo'in al-Din Jami
(702-83/1302-81), who came to Herat in 735/1335."13 Mo'in al-Din became a
famous scribe (monshi) and was, for many years, the main intermediarybetween
the Karts and his relatives at Jam."4 At the time of the decisive defeat of the
Sarbedarsby the Kartsat Zaveh nearJam (743/1342), the Kartmalek,Mo'ezz al-
Din, broughtalong Mo'in al-Din (who also had become his son-in-law) for good
luck. Buzjani credits Mo'in al-Din's decisiveness (he stopped Mo'ezz al-Din
from retreatingand goaded him on to victory) with the Kartsuccess.'15
107. Ibid., 100.

108. Sayf al-Harawi, Tdrikh-eHarut, 553, 558 and 624.
109. Buzjani, Rawzat al-raydhin, note by Moayyad, 141.
110. Ibid., 145; Khwandamir,Habib al-siyar, 386.
111. Mohammad Shabankareh'i, Majma' al-ansab, ed. Mir Hashem Mohaddas
(Tehran:Amir Kabir, 1363 Sh./1984), 306. I am indebted to Mr. Stephen Album for
this reference. See also the article by Jean Aubin, "Le Quriltai de Sultan-Maydan
(1336)," JA 279 (1991): 175-97.
112. Buzjani, Rawzat al-rayahin, 105.
113. Yusef AhI, Fard'ed-e Ghiyasi, document 55, 1:241.
114. On Mo'in al-Din Jami see Buzjani, Rawzat al-raya]iin, 107-8; Khwandamir,
Habib al-siyar 3:386; E'temadi, "Darbar-emoluk-e Kart,"49; and MohammadEsma'il
Gharjestani, "Daneshmandan-e mo'aser-e duidman-eKart,"Arydna-18, no.1 (Dalv
1338/January 1960): 51 (from Khwandamir). Aubin, "Le Khanat de Cagatai," 30,
considers Mo'in al-Din the strongmanof the triumviratethat ran the government.
Over the next decade Mo'in al-Din's power and wealth must have increased
greatly. This is evident from a farmdn, dated 23 Safar 753/10 April 1352,
which restoredpropertyto him that had been taken away when he fell out of fa-
vor.1 16 It cites his holdings
in the veldyat of Harat-Rud,vineyards (karum) and orchards (baghdt), etc.,

and [the same] in Kusuyeh and Zir-e Pol, and in the veldyat of Fushanj, and
the farm (mazra'eh) of Karuchehand Faraheh.117
These landholdingsappearto be spreadover the richestpartof the Harirudvalley

