1970 - A. K. Arends - The Study of Rashīd Ad-Dīn's Jāmi'u't-Tawārīkh in The Soviet Union

THE STUDY OF RASHĪD AD-DĪN'S JĀMI'U'T-TAWĀRĪKH IN THE SOVIET UNION
Author(s): A. K. ARENDS
Source: Central Asiatic Journal, Vol. 14, No. 1/3 (1970), pp. 40-61
Published by: Harrassowitz Verlag
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41926862
Accessed: 20-06-2016 20:27 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
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.
Harrassowitz Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Central Asiatic
Journal
This content downloaded from 128.223.86.31 on Mon, 20 Jun 2016 20:27:06 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE STUDY OF RASHID AD-DIN'S
JÄMPU'T-TAWARIKH IN THE SOVIET UNION
by
A. K. ABENDS
Tashkent
The Jämi'u't-tawärikh of Rashid ad-Din Fažl Allah is the first

known attempt at a scientific outline of universal history - a thing
without precedent at a time when the concept of inter-relations
between geographically remote peoples as one historical process
was only in its nucleus. 'Abdu'llah Kãshãní, one of Rashïd ad-Din's
closest collaborators, uttered the prophetic words: "The history of
the Arabs and Persians is but one of the many rivers flowing into
the ocean of world history".1 Many centuries were to elapse before
this idea found broad recognition in countries of advanced culture.
At the time of Rashid ad-Din the concept of the world was
understandably limited geographically. Nevertheless, in his work
we find historical data about peoples inhabiting countries extend-
ing from the shores of the Atlantic to the Pacific. In this work, which
at that time was unique in the scope of its material, we find Euro-
pean, Mongolian, Indian, Chinese and other traditions and also
facts from the history of the Mongol and Turkic tribes (in particu-
lar the Uyghurs, Qarluqs, Khalajis and Qanglis).
It stands to reason that it was beyond the power of one single
person to compile such a vast code of information about peoples
speaking so many different languages. It is known that Rashid ad-
Din was assisted in his work by his countrymen and also by scholars
from the countries concerned and he even mentions some of them
in his work. This latter fact testifies to the great trustworthiness of
the information contained in the book. Even assuming that a num-
ber of chapters in the Jâmi'uH-tawârïkh were not written by Rashid
ad-Din, the single literary style of narration bears witness to the fact
1 W. Bartold. Kultura musulmanstva. Petrograd, 1918. Tom VI (1966),

pp. 190, 191.
J ÄMI'U'T-TAWÄRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 41
that Rashîd ad-Dïn, as head of a group of authors, had carefully

read and edited the entire work.
Rashîd ad-Din himself commented on his book: "I can testify

that I spared no effort and took every precaution to find out the real
truth and to avoid writing anything that was either false or based
on hearsay. I collected, without changing anything, all that the
genuine monuments of the peoples contained, the most trustworthy
traditions and data which were brought to me by learned scholars
from those countries. I studied the works of historians and geneal-
ogists. I established the orthography of [the names of] each people
and each tribe. I arranged my material in systematic order, which no
one before me did, and which I believe should make my work under-
standable to all my readers".2
Ever since the Jãmixu't~tawãrilch entered the field of scientific
research, Orientalists in various countries have had respect for and
faith in these words since in studying this historic work they find
much to corroborate the trustworthiness of his words.
For more than two centuries - from the thirteenth to the fifteenth
century A. D. - Russia was under the so-called Mongol and Tatar
yoke which entailed immeasurable suffering for her people. The
consequences of the Mongol and Tatar conquest were felt for a
long time even after the fall of the Golden Horde. This was one of
the reasons for the retarded social, economic and cultural develop-
ment of Russia. Nevertheless the period of the Mongol and Tatar
yoke and particularly its consequences for Russia remained with-
out a comprehensive study till the second half of the nineteenth
century.
In 1826 the Russian Academy of Sciences offered a prize of 100
chervonets to Russian and West European scholars for a scientific
essay on the consequences of the Mongol invasion and rule in Russia.
The time given to complete the thesis was 3 years. There was only
one entry, but it was rejected by a special committee of the Aca-
demy. Thanks to the constant solicitude of Academician Chr.
Frãhn, a prominent Arabist and numismatist, for the study of the
history of the Mongols, the Russian Academy of Sciences repeated
its invitation in 1832 at the same time broadening the subject of
research and increasing the prize money to 200 chervonets.
2 Sborník Letopisey. Rashid ad-Din. Vvedeniye : o tyurkskikh i mongolskikh

plemenakh. Perevod s persidskogo I . Berezina . TVORAO, 1858, Ch. Y, p. 7.
42 A. K. ARENDS
Meanwhile there was growing interest among West European

orientalists in the JãmiKu9t4awãrikh of Rashîd ad-Dïn, which they
regarded as an essential source of information on the history of the
Turkic and Mongol tribes, the empire of Chingiz-Khan and the
principalities of his immediate descendants. In 1836 the well-
known French orientalist M. Quatremère published a small section
of the Jâmïu't-tawârïJch, namely the introduction and the history
of the Mongol kingdom of Hulagu-Khan in Iran. This work by M.
Quatremère, the significance of which, particularly with regard to
the commentaries, still remains great, stimulated considerable
interest in the Jâmi'iït-tawârïlch, among Russian orientalists as
well. Professoi I. Berezin (b. 1818 - d. 1896) of Kazan and St. Peters-
burg Universities, a gifted orientalist and an authority on the
Turkic and Mongol languages was also attracted to the Jâmi'uH-
tawârïlch. He became its first translator and commentator (it is
not known whether on his own initiative or at the request of
Chr. Frähn) and initiated the comprehensive study of it in Russia.
Although Professor Berezin, as he himself admitted, "did not
attach special significance to the Mongol element in ancient Russian
history", he nevertheless believed it was possible that the rule of
the Mongols had had some influence on Russia. The scope of this
influence could be assessed "though a comprehensive study of the
Mongols". Berezin further said that it was the duty of Russian
orientalists to "elucidate" the period of Mongol rule in Russia.3
Professor Berezin used the word "elucidate" possibly because there
was no unanimity among Russian historians in assessing the Mongol
conquest as a destructive blow to Russia from which the country
had been unable to recuperate for a long time.4
Professor Berezin began his research in this field at the time when
he was still in Kazan. At first he did not envisage the publication
and translation of the Jämi'u't-tawärikh hoping that M. Quatre-
mère would continue his research. Therefore Berezin's first steps
in the direction of "elucidating" the period of the Mongol conquest
of Russia boiled down to a series of articles based, to a greater or
s Op. cit., p. VII.

