secondary source analysis.

Sufis and Shamans: Some Remarks on the Islamization of the Mongols in the Ilkhanate Author(s): Reuven Amitai-Preiss Source: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 42, No. 1 (1999), pp. 27-46 Published by: Brill Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3632297 Accessed: 26-04-2017 00:59 UTC

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 [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

http://about.jstor.org/terms

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS: SOME REMARKS ON THE

ISLAMIZATION OF THE MONGOLS IN THE ILKHANATE*

BY

REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

(Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

Abstract

Some scholars have argued that sufis, Muslim mystics, played a decisive role in convert- ing the Mongols in Iran to Islam in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, mainly because of the similarity between the extreme sufis (the dervishes) and the shamans of the traditional Mongol religion. This paper maintains that it was primarily some moderate, "institutional" sufis who were close to Mongol ruling circles and thus played a part in their conversion. This, however, had little to so with any resemblance between shamans and sufis, since it is suggested that Muslim mystics, even of the dervish variety, are basically dissimilar to the Inner Asian shamans. If, indeed, both kinds of sufis were successful in influencing the Mongols, it would appear that this is due to other reasons suggested at the end of the paper.

It has long been a commonplace among historians of the late medieval Islamic world that sufis played an instrumental role in the conversion of the Turco-Mongolian populations which entered the Muslim lands from Central Asia from the early eleventh century onward. One of the first proponents of this idea, and certainly the most influential, was the great Turkish historian Mehmed Fuad K6priilii. According to his view, shared by many other scholars, the sim- ilarity between the traditional Inner Asian shaman and the popular Muslim mystic made the latter the logical agent of the conversion of the Eurasian nomads, both before and after their migration into the Islamic world. The syn- cretic and non-orthodox nature of the sufis added to their appeal among the tribesmen, whose entrance into the new religion was thus eased.')

* Earlier versions of this paper were given at a seminar on the Ilkhanate held on 24 May 1997 at St. Antony's College, Oxford, and at the International Medieval Congress, Univer- sity of Leeds, 15 July 1997. I am grateful to several participants in these two meetings who made important comments.

In this paper, the term "Iran" is used to describe the territory ruled by the Ilkhans from the mid-1250s until around 1335, comprising the modem states of Iran, Turkmenistan, Iraq (plus trans-Euphrates Syria) and Azerbaijan, as well as much of the Causcasus, Turkey and Afghanistan.

1) Kipriilii 1929; K6priilii 1993, pp. 5, 11; Vryonis 1971, pp. 271-2, 366, 371; M6nage

? Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 1999 JESHO 42,1

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

28 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

In the following paper, I am not disputing this explanation in its broad lines, and certainly not with regard to the Seljuqs and their Turcoman followers in Iran and later in Anatolia, a subject which must be dealt with elsewhere.2) I will, however, attempt to begin the reexamination of this approach for the period of Mongol domination in large swaths of the Middle East.3) My tentative conclu- sion is that we do not necessarily have to abandon this idea of sufi mediation between Islam and the Mongol tribesmen of the thirteenth and fourteenth cen- turies. We do, however, have to refine this thesis with regard to the Mongol ruling elite, i.e. the Ilkhans themselves, the royal family and the senior officers. This elite seems on the whole to have adopted a reserved and at times antag- onistic view towards the more popular, "extreme" sufis, the so-called dervishes. On the whole, the sufis who were welcomed into elite circles, and in fact played a vital role in the eventual conversion of the Ilkhans and their entour- age, were those of a more moderate ilk, certainly acceptable to and part of the orthodox urban milieu, in which inter alia the majority of the senior civil- ian bureaucrats would have felt at home. The prominence of the moderate sufis might in itself lead to a questioning of the assumption that it was the similarity of sufis to shamans which propelled the Mongol elite towards the former, since if anything, it was the extreme sufis, the dervishes, who most resemble, so it would seem, the traditional Mongolian shaman. Even this last assumption, however, may be doubted, as will be seen in the following discussion.

At this point, it would be useful to clarify the distinction between the two groups referred to above, the extreme, anti-nomian sufis, often known as der- vishes or faqirs, and the more moderate, "establishment" mystics. The former have recently been subjected to an excellent study by Ahmet Karamustafa,4) who has outlined their main characteristics: renunciation of the normal world;

deviance from social norms, including bizarre dress, general appearance (the so-called "four blows") and behavior; and, extreme poverty. These mendicant dervishes were frequently accused, not without justification, of acting counter to the Shari'a and harboring extreme theological and philosophical views. The

1979, pp. 59-67; Roux 1984, p. 44; Fletcher 1986, p. 44. Some scholars have given a more restricted version of this view, or expressed it with reservations: Cahen 1969, p. 139; Inalcik 1973, p. 186; Morgan 1988, p. 73.

2) This reexamination for the Turks in Anatolia, both in the Seljuq and Mongol period, has been initiated by Karamustafa 1994a, pp. 175-98; see also the comment by DeWeese 1996, p. 184, n. 11.

3) The matter has already been broached for the Chaghatayid Khanate by Paul 1990, pp. 313-9.

4) Karamustafa 1994b.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 29

second class of mystics-what Karamustafa calls "institutional sufis"-is per- haps more difficult to typify, but it would not be amiss to suggest that their characteristics included obedience to the Shari'a, a milder asceticism, and more

interaction and intermingling with both the 'ulamct' and the political elite.5) The distinction between these two groupings is not absolute; certainly there was no organized movement of all the dervishes or moderate sufis, and there were vast differences between the different groupings and shaykhs within both streams. Also the border between the two groups was not impermeable, and there was interaction between individuals from both camps.6) Finally, there is perhaps also a tendency by later pious scholarship over time to sanitize some extreme figures, portraying them in a more "respectable way."') Be that as it may, a rough distinction between these two forms of mystical Islam is a useful one, and on the whole is borne out by historical reality. It should be pointed out that two frequently encountered aspects of sufi life, the samd' (singing sessions)8) and the perceived ability of holy men to perform miracles (kardmdt) are not unique to either stream of sufism.