and indicatethatMo'in al-Din was a majorlandholder.
Sufis and Tribesmen
One of the most serious political crises for the Kart dynasty, which led to
Mo'ezz al-Din's temporaryloss of power and expulsion from Herat, arose soon
after he took the audacious step of declaring independence. Qazaghan, the
Chaghatay strongmanbased in northernAfghanistan, could not countenance a
Tajik on the throne of Herat,who in addition was harassinghis tribalfollowing
of the Arlat and Apardi. Qazaghan's forces defeated the Kartmalek near Herat
I8
and soon thereafterthe malek's brother,Baqer, was placed on the throne."
What is interestingis that the main instigatorsof this attackwere the shaykhsof
Jam. As relatedby Khwandamir,
Some of the great shaykhs of Jam, among whom was Khwaja Razi al-Din
Ahmad b. Shaykh Shehab al-Din Esma'il, who were related by blood and
marriage with Malek Hosayn-the raising of whose flag of greatness was
not in accordance with their taste-went to Amir Qazaghan and complained
about the malek.119
Hafez Abru portraysthis action by the shaykhs in a negative light. In his ac-
count, when Qazaghanrealizes that a long siege would have to be laid to take
Herat, he regrets mounting the expedition, saying, "Because of the words of
116. In Yusef Ahl, Fard'ed-e Ghiyasi, Central Library of Tehran University, folio
335a-335b, cited by Moayyad in his notes to Buzjani, Rawzat al-rayWhln,146.
117. Krawulsky, Horasan zur Timuridenzeit1:32, 2:31 ("Sar-e Pol-e Taban"). Zir-e
Pol was possibly in the Morghab district, Karucheh and Faraheh in Fushanj (ibid.
1:39, 2:36).
118. Felix Tauer, ed., Cinq Opuscules de YHdfi-iAbru-concernant l'histoire de l'Iran
au temps de Tamerlan, Supplement 5 to the Archiv Orientdlni (Prague: L'Academie
Tchecoslovaque des Sciences, 1959), 43. This Persian text is the best source for the
later Kart period, from the accession of Mo'ezz al-Din Kart in 1331 until the downfall
of the dynasty (hereafterOpuscules).
119. Khwandamir,Habib al-siyar 3:381. Khwandamiris the only historian to identi-
fy any of these "shaykhs of Jam" by name.
98 Potter
interestedparties I came to this kingdom; otherwise I had no animosity against
this land."'20
The great enigma is why the shaykhs of Jam would betraythe Kartmalek, their
kinsmanand protector,to the non-Iraniantribesmenthathad long sought to con-
quer Herat. The answer seems to be that the shaykhs,so well attunedto the pol-
itics of Transoxiana, were pragmatists. They may have regarded the rise of
Chaghatay power as inevitable, and to preserve their own position they were
ready to abandonthe Kartmaleks their ancestorshad associated with for a cen-
tury.
Intra-familyjealousy may also have played a role. PerhapsRazi al-Din Ahmad,

the shrine administrator,felt that his nephew at Herat, Mo'in al-Din Jami, was
becoming too powerful. By all accounts an excellent motavalli,12' Razi al-Din
may have perceived some dangerto the shrine's autonomy(and perhapshis own
position) shouldKartindependencebe allowed to stand.
The preferencethe shaykhs of Jam displayed for the Chaghataysin this incident
foreshadowedtheirwelcome of Timur,who in 1370 consolidatedhis controlover
the Ulus Chaghatayand a decade later was poised to invade Iran. Timurpatron-
ized the ulama and showed great regardfor the sayyids.122.But he also honored
the Sufi shaykhs of Khorasanand Transoxiana,who, considering their popular-
ity, could serve to buttresshis own legitimacy. Manz considers that
his primaryreligiousloyalty belongedalmostcertainlyto the Naqshbandi

Sufi orderwhosepowerandinfluencewas alreadywell fixedin Transoxiana.
[But]in religionas in otheraspectsof his life Temurwas aboveall an op-
portunist;his religion served frequentlyto furtherhis aims, but almost
neverto circumscribehis actions.123
The blessing of the shaykhs of Jam was the psychological key to his victory
over the Karts in 1381. Apparentlyby then the last Kartmalek, Ghiyas al-Din
Pir 'Ali (r. 1370-81), had stoppedtreatingthe shaykhswith the accustomeddef-
erence. Timur stopped by Jam to pay his respects before proceeding to Herat.
But it was his celebrated interview with one of Shaykh Ahmad's disciples at
nearby Tayebad, Shaykh Zayn al-Din (d. 791/1389), that caught the interest of
historiansand epitomizes the hostility that the shaykhs had come to feel for Pir
(Ali. 124
120. Tauer, Opuscules, 42.

