The Half-Millennium of Persian History Between The Coming of the Saljuqs and the establishment of the Safavid dynasty is one of repeated upheaval and largely alien rule. The arrival of the Ghuzz tribes in the early 11th century was not an entirely peaceful affair—the author of the Tārīkh-i Sīstān regards it as a calamity for that formerly prosperous province—and much worse was to follow, with the Mongol invasions of the 13th century and Timur's campaigns in the late 14th, all of which caused enormous destruction, while leaving a profound impression on Persian society, culture, and political life.

This long and eventful period is seldom treated as a whole; volume 2 of Marshall Hodgson's The Venture of Islam is still perhaps the nearest approach to a united vision of the “Middle Periods” of Islamic history, but of course his view is not confined to Iran. Traditionally, the Mongol sack of Baghdad in 1258 and the end of the Abbasid caliphate is taken as the defining turning point in medieval Persian history, an event that falls almost exactly in the middle of the period under review and which to some extent destroys its unity.

The history of Iran is still told very much in terms of events on center stage. A common enough lament: the intrigues at court, the deeds—edifying or otherwise—of the ruler and his entourage, the marching of armies and squashing of revolts, the rise and fall of dynasties, these seem to be the main stuff of history. When recognized for what it is, the tossing of waves, we blame the sources for the fact that we can't see below the stormy surface. There is some truth in this, of course; the main narrative histories are notoriously palace-centered or, later, camp-followers. The regions of Iran tend to come into focus only when they are, in fact, briefly transformed into centers. An example of this is Sistan, one of the few provinces to be the subject of detailed modern studies. Even then, it tends to be the same sort of story, writ small.

The celebrated universal Islamic history, Mīrkhwānd's Tārīkh-i Rauḍat al-ṣafā, written in Herat in the late Timurid period, became a model for later Persian histories, but has not yet been the subject of any substantial critical analysis as a work of historical literature, or in terms of its manuscript transmission. Although numerous copies exist of different volumes of the text, only a handful have been illustrated, providing another dimension to the reception and ‘reading' of the chronicle. This paper focuses on the fourth volume of Mīrkhwānd's history, on the Persian dynasties up to the rise of Timur, four copies of which have been illustrated, among them the Royal Asiatic Society’s manuscript no. P. 38. After detailing the ten pictures in the manuscript, the article concludes with a discussion of their character and purpose.

This paper explores some different, interrelated versions of the history of the Pīshdādiyān, the earliest dynasty represented in the Shāhnāmeh, especially the recently edited text of Rashīd al-Dīn's Jāmi‘al-tawārīkh. This is compared with Bal‘amī’s Persian version of the History of al-Ṭabari and Qāḍī Baiḍāwī’s Niẓām al-tawārīkh, of which the latter is shown to provide much the closer basis for Rashīd al-Dīn's work — especially when confronted with the manuscripts of the Jāmi‘al-tawārīkh contemporary with the life of Rashīd al-Dīn. Comparison with both the early Arabic and Persian witnesses of the work suggests that the printed edition does not represent Rashīd al-Dīn's original text, but later reworkings of his chronicle — such as that by the fifteenth-century historian, Ḥāfiẓ-i Abrū — which draw more directly on the Shāhnāmeh. In so far as there is discernible subtext to Rashīd al-Dīn's coverage of these earliest periods of Iranian monarchical history, it is more to emphasise the didactic message of the Shāhnāmeh and the justice and constructive achievements of the first kings, than to follow Firdausī’s narrative. Despite the potency of idea of the Shāhnāmeh as expressing Persian kingly traditions, it is suggested that perhaps it was only after the time of Rashīd al-Dīn and the Islamisation of the Mongol rulers that historians appreciated and emulated the literary and narrative aspects of the text for their own sake.

Research on the Safavid period has come a long way in the past ten years with the publication of several studies, conference proceedings, and printed editions of primary sources, including historical texts. Willem Floor has been at the forefront of this activity, with a number of monographs most notably on economic history. His new work, Safavid Government Institutions, is a detailed examination of the principal offices of the Safavid state, including the organization of central and provincial government and of the army. The book evolved out of a commentary on the administrative manual, Mirza Rafiעi's Dastur al-muluk, begun toward the end of the reign of Shah Sultan Husain (1694–1722). It is unfortunate that Floor has been unable to take advantage of the new and more complete text recently published by Iraj Afshar (Daftar-i Tarikh, vol. 1 [Tehran, 2001], 475–651). The newly discovered portion, for instance, contains details of the (minor) offices of daftardār and עazab-bāshī (pp. 618–19), discussed briefly by Floor (p. 59). Other elements of Safavid state organization, such as the judiciary and the religious establishment, are excluded but already largely dealt with in other studies by the same author (ZDMG 150 [2000]: 461–500; Studia Iranica 29 [2000]: 9–60). The material in the Dastur al-muluk (and, for that matter, in the comparable Tazkirat al-muluk) is entirely rearranged in a way that helpfully regroups most of the relevant offices according to their primary function in the administration or the army. The author pays fitting tribute to the pioneering work of earlier scholars, such as Röhrborn, Savory, and Aubin (whose work is oddly described as “less accessible”; p. x) but justly remarks that a great deal of new source material has become available since then.