Hiilegii, so it would appear, entered the Muslim world without much knowl-

edge or a clear attitude towards the mendicant dervishes. As late as 658/1260,9) in the aftermath of campaigning in the Middle East and some four decades

after the first Mongol invasion in the region, this prince--known already as ilkhan-was perplexed after meeting a group of Qalandars (jam' min al-fuqara' al-qalandariyya), the famous dervish group, at the plain of Harr~n to the east of the Euphrates in what is today southeastern Turkey. According to the chron- icle attributed to Ibn al-Fuwati, the Ilkhan asked the Shi'i scholar Nasir al-

Din al-Tflsi, a trusted advisor, the identity of these people. TOsi reportedly answered, "[They are] the surplus of this world," which led to Hiilegii having them executed. Only then did the Ilkhan ask the scholar the meaning of this comment. The latter replied: "People are divided into four classes, [those]

5) See the comments in Karamustafa 1994b, pp. 88-9. 6) Karamustafa 1994b, pp. 85-100; Karamustafa 1994a, pp. 196-7; see the comment by

H. Algar in EIr, vol. 3, p. 755. 7) M6nage 1979, p. 61. 8) On the practice of samd', raqs (dance) and wajd (ecstatic trance) by the Kubrawiyya,

who are mentioned below, see DeWeese 1992, pp. 144-6. 9) From the context it would appear that this incident occurred after Hillegii left Syria in

the late winter of 1260, and not earlier in the year (or late 1259), when he made his way from the Jazira into the country.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

30 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

involved in rulership, commerce, craftsmanship and agriculture, and those who are not [in these categories], they were a burden on [the people].""') For a mainstream, albeit Shi'i, scholar, these dervishes were clearly beyond the pale. Hillegii, perhaps not knowing any better, took him at his word. Less then a generation later, however, another Ilkhan had adopted a differ-

ent outlook towards the dervishes. Tegiider Ahmad (r. 1282-84), son of Hiilegii and the first Mongol ruler in Iran to convert to Islam, seems to have been asso- ciated with such sufis from an early age. The Mamluk historian al-Dhahabi (d. 1348) reports in his Ta'rikh al-isldm that Tegiider was exposed as a young child to members of the Ahmadiyya-Rif'ciyya, the so-called "howling der- vishes," which led to his conversion while still a boy.") There are several rea- sons to discount the veracity of this story, but it does hint at Tegiider's contact with sufis of the more extreme nature and their influence over him.12) We can be more certain of the Ilkhan's connection with another sufi personality, Kamal al-Din 'Abd al-Rahman, a rather dubious figure clearly outside the sufi estab- lishment and the 'ulamda' at large. Mamluk sources report that Tegiider had fallen under his influence as a young man, some time before he had acceded the throne, and was converted to Islam by him.'3) Some of these sources portray 'Abd al-Rahman as an out and out charlatan and purveyor of legerde- main,14) while others are somewhat more charitable."5) The latter mention that

he had studied with the shaykh al-islam Shaykh Muwaffiq al-Din al-Kayashi, a famous mystic of Mosul who died in 680/1281-2, known for his Quranic com- mentaries and his ascetism, as well as the distance he maintained from the gov- ernment of Badr al-Din Lu'lu', ruler of Mosul.16) But while Muwaffiq al-Din's

credentials as a scholar and moderate sufi - albeit on the austere side--were impec- cable, those of his former student left much to be desired from the point of view of institutional sufism. During the reign of Abagha, he had succeeded in ingratiating himself with part of the Mongol elite in Iran, particularly with the

noble ladies (khawttin), most important of these being the mother of young Teguider. This was not achieved through displays of spiritual powers or devo- tional intensity, let alone learning in the Islamic sciences, but rather in his suc- cess in performing tricks. The sources describe at some length how these

10) Ibn al-Fuwati 1932-3, p. 432 (on the matter of authorship see the comment in art. "Ibn al-Fuwati," El2). This passage is cited and discussed in Mazzaoui 1972, p. 42 n. 3.

11) Al-Dhahabi MS., fol. 23b-24a. 12) Amitai-Preiss forthcoming. 13) Ibn al-Dawadari 1971, p. 263; Ibn al-Furat 1942, p. 278. 14) Al-Dhahabi MS., fol. 25b; Yfnini, 1954-61, vol. 4, p. 215. 15) Ibn al-Dawddari 1971, pp. 262-3; Ibn al-Furat 1942, p. 278. 16) Mustawfi 1961, p. 702; al-Safadi 1931-, vol. 8, pp. 291-2.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 31

deceptions were engineered. 'Abd al-Rahmdn's rise in influence may also have been due to his powerful personality. His being a sufi, however, seems to have little to do with his success.

'Abd al-Rahman does not really seem to fit into either of the categories of sufis expounded above. He was surely neither a member of the sufi establish- ment nor a typical mendicant, anti-nomian dervish. However, an associate of his clearly fits into the latter class. This was Ishin or IHasan Mengli, who accord- ing to Rashid al-Din, had been a disciple of one Babi Ya'qfib from Arran. The historian reports that Tegfider would spend his time in Ishan Mengli's tent, which was pitched near that of the Ilkhan, taking part in samd' sessions, to the detriment of state affairs. 'Abd al-Rahman was called babic (Turkish: father)

by the Ilkhan, while Ishan Mengli was referred to as qarindcsh (Turkish: Brother).") The latter's teacher, Babi Ya'qfb (or perhaps Ya'qfbiyyan) appears to have been associated with the Qalandariyya. So, at least, he was accused by

the mid-fourteenth century writer Tawakkuli ibn al-Bazzaz.1') In any event, in the spring of 683/1284, Tegiider, on the eve of a confrontation with Arghun, paid a visit to this Babi Ya'qfib and his followers.'9) With regard to Ishan Mengli, Ibn al-Bazzaz claims that he used hashish together with the Ilkhan. While this last statement may be taken with some reservation, it is clear that

Tegtider had associated himself with a decidedly "low" sufi milieu, to which 'Abd al-Rahman did little to improve. The disdainful attitude of his father,

Hillegti, to such devotees, had thus been shunted aside. Whether this was a wise political move is another matter. It probably played

a part, as Jean Aubin has recently suggested, in helping to turn many of the Muslim bureaucrats against Tegfider, in spite of his being a Muslim.20) Ishan Mengli's attempts to discredit the moderate sufi Shaykh Zahid also appear not to have endeared him to the religious establishment.21) One wonders, although it must be admitted that this is highly speculative, whether the Ilkhan's close association with sufis of a decidedly non-institutional mien also contributed in some way to the growing alienation between him and much of the Mongol elite, who may have remained more faithful to Hiilegii's view on the matter. In any event, the idyll of the dervishes was to be of short order. The two person- alities just now discussed did not long survive the fall of their devotee and

17) Rashid al-Din 1941, p. 47. 18) Ibn al-BazzAz 1994, p. 217; Karamustafa 1994b, p. 57; Sohrweide 1965, pp. 103-4;

Aubin 1995, pp. 41-2. 19) Rashid al-Din 1941, p. 53. 20) Aubin 1995, p. 32. 21) Ibn al-Bazzdz 1994, pp. 217-9; Aubin 1991, pp. 39-53; Sohrweide 1965, pp. 103-104.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

32 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

patron. 'Abd al-Rahman, having been sent on a diplomatic mission to the Mam-

luk Sultan Qalawun, died--more-or-less under house arrest-soon after being informed of the news of Tegtider's death.22) Ishin Mengli, who remained at home, was executed after Arghun's accession to the throne by being cooked in boiling water.23) This was one trial by fire that a dervish did not survive. During his struggle against Tegiider, there are reports in sources of vari-

ous provenance that Arghun had criticized the Ilkhan's adherence to Islam and the policies inspired by this attachment. This, so it would seem, provided an effective rallying cry to those elements in the Mongol elite dissatisfied with