121. Buzjani, Rawzat al-raydhin, 107.
122. V. V. Barthold, Four Studies onithe History of Central Asia, vol. 2, Ulugh-Beg,
trans. V. and T. Minorsky (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1958; repr. 1963), 22.
123. Beatrice Forbes Manz, The Rise and Rule of Tamerlane, Cambridge Studies in
Islamic Civilization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 17.
124. On Shaykh Zayn al-Din see Jami, Nafah4a-tal-uns, 498-501. For accounts of
the meeting between Shaykh Zayn al-Din and Timur see Barthold, Four Studies, 20-
22; Khwandamir, Habib al-siyar 3:543, trans. Wheeler Thackston in A Cenzturyof
Tension between Shaykh Zayn al-Din and Pir 'Ali was evident long before
Timur's invasion; for example, the shaykh sent Pir 'Ali a poem warning him
thathe would be called to accountfor his oppression. A letterof advice from the
shaykh to the malek warns him that the people he considers his friends are not
so and that the people he is turningaway from are his true friends.'25 At a time
when Pir 'Ali was desperatelybuilding a city wall to protectHeratfrom Timur's
expected onslaught,Zayn al-Din wrote that he could not keep out misfortuneby
building a wall. The Kartmalekreplied that affairsof state were not the concern
of men of religion (a'emmeh) like Zayn al-Din, which infuriatedthe shaykh and
made him determinedthatPir 'Ali be deposed.126
Implicit in this exchange is the idea, well establishedby Sufis in medieval India,
that shaykhs had the power to bestow kingship or, should they choose, to take it
away.127 Zayn al-Din explicitly says as much in a letter to Timur, telling him
that it is the shaykhs who are the real kings of religion and state, and he should
pay them due respect.'28 This is a reminderthat Sufi shaykhs representeda po-
tent and more legitimate source of authoritythan ruling princes who, on occa-
sion when they felt threatened,expelled them from theirdomains.'29
As recountedby Hafez Abru (who got the story directly from Timur), when the
latter's army approachedTayebad he summoned Shaykh Zayn al-Din but the
shaykh refused to come, saying that they had nothing to discuss. Timur, there-
fore, came to the shaykh. He recalled that usually when he encounteredhermits
and ascetics they feared him, but when Timur met Zayn al-Din he was the one
who felt fear. As the shaykhadmonishedTimur,the conquerorasked,
"Whydon'tyou give any adviceto yourown malek;he drinkswine andoc-

