The Nāṣirī Generations 248.1
Tabakat-i-Nasiri 248.1
- Language
- English
248.1.1
eldest son of Aghuz, succeeded his father. He ruled over an extensive territory, and acquired predominance over great part of Iran, and died after a reign of eighty years, but some say seventy-three, and some seventy. By advice of his father’s old Wazir, Kabal Khwajah, he made such wise arrangements that each of his brothers and their sons had an appanage conferred upon him, and the place and rank of every one was so specifically assigned that each knew his proper place and his share even to the portion of the sheep at meal times, and this tended to keep them all on a good understanding towards each other. Abu-l-Ghazi says he divided his territory among his brothers and “their twenty-four legitimate sons and natural sons.” He appears to have forgotten that, by his own previous account, four legitimate sons, and as many natural ones, belonged to Kun Khan himself. What he calls a division of dominions is, no doubt, what I have just previously mentioned. V. On the death of Kun Khan, his brother, Ai or A-i Khan, succeeded, and, after a long reign, was succeeded by his eldest son, VI. Yal-duz—Yul-duz—or I-yal-duz. During his rule the people of Mughalistan were flourishing and prosperous. Abu-l-Ghazi, contrary to other writers, says he was not Ai Khan's brother of that name, but merely one of the same family, and says nothing of his being Ai Khan’s son.
248.1.2
VII. Next succeeded Mangali Khan, son of Yal-duz. He also made his people happy and prosperous, and died after a long reign. Some writers, however, do not even mention his name. VIII. Tingiz Khan—also written, according to the Tajzik method of substituting j for g—Tinjiz—son of Mangali, succeeded on the death of his father. A few writers are in doubts whether he was the son of Mangali or not, but there can be no reasonable doubt on the subject. By some he is said likewise to have abandoned the just ways and customs of his ancestors, but the contrary seems the fact, and that he reigned worthily for a period of 110 years over Mughalistan, and then resigned the authority into the hands of his son, and retired from the world. Some say his rule extended to a period of 100 years, and some 102. IX. I-yal Khan—but which may be, according to the vowel points that may be used with it, Il Khan, son of Tingiz or Tinjiz, succeeded to the chieftain-ship of the Mughal I-mak. His reign is a most important one in the annals of the descendants of Turk; and, at the period in question, Tur, son of Faridun, sovereign of ’Ajam, ruled over [what the ’Arabs subsequently styled by the name of] Mawar-un-Nahr, and Turkistan, which he had, it is said, lately reduced, and invaded I-yal Khan’s territory with a numerous army.
248.1.3
Inveterate enmity had, long prior to this, arisen between the I-mak of Tattar and I-mak of Mughal, as previously mentioned, and Tur succeeded in gaining over to his side Sunj or Sundz Khan, the eighth chief of the Tattar dynasty, and his subjects, and the I-ghurs, who were descended from another son of Mughal Khan, and had formed a separate tribe at an early date, and had now become a great nation, likewise aided Tur. The confederates marched against I-yal Khan, but the tribes of the Mughal I-mak, being much attached to I-yal Khan, fought bravely in his defence, and a great number of Tattars and I-ghurs and followers of Tur were slain in the conflict which ensued, and were pursued for two farsakhs by the Mughals; but victory was soon turned into defeat. The retreat of the confederates was a mere ruse, and, the Mughals having left their strong position and broken their array to pursue them, the confederates faced about—some say the confederates did not renew the attack until next day, when they fell upon them unawares—and entirely overthrew them, put the whole of them to the sword, and made a general massacre of the Mughal people, in such wise that, with the exception of Kaian, son of I-yal Khan, and Naguz, son of I-yal’s maternal uncle, and their two wives who were sisters, and all four of whom chanced to be without the camp at the time, not a soul escaped of the whole Mughal I-mak.