Tegtider's personality and actions.24) Once in power, however, Arghun re- turned to the earlier practice of even-handed treatment to the different religious

communities found in the Ilkhanate. Arghun may have gained power on an "anti-Islamic" platform, and he dis-established it as a state religion, but he had nothing against Islam per se and certainly did not persecute Muslims as a group. In fact, during his struggle with his uncle, he took advantage of his passing through Bisdm, to visit the tomb of the famous ninth century mystic Abfi Yazid,25) and there ask for divine assistance for victory.26) This was, it would seem, an attempt by Arghun to take out a little "celestial insurance," to

use David Morgan's apt term.27) It should come as no surprise then, that the sufis, at least of moderate leaning, appear to have been welcome at the court during Arghun's reign (1284-91). The Kubrawi shaykh CAla' al-Dawla Simnani (d. 736/1336), scion to a family of high officials in the Ilkhanate and himself in official service early in the reign of Arghun before embarking on the sufi path, was an involuntary guest at his court. It was during this forced stay, some eighty days long, that he engaged in the famous debate in which, so it is reported, he readily defeated the Buddhist monks.28) It was from the ranks of the Kubrawiyya that came the personality who

properly initiated Ghazan, Arghun's son and eventual successor (r. 1295-1304) into the Muslim faith. This was Sadr al-Din Ibrahim Hammiya, the son of Sa'd al-Din Muhammad, one of disciples of Najm al-Din Kubrd. The exact course

22) Holt 1986, pp. 130-1. 23) Ibn al-Bazziz 1994, p. 219. 24) Amitai-Preiss forthcoming. 25) On him, see E12, vol. 1, pp. 162-163. 26) Rashid al-Din 1941, p. 53. 27) Morgan 1986, p. 44. 28) Mustawfi 1961, pp. 675-676; F. Meier, "CAld' al-Dawla al-Simnani," E12, vol. 1, pp.

162-163; J. van Ess, "'Ala' al-Daula Semnani", Elr, vol. 1, p. 775; DeWeese 1994, p. 173; cf. Bausani 1968, p. 545. Simnani, it should be noted, had grown up at the ordu (royal camp) and thus had known Arghun since adolescence; Aubin 1995, p. 82.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 33

of this conversion has been analyzed in detail by Charles Melville, and need not detain us now. Mention should be made, however, that while Sadr al-Din gave the future Ilkhan instruction and performed the actual conversion, the lat- ter was convinced to adopt Islam by his lieutenant Nawriiz, and his motivation appears to have been an amalgam of conviction and political reasons.29) It is interesting to note that there is no record of any significant spiritual contact before hand between Ghazan and sufis of any kind.

Once becoming a Muslim, however, the situation is seen to change. Another sufi personality was found in the entourage of this Ilkhan: Sa'd al-Din Qutluq/ Qutlugh Khw ajah Khalidi Qazwini, who according to Mustawfi was responsi- ble for converting Ghazan "and most of the Mongols."30) Charles Melville,31) as well as the translators of the facsimile edition of Mustawfi's work, were surely correct to cast doubt on this claim.32) But such an avowal could only be made if this Qutluq Khwajah was indeed part of Ghazan's entourage. As Melville writes: "... it is not impossible that Sa'd al-Din [Qutluq Khw ajah] did indeed at some later stage attend and instruct Ghazan."33) The above mentioned Shaykh Zahid Gilini, who is portrayed as an opponent of the Qalandars, was also the recipient of a visit by this Ilkhan.34) Another possible sufi, Nizam al-Din Mah-

mud, seemingly of the moderate variety, is called shaykh al-shuytikh and was found among the group of scholars and high bureaucrats who accompanied Ghazan to Syria in 1300, what one Mamluk historian called a'ydn dawlat al-malik ghdzdn.35) This personality may be identified with the Mahmud Dinawari, who Rashid al-Din refers to as shaykh al-mashayikh, and was active in the events leading up to Ghazan's successful challenge of Baidu's rule, and afterwards.36)

This is not to say that Ghazan's relations with sufis were trouble-free. In

29) Melville 1990, pp. 159-177. 30) Mustawfi 1961, p. 675. 31) Melville 1990, p. 161. 32) Mustawfi 1913, vol. 2, p. 217, n. 1. 33) See also the comments in Aubin 1995, p. 60. 34) Rashid al-Din 1940, p. 100; Aubin 1991, pp. 41-48. A fantastic account of Ghazan's

relations with Shaykh Zahid, as told in the mid-fourteenth century Ghazan-ndmah, is the subject of a paper given by Charles Melville, at the Ilkhanate conference given mentioned in the initial note of this paper.

35) Ibn al-Dawidari 1960, p. 32. This list of personalities, without the description given above, is found in the anonymous Mamluk chronicle edited by Zetterst6en 1919, p. 76, who also mentions this Nizam al-Din several times during the Mongol occupation of Damascus; at least once he was requested to intercede with the Mongols on behalf of the local popu- lation (pp. 69-70). Zetterst6en, in the index (p. 307), gives him the entry: Nizam al-Din Mahmfid b. 'Ali al-Shibini, but it is unclear what the basis for this identification was.

36) Rashid al-Din 1940, passim; Aubin 1995, pp. 47-48.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

34 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

703/1303, word came to him of a conspiracy of sufi shaykhs and others to depose and replace him with his cousin, Ala Fireng, son of the Ilkhan Geikhatu (r. 1291-5). The conspirators, led by one Pir Ya'qub Bdghbani, were quickly rounded up, and conveniently branded as Mazdikites before they were exe- cuted.37) Whether they really held such extreme views may be doubted. Likewise it may be questioned whether these followers of Pir Ya'qib were actually der- vishes, as suggested by K. Jahn.38) On the contrary, the relationship of at least two of this group with the former wazir Sadr al-Din Khdlidi Zanjani hints at the sufis among them as being of the moderate type. In any event, it is clear that mystics may have been respected by the recently converted Ilkhan, but not if they meddled in politics, particularly if they plotted against him. Ghazan himself appears to have dabbled in sufism. According to the testi-

mony of Shaykh Sadr al-Din Ibrahim Hammuiya, recorded in several Mamluk sources, Ghazan was given a woolen coat by him, indicating that perhaps the Ilkhan was initiated as a sufi.39) Whether Ghazan understood the full implica- tions of this particular act remains an open question. In any event, in 1303, towards the end of his life, Ghazan isolated himself, ostensibly for forty days, from his court and usual comforts, and attended by only a few individuals.40) The use of the term chihilla (> the more common chilla)41) seems to indicate that a sufi-like retreat of devotion was planned. J.A. Boyle, however, has com- mented that "motives may well have been medical rather than spiritual for it is clear that the Il-khan's infirmity -whatever its nature-was no longer a mere inflammation of the eyes."42) All this being said, the enthusiasm that some modem scholars have expressed regarding Ghazan's devotion to sufism may be overstated,43) reading more into the sources that is warranted, and ignoring the Ilkhan's other intellectual pursuits, let alone his interest in Mongol tradition and

institutions.44) Dervishes of a more popular ilk were also found in the vicinity of the Ilkhan.

