Lane, George

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies

George Lane

Crossref

Andrew C.S. Peacock: Early Seljūq History: A New Interpretation. (Routledge Studies in the History of Iran and Turkey.) xi, 190 pp. London and New York: Routledge, 2010. £80. ISBN 978 0 415 54853 3.

SOAS Research Online

on the paintings, as much as two years before the completion date, Dr Canbydeduces, they were executed more or less in the same order in which the manuscriptwas written. In addition, she calculates, there must originally have been at least fif-teen more. She illustrates all but three of these, and provides charts of the paintingsin their proper order with exact details of the text associated with them. Her com-ments on the individual illustrations bring out his marked originality and includeinteresting suggestions regarding the models he used. This is an important contri-bution to the history of the Isfahan school and a major addition to the corpus ofthis industrious painter.J. M. RogersANDREW C.S. PEACOCK:Early Seljūq History: A New Interpretation.(Routledge Studies in the History of Iran and Turkey.) xi, 190 pp.London and New York: Routledge, 2010. £80. ISBN 978 0 415 54853 3.doi:10.1017/S0041977X11000188As Andrew Peacock observes in the introduction to this long overdue study, theSeljūqs have remained the neglected rulers of the medieval Muslim world, oversha-dowed by their more infamous successors, the Mongols, and by the more colourfulSafavids, and Mamluks, despite the longevity of Seljūq rule, the extent of their vastdominions, and the persistence of their influence on the art, politics and adminis-tration of the wider region. Peacock’s timely study of the early Seljūqs, followingDavid Durand-Guédy’s in-depth analysis of the emergence of Isfahan as theSeljūq capital, has gone some way to filling this gap. However, as well as providinga detailed account of the Seljūq clan from their probable beginnings in Khazaria tothe death of the Great Seljūq, Sultan Alp Arslan in 1072, Peacock questions andassesses the many assumptions and myths which have become associated withthe whole subject of the Seljūqs’ appearance and ascendancy.Central to his revised portrait of the Seljūqs is the relationship with their nomadicand tribal heritage; Peacock strongly rejects the assumption that they turned awayfrom their past in their haste to assume civilized, Persian ways. He discounts asunsatisfactory the three entrenched theses that: first, the Seljūqs sought to adoptthe Perso-Islamic model of leadership; second, the Seljūq sultans found their noma-dic subjects an embarrassment; and third, that the Seljūqs were fully committed tothe support of Sunni Islam and its institutions. Peacock sees the problem as originat-ing in part in the instinctive aversion to steppe societies felt by sedentary culturesand expressed through successive histories and chronicles. Common accounts ofthe barbarous ways of steppe people, and their unfamiliarity and unease with “civi-lized society” expressed rather the expectations and contempt of the Byzantine andMuslim authors than any real experience. In fact, Toghril Beg and Alp Arslan didnot reject their tribal support and nomadic heritage, and they were aware thattheir military prowess stemmed very much from their steppe experience.Far from being a diversionary tactic to spare Iran and Iraq from their troublesomeand embarrassing presence, the dispatching of the Turcoman tribesmen into Anatoliaand Caucasia was deliberate and economically advantageous. Anatolia and theCaucasus offered the most suitable and attractive topography and climate for theGhuzz tribesmen and, as the Mongols discovered two centuries later, these landsalso most closely resembled the steppe from which they had migrated. Questions326 R E V I E W Sof religion were not considered when the Turcomen descended on the villages andtowns that they encountered, and Muslims suffered just as much as Christians.Tabriz’s experience of the Seljūq tribesmen was no more positive than that ofByzantium or Armenia.Senior members of the Seljūq family maintained their roles as traditional tribalchiefs while simultaneously developing an identity as Islamic rulers. Peacock arguesthat it was during the reign of Malikshah and his successors that the Seljūqs’ role astribal chiefs was finally subsumed to that of Perso-Islamic rulers, with the eventualappointment of a shahna to deal with tribal affairs. Sultan Sanjar’s imprisonment bythe Ghuzz in 548/1153 represents the final collapse of the relationship between theSeljūq sultan and the tribes, but certainly in the early days the Sultans valued theirstrong tribal links and role as chiefs. Peacock is able to demonstrate this change inattitude and place it in its historical context. By comparing court-sponsored chron-icles he shows how the early versions of the Maliknāma composed for Alp Arslandwell on the early Turkish oral traditions recounting the Seljūqs’ Khazar connec-tions and links with Transoxiana and yet in later editions of the Maliknāma fromthe late twelfth century, all references to these early events have been erased.Peacock concludes that by stressing their links to the Khazars and the use of suchtraditional titles as the Yabghū, Alp Arslan and Toghril Beg were laying claim totraditional steppe political legitimacy. The abandonment of such references by thelate twelfth century suggests that such legitimacy was either no longer needed orhad simply become irrelevant.Seljūq attitudes to Islam are more problematic: the debate on who was respon-sible for the revival of Sunni Islam has long downplayed their active participation.Certainly Toghril’s burning of the mosques in Sinjar and the widespread devastationof the agricultural lands surrounding Baghdad, along with the destruction of largeSunni areas of the city which he permitted, cast legitimate doubts on the depthand sincerity of his Sunnism. Peacock questions whether all the tribesmen andtheir leaders were Muslim and assumes that for many of those who were, their reli-gion sat lightly upon them. Certainly the claim that Toghril Beg and his followerswere devout Muslims and even that he was a fanatical Hanafi can be dismissedas being totally without foundation. Peacock concludes that the policy the Seljūqspursued was characterized by pragmatism and driven primarily by political expe-diency, which would explain their flirtation with Hanbalism, their support for theShiites of Karkh (p. 120), and two references to late conversion: Bar Hebraeus’account of their conversion on the eve of the invasion of Iran (p. 123) andʿAzīmī’s mention of Toghril’s conversion to Islam in 1055. Peacock’s assessmentthat “the image of the Seljūqs as the protectors of Sunnism is far removed from rea-lity” appears convincing in the face of his evidence.Peacock sees the Seljūq adoption of a ghulam army, which Alp Arslan possessedby 1071 and the Battle of Manzikurt, as a far more accurate indicator of the Seljūqs’development as Perso-Islamic rulers than their proclamation of the khutba andacceptance of the sultanate. The army was the hallmark of every established statein the Middle East and such a standing army was more reliable and controllablethan a steppe army. The first recorded use of ghulams by the Seljūqs occurred in1060 when Toghril fought the Fatimid commander Basāsīrī for control ofBaghdad. Ibn al-Athir specifically notes that the troops accompanying Toghrilinto Baghdad in 1055 were “al-ghuzz al-saljūqiya”, which suggests that theSeljūqs began to form their standing ghulam army shortly after the capture ofBaghdad from the Buyids.This is a controversial study but Peacock is convincing in his arguments, the levelof detail, and his command of the wealth of primary source material. The bookR E V I E W S 327opens with an introduction recapping the traditional views of the subject and his ownstrongly argued response to them, with a survey of the principal primary sources.After an examination of the origins and very early history from 900–1025,Peacock explores the main points of contention, namely the relationship betweenthe Seljūqs and the tribes, the Seljūq conquests and the army, and finally theSeljūqs and Islam. The final chapter examines the Seljūqs and Anatolia, and offerssome new perspectives on their migration for which Peacock has employed contem-porary Armenian and Georgian sources to strengthen his contention that theTurcoman domination of Anatolia was facilitated by the economic decline andsteady fall in population of the region.Peacock has produced a very readable and controversial study which should suc-ceed not only in re-awakening interest in the Seljūqs themselves but in openingdebates about the very nature of their invasion and rule. The platitudes and mythswhich have become embedded in our attitude towards the Seljūqs must now bereconsidered and the whole period scrutinized from a new perspective and forthis our gratitude must lie with Andrew Peacock.George LaneFRANÇOISE COMPANJEN, LÁSZLÓ MARÁCZ and LIA VERSTEEGH (eds):Exploring the Caucasus in the 21st Century (Essays on Culture, Historyand Politics in a Dynamic Context).254 pp. Amsterdam: Pallas Publications, 2010. £25. ISBN 978908964183 0.doi:10.1017/S0041977X1100019XInitial reaction to delving into this collection is that the manuscript should have beenchecked by a native English speaker before being handed to the printer. Not all con-tributions are littered to the same degree with wrong choices of words, phrases, con-structions, or capricious use of commas, but none is totally free from such defects.This is one reason why readers interested in exploring the Caucasus will turn awayfrom this volume. Another, more serious disincentive would be the content.The book evidently seeks to illuminate, through a non-cohesive set of essays,aspects of the transition of parts of the Caucasus from Soviet administrative unitsthrough to whatever state destiny ultimately assigns them. The introduction(pp. 11–25), composed by the editorial triumvirate, is followed by eleven articles:Marácz’s “Gábor Bálint de Szentkatolne (1844–1913) and the study ofKabardian” (pp. 27–46); René Does’ “The ethnic-political arrangement of thepeoples of the Caucasus” (pp. 47–61); Michael Kemper’s “An island of classicalArabic in the Caucasus: Dagestan” (pp. 63–89); Marc Jansen’s “Chechnya andRussia, between revolt and loyalty” (pp. 91–110); Companjens’ “Recentpolitical history of the South Caucasus in the context of transition” (pp. 111–33);Max Bader’s “Authoritarianism and party politics in the South Caucasus”(pp. 135–55); Oliver Reisner’s “Between state and nation-building: the debateabout ‘ethnicity’ in Georgian citizens’ ID card” (pp. 157–79); Companjen’s “Thewar in South Ossetia, August 2008: four perspectives” (pp. 181–93); CharlotteHille’s “The recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia: a new era in internationallaw” (pp. 195–209); Versteegh’s “Freedom of speech in the Caucasus: watch-dogneeded in Armenia and Azerbaijan” (pp. 211–32); and Eva Navarro Martínez’s“Beyond frontiers: engagement and artistic freedom in South Caucasus modern328 R E V I E W S

Review of Early Seljūq History: A New Interpretation. (Routledge Studies in the History of Iran and Turkey) by Andrew Peacock. London: Routledge, 2010.

https://soas-repository.worktribe.com/file/340107/1/Peacock%27s%20Early%20Saljuqs.pdf

Review of Early Seljūq History: A New Interpretation. (Routledge Studies in the History of Iran and Turkey) by Andrew Peacock. London: Routledge, 2010.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref

SOAS Research Online