TURKOMANS BETWEEN TWO EMPIRES: THE ... - Bilkent University

example, we see Muhammad Han Ustaclu and Durmuş Han Shamlu, the son of Abdi
Beg Shamlu, discussing the war strategy at the court of Shah Ismail. Nevertheless none
of our sources mention any idea of Husayn Beg Lala at this meeting, although he
attended.
How should we understand this sharp change? The analysis of Masashi Haneda
deserves closer attention here. 942 According to Haneda, this change was a natural result
of the transformation of the administrative structure of the order. Before 1500, the
organization of the Safavid order was composed of two different elements: a) the core in
Ardabil, spiritual supervisors and directors who had certain privileges, and b) the
provincial disciples, which were principally members of several tribes. The first group
constituted a kind of spiritual elite functioning as a link between the Perfect Guide and
the corpus of disciples. It was exactly this function that provided them certain privileges
and administrative power. After the great meeting of Erzincan, however, the situation
was totally changed. The tribal disciples could directly get in touch with their mürşid,
thus the function of intermediary became useless. Consequently, sufis of Lāhijan, who
were selected elite of the first group, gradually lose their superiority. On the other hand,
the leaders of tribes became more and more influential for they took the control over
their fellow tribesmen, who constituted the backbone of the army. 943 In other words,
parallel to the Shah’s meeting with his tribal disciples, tribal character dominated the
newly emerging army and state; and consequently, tribal affiliation became more
eminent and tribal leaders more powerful. It is interesting to note that since the first
group held the position of spiritual guidance, which could be acquired only through
942 Haneda, Le Châh et les Qizilbāš, pp. 97-100.
943 See, for example, Hans R. Roemer, “The Qizilbash Turcomans: Founders and Victims of the Safavid
Theocracy”, p. 27.
291