Rashid al-Din mentions Ghazan's solicitude for a group of unknown dervishes in 703/1303 in Iraq.45) Of more significance is a shaykh of Turkish origin, Baraq

37) Rashid al-Din 1940, pp. 152-154; Bausani 1968, pp. 548-549. 38) In the summary of Rashid al-Din 1940, p. xliii. 39) Melville 1990, pp. 163, 168. 40) Rashid al-Din 1940, p. 152. There is no basis for the passage in Howorth, 1876-

1927, vol. 3, p. 480, for the following rendition of this passage: "[Ghazan] was waited upon by dervishes. His residence was enclosed by a palisade." 41) On this retreat, known as khalwa in Arabic, see E12, vol. 2, p. 55; vol. 4, pp. 990-991. 42) Boyle 1968, vol. 5, p. 395. 43) Cf. Murtadawi 1991, pp. 322-346; Lewisohn 1995, pp. 81-84. 44) See Amitai-Preiss 1996b, pp. 25-34; Amitai-Preiss 1996a, pp. 1-10. 45) Rashid al-Din 1940, pp. 151-2. On p. 209, mention is made of Ghazan's building of

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 35

B~ba, born near Tokat in eastern Anatolia, and a follower of Sari Saltuq, the "semi-legendary warrior saint who propagated Islam in the Crimea and Dobruja."46) Baraq arrived at the Ilkhanid court during the reign of Ghazan, obtaining there some prominence, at least according to the Mamluk sources. In 706/1306, during the reign of Oljeitii (1304-16), Baraq and a group of some 100 followers crossed the Euphrates into Syria. They were well received in Damascus, in spite of the scandal that their appearance and behavior caused, and were permitted to visit Jerusalem. By the order of the Mamluk Sultan al- Nasir Muhammad b. Qalawun (or rather the order issued in his name), how- ever, Baraq's progress to Egypt was halted, and he and his entourage were sent back across the Euphrates. Not long afterwards, the shaykh met his end in Gilan, while taking part in Mongol efforts to bring that recalcitrant region under

control.47) Perhaps our estimation of Baraq's importance during Ghazan's reign should be tempered by the total lack of any allusion to him in Rashid al-Din's JIami' al-tawdrikh. On the other hand, he does enjoy some mention in Qashani's

Ta'rikh-i tljdytfi, although only in connection with his ill-fated participation in the campaign to Gilan. His tomb was eventually placed near the mausoleum of Oljeitii, again an indication of his relationship with this later Ilkhan.48) There is, however, no getting around his greater prominence in the Mamluk sources, reflecting perhaps the image that Baraq had succeeded in projecting in Syria, and indicating less real authority and influence among the Mongols than he claimed.

It would seem then that the post-conversion Ilkhans adopted a more positive attitude towards mendicant dervishes than the founder of their dynasty. Yet, while Baraq Baba may have enjoyed some prominence, or was at least toler- ated during Ghazan's reign, it appears that those sufis with real influence, religious and perhaps otherwise, with the Ilkhan were of a more moderate, gen- erally institutional nature. During the early years of Oljeitti's reign, Baraq's posi- tion may have been more pronounced, although the exact extent of his influence is hard to gauge. In any event, it does not seem to have adversely affected the role of more temperate mystics, such as Safi al-Din Ardabili, the disciple of Shaykh Zahid Ibrahim Gilani, who enjoyed some eminence during the reign of

Oljeitui's son and successor, Abfl Sa'id (r. 1316-35).49) Mustawfi, writing just a

a khcnqdh sometime during his reign, as part of the many Islamic buildings which he estab- lished; the exact character of its inhabitants are not specified.

46) H. Algar, "Baraq Baba," EIr, vol. 3, p. 754. 47) H. Algar, "Baraq Babd," Elr, vol. 3, pp. 754-575; B. Lewis, "Barak Baba," EI2, 1:1031-

2; Karamustafa 1994b, pp. 62-63; Karamustafa 1994a, pp. 193-196; Melville forthcoming. 48) Q5ash~ni 1969, p. 70, cited in Melville forthcoming, n. 49; Blair 1986, p. 142. 49) See the short and general comments in Mazzaoui 1972, pp. 52-54; Minorsky 1954,

pp. 515-527.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

36 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

few years after this Ilkhan's death (and thus probably not out of overtly pious anachronism) states that the Mongols were greatly attached to Safi al-Din, who

restrained many of them from molesting the people."?) Other moderate sufis are also found to have enjoyed some prominence. After some initial tension, Ala' al-Dawla Simndni was reconciled to Oljeitii (at least until he became a Shi'i), who built an academy in Sultaniyya in his honor.51) This Ilkhan also recon- structed the tomb of the above-mentioned ninth century mystic Abi Yazid

Bist.mi, and supported Nur al-Din Isfarayini, another important mystic.52) Simnani was also well thought of by the Sunni Abi Sa'id, who is recorded to have visited him.53) A detailed discussion of the role of both anti-nomian and institutional sufis in the post-Ghazan period, when the matter of conversion to Islam was already settled for the Ilkhans, goes beyond the confines of this pre- sent study. We might mention, however, that the sufis were only a portion of the entourage of religious figures who surrounded Oljeitii and Aba Sa'id, and influenced them. In fact, it appears that it was theologians, such as the Shi'i al-'Allama al-Hilli, who set the tone of the religious life in the former's reign.54)

Michel Mazzaoui has written: "The whole question of Sfifism or mysticism during the Mongol period has not been studied in full, and our knowledge about folk Islam during this period and afterwards is very sketchy.""55) I must admit that the matter is still very murky, but perhaps my short survey, which surely has not touched upon every sufi shaykh with whom the Mongol elite had connections, permits the following tentative conclusions:

The dervishes of an anti-nomian bent began their contacts with the Ilkhans on a decidedly negative note. With the Islamization of the Ilkhans, their posi- tion appears to have improved, but on the whole and in the long run, they enjoyed a secondary status compared to more moderate sufis. Not only had the latter a place of some honor among the pagan Ilkhans, they were instrumental in the conversion of the Ilkhans and their continual instruction and guidance in the new faith.

