Now we are going to take a look further west, into the realm of the Seljuk Shahanshahs. While ruling over most of Persia and Sogdia, the new Turkic Emperors of Persia have already lost grip over the lands to the west of Qtēspōn by 1100s.
Their system of government by feudal appanages meant a further weakening of the crown. Loyalty of the atabegs or governors in the provinces- with powerful vassals in Khorasan, Kerman, Pars, Adarbaigan and Dailam – often depended upon the personal relations with the Shahanshah himself than any possible coercion mechanism. Furthermore, the tribes in the hilly Zagros were left to be be governed by themselves, while Sawat and Khozestan were considered to be the real golden eggs of the realm and placed under the most trusted administrators of the Shahanshah.
While Persian has become the language of court, of literature, science, philosophy and poetry, the newcomers often treated local Persians as second-class citizens, parcelling the land among themselves as spoils of war and extorting whatever resources they could. This was particularly the case of the Turkmen clans in the region of Pars (1) and the tribes in Kerman. The ancient regions of Media and Adarbaigan, but also Khorasan, on the other hand, experienced a significant influx of Turkic nomads into their lands, resulting in a general cultural shift.
As mentioned, the local Persians were generally given little influence and say under the Seljuks; especially if they remained Zoroastrian. Being Manichean was not better either, and both were encouraged to convert to Nestorianism. This was more successful in the more cosmopolitan regions along the Silk Road, where you could often meet merchants and monks from Mesopotamia or Sogdia. Taberestan and the southeastern regions of Iran, such as Yazd and Kerman remained much more conservative and Kerman was the site of a major Zoroastrian revolt against the undisciplined and few Turkic nomads stationed there.
Essentially, after the local Beg began extorting taxes in an exceptionally dry year and failed to receive the demanded sum, he sacked the local Fire Temple. This provoked a popular uprising, which resulted in him being and his garrison being lynched by the angry crowd.
The Shahanshah indeed acknowledged, that his vassal behaved in an unacceptable manner and chose “a man from amongst them, a man whom he fully trusted, for he was his loyal friend and courtier.Magi by faith, Persian by blood, Darius from the city of Semnan”. Thus Kerman received a Zoroastrian Satrap, who was to govern as to not provoke further revolts. Darius was one of the few Zoroastrians, who rose to prominence under the Seljuks.
In Dailam and the Zagros Mountains, the Shahanshah relied on local chiefs and satraps – who, as Seljuk authority waned, quietly reasserted their independence, without any such formal declaration, with their best protection being the mere inaccessibility of the mountain ranges, as well as the disunity and quarrelling among the Turks.
The major decision-makers in the realm were thus the Turks and the Assyrians – with the Turks being mostly the military and the nobility, while Assyrians dominate as clergymen and townsfolk. Assyrians were the ones giving the Turks the values to protect and the Turks were the ones ready to protect them; such an arrangement has been called the “pact of the priest and the knight” (2).
A little inferior, but also in places of influence were local Persian Christians. Some of them were actually descendants of Assyrian merchants in Persia who had assimilated into Persian culture, while preserving their faith. Others were Persians converted centuries ago, and ultimately there are also the most recent converts. You could find them mostly in the cities and towns, especially in the region between Hulwan and Semnan, where they could be found also in the villages along the Silk Road. Their major cultural centre was the city of Reyy, which was the seat of the metropolitan province of the Church of the East.
Many values ingrained in Persian culture were quite naturally upheld by the Christians as well. We are not talking merely about the ceremonial politeness or the celebrations of Nowruz. More problematic was the Persian custom of polygamy, as Persian nobles had enjoyed multiple wives for centuries. Marital ties have often held the realm together, as the lesser nobility sought to marry their daughters well. True, often they were junior wives, but fair and beautiful, giving birth to the most talented of the Persian nobility.
With many Persians now being Christian, there arose a problem. Polygamy as such is forbidden. However a solution has presented itself, by Farbokht, the private confessor of the king (5) suggests marrying them to eunuchs. After all, each man will be husband to one wife, and the harems will not grow too large, for one would need to feed as many eunuchs as one wishes to have extra wives.
The practice of these of “Persianate marriages” was at first largely ignored by the local Persian bishops and priests. After all, their aim was to gain as many converts as possible, not to ban them everything. Only after the Visitor of the Order of Mar Addai reports the case to the Patriarch Ishoyahb V (1149-1175), has the Church begun making a controversy of the whole thing.
Religion in Persia. Note the rise of Nestorianism in central Persia
Patriarch Ishoyahb has called a Council, with was to meet in Kashkar, in Lower Mesopotamia and discuss the whole issue. Politically speaking, Ishoyahb did not wish tear the Church apart. He saw what was going on in the Mediterranean, how endless disputes kept dividing the Church, after kicking a group of heretics out. Not here. In the East, the Holy Spirit kept the faithful together, despite their differences, despite the fact that it was stretched from Jerusalem to the steppes of the Naimans.
Therefore, the Council aimed to come up with a position which could be described as a consensus, yet still within the truth of the Church´s teaching. The general atmosphere was not offensive and hostile; rather the clergymen sought to speak of the phenomenon and why it is wrong. The Assyrians took a more principal stance, condemning the practice as sin and fornification; the Persian bishops however took a much more moderate attitude, citing examples from the Scripture, where Jesus remained in company of the sinners and would not stand the pride of the self-righteous. The bishops from the exterior provinces beyond Persia did not have any strong opinion in favour or against, and took sides upon basis of their zeal (or almost lack thereof).
In general, even the Persians understood that the practice was outside the limits of Christian ethics, yet they lacked the courage to act against it. Ultimately it was decided that the practice is contrary to Christian doctrine and therefore it shall not be practiced in the future; yet those who remain in such unions ought to seek penance and shall be forgiven, while still being allowed to stay in such a state. The Church did not seek a confrontation with the Seljuks, for the Seljuks actually depended on the Church and the Church depended on them greatly as well.
The Seljuks were indeed great patrons of the Church of the East, and helped build monasteries as caravanserais in almost regular intervals along the entirety of the length of the Silk Road in their territory. The travellers would often use the inns as their most commonly used function, but the hospitals, the schools and the libraries were beneficial mostly to those living in their close proximity. It was actually this network of monasteries that resulted in the conversion to Christianity in the area.
Persian Christians were thus offered the lower posts in the administration and bureaucracy, but without them the entire state could barely work. These people were the ones, who reintroduced the old Persian model of governance and the satrapies. However, implementing it into a country divided amongst the clans of the conquerors (3). And bringing back the Kurds, the Lurs and the Dailamites under control would be another.
Thus in the mid-twelth century, Shahanshah Petrus II. (4) decreed an administrative reform, subject to which was to be almost the entire country, save “Chartered Lands Under Exclusive Authority of Tribal Clans”. In other words, the land left to unruly tribes for it was not worth fighting them.
Administration in Persia
Implementing said reform was easiest in Sawat and Khuzestan and along the Silk Road, as well as in the royal demesne around Ispahan. More difficult, but not impossible was Kerman and Pars; Khorasan and Adarbaigan would have to wait.
Khorasan, whose language was already under heavy Turkic influence was one of the first parts of the empire to set itself free from the authority of the Shahanshah. The area had been previously mostly Manichean, now again converted to Nestorianism.
Let us see the Turkic enclaves in the Iranian Sea
And then we have Sogdia. The Mesopotamia of Central Asia. The area used to be a multireligious and multicultural melting pot, a crossroad of civilizations, where Iranian, Indian and Chinese influences met. By the twelfth century, the Nestorians have come to dominate the cultural landscape, increasing their proportion to 60%. The second most numerous group were the declining Manicheans, making around a fifth of the population. The Buddhists number a mere tenth of the population, and the rest being a mix of Zoroastrians, Jacobites and Jews.
While Manicheism used to flourish in the lands of Central Asia, where it was home and headquarters to the Denawar Church based in Samarqand, it has been in decline, and especially since the Seljuks began actively promoting Nestorianism, which was already gaining numerical superiority in the region by the eleventh century. Religious strife began to be an issue in the previously tolerant region, mostly Denawar against Nestorians, with occasional clashes and attacks. This results in more Buddhist emigration from Sogdia into the staunchly Buddhist- dominated Tukharistan; meanwhile a steady number of Manicheans move to the relatively safe region of Khwarezm.
The Denawar Manicheans took up a more militant version of the faith, as a response to being threatened. Manichean scholars and thinkers, writing in Sogdian and even more commonly in Kwarezmian-influenced Sogdian justify the need of self-defence and defence of one´s community in accordance with Manichean doctrine (6).
Many Persian were also prepared to use violence in bringing down the Seljuk Empire and reinstating a true Persian Persia. They would assemble in secret societies, and their bases of operation could have been found in the inaccessibility of the Elborz Mountains, but also anywhere where they could blend in with the locals. Their methods of warfare could not be described as guerrilla warfare either, although skirmish tactics were often used to attack patrols in the proximity of their hidden castles. But the most standard attacks were carried out as discrete murders (7) of important Seljuk official.
And finally a political map in the end
(1) Without Arabic influence, the change from “p” to “f” in Persian does not occur
(2) Yes, it reminds me of the Yuan dynasty of China.
(3) Or warlords, put it simply
(4) This a Muhammad II analogue
(5) I´ve inspired myself the Scorpion´s Bite, by @fi11222
(6) So maybe we have a sort of Central Asian islam after all. Or don´t we? Well, they are limited by now mostly to Uzbekistan, so not that much they can do anyway.
(7) The Assassins, anyone?
Their system of government by feudal appanages meant a further weakening of the crown. Loyalty of the atabegs or governors in the provinces- with powerful vassals in Khorasan, Kerman, Pars, Adarbaigan and Dailam – often depended upon the personal relations with the Shahanshah himself than any possible coercion mechanism. Furthermore, the tribes in the hilly Zagros were left to be be governed by themselves, while Sawat and Khozestan were considered to be the real golden eggs of the realm and placed under the most trusted administrators of the Shahanshah.
While Persian has become the language of court, of literature, science, philosophy and poetry, the newcomers often treated local Persians as second-class citizens, parcelling the land among themselves as spoils of war and extorting whatever resources they could. This was particularly the case of the Turkmen clans in the region of Pars (1) and the tribes in Kerman. The ancient regions of Media and Adarbaigan, but also Khorasan, on the other hand, experienced a significant influx of Turkic nomads into their lands, resulting in a general cultural shift.
As mentioned, the local Persians were generally given little influence and say under the Seljuks; especially if they remained Zoroastrian. Being Manichean was not better either, and both were encouraged to convert to Nestorianism. This was more successful in the more cosmopolitan regions along the Silk Road, where you could often meet merchants and monks from Mesopotamia or Sogdia. Taberestan and the southeastern regions of Iran, such as Yazd and Kerman remained much more conservative and Kerman was the site of a major Zoroastrian revolt against the undisciplined and few Turkic nomads stationed there.
Essentially, after the local Beg began extorting taxes in an exceptionally dry year and failed to receive the demanded sum, he sacked the local Fire Temple. This provoked a popular uprising, which resulted in him being and his garrison being lynched by the angry crowd.
The Shahanshah indeed acknowledged, that his vassal behaved in an unacceptable manner and chose “a man from amongst them, a man whom he fully trusted, for he was his loyal friend and courtier.Magi by faith, Persian by blood, Darius from the city of Semnan”. Thus Kerman received a Zoroastrian Satrap, who was to govern as to not provoke further revolts. Darius was one of the few Zoroastrians, who rose to prominence under the Seljuks.
In Dailam and the Zagros Mountains, the Shahanshah relied on local chiefs and satraps – who, as Seljuk authority waned, quietly reasserted their independence, without any such formal declaration, with their best protection being the mere inaccessibility of the mountain ranges, as well as the disunity and quarrelling among the Turks.
The major decision-makers in the realm were thus the Turks and the Assyrians – with the Turks being mostly the military and the nobility, while Assyrians dominate as clergymen and townsfolk. Assyrians were the ones giving the Turks the values to protect and the Turks were the ones ready to protect them; such an arrangement has been called the “pact of the priest and the knight” (2).
A little inferior, but also in places of influence were local Persian Christians. Some of them were actually descendants of Assyrian merchants in Persia who had assimilated into Persian culture, while preserving their faith. Others were Persians converted centuries ago, and ultimately there are also the most recent converts. You could find them mostly in the cities and towns, especially in the region between Hulwan and Semnan, where they could be found also in the villages along the Silk Road. Their major cultural centre was the city of Reyy, which was the seat of the metropolitan province of the Church of the East.
Many values ingrained in Persian culture were quite naturally upheld by the Christians as well. We are not talking merely about the ceremonial politeness or the celebrations of Nowruz. More problematic was the Persian custom of polygamy, as Persian nobles had enjoyed multiple wives for centuries. Marital ties have often held the realm together, as the lesser nobility sought to marry their daughters well. True, often they were junior wives, but fair and beautiful, giving birth to the most talented of the Persian nobility.
With many Persians now being Christian, there arose a problem. Polygamy as such is forbidden. However a solution has presented itself, by Farbokht, the private confessor of the king (5) suggests marrying them to eunuchs. After all, each man will be husband to one wife, and the harems will not grow too large, for one would need to feed as many eunuchs as one wishes to have extra wives.
The practice of these of “Persianate marriages” was at first largely ignored by the local Persian bishops and priests. After all, their aim was to gain as many converts as possible, not to ban them everything. Only after the Visitor of the Order of Mar Addai reports the case to the Patriarch Ishoyahb V (1149-1175), has the Church begun making a controversy of the whole thing.
Religion in Persia. Note the rise of Nestorianism in central Persia
Patriarch Ishoyahb has called a Council, with was to meet in Kashkar, in Lower Mesopotamia and discuss the whole issue. Politically speaking, Ishoyahb did not wish tear the Church apart. He saw what was going on in the Mediterranean, how endless disputes kept dividing the Church, after kicking a group of heretics out. Not here. In the East, the Holy Spirit kept the faithful together, despite their differences, despite the fact that it was stretched from Jerusalem to the steppes of the Naimans.
Therefore, the Council aimed to come up with a position which could be described as a consensus, yet still within the truth of the Church´s teaching. The general atmosphere was not offensive and hostile; rather the clergymen sought to speak of the phenomenon and why it is wrong. The Assyrians took a more principal stance, condemning the practice as sin and fornification; the Persian bishops however took a much more moderate attitude, citing examples from the Scripture, where Jesus remained in company of the sinners and would not stand the pride of the self-righteous. The bishops from the exterior provinces beyond Persia did not have any strong opinion in favour or against, and took sides upon basis of their zeal (or almost lack thereof).
In general, even the Persians understood that the practice was outside the limits of Christian ethics, yet they lacked the courage to act against it. Ultimately it was decided that the practice is contrary to Christian doctrine and therefore it shall not be practiced in the future; yet those who remain in such unions ought to seek penance and shall be forgiven, while still being allowed to stay in such a state. The Church did not seek a confrontation with the Seljuks, for the Seljuks actually depended on the Church and the Church depended on them greatly as well.
The Seljuks were indeed great patrons of the Church of the East, and helped build monasteries as caravanserais in almost regular intervals along the entirety of the length of the Silk Road in their territory. The travellers would often use the inns as their most commonly used function, but the hospitals, the schools and the libraries were beneficial mostly to those living in their close proximity. It was actually this network of monasteries that resulted in the conversion to Christianity in the area.
Persian Christians were thus offered the lower posts in the administration and bureaucracy, but without them the entire state could barely work. These people were the ones, who reintroduced the old Persian model of governance and the satrapies. However, implementing it into a country divided amongst the clans of the conquerors (3). And bringing back the Kurds, the Lurs and the Dailamites under control would be another.
Thus in the mid-twelth century, Shahanshah Petrus II. (4) decreed an administrative reform, subject to which was to be almost the entire country, save “Chartered Lands Under Exclusive Authority of Tribal Clans”. In other words, the land left to unruly tribes for it was not worth fighting them.
Administration in Persia
Implementing said reform was easiest in Sawat and Khuzestan and along the Silk Road, as well as in the royal demesne around Ispahan. More difficult, but not impossible was Kerman and Pars; Khorasan and Adarbaigan would have to wait.
Khorasan, whose language was already under heavy Turkic influence was one of the first parts of the empire to set itself free from the authority of the Shahanshah. The area had been previously mostly Manichean, now again converted to Nestorianism.
Let us see the Turkic enclaves in the Iranian Sea
And then we have Sogdia. The Mesopotamia of Central Asia. The area used to be a multireligious and multicultural melting pot, a crossroad of civilizations, where Iranian, Indian and Chinese influences met. By the twelfth century, the Nestorians have come to dominate the cultural landscape, increasing their proportion to 60%. The second most numerous group were the declining Manicheans, making around a fifth of the population. The Buddhists number a mere tenth of the population, and the rest being a mix of Zoroastrians, Jacobites and Jews.
While Manicheism used to flourish in the lands of Central Asia, where it was home and headquarters to the Denawar Church based in Samarqand, it has been in decline, and especially since the Seljuks began actively promoting Nestorianism, which was already gaining numerical superiority in the region by the eleventh century. Religious strife began to be an issue in the previously tolerant region, mostly Denawar against Nestorians, with occasional clashes and attacks. This results in more Buddhist emigration from Sogdia into the staunchly Buddhist- dominated Tukharistan; meanwhile a steady number of Manicheans move to the relatively safe region of Khwarezm.
The Denawar Manicheans took up a more militant version of the faith, as a response to being threatened. Manichean scholars and thinkers, writing in Sogdian and even more commonly in Kwarezmian-influenced Sogdian justify the need of self-defence and defence of one´s community in accordance with Manichean doctrine (6).
Many Persian were also prepared to use violence in bringing down the Seljuk Empire and reinstating a true Persian Persia. They would assemble in secret societies, and their bases of operation could have been found in the inaccessibility of the Elborz Mountains, but also anywhere where they could blend in with the locals. Their methods of warfare could not be described as guerrilla warfare either, although skirmish tactics were often used to attack patrols in the proximity of their hidden castles. But the most standard attacks were carried out as discrete murders (7) of important Seljuk official.
And finally a political map in the end
(1) Without Arabic influence, the change from “p” to “f” in Persian does not occur
(2) Yes, it reminds me of the Yuan dynasty of China.
(3) Or warlords, put it simply
(4) This a Muhammad II analogue
(5) I´ve inspired myself the Scorpion´s Bite, by @fi11222
(6) So maybe we have a sort of Central Asian islam after all. Or don´t we? Well, they are limited by now mostly to Uzbekistan, so not that much they can do anyway.
(7) The Assassins, anyone?