4 Four years prior to the publication of I. Berezin's book (from which the
quotations are made) there appeared the third and fourth volumes of the
History of Russia from Ancient Times by S. Solovyov. On page 701 of the
1960 edition, V. Pashut and A. Sakharov summarized the author's descrip-
tion of the Mongol-Tatar invasion: "(Solovyov) did not attach any decisive
significance to the Mongol -Tatar invasion in the history of Russia".
J AMI'U'T-TAW ÄRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 43
lesser extent, on Rashïd ad-Dïn's work. These included: "Domestic

Structure of the Golden Horde according to Yarliks of the Khans"
"Bulgar on the Volga", "The First Mongol Invasion of Russia" and
"Invasion of Russia by Batu-Khän". At this time he also published
his Library of Eastern Historians , in which, along with works by
Shaybãn! and Abû'1-Ghâzï, we find a concise Tatar translation of
the History of the Mongols by Rashïd ad-Dïn.
In 1856 the Oriental Branch of the Russian Archeological So-
ciety (VOR AO) accepted Professor Berezin's proposal to publish
the Jâmi'uH-tawârïkh at the expense of the Society. Like M.
Quatremère Professor Berezin limited himself to publishing and
translating a portion of the work, viz. the Introduction on the Turkic
and Mongol tribes and the History of Chingiz-Khan. A translation
of the Introduction was released from the press in 1858 while the
text was published in 1861. In his preface to the translation Pro-
fessor Berezin gave a brief outline of Rashïd ad-Dïn's biography,
paid tribute to his unique work and underlined its advantages as
compared with other sources. The author also mentioned the specific
difficulties encountered by the translator in dealing with the correct
pronunciation of proper names found in that part of the Jâmi'u't-
tawãriJch and in deciphering some technical expressions which were
current under the Mongols.
In pursuance of his work Professor Berezin published in 1868 a
translation of the first part of the history of Chingiz-Khan up to
his accession to the throne. This chapter was sub-divided into two
parts : on the genealogy of Chingiz-Khan and on his first acts in Mon-
golia prior to his accession to the throne. Professor Berezin found that
Rashïd ad-Dïn's work was the most complete source of data on the
history of Chingiz-Khan. This time the translator made only the
most essential annotations leaving detailed comments, which re-
quired special research, to a future date, "whenever an opportunity
might present itself". A translation of the second part of the history
of Chingiz-Khan and the Persian text of both parts were published
in 1888, that is, 20 years later, owing to various circumstance?.
Professor Berezin made a word-for-word translation. He express-
ed the opinion that Rashïd ad-Dïn's work would not be read by the
public at large and would be of interest to specialists only - that is,
to those who require a literal interpretation of the original. In his
comments Professor Berezin concentrated his attention on proper
names which he deciphered through the medium of the Turkic,
44 A. K. ABENDS
Mongol and Manchu languages. The author admitted that he might

have had made mistakes and for this reason refrained from general
conclusions in his comments.
Thirty years after the death of Professor Berezin, Academician
W. Barthold wrote an article in which he enumerated the principal
shortcomings in the publication of the text and translation of the
Jâmi'u't-tawârïkh. Academician Barthold further pointed to the
arbitrary interpretation of a number of vague passages in the text,
to the erroneous decipherment and to the differences in the comments
concerning one and the same name or term. Today, 40 years after the
publication of this article, the list of shortcomings in the Berezin publi-
cation could be lengthened. However it would be irrelevant here to
apply the criteria of modern textual criticism and scientific trans-
lation to a work that was written in the middle of the last century.
We have dwelt at length on I. Berezin and his work because his
publication of Rashïd ad-DIn was, for a whole century, the only
Russian translation to be used by generations of orientalists. Profes-
sor I. Berezin did what he could and what he deemed to be his duty,
thus earning the profound gratitude of posterity.
At the turn of the century W. Barthold5 (1869-1930), then a
student at the Oriental Faculty of St. Petersburg University, dis-
played exceptional talent and industry in historical research. Ten
years after graduating University he published his classic work
Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion , which won him a doctor's
degree in history and fame as an outstanding historian-orientalist.
From his student years W. Barthold had devoted himself mainly to
the history of Central Asia, and his brilliant dissertation was also
devoted to Turkestan at the time of the Mongol invasion. This was
followed by many other important works, large and small, devoted
to the study of the history of the East, in which the author dealt
with problems relating to the peoples of Central Asia and also the
historical geography of that part of the world.This does not, however,
mean that W. Barthold's interest in science was limited to Central
Asia alone. In fact the scope of hisre search embraced the whole of
the Near and Middle East as well as Central Asia. This is illustrated
by his works on the history of Islam, Muslim culture, the Arab cali-
phate, the political and social history of Iran, the historical geo-
graphy of this country as well as on the history of the Caucasian
6 W. Bartold. /. Berezin kak istorik. Zapiski Kollegii Vostokovedov. Tom II,
vip. 1, Leningrad, 1926.
J ÄMI'U'T-TAW ÃRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 45
and Trans-Caucasian peoples. He also wrote a number of articles

on Eastern epigraphy and numismatics. A distinctive feature of
Professor Barthold throughout his scientific career was his method of
exacting historical criticism and detailed analysis of all the sources.
He never took for granted what was mentioned in one source, but
invariably looked for confirmation elsewhere and compared various
sources. He took into consideration both the personality and the
social standing of the author. This trait of character and his brilliant
knowledge of eastern languages helped W. Barthold to make a
radical change in the existing methods of research of Central Asian
history and to develop new trends. He became the founder of the
Russian school of historical studies which won recognition far
beyond the borders of this country. Another characteristic feature
of Academician Barthold was his extreme caution in making de-
ductions or generalizations. He never asserted anything unless
there were sufficient data to provide one definite answer to a given
question.
Academician Barthold used in his research as many manuscripts
as possible and also other documents in the Eastern languages which
had been studied only in part or never cited before. Professor Bar-
thold wrote that his predecessors in Oriental Studies had examined
only those sources which had a direct bearing on Russia.6
Professor Barthold's methods of research were extremely success-
ful and helped to shed light on a number of valuable historical
sources which had not been previously published or were published
only in part. Among these was the Jâmi'uH-tawârïkh of Rashïd ad-
Din - an outstanding monument of Persian historiography which
Professor Barthold studied from various aspects and which served
him as one of the main sources of the data in Chapter IV of his
book Chingiz-Khan and the Mongols and Chapter V of his Turkestan .7
In these and other works W. Barthold revealed to historians the
entire wealth and scope of Rashïd ad-Dïn's work. This applies, of
course, first and foremost, to the History of the Mongols which had
been the focal point for Russian orientalists since the time of I. Bere-
zin. W. Barthold never planned to publish the entire text of the
Jâmi'u't-tawârïkh or to translate it into Russian. Actually he
published only a few excerpts from the work.8 He believed that the
6 W. Barthold. Sochineniya. Moskva. Tom I, 1963. p. 608.

7 First publication in 1963. pp. 531-584.
8 W. Bartold. Turkestan , Ch. I, Teksti, St. Pet., 1898, pp.
46 A. K. ABENDS
publication of such a large work was beyond the power of one man
and required the combined efforts of a group of scholars. The author
of this paper heard him express this point of view repeatedly at
lectures and public addresses. Professor Barthold made wide use of
the JãmiKu't-tawãríkh for research purposes and quoted from it in
over a score of works covering various aspects. The first and fore-
most of these are his works on the history of the peoples of Central
Asia : Essay on the History of S emir echy e , Essay on the History of the
Turkmen People, The Tajiks, The Kirghiz and History of Cultural
Activities in Turkestan . W. Barthold also referred to the Jämi'u't-
tawãrikh in such an important work as the Persian Inscription on
the Wall of the Ani Mosque . He translated the inscription into
Russian, gave an explanation of its contents, at the same time
touching on a number of aspects in the social life of Iran, and
interpreted the social and economic expressions in the inscription.
In another book: Islamic Culture (in the chapter on "The Mongol
Invasion and its Influence on Persian Culture") the name of Rashid
ad-Din is mentioned time and again in connection with his work,
the Jâmi'u't-tawârïkh. Similar references are found in W. Barthold's
numerous articles in the Encyclopaedia of Islam , in his reports on
explorations of Central Asia and in his reviews. Suffice it to mention
his review of a work by E. Blochet9 which was published in the
Journal Mir Islama (1912, Issue No. 1).
The nature of the references made by Professor Barthold to
Rashid ad-Din's work is extremely diverse. These were on history,
historical geography, the correct spelling of proper names, genea-
logy, numismatics, social-economic terminology, sources, science,
textual criticism and other questions. Most frequently Professor
Barthold made references to problems of history and historical
geography. His great erudition and amazing memory enabled him
to detect a number of errors in Rashid ad-Din's work. The writer
testifies to the fact that he had a profound knowledge of Rashid
ad-Din's works and attached great importance to them as a source
of information. W. Barthold did not exhaust all the wealth of
material in the Jâmi'ut-tawârïkh and the following generation of
orientalists still found plenty of material there to use.
In his time W. Barthold became a follower of the new school of
9 E. Blochet. Introduction à V histoire des Mongols de F adi Allah Rashid ad-

Dïn. Leyden-London, OMS , Vol. XII, 1910.
J ÄMTUT-TAW ÃRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 47
historian-orientalists which originated in Western Europe in the

forties of the last century. These scholars published a number of
works on the history of the Arab world10 - works which were free
from the spirit of "romantische Schwärmerei" and were based
mainly on newly-discovered oriental manuscripts that had been
subjected to very detailed historical criticism and analysis. Right
up to the end of the nineteenth century no one had applied the
method of historical research practised by this school to the history
of Central Asia. Professor Barthold was the first scholar to do this
in his work, Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion.
Academician Barthold lived a little over 12 years after the Great
October Socialist Revolution and felt its influence in the sense that
he approached the materialistic concept of historical processes.
Nevertheless, to the last days of his life he retained a world outlook
which he had developed at the height of his scientific career.
The most valuable parts of the Jâmi'uH-tawârïkh are those which
deal with the history of the Mongols, particularly the history of
their invasion of, and rule over, the advanced countries of Asia and
Europe. It has already been mentioned that these questions had
aroused considerable interest in Russia from the second half of the
last century. The end of the nineteenth century saw the publication
of the well-known work, Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion , by
W. Barthold, in which the fourth and fifth chapters are devoted
entirely to the Mongol invasion. This part was written after a
detailed study of a number of oriental authors - Ibn al-Athïr, Min-
hâj ad-Dïn Jüzjäni and Shihãb ad-Dïn Nasaw! and later writers,
but mainly Rashïd ad-Din's work, the JamiliCt-tawâríkh.
In the above-mentioned chapters the author touched not only
on the political aspects of the Mongol invasion in Central Asia but
likewise described the destruction of towns and agriculture, the
barbaric extermination of people and the influence of Mongol rule
on the local culture. With regard to the effect of the formation of
the Mongol empire on the history of Central Asia and its effects on
the states which arose from its ruins, W. Barthold said nothing
10 E. g. - G. Weil. Geschichte der Chalifen. Nach handschriftlichen größten-

teils noch unbenutzten Quellen bearbeitet , Bd. I-III, Mannheim 1846-1851;
R. Dozy. Histoire des Musulmans d'Espagne jusqu'à la conquête de V Anda-
lousie par les Almarovides (711-1110), t. I-IV, Leyde, 1861 ; A. Sprenger. Das
Leben und die Lehre des Muhammad nach bisher größtenteils unbenutzten
Quellen bearbeitet , 3 Bände, Berlin, 1861-1865.
48 A. K. ARENDS
more than to note that the problem was an interesting one and
should be the subject of special research.11
In later works Professor Barthold made repeated references to
the consequences of the Mongol invasion of Western Asia. Accord-
ing to his assessment the Mongol invasion of Western did Asia not bring
about such a heavy and lengthy decline as was the case in Europe
after the fall of the Roman empire and the rule of the Germans.
There was no returning from a monetary to a natural economy and
neither was there a return to power of the land-holding aristocracy
and an abandoning of the cities.
Professor Barthold of course recognized the fact that under the
rule of barbarians the general economic level of Iran dropped.
However, in spite of the destruction caused by the invasion, life in
the cities continued to develop. Forty years after their entry into
the country the Mongol khans had adopted the local culture. In
pursuance of their own advantages the Mongols restored the cities
and their industries and patronized medicine, mathematics, astrono-
my and other branches of science. They founded cities (Sultãníya in
the beginning of the fourteenth century) and reconstructed existing
ones (under the Mongols Tabriz developed into a large and wealthy
city). Among the new and imposing structures of that period were
Nasïr ad-Dïn Tùsï's observatory at Maragheh which was equipped
with the most up-to-date instruments, Uljaytu's mosque in Sultã-
níya and Abu Sard's mosque in Varãmín. In short, in spite of the
devastations inflicted by the Mongols, "Iran in the fourteenth century
was on a higher level of economic prosperity than the European
states".12 It must be said however that, after W. Barthold, other re-
searchers studying the same sources arrived at different conclusions.
The Great October Socialist Revolution of 1917 in Russia marked
a new stage in research methods in all spheres of science, including
Oriental Studies. This introduced new elements in the study of the
'JãmVuH-tawãrílctí by Rashld ad -Din and other eastern sources.
In the thirties of this century there appeared favourable condi-
tions for resuming research on the Jämi'uH-tawärikh. The year 1934
saw the posthumous publication of the Social System of the Mon-
11 W. Bartold. Turkestan . Sochineniya . Vol. I, p. 530.

12 W. Bartold. Persidskaya nadpis na stene Aniyskoy mecheti Manuche.
St. Peterburg, 1911. Sochineniya Tom IV, 1966, p. 320; Editorial in Mir
Islama , 1912, No. 1; Kultura musulmanstva. Petrograd, 1918. Sochineniya ,
Tom VI, 1966, pp. 190-191.
JÄMI'U'T-TAWÄRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 49
golslz by Acad. B.Vladimircov (1884-1931) a prominent Mongolist.

This book is imbued with a materialistic conception of history and
is an important work which provides a new explanation of the
social relations of the Mongols. The author wrote that there were
numerous sources on the social system of the Mongols in the eleventh
and twelfth centuries, and in the thirteenth century, that is, at the
time when the empire of Chingiz-Khan was founded. However he
attached especial significance to the Jämi'u't-tawärikh and the
Secret History 14 as the basic reference material for his work.
B. Vladimir co v appreciated the fact that Rashïd ad-Din succeeded
in providing a detailed description of nomadic everyday life of the
Mongol tribes which was based on numerous narrations by Mongol
nobility, mainly Bolad-Chingsang. Rashïd-ad-Dïn also gave the
best known description of vassal relations within the nomadic feudal
society of Mongols.15 In his research the author used the parts of the
J ami u't-tawârïkh that had been published by M. Quatremére, I.
Berezin and E. Blochet and also manuscripts deposited in Lenin-
grad. Judging from reviews and scientific comments, V. Vladimir-
cov's work aroused considerable interest and satisfaction among
Soviet orientalists since it provided a long-awaited explanation of
what Mongol society was like under Chingiz-Khan.
In working on the Social System of the Mongols Academician
B. Vladimircov used parts of the Jâmi'u't-tawârïlch that had been
published earlier and had become outdated. This, of course, hamper-
ed research and prompted the Institute of Oriental Studies of the
USSR Academy of Sciences to decide in 1936 upon the immediate
publication of the text and translation of the first part of Jâmi'u't -
tawârïkh, that is the Ta'rikh-i Ghãzãni. For the sake of convenience
the publication was planned in three separate volumes each com-
prising two halves : the Persian text itself and the Russian trans-
lation. The first volume was to comprise the Introduction on the
Turkic and Mongol tribes and the history of Chingiz-Khan; the
second volume the history of the Mongol khans from Uguday to
Timur and the third volume the history of the Hulaguids. A fourth
volume was also contemplated to include the commentary and
various documents relating to the first three volumes.
13 B. Vladimircov. Obschetstvenniy stroy Mongolov. Mongolskiy kochevoy

feodalizm. Leningrad, 1934, p. 6.
14 Yüan-ch'ao Pishi .
15 B. Vladimircov, op. cit., p. 64.
50 A. K. ABENDS
The manuscript of the Jâmi'u't-tawârikh now deposited at the

Institute of Oriental Studies of the Uzbek Academy of Sciences was
taken as the basic source for compiling the critical text. A brief
description of this manuscript was published as early as 192616 and
a more detailed review in the third volume of the above-mentioned
work (by Professor A. Romaskevitch). A second copy of the manu-
script was taken from the Revan Köskü library in Istanbul.17 This
copy is as old as the one in Tashkent - it was written in 717 A.H.
(1317 A. D.), that is during the life-time of Rashïd ad-Dïn. It is
similar to the Tashkent copy in size, handwriting and arrangement
of the material, which suggests that the two copies were made from
the same manuscript.
In 1936 a group ob scholars comprising A. Romaskevitch (head
of the group), L. Khetagurov, A. 'Ali-Zãde, O. Smirnova, B. Pan-
kratov and the author of this paper began to work on the preparation
of a critical text and translation of the Jämi'u't-tawäriJch. The late
Academicians I. Krachkovsky (anArabist) andS.Kozin (a Mongolist)
assisted the group with scientific advice. It was decided to begin
publication with Volume III, since the contents of the first two
volumes were available in other publications, even though these
were not up to the standards of modern textual criticism and trans-
lation.18 Of the contents of Volume III only the history of Hulägü-
Khãn19 and Ghãzan-Khãn20 were available by 1940. By the end of
1939, the translation of the third volume was completed and ready
for the press. The outbreak of World War II prevented the com-
pletion of this publication and further research for the publication
of the Jâmi'u't-tawârïkh as a whole was suspended for a long period.
Professor A. Romaskevitch, head of the research group and editor of
the text and translation, and Assistant Professor L. Khetagurov, the
16 W. Bartold. "Zaniatya v turkestanskikh bibliotekakh i muzeyakh le-
tom 1925". Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR. 1926, No. 3-4. pp. 217-218. ;
E. Betger. Otchyot Sredneaziatskoy Gosudarstvennoy Biblioteki za 1925 god .
Tashkent, 1926, p. 18.
17 F. Tauer. "Les manuscrits persans historiques des bibliothèques de
Stamboul, I. Extrait du Archív Orientální". Journal of the Czechoslovak
Oriental Institute , Prague, April 1931, Vol. Ill, No. 1, p. 93.
18 Publications by M. Quatremère, I. Berezin and E. Blochet mentioned
earlier in the paper.
19 In the above-mentioned publication by M. Quatremère.
20 Geschichte Gãzãn-Hãrís aus dem TaWïh-i Mubãrak-i Gãzãni des Rashïd al-
Dln. . . . herausgegeben nach den Handschriften von Stambul, London, Paris
und Wien mit einer Einleitung, kritischem Apparat und Indices von Karl
Jahn, E. J. W. Gibb Memorial Series, NS, XIV, 1940.
J ÄMI'U'T-TAW ÄRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 51
translator of Volume I, died during the siege of Leningrad by the

Fascists, while the other members of the group were evacuated from
the city and moved to various parts of the country.
It was only after the return of the Oriental Institute to Lenin-
grad in 1946 that the translation of Volume III was eventually
published.21 The group of scholars who resumed work on th eJãmi-
' uH-tawãrikh after the war had a slightly different composition.
Professor A. Semenov became the head of the group and editor of
Volume I (a translation in two books). The first book of Volume I
appeared in 1952 with an introduction to all three volumes by Pro-
fessor I. Petrushevsky entitled "Rashïd ad-Dïn and his Historical
Work".22 The second book was published the same year.23 Another
eight years elapsed before the second volume] of the JãmiKu9t-
tawârïlch was published under the editorship of Professor I. Petru-
shevsky, who replaced Professor Semenov (died in 1958). 24
The critical text of Volume III, prepared for publication by A.
'Alï-Zâde in 1940, appeared in Baku in 1957, together with the
second edition of the Russian translation in Baku in 1957. 25 Part of
the text to Volume I, the Introduction and the Turkic and Mongol Tri-
bes was published in Moscow in 1965. 26 The remaining texts of this
publication have also been prepared for the press and are awaiting
their turn of publication. One involuntarily recalls M. Quatremère's
words that life is short and the process of publication slow. Thus
this labour-absorbing and important publication of the whole
Tďrlkh-i Ghãzãní has been accomplished by Soviet orientalists.
Rashïd ad-Dïn's Persian-language correspondence, Mukãíabãt-i
Rashïdï (otherwise known as Munshďat-i Rashïdï), is an excellent
supplement to the history of the Mongol Ilkhans in Iran as described
in the Jâmi'u't-tawârïkh and other sources of that period.27 This is
21 Rashïd ad-Dïn. Sborník letopisey. Tom III. Perevod s persidskogo A.
Arendsa. Redaktsiya A. Romaskevitcha. M.-L., 1946.
22 Rashïd ad-Dïn Sborník letopisey. Tom I. Kniga I. Jferevod s persidskogo
L. Khetagurova. Redaktsiya i kommentarii A. Semenova, M.-L. 1952
23 Ditto. Tom I, Kniga 2. Perevod s persidskogo O. Smirnovoy. Kommentarii
B. Pankratova i O. Smirnovoy. Redaktsiya A. Semenova. M.-L. 1952.
24 Ditto. Tom II. Perevod s persidskogo Y. Verkhovskogo. Kommentarii
Y. Verkhovskogo i B. Pankratova. Redaktsiya I. Petrushevskogo. M.-L.,
196°.
25 Fazl Allah Rashïd ad-Dïn. J ãmiu t-tawarifch , Vol. ill. Kriticneskiy
text A. 'Alï-Zâde. Perevod A. Arendsa. Baku, 1957.
26 Ditto. Vol. I, Ch. 1. Kriticheskiy text A. Romaskevitcha, L. Khetagu-
rova i A. 'Alï-Zâde. Moskva, 1965.
27 Kitãb-i Mukãtabãt-i Rashïdï. Published and comments by Khãn Bahã-
52 A. K. ARENDS
a collection of letters published after Rashid ad-Din's death by his

secretary Muhammad Abarqühl. The manuscripts became known in
Europe from E. G. Browne's description about half a century ago,28
which means that they were not available to this leading Russian
historian and orientalist. The British orientalist Reuben Levy, who
analysed the letters, arrived at the conclusion that their authenticity
could be doubted and that they were allegedly of Indian origin and
had been written in the fifteenth century at the earliest.29 Professor
I. Petrushevsky, the first Soviet orientalist to study the 'Mukãtabãt-i
RashidI ' and to refer to it in his works, voiced his opposition to
R. Levy's reasoning.30 He adduced evidence that the latter's asser-
tions were unfounded and declared that there was no reason to
doubt the authenticity of Rashid ad-DIn's correspondence. The
only point on which Professor I. Petrushevsky agreed with Reuben
Levy was that the wording of the letters was somewhat different
from the way in which they had been written by Rashid ad-Din.31
The letters were addressed to Rashid ad-Din's sons, who held
high administrative posts in the provinces of the Ilkhans, and also
to prominent governement officials. They were official letters and
private addresses, containing opinions on problems of theology and
also advice on how to manage the provinces governed by his sons,
how to collect taxes and instructions concerning the management
of estates in Mosul, Basra and Karman which belonged personally to
Rashid ad-DIn. It is these letters and the replies to them that consti-
tute the greatest value to Soviet orientalists.
Professor W. Barthold believed that the history of Ghäzän-Khän's
rule gave no clear idea of the extent of Rashid ad-Din's personal
participation in the reforms of the Ilkhãn. However, a study of the
Mukãtabãt-i Rashïdï removes all doubt on the matter: "Ghäzän-
Khän's reforms were based on the political ideas of the historian
which recognized the necessity for the Mongol state to achieve a
rapprochement with the feudal nobility of the Persians and Azerbai-
janis, to adopt Iranian political traditions, to revive agriculture
which had been undermined by the old system of taxation and, for
dur Muhammad Shafť. Lahore, 1945. The Oriental Institute in Leningrad