248.1.4
This event is said to have happened 1000 years after the time of Aghuz Khan. At this rate, his five successors must have reigned 200 years each on the average, and it is therefore evident that, either what are termed rulers are the names of dynasties, or that only the names of the most celebrated of their chiefs or sovereigns have been handed down to posterity, or the thousand years must mean from the time of Yafis, not Aghuz. the Jazirah, Anbar, Sijistan, Mukran, Kirman, Fars,
248.1.5
At this point, the Fanakati, who gives but a very brief notice of the Chingiz Khan's ancestors, seems quite at sea. He says nothing whatever about Aghuz Khan's five successors, but states that, “after Ughuz had conquered many countries, and had become firmly established, he despatched some of his sons and kinsmen, with other persons, and a body of forces into the east, into the parts now, i. e. in his time, called Mughulistan [only Aghuz himself was ruler of Mughulistan as his forefathers had been before him], and, after a period of 4000 years, one among the Badshahs of Khitae began to make expeditions against those peoples, crossed the Kara Muran or Black River, made a night attack upon them, and massacred the whole [of the males], and carried off into captivity their women and children. Of that people, but two persons, named Naguz and Kaian, with their families, fled into the mountain tract which they call Irkanah — — in one copy, and Irakanah Kun — — in another, entered it, and there continued to dwell for a period of 400 years, during which time they increased to such degree that that tract became too confined for them,” &c.
248.1.6
This statement of his is simply impossible, because, if it were only those peoples sent into the east, into what in the writer’s time was called “Mughulistan,” by Ughuz, under “some of his sons and kinsmen,” that were massacred, what became of the parent stock of the Mughals over whom Ughuz reigned? They too must have also increased immensely during 4000 years. How is it that he says nothing about them? He has turned two events into one, and the last part of his statement is the account of the extermination of the Mughal I-mak, related above, and the former refers to a great massacre of the Jala-ir tribe by the Khita-is in after years, as will be presently related.
248.1.7
There is little to be gathered from the traditionary history of I-ran respecting these events, and the little that is mentioned is contradictory of the Mughal accounts. Careful comparison of the voluminous traditions of the two peoples might throw some light upon these occurrences, and some day I may attempt it. According to the I-rani accounts, however, Faridun divided his dominions among his sons, and gave Turan—not all Asia east of the Oxus, as modern writers appear to assume—the capital of which is Kashghar, and part of which tract was afterwards called Mawar-un-Nahr by the ’Arabs, Khurz, and Saklab, to Tur, and Turan is so named after him. Some of the I-rani chronicles relate that the Turks are of the seed of Tur, and that Afrasiyab [who is certainly styled “the Turk” by the ’Ajamis] was his great grandson, and that he ruled over the countries east of the Jihun, from the limits of Hind to the frontier of the Turks. Our author, Minhaj-ud-Din, in his account of the I-rani or ’Ajami kings, also says that Afrasiyab was third in descent from Turk, and that his father was Sunj — — which is much the same name as that of Sunj — — Khan, the VIIIth of the Tattar I-mak, which may also be written Sunj, without the long u.
248.1.8
But, as all this happened 1000 years—taking the most moderate period—after Aghuz Khan, and as Faridun, father of Tur, was contemporary, they say, with the patriarch Ibrahim, who was born in his reign, Aghuz Khan must, according to those chronicles, have flourished very far back indeed, and anterior to Nuh’s flood. Abu-l-Ghazi, whose history, as previously mentioned, is the most modern of those named at the beginning of this account, relates these events differently. Khuzistan, the Diyar-i-Bakr, and Mausil, as far as the He says that I-yal or Il Khan and Sundz Khan were continually at war with each other, and the former was always victorious, but it must be remembered that Abu-l-Ghazi sprung from the Mughal i-mak. Sundz Khan had therefore to seek aid from the Khan of Kar-kir or Kar-kiz, who was a very powerful ruler, and he also worked so much upon other tribes, the neighbours of I-yal Khan, that they too combined with him. I-yal Khan, in consequence, took up a very advantageous position which he strengthened so much, that the confederates were unable to force it, but, having placed their best soldiers in ambuscade, pretended flight, to draw the Mughals from their stronghold.