To what can we attribute this hierarchy of sufis? The Ilkhans may well have

50) Mustawfi 1961, p. 675, cited in Lambton 1988, p. 322. 51) J. Van Ess, in EIr, vol. 1, p. 775. 52) Lewisohn 1995, pp. 84, 111; cf. J. van Ess, in EIr, vol. 1, p. 775. 53) Safadi 1931-, vol. 7, p. 357; J. van Ess, in EIr, vol. 1, p. 775. 54) Schmidtke 1991, pp. 23-32. 55) Mazzaoui 1972, p. 42.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 37

been influenced by their various Muslim advisors and officials, drawn mainly from the urban administrative and scholarly milieu. These notables, of whom Nasir al-Din Tiisi's example was given above, seem to have looked upon the dervishes with distaste. On the other hand, some of the prominent moderate, institutional sufis, even those of a pronounced ascetic taste, were very much a

part of the world of the senior 'ulamd' and bureaucrats, and the border between these two sectors was neither fixed or impermeable. Second, they may well have remembered the role of popular dervish figures in fermenting rebellion against authority. An earlier generation of Mongol leaders had to deal with the move- ment of a charismatic Muslim ascetic figure claiming magical power, Mahmiid

T.rabi, in the area of Bukhara in 636/1238-9,56) and the memory of Batba Ishlq's rebellion in Anatolia in 1241 against the Seljuqs may have played a role."57) It might be suggested that the anti-nomian dervishes themselves shunned patron- age and contact with authority. Maybe there were those with such principles, and therefore we do not know about them, but in the examples adduced above, the dervishes in question do not seem to have held such scruples. All of the above applies to the relationship between Mongol rulers in Iran

and the various types of mystics in their realm. The information regarding wider circles of Mongols, let alone the average tribesman, is spotty at best. There is evidence, albeit not much, of the attraction of non-institutional sufis for the Mongols at large. The Mamluk historian al-Nuwayri (d. 1332) writes that among the reasons that the Mongol elite rose up against Teguider Ahmad was that his mentor Shaykh 'Abd al-Rahmdn, had drawn the "sons of the Mongols" (awldd al-mughul) towards him.58) Whether this inclination was of a spiritual nature is left unsaid in the source. Other Mamluk writers, describing more-or-less the same period, describe an Oirat Mongol who converted to Islam, took the name 'Ali, became a faqir (i.e. dervish), and with a group of

followers from among the "sons of the Mongols" (awldd al-mughul) made his way across the Euphrates to Syria. There, for reasons which are not completely clear (for unacceptable religious practices or moral turpitude?), he and some of his brothers were eventually arrested."59) Both of these pieces of evidence derive

from the time of Tegiider Ahmad, when anti-nomian dervishes were at the apogee of their influence. Whether these awlId al-mughul were from the elite

56) Juwayni 1912-37, vol. 1, pp. 85-90 (= Juwayni 1958, vol. 1, pp. 109-15). See also Bausani 1968, p. 548. 57) Cahen 1968, pp. 136-137. 58) Al-Nuwayri 1985, p. 402. 59) Baybars al-Mansiri MS. fol. 129b; Ibn al-Furat 1942, p. 250; al-Maqrizi, 1934-73,

vol. 1, pp. 708-709.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

38 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

or the common tribesmen is unspecified. Regarding other periods, we are still in the dark regarding the success of the sufis in converting the rank-and-file Mongols.

In the above discussion only the role of the sufis in the conversion to Islam of the Ilkhans has been mentioned. Other factors, such as the role of key mem- bers of the Mongol elite who had already converted (Nawriiz being the most prominent), political or other practical reasons, let alone the whole question of acculturation and assimilation to a wider culture (perhaps via the Turks) have been ignored and will have to wait analysis elsewhere.60) The focus here has been on sufis, and it has been seen that generally those with long-term and last- ing influence were of an institutional, moderate variety, heirs to a centuries- long tradition which was still vigorously developing in this period and would continue to do so long after the Mongols had disappeared as a political force or distinctive ethnic group in the Middle East.

There is little reason to connect the sufi personalities which we have encoun- tered here with traditional Mongol shamanism or shamans. The statement that the Mongols, at least their rulers and elites, were attracted to sufism because of the sufis' similarity to shamans is an assumption which has never been proven. In fact, there is nothing in sources of which I am aware that remotely justifies such a position. One might ask, where is the one statement by a source of any provenance which could remotely be construed to support the attraction of the Mongol rulers to sufis, moderate or otherwise, because of their shamanistic past? Even if we were to accept such a postulation, how do we account for the fact that the Mongol elite was attracted mainly to the moderate sufis rather to

the anti-nomian variety, who--one might a priori suggest-had a greater resemblance to the shamans.

A closer inspection of the matter reveals that perhaps shamans and sufis, cer- tainly of the institutional kind, have less in common than is often thought. The shaman in traditional Mongol religion seeks-according to Walther Heissig- "ecstasy and the ability to combat harmful powers and forces and to look into the future in order to interpret and prophesy, through the help of spirits which

have been made subservient."61) He or she has little if any interest in what would be considered spiritual or transcendental in both the monotheistic and Indian religions, but rather was basically involved "in preventive and healing

60) I am now working on what will hopefully be a comprehensive study of the whole question of the Mongols' Islamization, of which this present paper will be a part.

61) Heissig 1980, p. 6; see also Boyle 1972, p. 184. A detailed discussion of the Mongo- lian shaman and traditional Inner Asian religion is beyond the bounds of the present paper.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 39

magic."62) This is not the place to present a discussion, even a summary one, of sufism, but one might mention gnosis (ma'rifa), the "annihilation in God" (fana') and "the unity with Being" (ittihdd or wahdat al-wujid), sufi concepts which are completely foreign to the inner Asian shamanistic milieu. These and other goals of the sufi are achieved by various means, some of which have a certain resemblance with the technique of the shaman, i.e. communicating with the "otherworld" through ecstacy and trance (the so-called "shaman's ride") but these are mainly external aspects and have nothing to do with the essence of either the shaman's or sufi's vocation. In addition, the Mongolian shamans of that time (and even of today) practice neither ascetism nor self-abuse, the for- mer found among a broad range of sufis, and the latter common among certain extreme dervish groups.

But what of the anti-nomian dervishes? Does not their bizarre dress and

behavior, let alone at least some of their devotional practices, reveal a similarity and even relationship to Mongolian shamans? One piece of evidence, and as far as I can tell the only one, which has been adduced to show the alleged influence of shamanism on sufis is an interesting passage from the al-'Ibar ft khabar man ghabar by al-Dhahabi, who writes that among the latter day fol- lowers of Ahmad al-Rifd'i (d. 578/1182), "devilish practices had come into use since the Mongols took Iraq, such as entering fire, riding lions and playing with animals. Neither the Shaykh [al-Rifa'i] nor his righteous [first] followers had known these.. ."63)

There are, however, a number of reasons why this statement cannot serve as a basis for the attribution of a strong shamanistic connection between this par- ticular dervish group (let alone dervishes as a whole) and shamanism. It should first be noted that al-Dhahabi does not explicitly state that the Rifa'is took these allegedly new practices from the Mongols, but only that they were introduced sometime after the Mongols conquered Iraq (A.D. 1258). The exact origin of these innovations is not given, although it was perhaps Dhahabi's intention to imply that it was somehow connected to the Mongols. More importantly, as D.S. Margoliouth has noted, the wild practises to which the Rif'iyya were ascribed were no invention of al-Rifd'i, "since the like are recorded by al-Tantikhi in the

62) Heissig 1980, p. 12. This is not to suggest that traditional Mongolian (and Inner Asian) religion was without any interest beyond the practical and mundane. It certainly had cosmological concerns and attributed great importance in matters of origins and ancestors (see DeWeese 1994, pp. 27-35). These interests would appear to be somewhat different than those found in sufism.