has a defective copy No. D-938 dated 1088/1677.
28 A Literary History of Persia. Vol. III. Cambridge.
29 "Letters of Rashid al-Din Fadl Allãh". J RAS, 1946, I- II, pp. 74-78.
30 "K Voprosu of podlinnosti perepiski Rashid ad-Dina' ' . Trudi Leningrad -
slcogo Universiteta , 1948, No. 9, pp. 124-130.
31 In his argument Professor Petrushevsky explained how this could happen.
J ÄMI'UT-TAW ÃRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 53
this purpose, to reduce taxes and protect the peasants against the
oppression of the financial administration".32
Rashïd ad-Din's correspondence deserves special attention as
containing documents which elucidate questions concerning the
social-economic conditions of that time as well as the state of pro-
ductive forces and production conditions.
Any study of the Mongol invasion and its influence on Central
Asia, Iran and Transcaucasia, which at that time had a system of
developed feudalism, must begin, first and foremost, with a scienti-
fic analysis of the state of agriculture and agrarian relations as the
foundation of social production and after clarification of the latter
turn to the problems of the superstructure.
Academician B. Vladimircov, Professor I. Petrushevsky, Pro-
fessor A. Ali-Zade and Professor A. Yakubovsky are the leading
Soviet researchers who have devoted much time and effort to the
study of the social and economic aspects in the life of the above-
mentioned peoples and countries and referred to the Jâmi'u't-
tawârïkh for this purpose. We have already mentioned Academician
Vladimircov, the prominent Mongolist, and his work The Social
System of the Mongols . In 1960 Professor I. Petrushevsky published
his work Agriculture and Agrarian Conditions in Iran in the Thir-
teenth and Fourteenth Centuries , which was preceded by a series of
articles on questions whose final interpretation was given in the
above-mentioned book. This is indeed a classical work from the
point of view of research methods, the abundance of material in-
volved and the scope of research.
Professor Petrushevsky substantiated his choice of research sub-
ject by the fact that the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries were
a turning point in the social and economic life of mediaeval Iran and
other contiguous countries. The author encountered great diffi-
culties in his research mainly because of the lack of written sources,
without which it is almost impossible to establish such cornerstones
of agriculture and agrarian relations as forms of landownership and
feudal vassalage of the peasants. However Professor Petrushevsky
made up for the lack of archive materials by studying a great
variety of other sources, among which he gave priority to copies and
expositions of Ghãzãn -Khan's yarlighs (firmans) given in the Jãmi -
' u't-tawârïJch , which helped him to cope with his task brilliantly.
32 I. Petrushevsky. "Rashïd ad-Din i yego istoricheskiy trud" Sbornik
Letopisey. Tom I, p. 18.
54 A. K. ARENDS
Professor Petrushevsky's work comprises nine chapters of which

four chapters, (I. The influence of the Mongol Rule on the Social
and Economic Development of Iran in the 13th and 14th Centuries;
II. The State of Agriculture in Iran in the 13th and 14th Centuries;
V. Categories of Feudal Landownership and Their Development in
the 13th and 14th Centuries; VII. Forms of Feudal Vassalage of
Peasants. ; VIII. The Feudal Rent and Taxes) were based to a lesser
or greater extent on the Jâmi'u't-tawârïJch and the Mukãtàbãt-i
Rashïdï. To this we may add part of Chapter IX (Peasant Uprisings
in the 13th Century), The People's Liberation Movement in Iran;
Part of the contents of Chapter III (Irrigation, Implements and
Farming Methods), Chapter IV (Cultured Crops in Iran) and Chapter
VI (Land Tenure, Rural Settlements and Peasant Categories) was
substantiated by references to the Mukãtabãt-i Rashïdï.
It is hardly possible in a short article to enumerate all the new
aspects in Professor Petrushevsky's work. Therefore we shall only
outline a very important deduction of principle which was the result
of his many years of research - namely the periodization of the
section of Iranian history which he studied and in which he outlined
in concise form all the major phenomena relating to social life in the
country at the given period. The author sub-divided the given
section of Iranian history into three stages. The first two stages were
established with the help of the Jâmi'u't-tawârïkh .33
The first stage - from the twenties to the nineties of the thirteenth
century - is marked by a destructive depression in the national
economy of Iran as a result of the Mongol invasion. This showed
itself in a sharp reduction of cultivated areas, increased migration
of fresh masses of nomads, development of nomadic cattle-breeding
and natural-economy tendencies, the re-distribution of the land
resources, stagnation in city life, growing taxes and feudal rent,
aggravated class antagonism and the development of the peasant
rebel movement.
The second stage - from the end of the 13th century to the middle
of the thirties of the 14th century - is marked be a relative rise
in agriculture following the reforms of Ghãzãn-Khãn, but falling
short of the level of prosperity prior to the depression. Other fea-
tures of this period were : concessions by the Mongols to the Iranian
33 The JãmtfuH-Tawãrllch could not be used chronologically for the deter-

mination of the third stage, but we mention it in order to preserve the full
content of Professor Petrushevsky's deduction.
feudal nobility and the partial adoption of Iranian state traditions

by the former ; the development of big landownership (conditional
and unconditional) at the expense of the state and small holdings;
growth of immunities and feudal scattering of economy despite
efforts by Ghãzãn-Khãn to install centralized power ; final forma-
tion of the feudal hierarchy.
The third stage - from the middle of the thirties to the middle
of the eighties of the fourteenth century - shows the continued
feudal division of the country, the struggle between feudal group-
ings for power in various parts of the state of Hulaguids, the resto-
ration in a number of regions of the methods of peasant exploitation
which existed before Ghâzân-Khân's reforms, peasant and artisan
uprisings and the political disintegration of the kingdom of Hülä-
guids from 1336 to 1353. This period ended with the conquests of
Timur.
Summing up in brief Professor Petrushevsky's work it would be

appropriate to recall his own words: "The economic disaster at the
time of the Mongol invasion did not mean a general crisis of Iran's
feudal society. It was the destruction of the productive forces, the
people first and foremost, which in the 13th century conditioned
Iran's economic backwardness as compared with the western
countries - a process which lasted through the entire late medieval
period.34 Professor Petrushevsky's point of view is backed by all
the Soviet orientalists who have studied the consequences of the
Mongol invasion.
Professor A. 'Alï-Zâde deserves great credit for making the Jâmi'iït-
tawãrikh available for wide use. He compiled the critical text of
the entire third volume and participated in compiling the critical
text to volumes I and II of the 'J ami ' u't-tawârïJch '. Professor 'Alï-
Zade's work with the text - one of great responsibility and requiring
much time, enabled him to make a profound study of some of the
vague passages in the manuscripts, particularly when it concerned
special expressions. After compiling the text he began to study its
contents. In order to obstain an abolutely clear idea of what Rashid
ad-Dïn meant when he dealt with problems of social and economic
history it was necessary to determine the exact meaning of the terms
and expressions used by the author, their meaning prior to the
Mongol invasion and, where possible to trace the evolution of these
34 I. Petrushevsky. Zemledeliye .... p. 113.
56 A. K. ARENDS
words and expressions in connection with the time and place of

their usage. Professor 'Alï-Zâde published a number of articles in
Baku on the results of his research in this field. He focused attention
on such terms as tarli, qüpchür , injü, iqtãc, kharãj , bígãr, charilc.
Simultaneously with this work Professor 'All-Zãde used Rashïd
ad-Dïn's work and other sources to study the social-economic history
of his native Azerbaijan during the Mongol invasion. The results of
this research were outlined in a series of articles and a large summa-
rizing work.35
Inasmuch as Azerbaijan, like Iran, was part of the Mongol Ilkhan
state, and their administrative system and conditions for social
production were almost identical, the above-mentioned works by
Professor 'Alï-Zâde and Professor Petrushevsky contain identical
deductions, concerning mainly the state of agriculture, forms of
land-ownership, the position of the peasants, etc. With regard to
Professor 'Ali-Zade's deductions concerning the relations with for-
eign countries (which was centered around the almost continuous
war with the Golden Horde), the author believes that this war was
waged by the Juchids for the rights of inheritance. At one time
Chingiz-Khan had given Azerbaijan and Arran over to Batu and
the struggle was for rich pastures and a good strategic position.
Ever since the appeal of the Russian Academy of Sciences and
the publication of works by I. Berezin the history of the Golden
Horde has attracted the attention of many Russian historians and
orientalists (Grigoryev, Savelyev, Velyaminov-Zernov, Tiesen-
hausen, Veselo vsky and others). However there was no one capable
of writing such a history. W. Tiesenhausen (1825-1902), a well-
known orientalist, numismatist and archeologist, realised that the
different sources on the history of the Golden Horde (written in
about a dozen languages in various countries) constitued a difficulty
for study by Russian orientalists, since hardly anyone knew 12
languages. He therefore set himself the task of assisting his colleagues
by publishing a Russian translation of excerpts mainly from Eastern
authors with comments on them. Such a publication was to compen-
sate to some extent for the lack of sources from the Golden Horde
itself.
As a result of W. Tiesenhausen's study of manuscripts from St.
Petersburg and abroad appeared a publication of excerpts from
85 Sotsiyalnaya , ekonomicheskaya i politicheskaya istoria Azerbaijani, . Baku,
1956.
J ÄMTU'T-TAW ÄRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 57
Arab sources.36 This book was to have been followed by another one
containing excerpts from Persian sources but the author failed to
complete it before his death. He left publication material from
Persian manuscripts but these had not been studied intensively.
Some of them, like the excerpts from texts by Jûzjanï, Juvaynï and
Rashïd ad-Dïn, had been translated and supplied with comments
and brief introductions requiring only final editing. Other excerpts
had been translated roughly while still others had just been copied
from manuscripts.
W. Tiesenhausen's work was continued in the thirties of this
century by Prof. A. Romaskevitch and S. Volin. By that time W.
Tiesenhausen's comments and introductions had become outdated
and were replaced by new ones written by these two scholars. The
translation was also altered in places in view of the availability of
a number of copies of the J ami 'u't-tawârikh and among them the
copy of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Uzbek Academy of
Sciences, which has been mentioned earlier in connection with the
publication of the critical text of the work.
Persian sources provide few new data on the first conquests by
Jebe and Subuday but have much more to say about Batu than the
Arab and Russian chronicles. This particularly applies to the J ämVu't-
tawãrilch .37
W. Tiesenhausen's publications were greatly appreciated by
historians and undoubtedly stimulated (particularly Vol. II) the
writing and publication of the history of the Golden Horde before
the appearance of the complete translation of the history of the
Mongols by Rashïd ad-Dïn. The excerpts selected by W. Tiesen-
hausen from the J ãmi cu,t-tawãrlkh are parts of the introduction on
the Turkic arid Mongol tribes and the histories of Chingiz-Khãn,
Uguday-Qaan, Juchi-Khän, Qubilay-Qaan, Hulagü-Khän, Abagha-
Khãn, Arghun-Khãn, Gay khatu -Khan and Ghãzãn-Khãn.
Information obtained from the Jâmïu't-tawârïkh to supplement
other sources (Eastern, mediaeval Russian and foreign sources was
extremely helpful to the historian B. Grekov and the orientalist
A. Yakubovsky in writing the history of the Golden Horde, the
86 Sbomikmaterialov otnosyaschikhsya k istorii Zoloty Ordi. Vol. I. Izvleche -
niya iz arábkikh sochineniy sobranniye V. Tisengausenom. St. Peterburg,
1884.
37 See Sbornik materialov otnosyaschikhsya k istorii Zolotoy Ordi. Vol. II.
Izvlecheniya iz persidskikh sochineniy sobranniye W . Tiesengausenom i obra -
botanniye A. Romaskevitehem i S. Volinim . M.-L. 1941.
58 A. K. ARENDS
first book of its kind in the Soviet Union, for which the authors
received a State Prize.
Rashïd ad-Dïn's work was used not only by the four Soviet
researchers who wrote important books as a basis for further re-
search, but also by other Soviet orientalists whose works are men-
tioned in the bibliographical list attached to this paper.
ADDENDUM
'Ali- Zade A.A. "Bor'ba Zolotoy Ordi s gosudarstvom ilkhanov za Azerbay-

jan". Izv. Akad. Nauk Azerb. SSR , 1946. No. 5, 7.
'Ali -Zade A. A. "Zemelnaya politika ilkhanov v Azerbayjane (v XIII-XIY
vekakh". T rudi Institutia istorii imeni A. Bakikhanova , Tomi, Baku, 1947.
Ali-Zãde A. A. Iz istorii gosudarstva shirvanshakhov XIII-XIV vekov .
Izv. Akad. Nauk Azerb. SSR , 1949, No. 8.
'Ali-Zãde A. A. "Iz istorii feodalnikh otnosheniy v Azerbayjane v XIII-XIV
vekakh. Termin tkharãj,, ' Izv. Akad. Nauk Azerb. SSR , 1953, No. 3.
'Ali-Zãde A. A. K istorii feodalnikh otnosheniy v Azerbayjane v XIII-
XIV vekakh. Termin "tarh". lzv, AzFAN SSSR. 1942, No. 3.
'Ali-Zãde A. A. "K voprosu ob institute 'iktã' v Azerbayjane". Izv. AzFAN
SSSR , 1942, No. 5.
'Ali-Zãde A. A. "K voprosu ob institute 'injû' v Azerbayjane". Izv. AzFAN
SSSR , 1943, No. 8.
Ali-Zãde A. A. K voprosu o polozhenn krestyan v Azerbayjane v XIII-
XIV vekakh". Trudi Instituía Istorii Akad. Nauk. Azerbayjan. SSR ,
Tom III, Baku, 1953.
Ali-Zade A. A. Mongolsklye zavoyevateh v Azerbayjane i sopredelmkn
stranakh v XIII-XIV vekakh". Voprosi Istorii , 1952, No. 3.
c Ali-Zãde A. A. "Nekotoriye svedeniya o prirodnikh bogatstvakh i zanatiyakh
osedlogo naseleniya Azerbayjana v XIII-XIV vekakh." Izv. Akad. Nauk
Azerb. SSRt 1952, No. 7.
* Ali-Zade A. A. "Povinnosti 'bigãr' i 'charik' ' ' Dokladi Akad. Nauk Azerb.
SSR. Tom X, 1954, No. 7.
'All-Zada A. A. Sotsiyalno-ekonomicheskaya i politicheskaya istoriya Azerbay-
jana XIII-XIV vekov. Baku, 1956.
'Ali-Zade A. A. "Termin 'qûpchûr' ". Izv. Akad. Nauk Azerb. SSR , 1945,
No. 5.
*Ali-Zade A. A. "Termin 'tamghã' ". Izv. Akad. Nauk Azerb. SSR. 1945,
No. 4.
Bartold W. W. "Zanyatiya v turkestanskikh bibliotekakh i muzeyakh letom
1925 goda". Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR , 1926, p. 217.
Bartold W. W. "I. Berezin kak istorik". Zapiski kolegii vostokovedov pri
Aziatskom muzeye Akad. Nauk. SSSR , 1927, Tom 2, Vip. 1.
Bartold W. W. Istoriya izucheniya vostoka v Yevrope i Rossii. Izdaniye
vtoroye, Leningrad, 1925.
Bartold W. W. Istoriya kulturnoy zhizni Turkestana. Leningrad, 1927,
Glava IV.
Bartold W. W. "Istoriya Turkestana". Trudi Turkestanskogo Oos. Universi-
teta , Vip. 2, Tashkent, 1922.
J ÄMrU'T-TAWÄRlKH IN THE SOVIET UNION 59
Bartold W. W. Istoriya turetsko-mongolskikh narodov . Konspekt lektsiy,

Tashkent, 1928.
Bartold W. W. Kirgizi (istoricheskiy ocherk), Frunze, 1943. Sochineniya ,
Tom II (1), 1943, pp. 473-543.
Bartold W. W. Kultura musulmanstva. Petrograd, 1918. Sochineniya Tom
VI, 1966, pp. 190-191.
Bartold W. W. Mesto prikaspiyskikh oblastey v istoriyi musulmanskogo mira .
Baku, 1924.
Bartold W. W. "Obrazovaniye imperii Chingiz-Khana". ZVORAO , Tom X,
1897, pp. 105-119.
Bartold W. W. "O kolesnom i verkhovom dvizhenii v Sredney Azii". Zapiski
Instituía V ostokovedeniya AN SSSR , Tom, VI, 1936.
Bartold W. W. Ocherk istorii Semirechya. Izdaniye Vtoroye, Frunze, 1943,
Sochineniya , Tom II (1), 1963, pp. 23-106.
Bartold W. W. Persidskaya nadpis na stene Aniyskoy mecheti Manuche . SPb,
1911. Sochineniya , Tom IV, 1966, pp. 313-328.
Bartold W. W. Retsenziya na N. A. Aristov. Zametki ob etnicheskom sostave
tyurkskikh plemen i narodnostey i svedeniya ob ikh chislennosti. ZVORAO,
Tom XI, SPb. 1897, pp. 341-356.
Bartold W. W. Retsenziya na Blochet E. Introduction a V histoire des Mongols.
Leyden, 1910, "Mir Islama", 1912, Tom I.
Bartold W. W. Retsenziya na L. Cahun Introduction à Vhistoire de VAsie .
Turcs et Mongols des origines à 1405. Paris, 1896. Zhurnal Ministerstva
Narodnogo Prosvescheniya , 1896.
Bartold W. W. Retsenziya na B. Y. Vladimircov, Chingiz-Khan. Berlin-
Peterburg-Moskva. Vostok , 1925, kniga 5, pp. 251-256.
Bartold W. W. "Svyaz obschestvennogo byta s khozyaystvenim ukladom u
turok i mongolo v". Izv. Obschestva arkheologii istorii i etnografii pri Ka -
zanskom universitete , Tom XXXIV, Vip. 3-4, 1929.
Bartold W. W. Tadjiki. Sbornik "Tadjikistan", Tashkent, 1925. Sochieniya,
Tom II (1), 1966, pp. 451-468.
Bartold W. W. Turkestan v epokhu mongolskogo nashestviya. Ch. I, Teksti ,
SPb. 1898.
Bartold W. W. Turkestan v epokhu mongolskogo nashestviya. Ch. II, Issledo-
vaniya , SPb. 1900. Sochineniya , Tom I, 1963.
Belenitsky A. M. "K voprosu o sotsiyalnikh otnosheniyakh v hulaguidskuyu
epokhu". Sovetskoye V ostokovedeniye , Tom V, pp. 111-128.
Belenitsky A. M. K istorii feodamogo zemlevladeniya v Stredney Azn i
Iráne v timuriskuyu epokhu (obrazovaniye instituta suyurgal)". Istorik
marksist , 1941, No. 4.
Berezin I. N. Bibliotéka vostochnikh istorikov. Tom I, 1849.
Berezin I. N. Bidgar na Volge. Kazan, 1853.
Berezin I. N. Vnutrenneye ustroystvo Zolotoy Ordi po khanskim yarlikam ,
Kazan, 1850.
Berezin I. N. "Ocherk vnutrennego ustroystva ulusa Djuchiyeva". Trudi
VORAO , Tom VIII, SPb., 1863.
Berezin I. N. Sborník letopisey. Istoriya mongolov, sochinemye Rashid ad-
Dina. Vvedeniye turetskikh i mongolskikh plemenakh. Perevod s persid-
skogo s vvedeniyem i primechaniyami I. N. Berezina," Trudi VORAO ,
Ch. V, SPb., 1858.
Berezin I. N. "Sbornik letopisey (tozhe). Persidskiy tekst s predisloviyem i
primechaniyami I. Berezina". Trudi VORAO, Ch. VII, SPb. 1861.
Berezin I. N. "Sbornik letopisey. Istoriya mongolov, sochinemye Rashid
60 A. K. ARENDS
ad-Dina. Istoriya Chingiž-Khana do vosshestviya yego na prestol.

Rus8kiy perevod s pre disloviyem". Trudi VOR AO, Ch. XIII, SPb. 1868,
"Sborník letopisey (tozhe) persipskiy text s primechaniyami I. Berenzina."
TVORAO , Ch. XIII, SPb. 1868.
Berezin I. N. "Sborník letopisey. Istoriya Chingiz-Khana ot vosshestviya
yego na prestol do konchini. Sochineniye Rashid ad-Dina. Persidskiy
text v izdanii. I. N. Berezina. Russkiy Perevod s primechaniyami I. N.
Berezina". TVORAO, Ch. XV, Spb, 1888.
Betger E. K. Otchyot Sredneaziatskoy Qosudarstvennoy Biblioteki za 1925 god ,
Tashkent, 1926.
Veselovsky N. I. "Zametki po istorii Zolotoy Ordi". IORYSAN, Tom 21,
Petrograd, 1916.
Vladimircov B. Y. Obschestvenniy stroy mongolov . Leningrad, 1934.
Grekov B. D., Yakubovsky A. Y. Zolotaya Orda (ocherk istorii ulusa Djuchi
v period sozdaniya i rastsveta v XIII-XIV v. Izdaniye vtoroye. M.-L.,
1941.
Grekov B. D., Yakubovsky A. Y. Zolotaya Orda % yeye pademye. M. L. 1950.
Istoriya SSSR s drevneyshikh vremen do nashikh dney. Tom II, p. 501,
Moskva, 1966.
Krimski A. E. I stony a Persvi , yeye hteratun % dervwheskoy teoso fit. Izdaniye
tretye, Tom III, p. 5-6, 44-51. Moskva, 1914-1915.
Mugiiiov A. M. Persidskaya unikalnaya rukopis Rashid ad-Dina . Uch.
zap. Instituta vostokovedeniya Akad . Nauk SSSR, Tom XVI, 1958.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Vinogradarstvo i vinodeliye v Iráne v XIII-XIV vekakh
(iz istorii zemledeliya v Irane). Vizantiyskiy vremennik , Tom XI, 1956.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Gorodskaya znať v gosudarstve Hulaguido v". Sovetskoye
vostokovedeniye , Tom V, M. L., 1948.
Petrushevsky I. P. Zemledeliye i agrarniye otnosheniya v Irane XIII-XIV
vekov. M.-L., 1960.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Iz istorii Bukhari". Uch. zap. Leningradskogo universi -
teta , No. 98, SVN, Vip. 1, 1949.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Iz istorii orosheniya i selskogo khozyaystva v Irane v
XIII-XIV vekakh". Uch . zap. Leningradskogo universiteta, No. 179, SVN,
Vip. 4, 1954.
Petrushevsky I. P. "K voprosu o podlinnosti perepiski Rashid ad-Dina (po
povodu statyi R. Levy - The Letters of Rashïd ad-Dïn Fadl Allah. Jour-
nal of Royal Asiatic Society, 1946, part 1-2".) Vestnik Leningrad. Oos.
Universiteta , 1948, No. 9.
Petrushevsky I. P. "K voprosu o prikreplenii krestyan k žemle v Irane v
epokhu mongolskogo vladichestva". Voprosi istorii , 1947, No. 4.
Petrushevsky I. P. "K istorii instituta soiurgala". Sovetskoye vostokovedeniye,
Tom VI, M.-L., 1949.
Petrushevsky I. P. "K istorii selskogo poseleniya i selskoy obschini v Irane
v XIII-XIV vekakh". Uch zap. Insituta vostokoved. Akad. Nauk SSSR ,
Tom XVI. M.-L.. 1958.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Osnovniye problemi spetsifikatsii i periodizatsii feodal-
nogo razvitiya v XIII-XIV vekakh". Nauchnaya sessia Leningr. gos.
universiteta 1948 goda. Tezisi dokladov, Leningrad, 1948.
Petrushevsky I. P. "O formakh feodalnoy zavisimosti krestyan v Irane v
XIII-XIV vekakh". Sovetskoye vostokovedeniye, 1955, No. 5.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Poleviye i ogorodniye kulturi v Irane v XIII-XIV
vekakh (iz istorii zemledeliya v Irane)". Vizantiyskiy vremennik , Tom
IX, 1956.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Rashïd ad-Dïn i y ego istoricheskiy trud". Sborník leto-

pÍ8ey Rashïd ad-Dina. Tom I, Kniga pervaya. Perevod s persidskogo L.
Khetagurova, M.-L., 1952, pp. 7-37.
Petrushevsky I. P. "Sostoyaniye selskogo khozyaystva v Iráne v XIII -
pervoy polovině XIV vekakh". Uch. zap. Leningradsk. gos. universiteta ,
No. 195, SVN, Vip. 6, 1956.
Petrushevsky I. P. Feodalnoye khozyaystvo Rashid ad-Dina . Voprosi
istorii, 1951, No. 4.
Petrushevsky I. P. Hamdallah Kazvinï kak istochnik po sotsialnoekonomi-
cheskoy istorii Zakavkazya. Izd. Akad . Nauk SSSR. Otd. obschestv. nauk ,
1937, pp. 898.
Petrushevsky I. P. Rashid al -Din m Persian Historiography m the Middle
Ages". XXVII International Congress of Orientalists. Papers presented
by the USSR delegation. Moscow, 1967.
Puchkovsky L. S. Mongolskaya feodalnaya istoriografiya XIII-XIV v .
Uch. zap. Instituía vostokived. Akad. Nauk SSSR , Tom VI, 1953.
Fazlullãh Rashïd ad-Dïn. Jãmi at-tawãrlkh. Tom I, Ch. 1, Kriticheskiy text
A. Romaskevitcha. L. Khetagurova, 'A. 'Ali-Zäde, M. 1965.
Fazlullãh Rashïd ad-dïn. Jãmi at-tawãrikh (Sborník letopisey ) . lom III.
Perevod s persidskogo A. K. Arendsa. Baku, 1957.
Fazlullãh Rashïd ad-dïn. Jãmi at-tawarikh. Tom III. Sostavitel nauchno-
kritecheskogo teksta na persidskom yazike Abdul-Kerim Ali Ogli Ali-
Zade. Baku, 1957.
Tolstov S. P. "Genezis feodalizma v kochevikh skotovodcheskikh obschest-
vakh". Sborník " Omovníye problemi genezisa i razvítiya feodalnogo ob-
8che8tva ", Leningrad, 1933.
Yakubovsky A. Y. Vostaniye Tarabi 1238 goda (k istorii krestyanskikh i
remeslennikh dvizheniy v Sredney Azii)". Trudí Instituía vostokoved.
Akad. Nauk SSSRt Tom XVIII, M. L., 1936.
Yakubovsky A. Y. "Iz istorii padeniya Zolotoy Ordì . Voprosi istorii , 1947,
No. 2.
Yakubovsky A. Y. Istoriya Mongolskoy Narodnoy Respubliki. Razdel III.
Glava I, II. Moskva, 1954.
Yakubovsky A. Y. "Kniga B. Vladimirtsova ' ' Obschest venniy stroy mongo-
lov" i perspektivi dalneyshego izucheniya Zolotoy Ordi". Istoricheskiy
sborník. Institut istorii Akad. Nauk SSSR, Tom V, p. 293-313. M. L. 1936.
Yakubovsky A. Y. "Problema sotsiyalnoy istorii narodov v trudakh akade-
mika Bartolda". Věstník Leningradsk. Universiteta, 1947, No. 12, p. 62-79.
Yakubovsky A. Y. Mongolskaya împeriya . Istoricheskiy zhurnal , 194U,
No. 3.

1970 - A. K. Arends - The Study of Rashīd Ad-Dīn's Jāmi'u't-Tawārīkh in The Soviet Union

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1970 - A. K. Arends - The Study of Rashīd Ad-Dīn's Jāmi'u't-Tawārīkh in The Soviet Union

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE STUDY OF RASHĪD AD-DĪN'S JĀMI'U'T-TAWĀRĪKH IN THE SOVIET UNION

The Jämi'u't-tawärikh of Rashid ad-Din Fažl Allah is the first

1 W. Bartold. Kultura musulmanstva. Petrograd, 1918. Tom VI (1966),

that Rashîd ad-Dïn, as head of a group of authors, had carefully

Rashîd ad-Din himself commented on his book: "I can testify

2 Sborník Letopisey. Rashid ad-Din. Vvedeniye : o tyurkskikh i mongolskikh

Meanwhile there was growing interest among West European

s Op. cit., p. VII.

lesser extent, on Rashïd ad-Dïn's work. These included: "Domestic

Mongol and Manchu languages. The author admitted that he might

and Trans-Caucasian peoples. He also wrote a number of articles

6 W. Barthold. Sochineniya. Moskva. Tom I, 1963. p. 608.

9 E. Blochet. Introduction à V histoire des Mongols de F adi Allah Rashid ad-

historian-orientalists which originated in Western Europe in the

10 E. g. - G. Weil. Geschichte der Chalifen. Nach handschriftlichen größten-

11 W. Bartold. Turkestan . Sochineniya . Vol. I, p. 530.

golslz by Acad. B.Vladimircov (1884-1931) a prominent Mongolist.

13 B. Vladimircov. Obschetstvenniy stroy Mongolov. Mongolskiy kochevoy

The manuscript of the Jâmi'u't-tawârikh now deposited at the

translator of Volume I, died during the siege of Leningrad by the

a collection of letters published after Rashid ad-Din's death by his

dur Muhammad Shafť. Lahore, 1945. The Oriental Institute in Leningrad

Professor Petrushevsky's work comprises nine chapters of which

33 The JãmtfuH-Tawãrllch could not be used chronologically for the deter-

feudal nobility and the partial adoption of Iranian state traditions

Summing up in brief Professor Petrushevsky's work it would be

34 I. Petrushevsky. Zemledeliye .... p. 113.

words and expressions in connection with the time and place of

'Ali- Zade A.A. "Bor'ba Zolotoy Ordi s gosudarstvom ilkhanov za Azerbay-

Bartold W. W. Istoriya turetsko-mongolskikh narodov . Konspekt lektsiy,

ad-Dina. Istoriya Chingiž-Khana do vosshestviya yego na prestol.

Petrushevsky I. P. "Rashïd ad-Dïn i y ego istoricheskiy trud". Sborník leto-

You might also like