cupies[himself]withdiversions(malaht)andsins (mandhi)?"Themawldna
said,"Wetold him andhe didn'tlisten;God,glorybe to Him,sent you over
Princes: Sources on TimuridHistory and Art (Cambridge, Mass.: Aga Khan Program
for Islamic Architecture, 1989), 108; Tauer, Opuscules, 61-2; and Jurgen Paul,
"Scheiche und Herrscher im Khanat Cagatay," Der Islam 67 (1990): 307-9. On the
shaykh's tomb see Sayyid Mohammad Taqi Mustafavi, "Le Masdjid-e Mowlana de
Taiyabad," Athdr-e Iran 3, no. 2 (1938): 179-99.
125. Yusef Ahl, Fara'ed-e Ghiyacst,document 104, 1:471-5.
126. Fasih, Mujmal 3:113 (under year 780/1378).
127. Simon Digby, "The Sufi Shaykh and the Sultan: A Conflict of Claims to Au-
thority in Medieval India," Iran 28 (1990): 71-81. See also Digby's important arti-
cle, "The Sufi Shaikh as a Source of Authority in Medieval Irfdia,"Purusartha 9
(1986): 57-77
128. "Maktab-e Hazrat-e Shaykh al-Eslami Mawlana AbtuBakr Tayebadi be Amir
Taymar ...," in 'Abd al-Hosayn Nava'i, Asna-dva mokatebat-e tarikhi-ye Irdn, vol.
1, Az Taymur tacShah Esma'l1, in series Entesharat-eBongah-e Tarjomeh va Nashr-e
Ketab, no. 145 (Tehran 1341 Sh./1962), 1-3.
129. Important examples are Timur's expulsion of Shah Ne'matollah Vali from
Transoxianaand Shahrokh's expulsion of Qasem Anvar from Herat. See Jean Aubin,
Materiauxpour la biographie de Shdh Ni'matullah Wali Kermani, Bibliotheque Irani-
enne, vol. 7, (Paris: Librairie d'Amerique et d'Orient and Tehran: Departement
d'Iranologie de l'Institut Franco-Iranien, 1]956), 11-18.
100 Potter
him. I say to you: if you don't listen [He] will send anotherover you." The
amir.was touched and cried, and he took leave of the mawlana- and headed for
Herat.130
The city was soon taken and the Kart dynasty extinguished. Timur heeded the
advice of Zayn al-Din not to unnecessarilyplunderor oppress the people.131He
maintained good relations with the shaykhs of Jam and became a disciple of
KhwajaZiya' al-Din Yusef, who was the head of the shrine at the time of his in-
vasion. Timur's son and successor at Herat,-Shahrokh(807-50/1405-47), was
reportedlya disciple of KhwajaShehab al-Din Abu'l-Makarem,who was either
the custodianor head of the Jam shrinefrom 796-847/1394-1436 and wrote the
book Kholasat al-maqacmat,which he dedicated to Shahrokhin 840/1436.132
Relations between the Timurids and the shaykhs of Jam cooled, however, after
Shahrokhdecided to revive the cult of Herat's patronsaint, Khwaja'Abd Allah
Ansari.133 In 829/1425 Shahrokhbuilt a shrine at Ansari's tomb at Gazor Gah
on the outskirts of Herat and provided a substantialendowment. This was the
first buildingtherein two centuriesand markeda decision to henceforthassociate
the Herat government with the Sufis at Gazor Gah, not Jam.134From then on
Heratwas "thegardenof the Ansaris,"in the words of Jami.135
Conclusions
The period following the Mongol invasion of Iran was a time of religious fer-
ment, markedby the growing influence of the Sufi shaykh at the expense of the
Sunni 'alem and the transformationof Sufism from an elitist form of spiritual
retreatto a mass movement that was at times highly political. In 14th-century
Iran, two very different kinds of Sufism flourished simultaneouslynear the city
of Herat:one, at Chisht, an ascetic, saintly form that eschewed contact with sec-
ular authority;the other, at Jam, a wealthy, elitist form that played an important
role in regional politics. In the early years the Kartsappearto have been influ-
enced by both, but by the 1330s the Sufis at Jam supplantedthe Chishtis for in-
fluence. A study of the two orders illustratesthe great variety of Sufis and the
different ways their ordersevolved, and remindsus that, in Islamic societies, re-
ligious authoritywas more lasting than the secularvariety.
The shrinecommunities,located in borderzones, helped define the boundariesof

Kartpower. The shrine at Jam separatedthe Kartsfrom the Sarbedars,their en-
emies to the west, while the shrine at Chisht separated the Karts from the
Chaghatays, their enemies to the northeast. But even if the Sufi communities
130. Tauer, Opuscules, 62.

131. Fasih, Mujmal 3:116 (under year 782/1380).
132. Buzjani, Rawzat al-rayihin, 110.
133. Maria Eva Subtelny, "The Cult of 'Abdullah Ansari Under the Timurids,"in C.
Burgel and A. Giese, eds., God is Beautiful and He Loves Beauty (festschrift for
Annemarie Schimmel) (Bern: Peter Lang, 1994), 377-406.
134. Golombek, Gazur Gah, 82-3.
135. Jami, Nafahat al-uns, 362.
were located in backwaters,their leaders were accustomed to dealing with and
mediating between the top political figures, be they Il-Khans, Chaghatays or
Karts.
The orders,which generallyhad long-lived heads, helped to provide stabilityand

continuity at a time of political flux. They also played the role of protectorof
the people, both urban and rural. At a time of famine, it was the shaykhs of
Jam who providedgrain to the people, not the Kartmaleks that supposedlyruled
them. It is possible that, at the time of the Karts as in the late Timuridperiod,
prominentSufis also acted as a check against oppressionby the amirs.136
It is evident that there was a close symbiotic relationship between Sufis and
rulers in this period. Even those ordersthat prided themselves on avoiding con-
tact with secular authorities,such as the Chishtis in India, in fact depended on
them for donations and tax exemptions.'37 On the other hand, secular princes
often turnedto Sufi shaykhs when in trouble with rivals or when they needed to
buttresstheir legitimacy.
The Kartsin turnbestowed patronageon the Jam shrine, enlarging its buildings
and relieving it of taxes. They tolerated what was in fact a small sacred state
nearby. They also intermarriedwith the shaykhs to enhance their own prestige
and the legitimacy of the dynasty, and permittedthe Jam Sufis unprecedentedin-
terferencein affairs at court. Above all, the Sufis at Jam providedthe Kartswith
religious sanction for their rule. It is not coincidental that when this sanction
was withdrawn,the dynastyfell.
But despite these ties, the shaykhs of Jam were above all pragmatistswhen it
came to political power. As McChesney found at Balkh,
the shrine'shistoryshows that the mutawalliusually trimmedhis sails to

the prevailingpoliticalwinds, was discreetin his politicalallegiances,and
was usuallypredisposedto supportwhatevergroupseemedlikely to be per-
manentlyin powerin the region.138
This also applies at Jam. The shaykhs there were ready to come to an accom-
modationwith whateverpower controlledHerat-whether Turkor Tajik made no
difference. When they sensed that the Chaghataywere the wave of the future,
they quickly aligned with them. By showing such flexibility the Jam Sufis far
outlastedtheir erstwhile patrons,the Karts. As a result, hereditarycontrol of the
shrineat Jam was maintainedwithin the family of Shaykh Ahmad.
136. Paul, "Forming a Faction," 541.

137. Simon Digby, "Qalandarsand Related Groups: Elements of Social Deviance in
the Religious Life of the Dehli Sultanate of the Thirteenthand FourteenthCenturies,"
in Islam in Asia, 73.
138. R. D. McChesney, Waqfin CentralAsia: Four Hundred Years in the History of a
Muslim Shrine, 1480-1889 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), 308.
102 Potter
The Jam Sufis, like the Karts, were content to rule over a limited area. They
were satisfied with governing their small polity and saw no need to declare their
independenceor rule a wider area. The shaykhsof Jam alreadyenjoyedaccess to
power at Herat, and, like most other Sufis, felt no religious imperativeto exer-
cise power directly. Ideologically speaking, those Sufi groups that actually
founded states-such as the Sarbedarsand the Safavids-were much more ex-
treme than the Sufis at Jam or Chisht. They were also Shi'ites. The Sufis at
Jam and Chisht were not drawnto the heterodoxmovements so prevalentaround
them.
The period of Iranianhistory that lasted from approximatelyA.D. 1200 to 1500

was, above all, one of fluidity, both political and religious. The lack of a strong
centralauthorityduringmuch of this periodcorrespondedwith the heyday of the
Sufi orders and the height of power and prestige of Sufi shaykhs. After the for-
mation of the Safavid Empire, political and religious boundariesin the Iranian,
and indeed the Islamic, world were much more set. Powerful,virtuallyindepen-
dent, shrine communities could no longer be tolerated,and Sufism was brought
undermuch closer state supervision.
Lawrence G. Potter, Department of History, State University of New York at

Stony Brook.

Potter, Lawrence, Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Potter, Lawrence, Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

International Society for Iranian Studies

Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran

Sufis and Sultans in Post-Mongol Iran*

One of the least-studied eras of Iranianhistory is that between the invasion of

The Mongols themselves were not initially partial to a particularreligious per-

*This article is based on a chapter in my doctoral dissertation, "The Kart Dynasty of

The most significantreligious developmentof the Il-Khanidperiod (1256-1335)

In the post-Mongol period, shrines increasinglysupplantedmosques as the main

2. Mazzaoui, Origins of the Safawids, 38.

The increased attractionof Sufism is reflected in changing tastes in religious ar-

Some Sufi shaykhsbecame very rich and accustomedto receiving regulardona-

14. On this subject see Kiyani, Tirikh-e khdneqah, 502-10.

After the collapse of Il-Khanidauthority,some militant Shi'ite Sufi orders went

22. Sayyed Mohammad b. Mobarak b. Mohammad 'Alavi Kermani (Mir Khword),

considerationsmay have been paramount.

Sufis on the Frontier:Jam and Chisht

The city of Jam, known in pre-Mongol times as Buzjan27and at presentas Tor-

This situationis similar to the frontierSufis in North Africa describedby Ernest

composed by Hamd-Allah Mustawfi of Qazwln in 740 [1340], trans. G. Le Strange, E.

The Shrine Communities36

Shaykh Ahmad Jam (440-536/1049-1141), nicknamedZhandapil(the colossal

Almost a centurypassed afterthe deathof ShaykhAhmadbefore any buildingac-

The Khw4jegin of Chisht

The high point of the shrine came underKhwajaMawdudChishti (d. 527/1133),

46. Jean Aubin, "Le Khanat de Cagatai et le Khorassan (1334-1380)," Turcica 8

It was then that ShaykhAhmadhad come from Jamto Herat,where he succeeded

Ahmad-iJamwas a Persiansaintwho was the oppositeof Abu Sa'id in al-

Shaykh Ahmad was regardedas a conservative Sufi who strongly promotedthe

59. Schimmel, Mystical Dimensions of Islam, 241.

In the post-Mongol period the khdneqa-hplayed an importantrole as the source

Another anecdote is even more telling. Mir Khwordreportsthat aroundthe year

64. Mo'in al-Din Mohammad Zamchi Esfezari, RawzMtal-janndt fi awsdf madinat

The apparentcontradictionin the acquisition of wealth by a Sufi shaykh who

The Sufis' cooperationwith the state could-and did-make the shrinecommu-

The shaykhs of Jam appearto be in a similar category. According to Buzjani,

Like the Sufis at Ardebil,whose agriculturalwork is mentionedfrequentlyin the

84. Buzjani, Raw'at al-raydhin, 101.

In 693/1294, when the Il-Khanidgeneral Nowruz was unable to persuadeMalek

Another instance of mediation occured in 696/1297 when Nowruz, accused of

When Malek Fakhral-Din precipitatedthe greatestcrisis that was to befall Kart-

94. Sayf al-Harawi, Tdrikh-eHardt, 437-9; Esfezari, RawMatal-janndt, 435-7; Esfe-

Cooperationwith rulersdid not troublethe Sufis at Jam;they welcomed contact

Shehab al-Din, however, set a precedentfor maintaininggood relations with the

102. Buzjani, RawMatal-rayahin, 105.

107. Ibid., 100.

in the veldyat of Harat-Rud,vineyards (karum) and orchards (baghdt), etc.,

These landholdingsappearto be spreadover the richestpartof the Harirudvalley

Sufis and Tribesmen

Intra-familyjealousy may also have played a role. PerhapsRazi al-Din Ahmad,

his primaryreligiousloyalty belongedalmostcertainlyto the Naqshbandi

120. Tauer, Opuscules, 42.

"Whydon'tyou give any adviceto yourown malek;he drinkswine andoc-

The shrinecommunities,located in borderzones, helped define the boundariesof

130. Tauer, Opuscules, 62.

The orders,which generallyhad long-lived heads, helped to provide stabilityand

the shrine'shistoryshows that the mutawalliusually trimmedhis sails to

136. Paul, "Forming a Faction," 541.

The period of Iranianhistory that lasted from approximatelyA.D. 1200 to 1500

Lawrence G. Potter, Department of History, State University of New York at

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi