Chapter 10. Mobility of Scholars and Formation of a Self-Sustaining Scholarly System in the Lands of Rūm during the Fifteenth Century

Atçıl, Abdurrahman

doi:10.5771/9783956507014-315

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This notion of peripateticism of course complicated enormously his practicing of patronage, but medieval Islamic civilization is in many ways defined by the movement of scholars-sometimes voluntarily, sometimes coercively-and thus Ḫ v āndamīr was indeed part of a greater tradition of 'mobile' patronage politics. There has been less discussion in contemporary scholarship about this particular category, but interesting analyses have been offered by Ertuğrul Ötken (2013), Abdurrahman Atçil (2016), andShawqat Toorawa (2004). Most recently, Quinn has elaborated further on the historiographical import of historians like Ḫ v āndamīr with her superlative publication, Persian Historiography Across Empires: The Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals (Persian Historiography Across Empires: The Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Patronage, Genre, and Scholar-Bureaucracy: The Trans-Imperial Career of Ḫvāndamīr (d. 1534)

Mitchell¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the life, career, and patronage of the great statesman and historian, Ghiyath al-Dīn Ḫvāndamīr. Ḫvāndamīr lived and worked during a dynamic period of early modern Islamic history, marking the terminus of the great Timurid empire and the genesis of no less than three major polities in Iran, Central Asia, and South Asia: the Safavids, the Uzbeks, and the Mughals. During the first three decades of the sixteenth century, Ḫvāndamīr produced numerous texts across a multitude of genres, all the while dextrously navigating violent dynastic upheaval and negotiating new terms of patronage in different imperial settings. This paper examines a number of these patronized texts towards the objective of understanding more about how such “men of the pen” understood the act of patronage; specifically, Ḫvāndamīr’s approach to text and genre may have been shaped by the terms and conditions of these different negotiated “trans-imperial” relationships.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%