63) Al-Dhahabi 1985, vol. 3, p. 75, who refers to the RifY'iyya as Ahmadiyya. This pas- sage, cited by the sixteenth century writer Ibn al-'Imi~d 1931-32, vol. 4, p. 260, is seen as definite proof of a shaman-sufi connection by K6priilii 1929, p. 12; Vryonis 1971, p. 366.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

40 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

fourth century A.H. [= ca. tenth century A.D.]"64) Margoliouth, unfortunately, did not provide a reference for this information, but it seems in this author's al-Faraj ba'd al-shidda, there is a story of riding a lion.65) This information is not connected with sufis per se, but it does show that this motif, at least, was found in Islamic society centuries before the Mongols showed up on the scene. There also appears a story about a man seeking refuge in an oven, but this was

unlit, and also not tied to sufism.66) However, the motif of the trial by fire, and specifically being tossed into an oven, is an ancient one in the Near East, going back at least to the Book of Daniel (ch. 3).67) Some extreme dervish practices, including bizarre dress and self-inflicted

pain (although not necessarily the ones just described) apparently precede the Mongol invasion of eastern Iran (1219) and certainly that of Iraq (1258).68) So while we cannot rule out the possibility of some Mongol influence, among which might be something specifically shamanistic, on the Rifd'iyya, it seems no less likely that these activities were an independent, "Islamic" development, perhaps derived from the practices of other dervish groups. It might well be that al-Dhahabi's attribution, albeit by implication, to the Mongols, is nothing more than an attempt to blame outlandish practices among Muslims (in his eyes certainly) on the once infidel Mongols, with their plethora of strange customs. In this connection, we might mention the attempt by the fifteenth century Egypt jurist and historian, al-Maqrizi, to blame the adoption of the Mongol yasa (law code) for the infringement by the Mamluk hujja*b (chamberlains) on the author- ity of the qadis in Cairo, an accusation which has been shown to have little basis in fact.69)

The Mongol shamans, usually referred to as qams (a Turkish word) in the Arabic and Persian sources, are a fairly non-descript lot in Mongol Iran. In the post-Hiilegii period, groups of them appear on occasion, but invariably without names.70) In fact, as far as I know, not one individual shaman is ever named

64) Art. "Ahmad al-Rifd'i," EP2, 8:524 (this is basically the same article which appeared in El1). C.E. Bosworth, the author of the subsequent entry in E12, on the Rifi'iyya order, leaves open the question when these practises, which made the order famous, came about. 65) Tanfkhi 1978, vol. 4, pp. 139-147. I am grateful to Dr. Julia Ashtiany of St.

Andrew's University for her advice on this material. 66) Tanfikhi 1978, vol. 3, pp. 62-63; this passage is translated in Ashtiany 1991, pp. 108-

128.

67) See DeWeese 1994, pp. 243-267, for a discussion of the oven motif in pre-Islamic, Islamic and Inner Asian contexts. It is worth mentioning the taming of a lion story is also found in Daniel (ch. 6), a book which reflects a heavy "Eastern," i.e. Iranian, influence. 68) Karamustafa 1994b, pp. 39-46. 69) See Ayalon 1971-73, passim. 70) See, for example, Amitai-Preiss 1991, pp. 355-356; Rashid al-Din 1941, p. 46.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFS AND SHAMANS 41

in the Ilkhanid state; the term beki, often found in the sources for the early Mongol empire as a title of shamans together with a name, is no longer in use.7) This is in stark contrast to the many prominent sufi shaykhs, moderate and extreme, known in the sources, some of whom have been mentioned above. There is no evidence that the shamans were expelled from the Ilkhanate after

Ghazan's conversion, as were the bakhshis, the Buddhist holy men, who were eventually ordered out when it became clear that they were still practicing their religion while having ostensibly become Muslims.72) The shamans, on the other

hand, are found voicing their opinions in Oljeitti's reign,73) and may have lingered in Iran for some time, although their eventual fate is unknown. Other post- conversion vestiges of the pre-Islamic shamanism also remained for a period.74) Mention has been made of certain similarities between particular aspects

of the sufi experience and that of the shamans, such as the use of the trance (although sufis and and shamans employed it for different goals). Some sufis were known and venerated for their wonder-working (kardmdt), as were sha- mans. And sufis might have been consulted for mundane matters, and not only those relating to transcendental affairs. It is possible, then, that the partial re- semblance between shamans and sufis may have contributed to some degree for the success of some of the latter in converting and instructing the Ilkhans and their entourage, and their popularity in wider circles. This, it must be added, is an assumption that has yet to be substantiated. No source known to me offers it as an explanation. Other reasons may also be suggested. Perhaps the success of individual sufis in converting at least some of the Mongols, elite and otherwise, may be due to their attraction which they held for large sections of Islamic society, i.e. a homey, down-to-earth version of Islam, unencumbered with legalistic and theological niceties, and at times willing to turn a blind eye to elements of the traditional, pre-Islamic religion. It is also possible that the sufis, some of whom at least would be found in the country, would come into contact with the Mongol tribesman, and thus could influence them, both in con- version and afterwards.75) Thus, from what we have seen above, there is little proof to support the con-

tention of K6pruilii and others that the dervishes were an amalgam of shaman- ism and Islam, if not shamans in sufi clothes. If the shamans put on a Muslim

71) Roux 1984, p 71; Doerfer 1963-75, vol. 1, pp. 235-238; Paul 1990, p. 314. 72) Rashid al-Din 1940, p. 188. 73) Boyle 1968, p. 402; also Boyle 1972, p. 184, who points out that these were surely

shamans, although the source refers to them as bakhshis. 74) Amitai-Preiss 1996a, pp. 1-10, esp. 9. 75) This last reason was suggested by Prof. A.K.S. Lambton at the Ilkhanate seminar in

which this paper was first given.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

42 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

garb to please the princes, as K6priilii's claims,76) there is no evidence of it in the sources which I have examined. Perhaps, then, the time has come to eschew phrases such as "shamanistic" and "crypto-shamanistic"77) when discussing the sufis and dervishes of the Mongol period, such as Shaykh Baraq. This der- vish may have been un-orthodox and even weird in the eyes of the 'ulamnd' and others of the civil and political establishment, but it seems that he reflected a long developing strand of anti-nomian sufism,78) and the connection to Inner Asia shamanism is tenuous at best.

This study appears to confirm the measured statement by the anthropol- ogist A.M. Khazanov, with regard to conversion of Inner Asian peoples to a monotheistic religion: "Spiritual middlemen and mediators, very often of seden- tary origin, functionally somehow replaced their pagan counterparts... ."79) In other words, charismatic personalities of one type are replaced by those of another. In the case of the Mongols, it now can be questioned whether this replacement was also a result of some type of inherent similarity between the two groups of charismatic persons. There is no evidence that loyalty and later nostalgia for shamanism influenced the Ilkhans' choice of sufis, even before they converted. As we have seen, the Ilkhans generally preferred moderate sufis,

those mystics whose practice least resembled the holy men of the traditional Mongol religion. Elements of traditional Mongol religion, usually known under the rubric of shamanism, continued to be practiced for decades in the environs of the newly converted Ilkhans and their entourage.80) But this seems to be sep- arate from the relationship between Ghazan and his successors with their sufi teachers and associates.

Postscript

After this article went to press, I learnt of additional relevant information which was published in an important article by Daniella Talmon-Heller, "Arabic Sources on Muslim Villagers under Frankish Rule," in Alan V. Murray ed., From Clermont to Jerusalem: The Crusades and Crusader Societies 1095-

1500 (International Medieval Researches, 3) (Brussels: Brepols, 1998), p. 109. There evidence is cited from another work by al-Dhahabi, Siyar a'lam

76) K6prtilii 1929, p. 13. 77) For the latter, see H. Algar, "Bardq Baba," EIr, vol. 3, p. 754. 78) See Karamustafa 1994a, passim. 79) Khazanov 1994, p. 14. 80) On the assimilation of elements from traditional Inner Asian religion during the

process of Islamization in the Mongol khanates of Central Asia and their successor group- ings and states, see DeWeese 1994, p. 516 and passim.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 43

al-nubala', Sh. al-Arna'Ot and M.N. al-'Arqasusi eds. (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Risala, 1988), vol. 20, p. 383, of a Syrian sufi shaykh, Aboi al-Husayn al- Muqaddasi (d. ca. 548/1153-4), who is reported to have ridden a lion; suppos-

edly the Franks said of him: "Lions and Tigers are like tame animals for Aboi al-IHusayn."

Here, at least, al-Dhahabi believes that the lion-riding shaykhs made their appearance before the arrival of the Mongols in the Islamic world in the early thirteenth century. This weakens al-Dhahabi's own claim, cited above, that only in the aftermath of the Mongol conquest of Iraq did the Ahmadiyya/Rifa'iyya adopt inter alia lion-riding. The topos is found in connection to sufis long before the Mongols made their appearance in the area.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Baybars al-Mansfiri MS. Zubdat al-fikra ft ta'rikh al-hijra, MS. British Library Add. 23325.

al-Dhahabi, Muhammad b. Ahmad MS. Ta'rikh al-islim, MS. British Library Or. 1540. 1985 al-'Ibar fi khabar man ghabar, ed. by. M.S. Zaghlul (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub

al-'Ilmiyya).

Ibn al-Bazzgtz, Tawakkuli 1994 Safwat al-s.afc', ed. by Gh. Tabatabh'i (Tabriz).

Ibn al-Dawadari, Abli Bakr b. 'Abdallah 1960 Kanz al-durar wa-jacmi' al-ghurar vol. 9, ed. H.R. Roemer (Cairo: Deutsches

Archdiologisches Institut Kairo). 1971 Kanz al-durar wa-jcImi' al-ghurar vol. 8, ed. by U. Haarmann (Freiburg-

Cairo: Deutsches Archaologisches Institut Kairo). Ibn al-Furit, Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Rahim

1942 Ta'rikh vol. 7, ed. by C. Zurayk (Beirut: American University of Beirut, Publications of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences).

Ibn al-Fuwati, Kamal al-Din 'Abd al-Razzdq 1932-3 al-Hawadith al-jdmi'a wa'l-tajdrib al-ndfi'a fi'l-mi'a al-sdbi'a, ed. by

M. Jawdd (Baghdad: al-Maktab al-'Arabiyya, 1351H). Ibn al-'Imad, 'Abd al-Haqq b. Ahmad

1931-32 Shadharat al-dhahab ft akhbdr md dhahab (Cairo, 1350-51H). Juwayni, 'Ala' al-Din At~ Malik

1912-37 Ta'rikh-i jahdn gushd, ed. by M.M. Qazwini (London and Leiden: E.J. Brill). 1958 The History of the World Conqueror by 'Ala-ad-Din 'Ata-Malik Juvaini, tr.

by J.A. Boyle (Manchester: Manchester University Press). al-Maqrizi, Ahmad b. 'Ali

1934-73 Kitdb al-sulik li-ma'rifat duwal al-mulak, ed. by M.M. Ziyada and S.'A-F. 'AshOir (Cairo: Lajnat al-Ta'lif wa'l-Tarjama wa'l-Nashr).

Mustawfi, Hamdallah

1913 The Ta'rikh-i-Guzida or "Select History" of Hamdu'lldh Mustawfi-l-Qazwini, tr. by E.G. Browne and R.A. Nicholson (Leiden and London: E.J.W. Gibb Memorial Series, vol. 14/2).

1961 Ta'rikh-i guzidah, ed. by 'Abd al-Husayn Nawa'i (Tehran, 1339S).

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

44 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

al-Nuwayri, Almad b. 'Abd al-Wahhab 1985 Nihdtyat al-arab ft funin al-adab, vol. 27, ed. Sa'id 'Ashfir (Cairo: al-Hi'a

al-Misriyya al-'"Amma li'l-Kitab). Qashani, Muhammad

1969 Ta'rikh-i uljdytif, ed. by Mahin Hambly (Teheran: Majmfl'a-yi Mutfin-i Fdrisi, vol. 40).

Rashid al-Din, Fadl Allah 1940 Geschichte GOdzdn-Han's aus dem Ta'rih-i-mubarak-i-gdzdni ..., ed. Karl

Jahn (London: E.J.W. Gibb Memorial Series, New Series, vol. 14). 1941 Ta'rfh-i-Mubdrak-i-Gdzdni des Ra'id al-Din Fadl Alldch Ab-l-Hlair:

Geschichte der Ilhdne Abdgd bis Gaihyita (1265-1295), ed. by K. Jahn (Prague: Abhandlungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften und Kiinste in Prag. Philosophisch-Historische Abteilung, vol. 1).

al-Safadi, Khalil b. Aybak 1931- al-Wdfi bi'l-wafaydtt (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag).

Tanfikhi, al-Muhassin b. 'Ali 1978 al-Faraj ba'd al-shidda, ed. by 'A. al-Shiliji (Beirut: Dar al-Sadir).

Yfinini, Mfisa b. Muhammad 1954-61 Dhayl mir'dt al-zamdn ft ta'rikh al-a'ydn (Hyderabad: Dd'ira al-Ma'Arifa al-

'Uthmaniyya). Zetterst6en, Karl V.

1919 Beitrdge zu Geschichte der Mamlikensultane (Leiden: E.J. Brill).

Secondary Sources

Amitai-Preiss, Reuven 1991 "Evidence for the Early Use of the Title ilkhdn among the Mongols."

Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 3rd Ser., 1: 353-362. 1996a "Ghazan, Islam and Mongol Tradition: A View from the Mamluk Sultanate."

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 59: 1-10. 1996b "New Material from the Mamluk Sources for the Biography of Rashid al-

Din." In J. Rabi and T. Fitzherbert eds., The Court of the Il-khans (Oxford Journal of Islamic Art, vol. 12), pp. 23-38.

forthcoming "The Conversion of the Ilkhan Tegiider Ahmad to Islam." Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam.

Ashtiany, Julia 1991 "Al-Tanfikhi's al-Faraj ba'd al-shidda as a Literary Source." In Alan Jones

ed., Arabicus Felix: Luminosus Britannicus (Oxford: Ithaca Press), pp. 108- 128.

Aubin, Jean

1991 "Shaykh Ibrahim Zahid Gildni (1218?-1301)." Turcica 21-23: 39-53. 1995 Emirs mongols et vizirs persans dans les remous de l'acculturation (Paris: Studia

Iranica Cahier 15). Ayalon, David

1971-73 "The Great Yasa of Chingiz Khan. A Reexamination." Studia Islamica, Pt. A, 33 (1971): 97-140; pt. B, 34 (1971): 151-80; pt. Cl, 36 (1972): 113-58; pt. C2, 38 (1973): 107-56 [all reprinted in D. Ayalon, Outsiders in the Lands of Islam: Mamluks, Mongols and Eunuchs (London, 1988), art. no. IV].

Bausani, Alessandro 1968 "Religion under the Mongols." In J.A. Boyle ed., Cambridge History of Iran

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), vol. 5, pp. 538-549. Blair, Sheila S.

1986 "The Mongol Capital of Sultaniyya, 'The Imperial'." Iran 24: 139-151.

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

SUFIS AND SHAMANS 45

Boyle, John Andrew 1968 "The Political and Dynastic History of the Il-Khans." In J.A. Boyle ed.,

Cambridge History oflran (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), vol. 5, pp. 303-421.

1972 "Turkish and Mongol Shamanism in the Middle Ages." Folklore 83: 177- 193. [reprinted in J.A. Boyle, The Mongol Empire, 1206-1370 (London, 1977), art. XXII].

Cahen, Claude 1968 Pre-Ottoman Turkey, tr. by J. Jones-Williams (London: Sidgwick and Jackson). 1969 "The Turkish Invasion: The Selchiikids." In Kenneth Setton ed., A History

of the Crusades, vol. 1, second ed. (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press).

DeWeese, Devin 1992 "Sayyid 'All Hamadani and Kubrawi Hagiographical Traditions." In

L. Lewisohn ed., The Legacy of Mediaeval Persian Sufism (London and New York: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications/SOAS Centre of Near and Middle Eastern Studies, 1992), pp. 121-158.

1994 Islamization and Native Religion in the Golden Horde: Baba Tiikles and Conversion to Islam in Historical and Epic Tradition (University Park, PA.: Pennsylvania State University Press).

1996 "The Mash/a'ikh-i Turk and the Khojagdn: Rethinking the Links between the Yasavi and Naqshbandi Sufi Traditions." Journal of Islamic Studies 7.2: 180-207.

Doerfer, Gerhard

1963-75 Tiirkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen (Wiesbaden: Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. Ver6ffentlichungen der Orientalischen Kommission).

E12 Encyclopaedia of Islam, new edition (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1960-).

EIr

Encyclopaedia Iranica (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985-). Fletcher, Joseph F.

1986 "The Mongols: Ecological and Social Perspectives." Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 46: 11-50.

Heissig, Walther 1980 The Religions of Mongolia, tr. by Geoffrey Samuel (London: Routledge

and Kegan Paul). Holt, Peter M.

1986 "The Ilkhan Ahmad's Embassies to Qalawoin: Two Contemporary Accounts." Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 49: 128- 132.

Howorth, Henry H. 1876-1927 The History of the Mongols (London: Longmans, Green).

Inalcik, Halil 1973 The Ottoman Empire: The Classical Age 1300-1600, tr. by Norman

Itzkowitz and Colin Imber (London: Wiedenfeld and Nicolson). Karamustafa, Ahmet T.

1994a "Early Sufism in Eastern Anatolia." In L. Lewisohn ed., Classical Persian Sufism: From its Origins to Rumi (London: Khaniqahi Nimatullahi Publications), pp. 175-98.

1994b God's Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Later Middle Period, 1300-1550 (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press).

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

46 REUVEN AMITAI-PREISS

Khazanov, Anatoly M. 1994 "The Spread of World Religions in Medieval Nomadic Societies of the

Eurasian Steppes." In Michael Gervers and Wayne Schlepp eds., Nomadic Diplomacy, Destruction and Religion from the Pacific to the Adriatic (Toronto Studies in Central and Inner Asia, No. 1), pp. 11-33.

Kiprtilii, Mehmed Fuad 1929 Influence du chamanisme turco-mongol sur les ordres mystiques musul-

mans (Istanbul: M6moires de l'Institut de Turcologie de l'Universit6 de Stanboul).

1993 Islam in Anatolia after the Turkish Invasion (Prolegomena), tr. and ed. by G. Leiser (Salt Lake City: University of Utah).

Lambton, A.K.S. 1988 Continuity and Change in Medieval Persia (Albany: State University of

New York Press). Lewisohn, Leonard

1995 Beyond Faith and Infidelity: The Sufi Poetry and Teachings of Mahmud Shabistari (London: Curzon).

Mazzaoui, Michel M. 1972 The Origins of the Safawids: Si'ism, Sufism and the Guldt (Wiesbaden:

Franz Steiner Verlag). Melville, Charles

1990 "Pddshdh-i Isldm: The Conversion of Sultan Mahmfid Ghazdn Khan." Pembroke Papers 1: 159-177.

forthcoming "The History and Historiography of Oljeitti's War with Gilan (1307)." In Reuven Amitai-Preiss and David Morgan eds., The Mongol Empire and its Legacy (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers).

M6nage, V.L. 1979 "The Islamization of Anatolia." In N. Levtzion ed., Conversion to Islam

(New York and London: Holmes and Meier), pp. 52-67. Minorsky, Vladimir F.

1954 "A Mongol Decree of 720/1320 to the Family of Shaykh Zahid." Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 16: 515-27.

Morgan, David 1986 The Mongols (Oxford: Blackwell). 1988 Medieval Persia (London: Longman).

Murtadawi, M. 1991 Masd'il-i 'asr-i ilkhdanadn, second ed. (Tehran, 1370S).

Paul, Jiirgen 1990 "Scheiche und Herrscher im Khanat Cagatay." Der Islam 67: 278-321.

Roux, Jean-Paul 1984 La Religion des Turcs et des Mongols (Paris: Payot).

Schmidtke, Sabine 1991 The Theology of al-'Alldma al-Hilli (d. 726/1325) (Berlin: Klaus Schwarz

Verlag). Sohrweide, Hanna

1965 "Der Sieg der Safaviden in Persien and siene Riickwirkungen auf did Schiiten Anatoliens im 16. Jahrhundert." Der Islam 41: 95-223.

Vryonis, Speros 1971 The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of

Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century (Berkeley: University of California Press).

This content downloaded from 129.123.124.117 on Wed, 26 Apr 2017 00:59:05 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms