The Career of Nader Shah, Up to and Including the Conquest of India (1736–1741)

Potts, D. T.

doi:10.1007/978-3-658-36032-0_4

D. T. Potts⁸

Part of the book series: Universal- und kulturhistorische Studien. Studies in Universal and Cultural History ((UUKS))

179 Accesses

Abstract

The elevation of Nader Shah to the paramount position of control in Persia was acknowledged in both Constantinople and St. Petersburg, and an effort was made on the Ottoman side to secure peace with the new leader. This was complicated, however, by Nader Shah’s demands of a religious, doctrinal nature, which greatly exercised the Ottoman clerical élite. Meanwhile, in St. Petersburg, Nader Shah’s ambassador was forced to concede that it had not been possible to include Russia in the Turco-Persian accord. Nevertheless, assurances were given that Nader Shah would respect Russia’s possessions in the Caucasus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 169.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 219.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 219.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Tahmasp II.
2.
Anna Ivanovna.
3.
Augustus III.
4.
Charles VI.
5.
Compare the grand strategy for the dismemberment of the Ottoman empire in Alberoni (1736: 23–24), which called for the participation of Russia, Poland, Denmark, Sweden, France, Spain, Sicily, Portugal, Sardinia, Venice, Genoa, Switzerland, England, Holland and Naples to assemble land and naval forces to attack the Porte. Cf. the summary in Krones (1879: 132).
6.
Mahmud I.
7.
According to Laugier (1768/1: 35–36), as winter approached at the end of the 1736 campaign, ‘L’armée du Grand-Visir étoit presque entierement dissipée. Ce premier Ministre se proposoit d’aller hiverner à Adrinople, en laissant des ordres pour que les Milices de Gréce & de Romanie se trouvassent l’année suivante rassemblées au même rendez vous.’
8.
Mahmud I.
9.
Ahmed Pasha.
10.
Mohammad Shah (r. 1719–1748).
11.
Rumors to the contrary prompted Bonneval (Desherbiers 1806: 276–279) to write of Tahmasp Qoli Khan, ‘Il pensa à s’allier au grand mogol, la seule puissance mahométane qui fût à portée d’inquiéter les Turcs. Ses propositions furent reçues avec hauteur: on lui répondit durement qu’on ne voulait point la guerre, que si on la faisait ce serait contre lui, pour le précipiter du trône qu’il avait indignement usurpé.’
12.
Charles VI.
13.
Anna Ivanovna.
14.
The Ottoman court.
15.
Cf. 4.5, 4.15 and 4.16, a fallacious reference to the involvement of the Mughal empire.
16.
Charles VI.
17.
Anna Ivanovna.
18.
Antioch Dmitryevich Cantemir (1708–1744), son of Dmitry Konstantinovich Cantemir (1665–1723), was at the time Russian ambassador in London. According to Mottley (1739: 179), ‘Prince Antiochus Cantemir, not long since Ambassador to the Court of Great Britain,’ was ‘highly esteemed for his fine Understanding and polite Behaviour.’ In September, 1738, he became Russia’s ambassador in Paris.
19.
Anna Ivanovna.
20.
La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 350) gives a good example of the diplomatic relationship struck up by the Persian ambassador in Constantinople prior to his departure for Isfahan. ‘Cet Ambassadeur envoya avant son départ son Kiaya & son Secrétaire faite compliment à M. l’Ambassadeur de France, lui offrir ses services en Perse, & l’assurer qu’il entretiendroit, lorsqu’il y seroit arrivé, Tahmas-Kouli-Kan dans les sentimens favorables qu’il avoit naturellement pour la nation Françoise. Son Excellence reçut ces Officiers avec les cérémonies usitées parmi les Orientaux, & leur fit voir les jardins & les differens appartemens du Palais de France, dont ils parurent satisfaits; ils le furent encore plus à la vûe d’une très-belle estampe de M. Parocel, représentant Sa Majesté à cheval, & prierent avec beaucoup d’instance M. l’Ambassadeur de la leur donner, en l’assurant qu’ils ne pourroient faire un présent plus agréable à leur Souverain, & son Excellence la leur fit remettre sur le champ.’
21.
Anna Ivanovna.
22.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
23.
On 17 July 1736 Empress Anna held a festive celebration in honor of the Russian capture of Azov. As Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 657) noted, ‘Wenig Tage nach diesem Festin langte ein vornehmer Daghestaner, Namens Migir-Ali-Bec, bey dem Persianischen Gesandten Chulefa-Mirsa-Caffi an. Diesen hatte der Schach Nadir abgefertiget, seine Erhebung auf den Persianischen Thron nach St. Petersburg zu überbringen, weshalb er das Notifications-Schreiben an die Rußische Kayserin sowohl, als ein neues Creditiv vor den Persianischen Gesandten bey sich gehabt.’ Cerceau (1740/1: 187) called him ‘le Seigneur Daghestan.’
24.
This took place on 18 July 1736. See Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 658).
25.
Mythical Iranian hero in the Shahname. See Tafażżoli (1999/2012).
26.
For this ancient Türkic title with earlier literature see Potts (2014: 133, n. 83).
27.
Alexey Mikhailovich Cherkassky (Czerkaskoi) (d. 15 November, 1742; see Anonymous 1749a: 960). ‘Geheime Rath und Ritter des S. Andreas-Ordens, Fürst Czerkaskoi,’ was made a member of Czarina Anna’s cabinet in 1731. See Schumann (1733: 110).
28.
The entire text of this address and the response in German are also published in Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 658–660), and in French in Cerceau (1740/1: 186–187).
29.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
30.
Muhammad Shah.
31.
Muhammad Shah.
32.
Mahmud I. No such ‘Convention’ was ever made.
33.
This may allude to the Afghan rebellion in Khorasan which began in the winter of 1736, described in Jones (1770/2: 23ff).
34.
Anna Ivanovna.
35.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana. Cf. 4.23.
36.
The main ambassador, ‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana governor of Kermanshah, was accompanied by molla-bashi Molla ‘Ali Akbar; and sadr al-mamalek ‘Abu al-Kasim Kashani. See Tucker (1996: 24). For these offices see e.g. Sefatgol (2005: 78–80); Floor and Faghfoory (2007: 1, 3, 4 and 22).
37.
Presumably a corruption of Kandahar, if the sentence is to be read as ‘the Kandaharans, the Inhabitants of Kandahar,’ rather than ‘Fahamar’ designating an altogether different place.
38.
Hoseyn Soltan Ghalza’i or ‘Hussein le Galgien,’ in Jones (1770/2: 16ff. Cf. 4.73, 4.76, 4.83, 4.86).
39.
This name does not resemble those of Nadir Shah’s generals. From Mughan, for example, around the time he was being crowned, Nadir Shah sent Fath ‘Ali Khan Afshar to attack Kalat. See Jones (1770/2: 27). In May another force under Imam Verdi Beg Kirklu was sent to besiege Kalat. See Jones (1770/2: 30). A rebellion in Baluchistan was put down by Mohammad ‘Ali Beg Sarivlilu. See Jones (1770/2: 31–32). Perhaps ‘Bendhar’ is a confusion with the name of the ‘Bakhtiari fortress of Banavar,’ near which Nader Shah’s troops captured the Bakhtiyari rebel ‘Ali Murad around this date. See Lockhart (1938: 110).
40.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
41.
Mahmud I.
42.
Cf. von Hammer (1831: 466), ‘Da der Friede auf dem Fusse des mit Sultan Murad IV. abgeschlossenen mit denselben Gränzen abgeschlossen ist, tritt auch wieder das alte Herkommen in Betreff des Schreibenwechsels der beyden Höfe ein, nach welchem der Sultan und der Wesir dem Schah, dem Sultan aber nur der Schah allein, und der erste Minister (die Reichsstütze) aber nur dem Grosswesir, und nicht auch dem Sultan schreibt.’ Cf. Abeken (1856: 153), ‘Nadir wurde als Schah anerkannt, die Perser als rechtgläubige Sunni behandelt, und die Gränzen wieder hergestellt, wie der Friedensschluß unter Sultan Murad IV. (7. Mai 1639) sie bestimmt hatte, alles durch den russisch-türkischen Theilungsvertrag erworbene also aufgegeben.’
43.
Anna Ivanovna.
44.
Cf. Laugier (1768/1: 35), along with the retreat of the Russian forces from the Crimea, due to a shortage of food and fodder; a Tartar counter-attack in the Ukraine; and the recently concluded treaty with Persia, ‘Une chose augmenta la défiance de la Cour Ottomane; ce fut la connoissance qu’elle eut des articles préliminaires que M. Talman étoit chargé de lui proposer, dont l’un étoit la cession d’Azoph.’ Further, Laugier (1768/1: 43) noted, ‘La certitude d’avoir l’Empereur [Austrian] pour ennemi, si on ne s’accomodoit pas avec la Russie, & la difficulté de parvenir à cet accomodement, attendu que les Russes insistoient sur la cession d’Azoph, que la Porte jugeoit deshonorante, jetterent le Grand-Visir dans une extrême perplexité.’
45.
Ahmed Pasha.
46.
Rather unlikely, both because the Persian-Ottoman treaty had recently been signed, and the fact that the Italian toponym ‘Tripoli de Soria’ refers to Tripoli in Lebanon (as opposed to Tripoli in Barbary [Libya]).
47.
Yenişehirli ‘Abdullah Efendi. Cf. 3.7.
48.
Returning home after signing the treaty with Turkey, ‘Abd al-Baqi Khan ‘hat etliche Türkische Geistliche mit sich genommen, welche versuchen sollen, ob sie die Lehre des Omar mit der Secte des Ali, dem die Persianer anhangen, vereinigen können?’ See Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 651).
49.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
50.
Anna Ivanovna.
51.
Seyyid Mehmed Pasha. Cf. 3.206.
52.
Burkhard Christoph Graf von Münnich. Cf. 3.216.
53.
Mahmud I.
54.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
55.
Ahmed Köprülü. See von Hammer (1839: 332). The title, from Arabic qa’em-maqam, ‘one standing in the place of another,’ was used in both Turkey and Iran for ‘lieutenant, deputy, substitute, lieutenant-colonel; a deputy-governor; specifically, the deputy of the Grand Vizier, and governor of Constantinople.’ See Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 647, n. *); Gatenby (1954: 104).
56.
Mahmud I.
57.
Seyyid Mehmed Pasha.
58.
Burkhard Christoph Graf von Münnich.
59.
Thogmartin (1998: 18–19) noted that, to augment the news from the state-sanctioned Gazette, ‘Paris made up for its government-induced dearth of reliable printed news by developing oral news in a singular way… .the eighteenth-century Parisian stroller could pick up different kinds of news by walking to various parts of the Tuileries gardens. In each part, he would have found circles of nouvellistes à la bouche (oral news specialists, or perhaps “mouth newsmen”)… .Extensive hand-written newsletters by…specialists called nouvellistes à la main (perhaps “hand newsmen”) were…used to evade censorship.’
60.
Mahmud I.
61.
Charles VI.
62.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
63.
Ahmed Köprülü.
64.
Yenişehirli ‘Abdullah Efendi.
65.
Another way of saying Sunni and Shi‘a.
66.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
67.
On 23 October 1736, according to Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 651).
68.
Muhammad Shah.
69.
A false rumor.
70.
Charles VI.
71.
Mahmud I.
72.
According to Abeken (1856: 153), Nader Shah’s ambassador ‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana concluded the peace with Turkey on 17 October, 1736. ‘Nadir wurde als Schah anerkannt, die Perser als rechtgläubige Sunni behandelt, und die Gränzen wieder hergestellt, wie der Friedensschluß unter Sultan Murad IV. (7. Mai 1639) sie bestimmt hatte, alles durch den russisch-türkischen Theilungsvertrag erworbene also aufgegeben.’ Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 650), however, wrote that ‘Der Friede ward im September 1736. geschlossen.’ La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 349–350) said the Persian ambassador ‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana had his last audience with the Sultan on 16 October, 1736, and left Constantinople on 14 November, marching towards Persia from Scutari on 24 November. This seems unlikely, since peace was concluded on 17 October and indeed Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 651) said that, ‘Am 23. Octobris 1736. hatte der Persianische Gesandte bey dem Groß Sultan seine Abschieds-Audienz, der ihm grosse Caressen erwiesen. Seit dem hat er alle Grosse und Vornehme der Pforte fleißig besuchet, bis er endlich am 14. Decembris mit zweyen Galéeren von Scutari abgesegelt.’ Cf. Lockhart (1938: 102).
73.
Murad IV. Cf. 4.23.
74.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
75.
Anna Ivanovna.
76.
Mahmud I.
77.
War had been declared on 8 June 1736. See above.
78.
Seyyid Mehmed Pasha.
79.
The chronology here may be questioned. According to von Hammer (1831: 480–481), the Grand Vizir was at Babataghi (mod. Babadag, Romania) on 12 November 1736 and on 17 January 1737 when the Austrian ambassador Ludwig von Thalman visited him there.
80.
Anna Ivanovna.
81.
Charles VI.
82.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
83.
Anna Ivanovna.
84.
The Reis-Efendi Ismail. See von Hammer (1839: 342). Cf. 3.223.
85.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
86.
Mahmud I.
87.
Not Murad I (r. 1362–1389) but Murad IV (r. 1623–1640), the contemporary of Shah ‘Abbas I. Cf. 4.23.
88.
Anna Ivanovna.
89.
The Black Sea, the Pontus Euxinus. For refs. see Forbiger (1844/2: 24–25).
90.
Mahmud I.
91.
Anna Ivanovna.
92.
Discussing the period 1736/7, Anonymous (1742b: 358) wrote, ‘the current Price of the whole remaining Capital must rise a great deal above the present Market Price.’
93.
Mahmud I.
94.
Murad IV.
95.
Anna Ivanovna.
96.
Baron Casimir Christoph von Brackel (1686–1742), successively Russian minister in Denmark (1731–1735) and Prussia (1735–1742). See Amburger (1966: 447, 449). Prior to this ‘der kluge und ehrenwerte Oberhauptmann Casimir Christoph von Brackel’ had served as ‘kurländische Landesdelegierte in Warschau.’ See Seraphim (1904: 187).
97.
Peace was concluded on 17 October according to Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 651).
98.
Murad IV.
99.
Claude Alexandre, comte de Bonneval (1675–1747). Cf. 3.169.
100.
In his memoirs, Bonneval (1806/2: 297) wrote, ‘On est d’accord avec Kouli-kan; on le reconnaît pour roi des Perses; on se rend, de part et d’autre; ce qu’on s’est pris; on a tout sujet d’espérer qu’il s’unira avec nous, et qu’il attacquera les Moscovites.’ Cf. von Hammer (1831: 469) noted, ‘Rakoczy [Ferenc II Rákóczi d. 1735; perhaps a reference to his son?], Bonneval, Villeneuve und ganz neuerdings die schwedischen Ausgesandten Höpken und Carlson…bliesen zwar beständig den Krieg wider Russland und Oesterreich ein.’ Cf. Zinkeisen (1857: 670–671).
101.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
102.
Anna Ivanovna.
103.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
104.
These are described in a number of sources. Thus Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 651–652), ‘Die Geschencke des Groß-Sultans, so dieser Ambassadeur bloß und allein vor sich erhalten, haben in fünff und vierzig tausend Piasters am barem Gelde, desgleichen in einem mit Diamanten besetzten Säbel, und in einigen anderen Stücken, auf dreißig tausend Piasters am Werth, bestanden; welchen Præsenten annoch siebenhundert Persianische Sclaven, sowohl Manns- als Weibs-Personen, hinzugethan worden. Alle Grossen des Türkischen Reichs haben sich ebenfalls bemühet, ihm [Nader Shah] Geschencke zu bringen.’
105.
Mahmud I.
106.
According to La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 351), towards the end of 1736 ‘Le Grand-Seigneur a envoyé en Perse le Buyuk Imbrohor, ou Grand-Ecuyer, en qualité d’Ambassadeur. Sa Hautesse envoye par lui à Tahmas-Kouli-Kan les présens suivans. Une pélisse fourrée de renard noir avec agraffes de diaments, estimée 40,000 Piastres. Un sabre garni de pierreries. Un cheval dont les harnois sont enrichis de diamants & autres pierreries précieuses. On a aussi remis à cet Ambassadeur soixante plats d’or garnis de pierreries tirés du trésor du Grand-Seigneur, pour s’en servir dans le repas de cérémonie que l’on croit qu’il pourroit donner au Roi de Perse, mais qu’il a ordre de rapporter lorsqu’il reviendra.’
107.
Anna Ivanovna.
108.
In the scheme of things, the Bakhtiyari revolt was minor and, so far as we can tell, had nothing to do with the conclusion of a treaty with the Porte. Rather, it was his desire to settle affairs in the west so that he could launch his campaign against the Mughal empire. Hanway (1753/2: 148) also notes that, when Nader Shah was besieging Kandahar, ‘The Lesgees, taking the advantage of Nadir’s absence, had invaded Shirvan.’ According to Jones (1770/2: 85) Uzbek raiding in Khorasan only began in 1738.
109.
As Hanway (1753/2: 148) noted, ‘During the siege of Kandahar, Nadir Shah knowing the difficulties he should encounter, sent orders to Riza Kouli Myrza, whom he left at Mesched, to march with a body of troops and attack the Ousbeg Tartars of Balkh, in order to make a diversion, or at least to prevent any succours coming to the Afghans from that quarter. Riza Kouli Myrza succeeded in this enterprise; and from thence marched against the Ousbegs of Bokhara, who, in the interim, had made incursions into Khorasan. Having brought these Tartars also into subjection, he returned victorious to Mesched .’
110.
Louis XV. As Laugier (1768/1: 32) noted, ‘M. Talman avoit déployé depuis peu de jours son caractere d’Ambassadeur plénipotentiaire, chargé de la médiation; & on lui rendoit à la Porte tous les honneurs dûs à ce caractere… .Le Comte de Bonneval continuoit d’agir pour procurer la médiation de la France. Il comprenoit qu’il seroit difficile de l’obtenir concurremment avec celle de l’Empereur [of Austria], de l’Angleterre & des Etats-Généraux; mais comme jusques-là il n’y avoit point eu de concert entre ces trois Puissances au sujet de la médiation; qu’au contraire elles travailloient sous main à s’exclure mutuellement, il ne désespéroit pas que cette rivalité n’aboutît à donner à la France le premier rang dans la médiation.’ For an analysis of the French position as a mediator invited by the Porte, see Vandal (1887: 286ff.), Satow (1922: 353–356).
111.
Muhammad Shah. As Scott (1794: 200) observed, ‘The grand cause of the Persian monarch’s displeasure against Hindoostan, was the protection which the rebellious Afghauns had received in the empire, after their defeat by his arms when regent of Persia, though he had sent an ambassador to Dhely [Delhi], requesting Mahummud Shaw that they might not find refuge in his dominions’
112.
Regular cavalry.
113.
Discussing the ‘abortive Congress of Nemirov’ (Bain 1897: 300), Creasy (1856/2: 182–183) noted, ‘The Ottoman court was solicitous to put an end to the war with Russia, and made frequent attempts to negociate a peace, sometimes through the intervention of France and Sweden, and sometimes through that of Austria, which last was insidiously proffered in the hopes of retarding and arresting the preparations of the Turks for a new campaign. The Emperor Charles VI. was, in reality, eager to share with Russia the spoliation of the Turkish provinces: and in January, 1737, a secret treaty was made between the Court of Vienna and St. Petersburg, which stipulated that the Austrian armies should invade Turkey in concert with the Russian forces. But it was wished that the Emperor’s troops should have the same advantage of taking the Turks by surprise, which the Russians had obtained when they attacked Azof and the Crimea without any declaration of war. The Austrian statesmen therefore feigned to be solicitous for peace; and a congress was opened at Nimirof, in which the Czarina’s and the Emperor’s plenipotentiaries kept up the hollow show of negotiations till the November of 1737.’ Cf. von Hammer (1831: 484–488), ‘Vorbereitung zum Congresse von Niemirow. Anstand der türkischen Vollmacht.’ On Austria’s position at the Congress see Roider (1976/77).
114.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
115.
Mahmud I.
116.
Also Budjak Tartars. See e.g. Bain (1909: 305) who, discussing the outcome of the Russian conquest of Azov, noted, ‘So soon as Münnich had stormed the lines of Perekop, he was to detach 12,000 against the fortress of Kinburn on Dnieper to prevent the Budjak Tartars from crossing that river by way of Ochakoff , whilst Lacy, after capturing Azoff, was to hasten to the support of Münnich’s army.’
117.
Thus Laugier (1768/1: 33), ‘Les progrès des Russes avoient été arrêtés par une entreprise du Sultan de Budziac, qui, ayant fait une irruption dans l’Uckraine, avoit attaqué un corps de cinq mille Moscovites sortis de Pologne, & l’avoit presque entierement détruit. De-là il s’étoit répandu dans le pays, qu’il avoit ravagé, & d’où il avoit emmené près de trente mille esclaves.’ Cf. von Hammer (1839: 369), ‘Le sultan du Boudjak envahit l’Ukraine, défit un corps de cinq mille Russes, qui voulait lui barrer le passage, mit cette province à feu et à sang, et après avoir ainsi vengé les incendies commis en Crimée, il se retira, emmenant avec lui trente mille esclaves.’
118.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
119.
Mahmud I.
120.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
121.
Presumably the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs is meant here, Andrey Ivanovich Osterman (1686–1747) who served in this capacity from 1734 to 1740. For his role around this time see e.g. Mannstein (1773: 96–99).
122.
Anna Ivanovna.
123.
Muhammad Shah.
124.
There is no evidence of this. In fact, there was no communication between the Mughal administration and Nadir Shah prior to his invasion, despite the fact that he sent several ambassadors to Mohammad Shah. See Scott (1794: 200).
125.
An archaic term applied to much of Eurasia from the Great Wall of China to the Black Sea. In the early fifteenth century Johann Schiltberger described the countries in Great Tartary that he visited, noting that ‘Tartary is a three months journey in extent.’ See Telfer (1879: 50). In keeping with other references, this presumably refers to the Cham of the Crimean Tartars, Fatih Giray. See von Hammer (1831: 477) who noted that after the Russian campaign against Crimea in 1736, ‘Der Chan der Krim, Kaplangirai, der sein Land so schlecht vertheidigt hatte, wurde abgesetzt, und der Kalgha Fethgirai zum Chan ernannt.’
126.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
127.
A completely false rumor.
128.
Murad IV.
129.
Mahmud I.
130.
Mahmud I.
131.
The Turkish title, emir achür; in European writings also imrahor, imbrohor, imbrahor, imbrohur, imbroor, etc. See Rocchi (2017: 137–138). Cf. ‘Imbrahor Bassa (Gentleman of his Horse)’ in Knolles and Rycaut (1704: 403). ‘Ober Stallmeister’ according to Korabinsky (1788: 139); Kakuk (1973: 142–143), ‘écuyer, chef d’écurie, grand-écuyer’ from Persian amir-e akhwur, ‘Master of the horse.’ According to Alderhold (1739: 80), ‘Der Imbroor Bassa oder Ober-Stallmeister dessen Ampt darinn besteht, daß er den Käyser wann er zu Pferd steigt, unter die Armen greifen und ihm aufs Pferd helffen muß, sonsten hat er auch alle Sättel und Zeug des Käysers in seiner Aufsicht.’
132.
Depending on when the courier was sent, the governor would have been either Igor Ivanovich Pashov (1684–1736) or Feodor Ivanovich Soimonov (1682–1780). See https://worldleadersindex.org/russiangovernorates.html.
133.
Ahmed Pasha.
134.
Shah Safi. This refers to the same treaty alluded to in other articles mentioning Murad IV, often known as the Treaty of Zohab, which was signed in 1639 and ratified in 1640 by Murad. See e.g. Ateş (2013: 22).
135.
‘Abbas III. A wildly fictitious rumor.
136.
According to Hanway (1753/2: 135), while the negotiations for a peace treaty were proceeding in Constantinople, sometime around mid-1736, ‘Nadir marched with his army from Casbin to Isfahan, with a view to settle the interior government of the empire.’ There was no mention of malcontents, however, unless this is a reference to the Turkish-backed rebel Laccie/Lacca, mentioned above, who was defeated by Nader. See Cerceau (1740/1: 168).
137.
Shah Tahmasp II may be meant as ‘Abbas III was still an infant.
138.
‘Abbas III.
139.
Qazvin.
140.
In his corrupted history of Nader Shah, Le Margne wrote that he was born ‘at Afcheir in the province of Charazam ,’ conflating Khwarezm with Khorasan . See Lockhart (1926b: 326). Cf. Cerceau (1740/1: 132) citing a letter of 8 September 1736 from Villeneuve, French ambassador to the Ottoman Porte, written in Constantinople, who said, ‘Thamas Kuli-Kan est né dans un Village de la Province de Chorassan nommé Afehis, distant de quatre à cinq lieues de Mached ;’ de Claustre (1743: 8), ‘Il y a donc tout lieu de croire que Thamas Kouli-Kan est né dans un Bourg du Chorassan, nommée Afeheir ou Esfarain à trois journées de Mached.’ More probably, this is a confusion with Afshar, his tribal affiliation. Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 520), whose work seems to have been the primary source for the information in this article, has, ‘Thamas Kuli-Chan ist aus einem Dorffe der Provinz Chorassan, Afehis genannt gebürtig, welches drey Tage-Reisen von Mached lieget.’ Cf. Hanway (1753/2: 3), ‘He was descended from the Afshars, who are a tribe of Tartars, and subjects of Persia;’ or Jones (1770/1: 1), ‘Ce grand guérrier étoit de la tribu de Kirklou , une des plus considerables tribus des Afschars, race de Turcmans.’
141.
Thus Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 520), ‘Sein Vater war ein Schäfer.’ Fraser (1742: 71–72), on the other hand, wrote, ‘His father was Chief of a Clan of the Afshar Tribe and Governor of a Fortress belonging to that Place [Calot, i.e. Kalat], wherein a sufficient Guard was kept to prevent the Ousbeg Tartars from making Incursions into Khorasan.’ According to Hanway (1753/2: 3), ‘The name of Nadir’s father was Imam Kouli, whose situation of life was such, that he earned his bread by making caps and sheepskin coats, which is the apparel of the lowest of the common people in Persia.’
142.
Hanway (1753/2: 3) wrote, ‘Nadir himself was bred up to no other employment than that of a shepherd.’
143.
Also Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 521) wrote, ‘Er ward also des Schäferlebens gar bald überdrüßig, entführte seinem Vater sieben hundert Stücke Schaafe, und verkauffte sie zu Mached. Das daraus gelösete Geld gebrauchte er darzu, daß er einen Hauffen verwegener Leute zusammen brachte, über die er das Haupt war, und mit ihnen verschiedene Caravanen plünderte, wodurch er sehr reich wurde;’ and de Claustre (1743: 9), ‘Pour faire les fonds d’un nouveau métier, il s’avise de voler une partie considérable des Troupeaux de son Pere, dont il fait une bonne somme d’argent; avec ce secours, il va tenter fortune, s’associe une troupe de Brigans qui le prennent pour leur Chef, & se met à piller les Caravannes.’ According to Hanway (1753/2: 3), on the other hand, Nader Shah’s father died when he was 13 years old and ‘he was left in so poor a condition, that he was obliged to gather sticks in the woods, for the support of himself and his mother, and carry them to market on an ass and a camel, which were his only patrimony.’ Hanway (1753/2: 4) wrote that, around 1704, he and his mother were captured by the Uzbeks on one of their raids. His mother died in captivity, but he escaped c. 1708 and returned to Khorasan. ‘From this time we hear no more of him, till with some of his companions he robbed a flock of sheepⁿ [‘ⁿ Not of his father’s, as some writers mention, for he was already dead; nor do we find (tho’ his uncle might be in better circumstances) that his father was ever master of a flock of sheep.’]; the money which this produced enabled him to retire into the mountains: however, we do not find that he continued the profession of a robber for any length of time, but entered into the service of a BEG, by whom he was employed as a courier.’
144.
Thus Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 521), ‘Auf diese Weise schweiffete er sieben ganzer Jahre herum, bis zur Einnahm von Ispahan durch die Aghwaner, die sich An. 1722. ereignet.’
145.
According to Hanway (1753/2: 5), Nader’s first visit to Isfahan was made in 1712, while Shah Soltan Hoseyn was still in power.
146.
This comes directly from Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 521–522), ‘Zu Asterabad nun, in der Provinz Tabristan , am Caspischen Meer, geschahe es, daß Nadir-Kuli, welches der Name war, den er damals führte, dem Prinzen Thamas seine Schätze und seine Troupen offerirte, die sich auf fünff bis sechs tausend Mann beliessen, und sich anheischig machte, ihm wieder auf den Thron seiner Vorfahren zu verhelffen, mit der Bedingung, da wann er in dieser Unternehmung glücklich wäre, der Prinz Thamas ihn zu seinem ersten Vezier machen solte; wo ihm aber sein Anschlag nicht von statten gienge, so unterwürffe er sich, den Kopff zu verlieren.’
147.
This is a highly abbreviated and selective version of events. The name Tahmasp Qoli Khan was given to Nader in 1728 after he and Shah Tahmasp entered Mashshad. See Hanway (1753/2: 20).
148.
Mashhad. Hanway (1753/2: 20) considered the name change a reward following the entrance to Mashhad and mentions no rebel resistance there. ‘Mesched being a place of little or no strength, and the inhabitants intirely averse to the rebel government, they retired from that city; so that when Nadir arrived there with his troops, the Shah made a triumphant entrance, without effusion of blood.’
149.
Hanway (1753/2: 22–23), ‘Tæhmas Kouli Khan having represented to the Shah, the facility with which he could reduce Heart [sic, Herat], obtained a permission to march to that province, with about 12,000 men: he no sooner encamped under the walls of the city, than the inhabitants naturally inconstant, and diffident of their ability to oppose the fortune and valour of Tæhmas Kouli Khan, submitted to him, and delivered up their chief, together with the garrison. The Persian general having caused the former to be beheaded, left a garrison in Herat… .Being returned victorious, with the head of the late governor of Herat, he began to form a more important enterprise, than that of marching southward through the deserts of Segestan , as the Afghans had done five years before.’
150.
Isfahan was not besieged. It had already been abandoned by the Afghans and Tahmasp Qoli Khan entered the city on or shortly after 16 November, 1729. See Fraser (1742: 99); Hanway (1753/2: 33); Jones (1770/1: 85). According to La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 50), ‘ce fut le seize du même mois que Tahmas-Couli-Kan en prit possession au nom de Chah-Tahmas son Maître.’ For Shah Tahmasp’s triumphant entry see Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 530).
151.
Echoing La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 342–343), ‘Il y a sept mois qu’il s’est fait déclarer Roi, après avoir fait mourir Schah-Tahmas, tous les Princes de la famille des Sophis, & plusieurs Seigneurs Persiens qui faisoient ombrage à sa Royauté naissante.’
152.
Fraser (1742: 119–120) noted that, on the occasion of his coronation, ‘Coins, with a pompous Inscription were struck in his Name,’ and reproduced their legends. La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 343), wrote, ‘Il se fait appeller Schah-Nadir, & on voit sur les monnoies qu’il a fait frapper à son coin l’inscription suivante: Schah-Nadir Alemdar / Char Kioche…… qui signifie le Roi incomparable, Souverain des quatres parties du monde.’ For Nader Shah’s coinage see Matthee et al. (2013: 150–157).
153.
According to Hanway (1753/2: 3), he was born in 1687 which would have made him 50 in 1737 when this article was published. Jones (1770/1: 3) has him born in 1688. La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 343) seems to be the real source here since the English of this article is an almost verbatim translation of, ‘Il est âgé d’environ 50 ans, il a la phisionomie majestueuse, il est robuste & endurci à toutes sortes de fatigues.’
154.
Topal Osman Pasha. Cf. 3.78 et al.
155.
‘Abdullah Köprülü. Cf. 3.170. As Cerceau (1740/1: 193) noted, ‘il a rendu aux morts les honneurs de la sépulture; témoins Topal Osman-Bassa & le Sérasquier Abdallah Cuprogli, dont il fit chercher les cadavres, pour les ensevelir selon leur dignité.’ Cf. La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 344), ‘On a toujours remarqué en lui beaucoup d’équité & de générosité, même envers ses ennemis, ayant toujours traité avec humanité les prisonniers de guerre, & fait rendre les honneurs funébres à Topal-Osman Pacha & à Abdula-Kiuproli, Généraux des armées Ottomanes, tués dans les deux derniers batailles qu’il a gagnées sur les Turcs.’
156.
Cerceau (1740/1: 193), ‘Il a traité avec beaucoup de douceur les prisonniers de guerre.’
157.
Again, La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 343) has, ‘grand mangeur, buvant beaucoup de vin & de liqueurs, & fort adonné aux femmes.’
158.
Confirmed by the fact that, according to Cerceau (1740/1: 193), ‘Il a mis ses Troupes sur le pied Européen, & attiré à son service des Officiers & des Ingénieurs François, Anglois, Italiens, &c.’ Similarly, de Claustre (1743: 349) noted, that at the siege of Kandahar ‘les batteries furent aussi bien-tôt dressées & servies avec tant de diligence & d’adresse par les Canoniers Francs dont il y avoit bon nombre dans l’armée Persanne.’
159.
Louis XV.
160.
Anonymous (1736b: 2762–2763), ‘Lorsqu’en dernier lieu on eut reconquis la Géorgie & pris Tiflis, les Peres Capucins Missionaires, qui sont dans cette Ville sous la protection de la France, allerent le saluer; il les reçût le plus gratieusement du monde, les fit asseoir auprès de lui, et les combla de politesses; il leur demanda d’abord s’ils étoient François ou Allemands, et ces Peres ayant répondu qu’ils étoient François, il leur dit qu’il avoit toûjours eu beaucoup d’estime et d’amitié pour cette Nation, et une grande vénération pour l’Empereur de France…et que ses Sujets seroient toûjours traités avec distinction dans ses Etats. Il confirma tous les Privileges de ces Missionnaires, et leur dis qu’il les regarderoit toûjours comme ses Freres; il ordonna sur le champ aux Gouverneurs, et autres Officiers de la Géorgie, d’avoir tous les égards possibles pour eux, sous peine d’être châtiés avec la derniere severité. Les Capucins profitant de cette heureuse disposition, lui demanderent sa protection en faveur des Jésuites François établis à Chamakié, et pour leur Eglise.’ Cf. La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 344–345) where this text is reproduced almost word for word.
161.
La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 346), ‘Il leur donna 40 sequins, en leur disant qu’il étoit bien fâché de ne pouvoir pas reconnoître plus généreusement leur politesse, mais que c’étoit-là tout l’argent qu’il avoit sur lui.’
162.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
163.
As noted above, see Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 651).
164.
Another false rumor.
165.
Mahmud I.
166.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
167.
Mahmud I.
168.
Anna Ivanovna.
169.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
170.
Mir Islam. According to Anonymous (1747a: 187): ‘Mery Islam hält sich in Candahar auf, und mehret sich daselbst wider den Schach Thamas Kulican.’ He was called a grandson (‘Enkel’) of Mir Mahmud. Cf. Anonymous (1751b: 244). More probably, this refers to Mir Mahmud’s brother, Hoseyn Khan. Cf. 4.76. After Ashraf’s murder of Mahmud, Hoseyn ‘had made himself supreme at Qandahar .’ See Lockhart (1938: 16). Citing an unnamed Jesuit, Aimé-Martin (1838: 398) called him ‘le chef des rebelles, frère du fameux Mahmoud…et se nommoit Hussein Kan.’
171.
This paragraph is clearly based on Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 589), where a letter from someone in Venice was quoted: ‘Man hat allhier zu Anfang des Aprilis dieses ietzt lauffenden 1737sten Jahres, Briefe von Smirna erhalten, worinnen allen denen widrigen Gerüchten, die sich bishero wegen des Schach Nadir, ehemaligen Thamas Kuli-Chans ausgebreitet, widersprochen, und vielmehr gemeldet wird… .Es findet sich zwar eine Parthey, die ihn nicht als König erkennen will. Es ist aber eben diejenige, welche schon seit vielen Jahren bestehet, und viel zu schwach ist, eine neue Veränderung in dem Reiche zu machen. Der Anführer derselben ist kein Prinz, weil der Schach Nadir, nach denen Morgenländischen Staats-Regeln, die meisten von dem Königlichen Geschlechte aus dem Wege räumen lassen; den von ihm abgefetzten Thamas, und dessen Sohn Abas ausgenommen, die er beyderseits auf der Insel Ormus, in der dasigen Festung, gefangen hält. Das Haupt der andern Parthey ist Mir-Islan, ein Bruder des bekannten Miriweis, welcher sich zuerst des Persianischen Throns angemasset hat.’ As, however, Pithander von der Quelle (1738: 590–591) noted, although virtually the same information was contained in letters from St. Petersburg and Derbent, ‘Ein Bruder des Miriweis kan es schwerlich seyn, der sich im Königreich Candahar zum Haupt derer Rebellen aufgeworffen; aber ein Sohn von ihm, des Mahghmuds Bruder, könnte es wohl seyn, von dem wir schon gedacht, daß er im Gouvernement zu Candahar bestätiget worden, weil er dem Eschref die Thore zu Candahar verschlossen, als dieser auf seiner Flucht hinein gewolt… .Es kan aber auch wohl ein anderer Aghwaner und Anverwandter des Miriweis seyn, den der Kützel zu rebelliren noch anficht.’
172.
Tahmasp II.
173.
Muhammad Shah.
174.
There are conflicting statements as to the number of ambassadors. According to Özel (2018: 11), during the siege of Kandahar, Nader Shah sent Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan to St. Petersburg.
175.
Anna Ivanovna.
176.
Mir Mahmud’s brother Hoseyn Khan who was in Kandahar, expecting a long siege by Nader Shah. See Sykes (1940/1: 337). For the chronology of Nader Shah’s movements between his coronation in the spring of 1736 and early 1738, see Minorsky (1934: 18–19).
177.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
178.
Cf. a letter from Claudius Rondeau, British Resident in St. Petersburgh, to his superior, William Stanhope (Lord Harrington), Secretary of State for the North, on 8 January 1737, from St. Petersburg, in which he said, ‘Count Osterman has informed me, that the Persian ambassador residing here has received some days ago a courier from Ispahan, by which he is ordered to give this court the strongest assurances, that his master, shach Nadyr, will never make peace with the Porte that had been bribed by the turks, and that shach Nadyr will not ratify the treaty his ambassador has signed at Constantinople, but will find out some excuse to gain time to see how affairs will turn, and try to suppress the revolt of the people of the province of Candahar, who openly oppose him, as well as several other parties that are retired to the mountains. The court nevertheless added that no great dependence was to be given to the assurances the Persian ambassador had given, though the same was also confirmed by their resident [Kalushkin] at Ispahan.’ Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 93–94).
179.
Mahmud I.
180.
Seyyid Mehmed Pasha.
181.
Anna Ivanovna.
182.
Afghans.
183.
Lezgins.
184.
Shirvan.
185.
Hekimoğlu ‘Ali Pasha.
186.
In 1730 the Ottoman forces occupying Ardabil were hard pressed by Nader Shah. Levashov ‘acted as intermediary for the surrender of the town, which , after the Turkish evacuation, was held by Russia for a time.’ See Lockhart (1938: 50).
187.
Ludwig von Talmann/Thalmann. Cf. 2.63, 3.149.
188.
Mir Mahmud Ghalza’i’s brother, Hoseyn Khan.
189.
Muhammad Shah.
190.
Mahmud I.
191.
Hoseyn Khan.
192.
Muhammad Shah.
193.
Seyyid Mehmed Pasha.
194.
Charles VI.
195.
Seyyid Mehmed Pasha was succeeded on 22 August 1737 (to 19 December 1737) by Muhsinzade ‘Abdullah Pasha but von Hammer (1839: 379) refers only to the former’s dismissal without any mention of his health, noting ‘Ces mesures étaient l’œuvre du kislaraga [Kizlar Agha, head of the eunuchs; as Otter (1748: 14), n. 11 noted, ‘Le Kizlar-Agasi est un Officier chargé en chef de la garde des femmes du Grand Seigneur. C’est un Eunuque noir, & lef chef de tous les Eunuques; il a la direction générale des legs pieux appelés Vakef, & il donne audience dans le Seraï.’], qui, cherchant à apaiser le mécontentement général qu’avaient causé les derniers malheurs de la guerre, en avait rejeté la faute sur ces derniers.’
196.
Edirne in European Turkey.
197.
Mahmud I.
198.
Anna Ivanovna.
199.
Mahmud I.
200.
‘Abd al-Karim Khan. In principle he was a member of ‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana’s embassy, but as he accompanied the elephant sent as a gift to the Sultan by Nader Shah, and travelled slowly, he did not arrive until almost a year after ‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana. ‘His main mission was to deliver royal gifts, including an elephant, therefore the preparations probably took time. He presented the gifts and letters to the royal court on 15 July. ‘Abd al-Karim Khan began his return journey in the middle of August 1737. See Özel (2018: 11). As Hanway (1753/2: 137) noted, ‘After the conclusion of the peace with the Turks, Nadir sent another embassador to the grand signior, with several magnificent presents, among which was an elephant of a very extraordinary size. Having therefore nothing to apprehend from any of his neighbours; the end of this year [1736] he prepared to set out on his eastern expedition.’ This may have been the elephant seen by the Hungarian Kelemen Mikes (1690–1761) during his stay in Constantinople, and of which he wrote in a letter dated 16 September 1737. See Jones (1966: 83).
201.
Mahmud I.
202.
Cf. 4.50.
203.
‘Abd al-Karim Khan.
204.
Mahmud I.
205.
Mirza Nasiri Kafi Kholafa.
206.
Muhammad Shah.
207.
According to Fraser (1742: 128), Nader Shah received this acknowledgement prior to setting out on his Kandahar campaign, but Scott (1794: 200) noted Nader Shah’s repeated embassies to the Mughal court which elicited no response—first, while still Shah Tahmasp’s general; secondly upon his accession to the throne, when ‘no answer was given to his letters, nor the minister permitted to return to his master;’ again ‘During the siege of Candahar, Nadir dispatched a nobleman of high rank, named Mahummud Khan Turkoman, to the court of Dhely , to repeat his request concerning the fugitive Afghauns, and to express his disgust at the neglect shewn his embassies by the emperor of the Moguls. Mahummad Shaw and his ministers were at a loss what answer to return, and delayed the dismission of the ambassador, in hopes that he might fail in the conquest of Candahar…These repeated slights, and the escape from his vengeance which the Afghauns found in the provinces of Hindoostan, determined Nadir Shaw, upon the fall of Candahar, to invade the empire.’
208.
Charles VI.
209.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha, ‘ein hochmüthiger heftiger Mann, von entschiedenem halsstärrigem Sinne.’ See von Hammer (1831: 503).
210.
There is no evidence of either an Ottoman offer of further territory or of Nader Shah’s offer of 160,000 men to support the Ottoman interest.
211.
‘Abd al-Karim Khan.
212.
Charles VI.
213.
Von Hammer (1839: 428–429) noted, ‘La médiation de la France ayant été reconnue et acceptée par la Porte et les cours de Vienne et de Saint-Pétersbourg, on refusa celle de l’Angleterre et de la Hollande, aussi bien que celle que le nouveau souverain de Perse, Nadirschah, avait fait offrir par son ambassadeur,’ and p. 433 referred to the embassy as ‘l’ambassade persane que Nadirschah avait envoyée à Constantinople pour offrir sa médiation.’
214.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
215.
‘Abd al-Karim Khan.
216.
Mahmud I.
217.
Delaria or de Laria was the French interpreter for the French ambassador Louis Sauveur de Villeneuve, ‘qu’un long séjour en Turquie avait rendu familier avec les hommes, les mœurs et la diplomatie de l’Orient.’ See Vandal (1887: 278). According to von Hammer (1839: 385), after the last meeting at Nemirow, ‘Les plénipotentiaires chrétiens partirent pour leurs cours respectives et les Ottomans s’en retournèrent au camp du grand-vizir, où ils rendirent compte de leurs dernières entrevues avec Talman (11 novembre 1737—18 redjeb 1150). Dès lors, le grand-vizir prêta l’oreille aux représentations de l’interprète Laria, que l’ambassadeur français de Villeneuve avait envoyé au camp pour l’engager à continuer la guerre, plutôt que de souscrire à une condition aussi onéreuse que celle de la libre navigation des Russes dans la Mer-Noire.’ Cf. Abeken (1856: 171), ‘Allein jetzt nahmen die Bestrebungen Rußlands nach gerade einen so gemeingefährlichen Charakter an, daß Villeneuve sowohl in Constantinopel, als durch seinen nach Niemirow gesandten Dolmetsch Delaria dringend zur Fortsetzung des Krieges rieth, daneben aber die Unterhandlungen bis gegen den Winter hin zu spinnen, diesen zu umfassenden Rüstungen zu benutzen, dann die Verhandlungen unter freanzösischer Vermittlung wieder aufzunehmen, und ohnee einen entschiedenden Schlag zu versuchen, sich lediglich in der Defensive zu halten.’ Delaria had already been introduced to the Ottoman command. As Uebersberger (1913: 210) noted, almost a year earlier, ‘Als Talman sich Ende Dezember 1736 ins türkischer Feldlager nach Babadagh begab, folgte ihm der als Türke verkleidete Baron Tott im Auftrage Villeneuves auf den Fersen. Ihm zur Seite stand der erste Dragoman der französischen Botschaft, Delaria. Beide sind erstens bemüht, die Friedensarbeit zu durchkreuzen, und dann, als dies nicht vollständig gelingt, den bevorstehenden Friedenskongreß in Nemirow von vornherein zur Unfruchtbarkeit zu verdammen.’ Delaria died of the plague in Constantinople sometime between 1748 and 1761, although the year is uncertain. See Mackenzie (1764: 75–76).
218.
Charles VI.
219.
Treaty signed on 21 July 1718 between Austria, the Republic of Venice and the Ottoman Empire. By the terms of this treaty ‘Venice gave up the Morea to the Porte; and though she retained a few fortresses, which she had acquired in Dalmatia or Albania, she was obliged to make over to the Sultan the unconquered districts of Zarine, Ottovo and Zubzi in order to keep open the Turkish communications with Ragusa. Her cession of the Morea showed that the power and glory of Venice had departed from her…After the peace of Passarowitz, Venice possessed no part of Greece except the Ionian islands.’ See Creasy (1856/2: 150).
220.
Mahmud I.
221.
‘Abd al-Karim Khan’s presentation to the Sultan occurred on 15 July 1737. See Özel (2018: 11). Thus, the chronology of this report, dated to 28 July 1737, is perfectly accurate.
222.
Mahmud I.
223.
‘Abd al-Karim Khan.
224.
Charles VI.
225.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
226.
Mahmud I.
227.
A completely false rumor, as Nader Shah, following the conquest of Kandahar, was concentrating on the capture of Kabul and the invasion of the Mughal empire.
228.
Anna Ivanovna.
229.
Nader Shah did not turn his attention again to Baghdad until 1743. See Lockhart (1938: 227).
230.
‘Abd al-Karim Khan.
231.
Mahmud I.
232.
A false rumor.
233.
Mahmud I.
234.
According to Jones (1770/2: 39), negotiations for the surrender of the citadel of Kandahar commenced on 13 January. Sykes (1940/1: 338), however, noted that the capitulation of Kandahar only occurred following ‘a grand assault against the Burj-i-Dada, the chief fort’ of the city, which took place on 23 March 1738. See Lockhart (1938: 119).
235.
Mahmud I.
236.
Both had been conquered by the Russians and at the fourth meeting during the congress of Nemirow the Russian foreign minister Osterman was of the opinion that, ‘Gehen die Türken auf alle Bedingungen nicht ein, so sollen daher die russischen Bevollmächtigten sich mit der Abtretung Očakovs, Kinburns und Asows mit ihren Gebieten begnügen.’ See Uebersberger (1913: 204).
237.
Anna Ivanovna.
238.
Muhammad Shah.
239.
As de Claustre (1743: 365) noted, after the fall of Kandahar Mohammad Shah, the Mughal emperor, ‘se hata de lui [Nader Shah] envoyer un Ambassadeur avec de magnifiques présens, pour le complimenter sur son avénement à la Couronne, & sur l’heureux succès de ses armes, ensuite pour lui proposer le renouvellement des anciens traités de paix faits entre les deux Puissances.’ Upon hearing of this, Nader Shah rallied his troops and excited them with the thought of pushing their conquests all the way to India. de Claustre (1743: 368–369) continued, ‘C’est dans ces circonstances qu’on vit arriver aux portes de Candahar l’Ambassadeur Indien. Le Roi ne voulut pas permettre qu’il y entrât, mais il le fit conduire au Camp, où on lui avoit préparé des tentes pour lui & pour sa suite: & après l’avoir fait attendre plusieurs jours sous différens prétextes, lorsque tout fut prêt pour le voyage des Indes, il lui donna son audience publique à la tête de son armée. L’Ambassadeur commença par lui offrir les présens de son Maître qui consistoient en pierreries & diamans, en riches étoffes, en bois précieux, le tout porté sur un Eléphant couvert d’une magnifique housse, & très-bien dressé. Il exposa ensuite le sujet de sa députation, s’étendit beaucoup sur le désir qu’avoit le Grand Mogol de vivre en paix & en bonne intelligence avec Sa Majesté, & proposa de faire un nouveau traité d’alliance entre les deux Nations. A ces mots, Schah Nadir l’interrompit, & lui dit, “Après les dernieres infractions, c’est avec votre Empereur lui-même que je vous traiter, lorsqu’il m’aura donné des garands de sa parole; je vais le chercher: remportés ses présens, je n’en reçois point des traîtres.” L’Ambassadeur demeura interdit d’une si fiére réponse à laquelle il ne s’attendoit point: il n’eut pas le tems de répliquer pour justifier son Prince: le Roi s’étoit déja retiré, déja les premieres Lignes de l’armée Persanne défiloient vers le Caboulistan.’
240.
Shah Tahmasp I (r. 1524–1576).
241.
Homayun (r. 1530–1556).
242.
After losing the Mughal throne to Sher Shah Suri, Homayun went into exile in Iran but on his return in 1545, he found when he reached Seistan that Shah Tahmasp I, who had promised 12,000 cavalry and 300 of his own bodyguard, had actually sent a force of over 14,000. See Rani (2016: 14). According to the Homayun-nama of Gulbadan Begum, after conquering Kandahar, but before entering Kabul, Homayun ‘dismissed his 12,000 troopers, and went off.’ See Beveridge (1902: 177). Dutch VOC witnesses in Isfahan reported that Mohammad Khan Turkoman ‘allegedly had been sent as ambassador to India with a suite of 500 persons…to claim the debt that emperor Homayun owed since 1530.’ He was accompanied by the vizier of Isfahan, Mirza Reza. See Floor (2009a: 71). In Rondeau’s letter of 17 June 1738 to Lord Harrington he gave an exaggerated notion of the original assistance tendered by Shah Tahmasp I when he wrote, ‘the grand mogul had consented to give him [Nader Shah] a large sum of money in consideration of an ancient pretension the Persians made on the moguls for assisting them with thirty thousand men.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 316–317). On the other hand, in his letter of 10 February 1749 to Mme de Sainte Hyacinthe de Sauveterre, written at Chandernagor (mod. Chandannagar in West Bengal) Père Saignes alleged ‘que les Perses ayant prêté et sodoyé dix mille hommes pour aider le grandpère de Mahadmad Schah, oncle de Gehanguir , à monter sur le trône, l’empire mogol n’avoit point encore dédommagé la Perse des dépenses qu’elle avoit faites en sa faveur.’ See Aimé-Martin (1838: 401).
243.
According to Jones (1770/2: 48–49), Muhammad Shah had promised Nader Shah’s envoy ‘Ali Mardan Khan ‘de donner ordres aux soubadars (gouverneurs) de Cabul, & des environs de fermer les passages aux rebelles. Cet empereur promit non seulement de faire notifier cet ordre, mais aussi d’envoïer aux soubadars de l’argent, & des troupes pour le mettre en état de s’opposer à la suite des revoltés. Après le retour d’Alimerdan Khan, Mohammed Khan le Koullar Aga, un des princes de Perse, en qui on pouvoit le plus se confier, fût dépeché pour faire ressouvenir l’empereur de l’engagement qu’il avoit pris, & il fût renvoïé avec la même réponse.’ Lockhart (1938: 116–117), gave a different version of event, noting that on 11 May 1737 ‘Nadir dispatched Muḥammad Khan Turkoman, the former Ṣafavi general, on a mission to Muḥammad Shah. The reason for this mission was that, when a Persian detachment had defeated some Ghalzai’s a few farsakhs beyond Qal‘at-e Ghalza’i, and the survivors had fled over the Indian frontier, the Mughal authorities, despite the repeated requests that had been made to them, made no attempt to stop the fugitives.’
244.
Mustafa Pasha, the Ottoman ambassador, arrived in Isfahan in late July, 1737, and remained there until February, 1738, when he departed with the former Persian envoy to Constantinople, ‘Abd al-Baqi Khan, to see Nader Shah at Naderabad near Kandahar. Von Hammer (1839: 346) observed, ‘Moustafa, fils de Kara Moustafa-Pascha, fut nommé ambassadeur et pascha à trois queues, et on choisit parmi les oulémas, pour l’assister dans l’exercice de ces fonctions, deux anciens dépositaires des fetwas, Abdoullah et Khalil-Efendi, qui furent nommés, l’un grand-juge d’Anatolie, l’autre molla d’Andrinople.’ As Otter (1748: 216–217) noted, Mustafa Pasha ‘avoit encore un autre subjet de chagrin: c’étoit le voyage de Kandehar dont Nadir Chah faisoit alors le siège. On lui avoit signifié que ce Prince vouloit qu’il s’y rendît pour avoir son audience, & il en étoit fort fâché.’ Cf. Lockhart (1938: 121). They were received by Nader Shah on 9 May 1738. See Minorsky (1934: 19). The Armenian musician Artin (Aroutioun) Tambouri accompanied Mustafa Pasha and published his Notice historique sur Tahmas Kouli Khan in Turkish (but in the Armenian alphabet) at Venice in 1800. See Zenker (1861: 63).
245.
Charles VI.
246.
Anna Ivanovna.
247.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana.
248.
A reference to the rebel Sarı Beyoğlu, also known as Sari ‘Ali (von Hammer 1831: 525; 1838: 442) or Saribeg-Oglu (Zinkeisen 1857: 767). Under the date 27 March 1738 Constantine Dapontes wrote, ‘Un rebelle nommé Saribey s’est, depuis longtemps déjà, signé en Asie-Mineure. Il se trouve à la tête d’une armée de plus de quinze mille hommes, qui grossit tous les jours et commet beaucoup d’excès dans le pays. La Porte a donnée ordre à des pachas de marcher contre lui avec des troupes.’ See Legrand (1881: 82–83). As Legrand (1881: 82, n. 1) noted, ‘La révolte de Saribeyoglou se prolongea pendant neuf années, grâce à la guerre que la Porte eut à soutenir d’abord avec la Perse, puis avec les Russes et les Autrichiens. Les commencements de cette rébellion remonteraient donc aux premiers mois de l’année 1731.’ Under 6 April 1738 Dapontes wrote, ‘Le grand écuyer impérial, Ghiaour Achmet aga, a été nommé pacha à trois queues, et on lui a donné le pachalic d’Aïdin. Il a reçu ordre de marcher contre le rebelle Saribey.’ See Legrand (1881: 87). As Zinkeisen (1857: 767) observed, ‘schon seit mehreren Jahren währte in Kleinasien die Gährung, welche jetzt einen ziemlich drohenden Charakter angenommen hatte und ernste Abwehr nöthig machte. Ein guter Theil der disponibeln Truppen mußte dahin geschickt werden. Ein kühner Bandenführer, Saribeg-Oglu, hatte dort an der Spitze von 20,000 M. das Panier des Aufruhrs erhoben, vorzüglich Smyrna und die Umgegend hart bedrängt, dann seine Verheerungen fast über ganz Kleinasien und Syrien ausgedehnt.’ According to a document written by the Venetian envoy in Constantinople, Simon Contarini, on 30 September 1738, the Ottomans sent a force of 12,000 ‘contra il ribelle Sariogli.’ For more reports see below, 1739.29.
249.
Ahmed Pasha, who had been removed in 1736 but restored to office in 1738. He held this position until his death in 1747 while campaigning against the Baban. See Longrigg (1925: 162). Although Ahmed Pasha was loyal to the Porte, Longrigg (1925: 160–161) noted that, ‘In his relations with Stamboul he was not impeccable. Little or no revenue left Baghdad for the capital; he refused at times to accept Imperial nominees to office; and the Porte was little pleased in recognizing, as it must, that he could not be replaced… .Ahmed devoted a long career to defending his province from Persia, and by no public act gave room for…suspicion of treachery.’
250.
According to Zinkeisen (1857: 767), Saribeg-Oglu ‘endlich selbst Miene gemacht, sich mit dem Pascha von Bagdad zu vereinigen, welcher der Pforte gleichfalls den Gehorsam verweigern wollte.’
251.
Mahmud I.
252.
Ivan Petrovich Kalushkin [Иван Летрович Квлушкн] (d. 30 November 1742) was Russian envoy in Isfahan from 1735 to 1742. See Lockhart (1938: 337). He had been secretary to the Extraordinary Envoy, Prince Sergius Dmitryevich Golitsyn, sent to Isfahan in 1733 and succeeded him when Golitsyn returned to Russia (cf. 3.140). See Floor (2009a: 55). Otter (1748: 215) called him ‘Monsieur Caluski, Sécretaire de Russie.’ According to the anonymous letters by Jesuits in Persia from which a summary history of Tahmasp Qoli Khan was assembled, ‘car le prince Gallitzin, aussitôt après la première audience que lui donna le général persan, reçut ordre de le suivre: ce ne fut qu’à la fin de la campagne qu’il prit son audience de congé laissant, par ordre de sa cour, en qualité de résident, M. Calouski, Homme de mérite, qui étoit secrétaire de l’ambassade. Ce résident a pareillement accompagné Thamas Koulikan dans toutes ses courses, jusqu’à quelques journées d’Ispahan, où celui-ci s’étant arrêté pour soumettre quelques montagnards rebelles, il permit au résident d’aller l’attendre dans la capitale.’ See Aimé-Martin (1838: 394).
253.
Reza Qoli Mirza.
254.
It is unclear what this refers to, although if it is a toponym then it should be located in a fairly small area between Balkh and Kunduz. A corruption of Chachaktu, another region conquered at this time by Reza Qoli Mirza? See Lockhart (1938: 163).
255.
The form Kandus is attested in Anonymous (1738a: 404). Hedin (1918: 325) recorded Kandus(z) as an alternate spelling of Kundus/z.
256.
Mahmud I.
257.
Ahmed Pasha.
258.
Mahmud I.
259.
See the detailed description in Lockhart (1938: 118–120). The attack began in earnest on 30 January and the city fell on 24 March 1738.
260.
Muhammad Shah.
261.
This was certainly not the case and once Kandahar was taken Nader Shah proceeded to Kabul and on to India.
262.
Mahmud I.
263.
Muhammad Shah.
264.
Muhammad Shah. This reports an unfounded rumor.
265.
Mahmud I.
266.
Burkhard Christoph Graf von Münnich.
267.
Muhammad Shah.
268.
Ahmed Pasha.
269.
Mahmud I.
270.
As Longrigg (1925: 161) noted, there were many rumors of Ahmed Pasha’s ‘apostasy to Persia,’ though nothing of the sort ever eventuated. In Rondeau’s letter of 17 June 1738 to Lord Harrington we read, ‘I have also heard from this ministry [in St. Petersburg], that the bashaw of Babilon is on the point of submitting to the Persians, but considering the great power he has usurped of late years, there is, I think, little appearance that he will as [sic, at] present submit to the Persians.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 317).
271.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan. As Claudius Rondeau wrote to Lord Harrington on 15 April, 1738, ‘Two Persian ambassadors are soon expected here [St. Petersburg], being already come to Astrachan. Some will have it that shach Nadyr must have affairs of consequence to propose, since he sends two more ministers to this court, where he has already an ambassador, who was called, when he first arrived, that prince’s right hand.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 290).
272.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan.
273.
Ahmed Pasha.
274.
Kalushkin . As Rousselot de Surgy (1767: 215–216) noted, ‘On ne savoit alors ce qu’on devoir penser de Cha-Thamas; on ne pouvoit dire s’il étoit mort, ou s’il avoir été contraint d’abdiquer la Couronne. Tout ce qu’il y avoit de certain, c’est que Thamas Kouli-Kan, pour mieux couvrir le dessein qu’il méditoir, avoit fait placer sur le Trône un des enfans du Roi, qui n’étoit âgé que de cinq ou six mois… .Cette Ambassade fut toute ambulante; car le Prince Galliczin, aussitôt après la premiere audience que lui donna le Général Persan, reçut ordre de le suivre. Ce ne fut qu’à la fin de la campagne qu’il prit son audience de congé, laissant par ordre de sa Cour en qualité de Résident M. Calouski, qui étoit secrétaire de l’Ambassade. Ce Résident accompagna pareillement Thamas Kan dans toutes ses courses, jusqu’à quelques journées d’Ispahan.’ Cf. Otter 1748: 215 who referred to Kalushkin as ‘Monsieur Caluski’ and the anonymous, Jesuit sources in Persia from whose writings a summary history of Tahmasp Qoli Khan, was assembled, called him ‘M. Calouski.’ See Aimé-Martin (1838: 394). Galowski is clearly a variant of Caluski. For his activity in Isfahan see in general Vanina (1997).
275.
This clearly reproduces much of the content of a letter from Kalushkin, dated 21 May 1738, sent to the Court at St. Petersburg, which was paraphrased in a dispatch from Claudius Rondeau to Lord Harrington of 5 August 1738. In it Kalushkin reported that Nader Shah ‘had ordered the Turkish ambassador (that had waited his return near two years at Ispahan [an exaggeration]) and his own ambassador, who had concluded the late treaty with the Porte, to come to his camp, which they accordingly did; but at their arrival within three stages of it, one of the shach’s officers gave the Persian ambassador, by order of his master, ten blows with a stick, and when they came at the distance of two stages, the same person gave him fifteen blows more, and on his arrival at the camp twenty. All this passed in the presence of the Turkish ambassador. When the Persian minister was brought before his master, he asked him—what he had brought from Constantinople? He answered: “A letter from the grand-signior”. Then the shach replied, that if he had only wanted a letter, he would have sent somebody else, and called the ambassador rogue and traitor for letting himself be bribed and making a treaty on such dishonourable conditions, which he was resolved never to ratify. After several reproaches, the shach beat the ambassador himself, and immediately ordered one of his secretaries to write to the grand-signior to inform him, that he had never ordered his minister to make such a treaty, for he would not consent to make peace without the Porte would do it on the conditions formerly proposed by the great shach Abbass, which were to return Babilon and all the conquests they have from time to time made on the Persians, and give him seven millions of crowns to defray the expense of the war, and that the Persians may at their arrival at Mecca enjoy the same privileges the turks do; and in case of refusal, he would immediately march to Constantinople; and then ordered, in the presence of the Turkish ambassador, that all his troops at Tauris and Erivan should be immediately assembled, for he designed to put himself at their head. After all this, shach Nadyr turned towards the Turkish ambassador and asked him how he did, and so dismissed him without any more ceremony. M-r Kalushkin also mentions that the shach hopes this court will not think of making peace with the Porte on any terms, since Her Majesty may depend he will attack the turks as soon as he can get his army together.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 338–339). A different story was preserved by Cerceau (1742: 159), according to whom Nader Shah ‘returned to Ispahan about the Middle of the Year 1738’ following his capture of Kandahar, which is wrong, and ‘Scarcely was he arrived there, before he ordered his Minister, who had negociated the Peace at Constantinople, to be arrested, and with him the new Ambassador of the Porte. He had them both brought into his Presence, and commanded twenty Bastinades to be given his own Plenipotentiary, upon the Soles of his Feet. That being over, he asked the Turkish Ambassador what he had brought with him; who answering, that he was charged with a letter from the Sultan, the Schah replied, that it was not worth while to come so far to bring a Letter; at the same Time falling on his own Minister, and beating him heartily. He then told the Turk, that for his Part, he had nothing to fear, being too old for a Bastinading: But he would have him to know, that he was extremely enraged with the Ottoman Court, for having taken Advantage of his Plenipotentiary’s Stupidity, by concluding a peace with Persia, of which they alone had the Advantage, notwithstanding they had been beaten. After this, he let him go out of his Presence, telling him, that he was at Liberty either to go or stay. Some advices say since, that he afterwards had his own Ambassador beheaded.’
276.
‘Abd al-Baqi Khan Zangana and Mustafa Pasha. According to Lockhart (1938: 120–121) the ambassadors left Isfahan in early February, 1738, and arrived at Naderabad where Nader Shah was staying after the capture of Kandahar on 19 May.
277.
Mahmud I.
278.
Shah ‘Abbas I (r. 1588–1629).
279.
The same relation, in German, appeared in Anonymous (1738f: 877–881). Cf. Anonymous (1738g: 184–186).
280.
Muhammad Shah.
281.
Cf. Rondeau’s letter of 17 June 1738 to Lord Harrington, ‘By the letters the Czarinna received some days ago from her minister at Ispahan [Kalushkin], she is informed that shach Nadyr had at last taken the town of Candahar, after a siege of eighteen months.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 316).
282.
Kalushkin.
283.
Mahmud I.
284.
Shah ‘Abbas I.
285.
The two were his own, ‘Ali Mardan Khan Shamlu, and the Ottoman envoy, Mustafa Pasha. See Lockhart (1938: 121). According to Otter (1748/1: 225), Nader Shah ‘donna audience de congé à l’Ambassadeur du Grand Seigneur, le chargea de rendre un compte fidèle à son maître, Sultan Mahmoud, de tout ce qu’il avoit vû, & de l’assurer qu’il auroit de ses nouvelles dès qu’il seroit de retour de l’Inde, où il comptoit entrer incessamment, disoit-il, pour régler quelques affaires d’intérêt avec son ami Muhammed Chah.’
286.
Mahmud I.
287.
Mahmud I.
288.
A patently false rumor as Nader Shah was about to embark on his conquest of India.
289.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan. See Özel (2018: 11). As Rondeau wrote to Lord Harrington from St. Petersburg on 11 November 1738, ‘The 6th instant [November] two Persian ambassadors made a magnificent entry into this place; they had a prodigious suite of attendants. Count Osterman has been pleased to tell me, that all he yet knows of their commission, is, that shach Nadyr has sent them to inform themselves how the war went on between the court and the turks, and to assure the Czarinna, that in case she was inclined to continue the same, the Sophy would immediately attack the Ottoman Porte with all his forces; but if Her Majesty designed to make up matters, he offered his mediation and desired to be included in the treaty.’ Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 391). Cf. Hanway (1753/2: 182) who said that the two ambassadors arrived in November.
290.
Muhammad Shah.
291.
‘Ali Mardan Khan Shamlu and Mustafa Pasha.
292.
Mahmud I.
293.
Paul-Hippolyte de Beauvilliers, duc de St. Aignan (1684–1776), ‘ambassadeur extraordinaire de la Cour de France à Rome’ (1732–1741). For his career in Rome see Berti (2012: 246ff).
294.
The ‘hospice for Armenian pilgrims’ in Rome was an annex to the Church of Maria Egiziaca which had been ‘conferred upon the Armenian nation by Pius V. in 1571, and…restored by Clement XI. (1700).’ See Malleson and Tuker (1897: 299). Located near St. Peter’s Basilica, it hosted ‘not only monks from Cilicia…but also those from monasteries in Greater Armenia…Vartan of Khachen, one of the copyists of the Armenian gospel book of 1239, noted down in its colophon that he made it “in the universal metropolis under the protection of the Apostles Peter and Paul and the holy Image of Christ known as the sudarium [the Veronia] in the Armenian hospice.”’ See Stopka (2016: 157).
295.
The Abbé Certain (an ‘agent of the French Embassy at Rome;’ see Battifol 1912: 243, n. 3) wrote to the French foreign minister Amelot de Chaillou on 12 September, 1738, as follows: ‘Il y a icy un Persan qu’on dit qui vient de France. Il vint mardy dernier faire une visite à M. l’Ambassadeur, qui ne jugea pas à propos de luy donner audience ce jour-là, ayant imaginé que c’étoit luy qui avoit apporté au Roy un portrait de Koulican et qu’il étoit venu à Rome pour y exécuter quelque commission secrè qu’il avoit peut-être envie de luy communiquer. Son Excellence voulut prendre du temps pour s’informer de cet homme et tâcher de le connoître avant de s’engager à luy parler. Il étoit venu avec un évêque arménien, qui luy servoit d’interprète, et deux hommes de suitte. Il n’est point revenu; je ne sçais pourquoy. Peut-être reviendra-t-il.’ See de Montaiglon and Guiffréy (1899: 351). A week later, on 19 September, 1738, the Duke of St. Aignan himself wrote to Amelot de Chaillou, ‘Le personnage que je vous ay dit qui s’estoit fait annoncer en qualité d’un ambassadeur de Perse est un nommé Jaïa Bègue [Yahya Bey], Géorgien et catholique romain, que Scha Tamas avoit en effet chargé, en 1723, d’une lettre pour Sa Majesté, mais qui, ayant esté arresté à son passage par la Moscovie, y a ésté retenu prisonnier jusqu’au commencement de l’année dernière. M. de Maurepas, qui m’a écrit par luy pour me le recommander pendant le séjour qu’il feroit à Rome, me parle avec éloge du zèle qu’il a fait paroistre pour le service du Roy et de la nation, en diverses occasions où l’on en a fait usage, en m’apprenant que Sa Majesté luy a fait donner mille écus pour les frais de son retour. Instruit de tout cela, je n’ay rien oublié pour qu’il fût content de moy, l’ayant envoyé prendre dans un des carosses de ma suite et l’ayant reçu dans mon grand appartement, où je luy ay fait servir du caffé et du sorbet à l’usage de son païs, en luy offrant tou ce don’t il pourroit avoir besoin pour le temps qu’il voudroit rester à Rome; mais il me paroist pressé de s’en retourner, n’attendant que l’avis du premier vaisseau qui partira de Marseille ou de Livourne pour Constantinople, d’où il se rendra chez luy, et son voyage ici n’estant que pour accomplir un vœu qu’il a fait pour le recouvrement de sa liberté et peut-estre pour remercier le Pape, qu s’est intéressé à luy faire rendre, en chargeant le nonce de Vienne d’obtenir de l’Empereur un ordre par lequel il fût prescrit à son ministre auprèsde la czarine de s’employer à la luy procurer…’ See de Montaiglon and Guiffréy (1899: 354–355). On the same day that this letter was sent Abbé Certain wrote to Amelot de Chaillou with several other details of interest, including the facts that he only obtained release from prison in Russia thanks to the intervention of Charles VI, emperor of Austria; that after continuing his journey to France he remained there six months; and that once in Rome, ‘Il a vû le Pape et quelques Cardinaux de la Propagande.’ See de Montaiglon and Guiffréy (1899: 356). According to Anonymous (1738e: 488), ‘C’est sans fondement qu’on a débité que le Persan qui arriva ici [Rome], il y a quelque tems, devoit aller à la Cour de France en qualité d’Envoyé Extraordinaire de Thamas-Kouli Kan, Sophi de Perse. Ce qui a donné lieu au bruit qui en a couru, c’est qu’en effet il fut il y a 13. ans à la Cour de France, & qu’ayant été pris ensuite à Astracan par les Russiens, qui ne l’ont relâché quaprès 12 ans de prison, il étoit retourné en France, d’où il est venu ici; mais il est présentement parti pour se rendre par Lorette à Constantinople, & Mr. le Duc de St. Aignan, qui lui a donné des Passeports, lui a fait present d’un demi Corps Saint.’ On the other hand, according to an undated letter from Paris, cited by De Voulton, ‘There are letters from Rome of the 8th October [year?] which state that on the first day of this same month Monsignore Mori [sic, Filippe Monte, Secretary of Propaganda, 1735–1743], Secretary of the Congregation of Propaganda of the Faith, presented to His Holiness a letter written in the Persian language by the elder son of T.K.K. [Tahmasp Qoli Khan, i.e. Nader Shah; the elder son is Reza Qoli Mirza], whereby this Prince ratifies and confirms all the advantages and privileges granted by his father to the Christians of Erivan, and adds that all the religious (orders) which have missions in Iṣfahān may live in complete freedom, teaching the Catholic religion, and administering freely the sacraments to all that profess it.’ See Lockhart (1926a: 245).
296.
Louis XV (r. 1715–1774). Normally ‘Most Christian Majesty.’ The title, borne by the kings of France, was first conferred upon Pepin (c. 755) by Pope Stephen II. See Brown (1875: 17).
297.
Clement XII (r. 1730–1740).
298.
Abbé Certain noted in his letter to Amelot de Chaillou of 19 September 1738 that ‘La religion est hautement protégee par Koulican. On a reçu cette agréable nouvelle, il y a quelques jours, par les lettres de l’archevêque d’Ispahan à la Propagande. Ce prélat écrit du 17 avril dernier, que Koulican a non seulement permis l’exercice libre et public de la religion chrétienne dans ses états, mais qu’il a encore permis par un édit aux missionnaires d’ouvrir des écoles pour instruire la jeunesse, laissant la liberté à ses sujets d’y aller et d’y envoyer leurs enfants pour y apprendre les principes de notre religion. Les Capucins ont déjà commencé à faire bâtir une église. Il paroit que Koulican suit les errements et les maximes du feu sophie et qu’il recherche l’appuy des chrétiens contre les Turcs pour s’assurer la paisible possession du trône qu’il a usurpé.’ See de Montaiglon and Guiffréy (1899: 356).
299.
Yahya Bey.
300.
Clement XII.
301.
Mahmud I.
302.
Muhammad Shah.
303.
As Jones (1770/1: 57) described, ‘une compagnie de mousquetaires fût envoïée pour s’emparer de la forteresse de Gelalabad, & pour punir Veled Mir Abbas, auteur du meurtre de l’envoïé de sa Majesté. Le gouverneur de Gelalabad, qui s’étoit opposé au passage des chefs de Cabul, s’enfuit aussi-tôt, & les habitans du païs entrant dans la voïe de la submission, s’avancérent & délivrérent leur cité.’
304.
Presumably the Kabul or the Kunar river is meant. Other printed versions of the same account give ‘Catat’ rather than ‘Catar.’ See e.g. Anonymous (1739c: 333); Anonymous (1739d).
305.
Chin Qulich Khan, Asaf Jah [‘he who has the pomp of Āṣaf,’ see Lockhart (1926a: 231, n. 1); given as ‘Azefia’ by Père Saignes in his letter of 10 February 1749 to Mme de Sainte Hyacinthe de Sauveterre; see Aimé-Martin (1838: 401)], the Nizamu’l-Mulk, ‘Gouveneur du Decan’ according to La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 361). Jones (1770/1: 69), called ‘Nezamelmolc, soubadar des sept provinces du Decan, & l’un des plus grands Princes de la cour.’ De Voulton called him ‘one of the principle nobles of the court.’ See Lockhart (1926a: 231 and n. 1).
306.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
307.
European newspapers named both ambassadors. Alongside Mohammad Rahim Khan (or Beg; he was later director of the arsenal or jabbehdar-bashi; see Floor 2009a: 87), the second was Nazur-Alac [Nezar ‘Ali] Khan. See Anonymous (1738c: 2059; 1738d: 398); Floor (2009a: 76). Jones (1770/2: 85) wrote that ‘Hagi Khan Tchemechekezek, maître de l’artillerie, fût envoïé à la Porte’ on 18 October 1738.
308.
Rasht. The Russian consul was S.Z. Arapov. See Dorn (1875: 114); Rabino (1917: 467); Tolmacheva (1992: 120). Hanway (1753/1: 70) described him as ‘a very honest and discreet man.’
309.
Muhammad Shah.
310.
According to Hanway (1753/2: 182), Nader Shah’s ambassador Mohammad Reza [? Rahim] Khan, arrived in November ‘and in the beginning of the next month was admitted to an audience of the grand signior.’
311.
Mustafa. See von Hammer (1839: 435, 439).
312.
Mahmud I.
313.
Clement XI.
314.
Yahya Bey.
315.
Louis XV.
316.
Cf. 3.239–3.241.
317.
Writing under the date 29 July 1738, Constantine Dapontes noted, ‘Ces jours-là, deux ambassadeurs persans arrivèrent à Constantinople.’ See Legrand (1881: 112).
318.
Mahmud I.
319.
Anna Ivanovna.
320.
Writing under the date 12 November, Constantine Dapontes noted, ‘On tint une grande conférence concernant la réponse à faire à l’ambassadeur de Perse.’ See Legrand (1881: 158).
321.
Mohammad Rahim Khan and Nezar ‘Ali Khan.
322.
Mahmud I.
323.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
324.
Mohammad Rahim Khan and Nezar ‘Ali Khan.
325.
Mahmud I.
326.
Muhammad Shah.
327.
This list of demands is almost identical to Hanway (1753/2: 182), who wrote that, in his audience with the Sultan, Nader Shah’s ambassador Mohammad Reza Khan said, ‘That his master, the Shah, had the greatest desire to live in perfect amity with him; but that the means of doing this was to yield up Diarbekir, in the same condition it was in during its subjection to the Persian empire. He also pretended to the Upper Armenia: and further insisted that the grand signior should renounce his alliance with the Great Mogul; that the new fortifications made a Bagdat, since the provisional treaty of peace, concluded three years before, should be demolished; and that the Persian caravans should have every where a free passage in the dominions of the Ottoman empire.’ These demands are echoed by those made, according to the anonymous and undated ‘Relation historique, des révolutions de Perse, sous Thamas Koulikan, jusqu’à son expédition dans les Indes, tirée de différentes lettres écrites de Perse par des missionnaires jésuites,’ by Nader Shah to the Ottoman ambassador while he was still in Kandahar. ‘Tandis qu’il [Nader Shah] assiégeoit Candahar, arriva un ambassadeur de la Porte nommé Ali Bacha.’ As this must refer to Mustafa Pasha, perhaps the writer confused the name of ‘Ali Mardan Khan Shamlu with that of the Ottoman envoy? Be that as it may, the source continues, ‘Sa négociation ne fut pas longue, car dès la première audience, elle fut arrêtée par ces demandes et des propositions si hautes de la part de Velim-Amet [Valīne‘mat, lord of beneficence, i.e. Nader Shah; for the title see Bournoutian (1999b: 18, n. 1); Floor (2009a: 53); Axworthy (2010: 166 and n. 66)], que l’ambassadeur ne put y souscrire. Il répondit qu’il ne pouvoit rien conclure, sans en avoir donné avis à sa cour pour en recevoir de nouvelles instructions. La distance des lieux ne permettant pas d’avoir sitôt des nouvelles de la Porte, et le Velim-Amet voulant tourjours suivre son entreprise, le parti qu’il prit fut de donner des pleins pouvoirs à un de ses khans ou gouverneurs, pour traiter avec l’ambassadeur, selon les réponses qui lui viendroient de Constantinople. Bagdad fut choisi pour le lieu des conférences, et les deux plénipotentiaires s’y rendirent. Les propositions du Velim-Amet étoient, 1° qu’on lui rendit Bassora, Bagdad, Moussol, Diarbekir et Erzerum, qu’il prétendoit avoir été de l’ancien domaine de Perse; 2° qu’on lui permit d’avoir à la Mecque une mosquée, où les pélerins persans pussent faire leurs prières selon leurs usages, et y eussent un libre exercise de leur religion; 3° qu’on y établit des receveurs de sa nation, qui retireroient à son profit tout l’argent qui sortiroit de Perse.’ See Aimé-Martin (1838: 398).
328.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
329.
Anna Ivanovna.
330.
The sanjac sherif, or standard of Mohammad. Cf. 3.177.
331.
The identity of the ambassador in question here is unclear. Cf. 4.209.
332.
As Storch (1801: 52) noted, ‘The Monastery of St. Alexander Nevsky contains in its spacious circuit the mansion of the metropolitan, a monastery for sixty monks, five churches, a seminary, &c. The famous shrine of St. Alexander, consisting entirely of wrought massy silver has been lately put up in the extremely elegant church constructed expressly for that purpose.’
333.
According to Rondeau’s letter of 11 November 1738 to Lord Harrington, ‘the 6th instant [November] two Persian ambassadors made a magnificent entry into this place [St. Petersburg],’ and, according to a letter of 2 December 1738, ‘The two Persian ambassadors mentioned in my dispatch, dated the 11th of November, had the 28th of the same month their first audience of Her Majesty.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 391, 397–398). Jones (1770/2: 85) wrote that ‘Serdar Beg Kirklou’ was sent to Russia on 18 October 1738.
334.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan.
335.
Mohammad Rahim Khan and Nezar ‘Ali Khan.
336.
Mustafa Pasha.
337.
Mahmud I.
338.
Von Hammer (1839: 442) gave a different account when he wrote, ‘Ce fut vers cette époque, que les ambassadeurs persans, envoyés l’année précédente à Constantinople par Nadirschah pour offrir sa médiation, annoncèrent à la Porte leur arrivée dans l’Asie-Mineure…Bien que chargés d’une nouvelle mission du Schah pour le Sultan, celui-ci leur ordonna d’attendre en Nicomédie le moment où il pourrait les recevoir.’
339.
Shah ‘Abbas I.
340.
Mohammad Rahim Khan or Nezar ‘Ali Khan is meant here.
341.
Mahmud I.
342.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan.
343.
Anna Ivanovna.
344.
Mohammad Rahim Khan and Nezar ‘Ali Khan.
345.
Mohammad Rahim Khan and Nezar ‘Ali Khan.
346.
Muhammad Shah.
347.
Muhammad Shah.
348.
Delhi.
349.
Muhammad Shah.
350.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan.
351.
This ‘news’ is about four years out of date.
352.
Fath Giray.
353.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
354.
Sarıbeyoğlu. According to Anonymous (1739a: 50), ‘Sare-Bey-Oglu, is the Son of one of the richest Officers in all the Ottoman Empire. His Mother, from his Childhood, fill’d his Mind with the Principle of Revenge; because, on the Death of his Father, the Porte had not only deprived him of great Part of his Possessions, but clapp’d up his Sister in the Seraglio. Having, nevertheless, considerable Estate left in Natolia, he form’d a Faction of Malecontents there, who fortify’d themselves in the Mountains of Boldag and Diagli Bogasse, which are the retreats of the Robbers that infest the Country between the Rivers of Sarabat and Madre. Sare-Bey-Oglu made himself their Chief, and fixed his Place of Arms in an old Castle on the Top of a Mountain, fortify’d and surrounded with Trenches, so that ‘tis out of the Reach of any Artillery: And his Lieutenants are intrench’d in the Defiles, or narrow Passes of the Mountains, and in old Cottages.’ Anonymous (1739b: 237), reported, ‘Letters from Constantinople say, That Achmet Bashaw, who was sent to Natolia to take upon him the command of the Grand Seignior’s troops in that province, is returned to that city, after having dispersed the rebels, and forced their commander, Sare-Bey-Oglou, to abandon the castle to which he had retired; and that the Grand seignior, in reward for this service, had restored Achmet Bashaw to the post of Kiamaikan, or Governor of Constantinople, of which he had been divested by the intrigues of the late Grand Vizier.’ Describing the mood in Constantinople after Nader Shah’s ambassadors had delivered their claims on Baghdad, Diyarbakir, etc, noted above, Hanway (1753/2: 182), noted, ‘What added to the distress of the port, was the rebellion of Sare Ben [sic, Bey] Oglou in Natolia.’ As Zinkeisen (1857: 767) noted, ‘Ein kühner Bandenführer, Saribeg-Oglu, hatte dort [Asia Minor] an der Spitze von 20,000 M. das Panier des Aufruhrs erhoben, vorzüglich Smyrna und die Umgegend hart bedrängt, dann seine Verheerungen fast über ganz Kleinasien und Syrien ausgedehnt, und endlich selbst Miene gemacht, sich mit dem Pascha von Bagdad zu vereinigen, welcher der Pforte gleichfalls den Gehorsam verweigern wollte. In mehreren Gefechten mit den gegen ihn ausgeschickten Truppen des Großherrn blieb er im Vortheil, bis er endlich, erst im Mai 1739, in der Nähe von Philadelphia von dem Statthalter von Rakka gänzlich geschlagen und sein Kopf, zum Zeichen der glücklichen Unterdrückung dieses gefährlichen Aufruhrs, nach Constantinopel gesandt wurde.’ Anonymous (1739a: 442) reported, ‘We have an Account of the total Defeat and Destruction of the famous Rebel, Sare Bey Oglou…who was taken, beheaded, and his Head sent to Constantinople, where it was set upon a Pole over-against the Great Seraglio.’ According to von Hammer (1831: 525) the head arrived at Constantinople on 15 June 1739. For a letter from Smyrna dated 1 November 1740 which recounts his life and deeds see De la Barre de Beaumarchais (1741: 68–73).
355.
Ahmed Pasha.
356.
Mahmud I. Apparently Ahmed Pasha of Baghdad has been confused with a namesake, the governor of Raqqa, for, according to von Hammer (1831: 525), ‘Von Klein-Asien traf der Kopf des Rebellen Saaribeg Ali ein, wider welchen vormahls der jetzige Kaimakam Ahmedbeg in Aiden zu Feld gelegen, den aber jetzt Ahmedpascha, der Statthalter von Rakka, zu Paaren getrieben.’
357.
It is unclear whether this refers to ‘Ali Mardan Khan Shamlu. According to Hanway (1753/2: 182) a second Persian ambassador, Mohammad Reza Khan, travelled separately from Kandahar, and ‘arrived at Constantinople in November last year [1738].’ It is possible that Hanway was confusing this report with Mohammad Reza Khan who was sent to St. Petersburg, for whom see 4.75.
358.
Cf. 4.145. Nadir Shah’s ambassadors were detained at Nicomedia (mod. İzmit) en route to Constantinople. Constantine Dapontes wrote under the date 15 November 1739, ‘L’ambassadeur persan est proche de Constantinople, mais on retarde son arrivée, pour que son entrée dans la capitale ait lieu durant le ramazan, époque à laquelle on n’examine pas d’affaires. De cette façon, la chose sera renvoyée après le baïram, et l’on gagnera du temps. On agit de la sorte, dans la crainte qu’il n’ait à proposer quelques questions difficiles à trancher dans les circonstances présentes.’ See Legrand (1881: 401).
359.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
360.
Various accounts were reported of the death of the ambassador including that he died on his journey seemingly of natural causes, was poisoned or was imprisoned. Constantine Dapontes wrote under the date 16 February 1739, ‘Le grand ambassadeur persan, qui avait accompagné Moustafa Pacha, mourut en route. Le second ambassadeur qui était avec lui va arriver à Constantinople.’ See Legrand (1881: 185). Jones (1770/2: 84–85), reported that in the autumn of 1738, ‘un courrier d’Ahmed Pacha, gouverneur de Bagdad, apporta à l’auguste cour la nouvelle de la mort d’Alimerdan, ambassadeur en Turquie, qui avoit fini ses jours à Sivas.’
361.
Mahmud I.
362.
Haji Beshir Agha, Chief Harem Eunuch (overseer of the Sultan’s harem) from 1717 to 1746. See Hathaway (2009: 294). As Hathaway (1992: 141) noted, the Kislar Aga was ‘the chief black eunuch of the Ottoman imperial harem in Istanbul’ who, ‘by the mid-17th century…rivalled the grand vezir for de facto control of imperial policy.’ For a full biography see Hathaway (2005). As Hathaway (2019: 115) observed, ‘Hacı Beşir (Beşīr) Ağa…represents the epitome of the kızlar ağası’s authority… .Following Ahmed (Aḥmed) III’s deposition in the 1143/1730 Patrona Halil (Khalīl) rebellion, Hacı Beşir was allegedly able to hand-pick grand viziers and even to direct Ottoman foreign policy.’ Cf. 4.207.
363.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha.
364.
As Claudius Rondeau wrote to Lord Harrington on 24 April 1739, ‘This morning a courier arrived here from Kioff [Kyiv] with advice, that the grand-visir had been deposed the 11th of March, and was sent in exile to Chio… .It appears by the ambassador’s papers, that were brought to Constantinople, that he had orders to declare war to the Porte in case his proposals were not accepted of. This discovery engaged the grand-signior to send for his confident [sic, confidante] the kizlar aga, who was no friend to the grand-vizir, and asked him, if they had not already enough enemies on their hands without disobliging the Persians, and why they had not concluded the treaty with the French ambassador. The kizlar aga replied he was not in fault, but the grand-vizir, who never could be brought to hear of making up matters. Upon this it was resolved to depose him, and the bashaw of Widdin, who was expected at Constantinople about the 15th instant, is named to succeed him.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 462–463). Cf. d’Irumberry (1813: 207), ‘Aveuglé par l’éclat de ses services et de leur récompense, il [Yeğen Mehmed Pasha] eut l’imprudence de se croire assez puissant pour braver ses ennemis personnels, comme il bravait les ennemis de l’empire: il essaya de lutter contre le kislar-aga, et d’ébranler son autorité sur les vieux fondemens dont l’habitude et la confiance du sultan faisaient les appuis. La perte de Siéghen [Yegen] fut jurée par le kislar-aga et la sultane validé; et au moment où sa noble ambition le berçait des illusions les plus vastes, au moment où il partait pour aller reprendre à Adrianople le commandement de l’armée et le cours de ses succès, le capidgi-bachi vint lui demander le sceau impériale, et lui intimer l’ordre d’aller en exil dans une île de l’Archipel: la reconnaissance de son maître se borna à lui laisser le choix du lieu.’ Describing the bitter rivalry between the Kislar Agha and ‘der Grosswesir,’ who had ‘seinen Untergang geschworen,’ von Hammer (1831: 523–524) noted that, after gathering all of the nobles together, the Sultan announced ‘dass er das Siegel dem Statthalter von Widden, Elhadsch Mohammedpascha [Haji Ivaz Mehmed Pasha; see Özel 2018: Table 3.1], und die Kaimakamschaft dem Wesir Ahmed, der dermahlen zu Widden, verliehen habe.’ The imperial seal was taken from Yeğen Mehmed Pasha on 22 March 1739. See Zinkeisen (1857: 766).
365.
Yeğen Mehmed Pasha is still meant here.
366.
Mustafa Pasha.
367.
Tahmasp II.
368.
In a letter to Lord Harrington, dated 26 May 1739, Claudius Rondeau reported, ‘I hear some of this ministry say almost every day, that shach Nadyr is soon to return from the borders of the mogols, where he is at present in order to attack the turks, but others, who must be well informed of all that passes in those parts, tell me the lesguins, a warlike people, inhabiting the mountains between the Caspian and Black seas under the command of their chief Sakoy -chan, had invaded with a powerful army the province of Shirvan and made themselves masters of Shamachy, after having beat the Persian army commanded by the Sophy’s brother, who was killed on the spot.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 490). Cf. de Claustre (1743: 355–356) who noted that, shortly after Reza Qoli Mirza had been made regent, ‘les Lesghis du Daghestan, les Arabes de Mascate de l’autre s’étoient révoltés dès qu’ils sçurent le Roi engagé dans la guerre de Candahar dont ils n’attendoient pas sitôt la fin. Les Lesghis furieux de la destruction de leur Ville & du massacre de leurs familles, se rassemblérent en plus grand nombre qu’auparavant & du haut de leurs Montagnes fondirent comme un torrent impétueux sur les frontières de Géorgie qu’ils désolérent, mettant tout à feu & à sang, & résolus de faire à toutes les Villes qu’ils prendroient le même traitement que Chamaki avoit reçu. Ibrahim Kan Frere du Roi à la premiere nouvelle qu’il eut de l’irruption des Lesghis, partit de Tauris avec quelques troupes réglées pour s’approcher de Gandja comme la Ville la plus menacée & manda au Roi de Tiflis & à tous les Princes de Géorgie de rassembler les troupes de leur département & de venir le joindre.’ According to Otter (1748: 226–227), ‘Les Lezguis firent une nouvelle incursion dans le Chirvan. Ce peuple habite le Daguistan, pays au Nord de la Perse, confinant du côté de l’Occident à celui des Tcherkiés ou Circassiens, du Sud à la Géorgie, de l’Est à la mer de Chirvan, du Nord au pays de Kharez… .les Lezguis…sont divisés en plusieurs Tribus, gouvernées chacune par son chef, & indépendantes des Princes voisins. Commes ces peuples infestoient souvent par leurs courses les frontières de la Perse, les Rois n’avoient point trouvé d’autre moyen de les contenir, que celui de leur payer tous les ans une somme d’argent sous le nom de subside, à condition qu’ils garderoient la frontière. Le payement en avoit été interrompu pendant les derniers troubles, & Nadir Chah, bien loin de s’assujettir à ces subsides, prétendoit au contraire que les Lezguis devoient se soûmettre & lui payer un tribut, pour qu’il pardonnât leurs brigandages passés: mais cette brave Nation, qui se glorifie de n’avoir jamais été subjuguée, pas même par Teïmour, ou Tamerlan.’ Hanway (1753/2: 148), noted tersely, ‘The Lesgees, taking the advantage of Nadir’s absence, had invaded Shirvan. Ibrahim Khan, who resided at Tauris, put himself at the head of a body of forces to oppose their progress, and coming to an engagement with them, he was killed in the field.’ Shaykh Hazin noted, ‘As the expedition to Candahâr and Kâbol drew to a great length, a body of the Lezgîs, having equipped themselves for war, led an army into the province of Shîrvân, which is in their neighbourhood; and Ibrâhîm Khân, having marched into the same province, gave battle to that nation, and was killed in the action. Nâdir Shâh, not giving much attention to this occurrence, dismissed one division of his army from further attendance on him and sent it into Shîrvân.’ See Belfour (1830: 290). Cf. Jones (1770/2: 98) where the death of Nadir Shah’s brother, Ibrahim Khan at the hands of the Lezgins meant that ‘Nader Chah avoit deslors resolû de punir ces rebelles, & de vanger la mort de son frère.’ Under the date 2 July 1739 Constantine Dapontes noted that, ‘Les Letchguis sont toujours en guerre avec la Perse, et ils semblent remporter des succès.’ See Legrand (1881: 224). For more in the Georgian sources on the Lezgin incursions see Brosset (1857: 55–56).
369.
Hatem Beg. He held this post until the spring of 1740 when Nader Shah made him Hatem Khan and conferred the governorship of Fars upon him. See Floor (2009a: 87–88).
370.
Multan, today in Pakistan.
371.
Kashmir.
372.
‘Ali Mardan Khan Shamlu. As Claudius Rondeau wrote to Lord Harrington on 24 April 1739, ‘Two couriers that are arrived on the borders of Russia from Constantinople, report as certain, that the Persian ambassador, that was going to the Porte, died on the road, having been secretly poisoned by order of the grand-vizir.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 462).
373.
‘Ali Mardan Khan Shamlu.
374.
Muhammad Shah.
375.
The siege of Kandahar in fact lasted 15 or 16 months, according to the anonymous letter from a Jesuit eyewitness in Isfahan, cited in Aimé-Martin (1838: 398). By contrast, Claudius Rondeau wrote to Lord Harrington on 17 June 1738, ‘By the letters the Czarinna received some days ago from her minister at Ispahan, she is informed that shach Nadyr had at last taken the town of Candahar, after a siege of eighteen months.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1892: 316). As Hanway (1753/2: 147) noted, ‘As he had no heavy artillery with him, it was impossible he should reduce a fortification so advantageously situated, by any other means than by famine; he determined therefore only to blockade it.’ Nader Shah set out for Kandahar in late December, 1736 (Hanway 1753/2: 146), and the city did not surrender until the spring of 1738. See Lockhart (1938: 115–120).
376.
According to Shaykh Hazin, after the conquest of Kandahar, Nader Shah ‘issued an order in his camp, that every man should build a habitation suitable to his condition; and for himself he gave directions to throw up ramparts and towers, and for the construction of a palace and some lofty edifices. The architects and workmen, who accompanied him in a great body, were not long in completing their tasks; and by the side of Candahâr a vast city with all its appurtenances sprang to view, which obtained the name of Nâdir Abâd.’ See Belfour (1830: 274). Cf. Jones (1770/2: 45), ‘Le chateau de Kandehar dont le côté occidental étoit sur le Mont Leki, & qui, au vrai, étoit un fort très dangereux…fût, par l’ordre de sa Majesté saccagé, & rasé jusq’aux fondemens; & Naderabad devint le siége de la résidence des gouverneurs du païs.’ Otter (1748/1: 336) noted that, while preparing for the siege of Kandahar, Nadir Shah ‘rassembla ses troupes devant la place dans un camp retranché, où il fit même bâtir des maisons, & nomma ce camp Nadir-Abad, c’est-à-dire, l’habitation de Nadir.’ After this Naderabad became the new provincial capital. See Lockhart (1938: 120).
377.
Claudius Rondeau wrote to Lord Harrington on 18 August 1739 from St. Petersburg as follows: ‘Some days ago this court received an account from their consul at Rash [Rasht] in Persia, with advice, that shach Nadyr had gained a great victory over the grand-mogul in the province of Caboul, and that afterwards the great-mogul was come into his camp, on certain conditions not yet known, where he delivered his crown to the Sophy, who generously returned it to him. As the russ minister at Ispahan has not mentioned this great event, everybody doubts of the truth of it, though the russ consul has sent in the Persian language a printed relation thereof.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1886a: 523–524). Nadir Shah took possession of Kabul on 30 June 1738. See Minorsky (1934: 20).
378.
‘A corruption of the Portuguese Gentio, “a gentile” or heathen…applied to the Hindus in contradistinction to the Moros or “Moors,” i.e. Mahommedans.’ See Yule and Burnell (1903: 367).
379.
‘That is to say, the great Lords of the Kingdom, such as the Basha’s in Turkey, and the Kan’s in Persia.’ See Tavernier (1684: 46). De Voulton called the Omhras ‘general officers’. See Lockhart (1926a: 230). For La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 355, n. 3), the Omrats were ‘Généraux d’Armées, Gouverneurs de Province, premier titre dans cet Empire.’
380.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan and Mohammad Reza Khan.
381.
Muhammad Shah.
382.
Muhammad Shah.
383.
A remarkable and extraordinarily erroneous assertion.
384.
Muhammad Shah.
385.
The decisive defeat of Muhammad Shah’s forces occurred on 24 February 1739. See Minorsky (1934: 21) for the date. The defeated Mughal emperor certainly did not flee to the English factory in Bengal. On the contrary, he was taken prisoner by Nader Shah. See Otter (1748, 1: 387–388).
386.
For the correspondence of Joseph François Dupleix (1697–1763), the French governor of Pondicherry, regarding Nader Shah, see Martineau (1916: 187–193). For the history of the French Compagnie des Indes in general at this time see Malleson (1893).
387.
Muhammad Shah.
388.
Muhammad Shah. A number of dates in Nader Shah’s Indian campaign stand out as significant: 24 February 1739, when his forces defeated the Mughal army; 20 March, when he entered Delhi; 6 April when his son Nasrollah Mirza was married to a Mughal princess (Fraser 1742: 197); 12 May when he crowned Muhammad Shah and confirmed the cession of the Mughal provinces west of the Indus River; and 17 May when he departed after 59 days in Delhi. For the dates see Minorsky (1934: 21–22).
389.
Muhammad Shah.
390.
According to Voulton, Muhammad Shah sent the Nizamu’l-Mulk ‘in search of the King of Persia,’ and after meeting with Nader Shah, ‘went in search of the Emperor, whom he told of all that had happened, and on the following day, the two kings, having reached the appointed spot, embraced each other, and Muḥammad Shah presented the Empire to Nādir.’ Thereafter, ‘Nādir Shāh raised his claims to 40 crores, that is, 200 million patacas, asking as much by way of impost as he did for the expenses which he had incurred during 14 years, including the cost of his army up till its return to Persia.’ See Lockhart (1926a: 233, 234). Many other figures appear in the sources. According to Scott (1794: 204), ‘Boorahan al Moolk…had prevailed on Nadir Shaw to offer peace, and retreat from Hindoostan, on the payment of two crores of rupees,’ c. £2,000,000. In fact, this was only the assessment levied on Delhi itself. See Lockhart (1938: 152). For additional figures see Fraser (1742: 192–193), Minorsky (1934: 21–22) and Lockhart (1938: 152, n. 6). Some of these represent estimates of the value of the total booty taken from India.
391.
Muhammad Shah.
392.
Muhammad Shah.
393.
Actually ‘la rivière d’Etek,’ not ‘Detek. See de Bougainville (1752: 51); Jones (1770/2: 82). As Otter (1748/1: 371) noted, ‘La rivière d’Etek prend son nom d’un fort situé sur son bord oriental. Les anciens peuples d’Inde l’ont appellé Enider. Les Géographes Grecs & Latins lui ont donné le nom d’Indus, & les Orientaux l’appellent aujourd’hui la rivière du Sind.’ Fraser (1742: 146 and 223) wrote ‘Attock’ and ‘Attok;’ Jones (1770/2: 116) has ‘Atek;’ and Picault (1810/2: 201), ‘Atock.’
394.
Qianlong (r. 1735–1796).
395.
As Minorsky (1934: 22) noted, ‘Le 3 Ṣafar 1152/12-V-1739 un grand conseil fut tenu à Delhi au cours duquel Nāder reposa la couronne sur la tête de Mohammad chāh. En signe de reconnaissance pour son rétablissement sur le trône, ce dernier dut céder les provinces à l’ouest (nord-ouest) de l’Indus depuis Kachmir jusqu’au Sind, y compris la sūba de Tattha avec ses ports. Les territoires à l’est (sud-est) de l’Indus occupés par les troupes de Nāder devaient être libérés graduellement à mesure du paiement de la contribution.’ For a description of Mohammad Shah’s coronation see Fraser (1742: 205–208).
396.
Muhammad Shah.
397.
Muhammad Shah.
398.
Mahmud I.
399.
Muhammad Shah.
400.
Voulton estimated the size of the Mughal army at ‘400,000 horsemen, 800,000 infantry, 30,000 camels, 2000 armed elephants and 1000 pieces of artillery.’ See Lockhart (1926a: 230). In contrast Hanway (1753/2: 158) wrote, ‘the imperial army of India…was one of the most brilliant and numerous, tho’ not the most formidable, that had for many ages appeared in the east. It consisted of near two hundred thousand fighting men, of which a great part was cavalry.’
401.
Reza Qoli Mirza.
402.
Tahmasp II.
403.
‘Abbas III.
404.
Hanway (1753/2: 208) noted that, after hearing a rumor that Nader Shah had been killed early in 1739, Reza Qoli Mirza ‘in some measure assumed the regal authority. He began, by causing the unfortunate Shah Tæhmas to be put to death, together with all his family, who were prisoners at Sebsawar.’ According to Mohammad Kazim, the actual assassin was Mohammad Hoseyn Khan, a Yokharibash Qajar from Astarabad in the service of Reza Qoli Mirza, who ‘forced his way into the harem, seized Ṭahmasp and strangled him with a piece of rope that he had brought.’ See Lockhart (1938: 177). According to Shaykh Hazin, after hearing the rumor that his father had died, ‘Rizâ Colî Mîrzâ, who resided at the holy Meshed, fell to think of his personal interests; and looking on the life of that youthful king as repugnant to the arrangement of his affairs, though he had not once during the whole of that time set up any claim to sovereign power, and was attentively watched by his guards, he gave the signal for his death; and the officers having smote him to the ground, carried him to the holy Meshed and there interred him. His sons Abbâs Mîrzâ and Soleimân Mîrzâ, who were both tender infants, bade adieu also to this transitory world, and no children of him remained.’ See Belfour (1830: 302–303). For this narrative and its interpretation see also Tucker (1993: 108). For another important account by Kalushkin’s successor as Russian Resident see Bratischev (1763).
405.
Although earlier articles referred to the arrival of two Persian ambassadors, Jones (1770/1: 85) noted that on 18 (or 23? Lockhart 1926a: 244, n. 2) October 1738 ‘Serdar Beg Kirklou’ left Nader Shah’s camp for Russia. Sardar Khan Qirklu died, however, before the mission reached Astrakhan and he was succeeded by one Hoseyn Khan. See Lockhart (1926a: 244, n. 2).
406.
Muhammad Shah.
407.
The Russian resident in Isfahan, Ivan Petrovich Kalushkin, had an informant who was probably an officer in Nader Shah’s confidence. He seems to have been ‘among the Shah’s eight most trusted confidants specially recruited, following an oath of fidelity, to count and evaluate the plundered wealth of the Mughal treasury. According to the agent’s report, forwarded by Kalushkin to St. Petersburg, there were sixty boxes of loose precious stones—diamonds, emeralds and rubies. The weight of the celebrated Peacock Throne was estimated to be around 1965 kg, made of pure gold and precious stones. Apart from 200 big diamonds of 253.56 to 380.34 carats each, there were 491 kg of smaller diamonds and countless pearls.’ See Vanina (1997: 35).
408.
According to Dutch reports from Isfahan, on 30 June 1739 Nader Shah ordered 30,000 camels to carry home the Indian booty. See Floor (2009a: 84).
409.
‘Uthman b. ‘Abdar-Rahman. Appointed 27 November 1737 (4 Shaban 1150), he served until September/October 1739 (Jumada ii 1152). See Mingana (1926: 519).
410.
Mahmud I.
411.
Muhammad Shah.
412.
This is a completely false rumor.
413.
Muhammad Shah.
414.
Chin Qulich Khan, Nizamu’l-Mulk.
415.
The Delhi massacre was not occasioned by Nader Shah putting out the eyes of Muhammad Shah and his Prime Minister. Rather, on 26 March 1739, after Nader Shah had seen Muhammad Shah, a rumor circulated that the Nader Shah had been assassinated, whereupon the populace spontaneously attacked the Persians, killing between 3000 and 7000 of them. The next morning Nader Shah gave the order for a general massacre of the population which lasted from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. See Minorsky (1934: 21–22). According to a more embellished account in Fraser (1742: 181) the rioting was instigated by some corn merchants who were angry at Nader Shah’s men for forcing them to open their storehouses as a means of alleviating a food shortage. When this happened, some of Nader Shah’s men were killed by a mob. Afterwards, ‘they spread a Report that Nadir Shah was taken Prisoner, and some said he was poisoned, on which the Mob and Tumult exceeded all Bounds.’ When the following morning Nader Shah went to the mosque, and was nearly killed by a bullet that killed an officer right beside him, he became incensed and he ordered the reprisal. According to Fraser (1742: 185), ‘The Slaughter continued from eight in the Morning till three in the Afternoon; above 400 Kuzzlebash were killed, and of the Citizens (great and small) 120,000 were slaughtered, others computed them 150,000.’ According to De Voulton, ‘On Eastern Saturday, four young Omhras of medium rank, having become intoxicated at eight in the evening, spread the rumour that the Emperor had killed Nādir Shāh with a blow. These vicious young men were accompanied by twenty Persian horsemen who acted as supervising guards; having made their servants and people join with them, they killed these men. This news being spread through the city, the populace rose and attacked the Persians, of whom they slew more than 5000, each one taking refuge in his barracks. Thereupon the Persians shut themselves up in the fortress and turned the artillery on the city, on which they fired until midnight. In the morning, on Easter Sunday, Nādir Shāh was filled with fury, and ordered his troops to enter the city with fire and sword and sack it, which was done.’ See Lockhart (1926a: 237–238). Whereas La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 378) put the number of Persian dead at 5–6000, Shaykh Hazin put it at 7000. Nor did he mention the bombardment but suggested that, ‘At day-break the tumult was still increasing in vehemence. Soon afterwards, Nâdir Shâh rode down from the castle, and gave orders for a general massacre. To the division of horse and foot charged with this service he said, that as far as the very spot, in every direction, where a Kizil Bâsh had been killed, they were not to leave alive a single Indian.’ See Belfour (1830: 299–300). Cf. de Bougainville (1752: 63) who said 200,000 Indians were killed.
416.
Reza Qoli Mirza. According to Jones (1770/2: 58), as early as 1737, before his invasion of India, Nadir Shah ‘résolût d’établir l’excellent Prince Riza Kuli Mirza vice-roy & régent de l’Iran.’ Minorsky (1934: 20), however, dated this to the summer or early autumn of 1738. Cf. Lockhart (1938: 126).
417.
Mahmud I.
418.
Mohammad Rahim Khan and Nezar ‘Ali Khan.
419.
Claude Alexandre de Bonneval.
420.
As Bonneval wrote, ‘Comme j’étaits presque assuré que Thamas Kouli-Kan n’accepterait jamais ces conditions, la guerre de Perse, où je devais aller commander, m’inquiéta beaucoup.’ See Desherbiers (1806: 413).
421.
Mahmud I.
422.
Mohammad Rahim Khan and Nezar ‘Ali Khan.
423.
Charles VI.
424.
The Treaty of Belgrade, the ratifications of which were exchanged at Constantinople on 28 December 1739. For the text of the treaty see Hurewitz (1956: 47–51).
425.
As Vandal (1885: 77) noted, ‘De 1740 à 1747, il [Bonneval] fut mêlé à tous les mouvements de la politique orientale et, durant cette période, la liste est innombrable des projets ingénieux ou grandioses, pratiques ou hasardeux, qui sortirent de sont esprit fécond, qu’il embrassa avec passion, transforma, abandonna et reprit, manqua ou conduisit à bonne fin.’ Laugier (1768/2: 222) observed, ‘Le Comte de Bonneval présentoit chaque jour de nouveaux Mémoires, sur lesquels le Grand-Visir gardoit un silence profond. Le vues de ce Bacha ne pouvoient tendre qu’à brouiller de nouveau la Porte avec la Cour de Vienne.’
426.
Mahmud I.
427.
Charles VI.
428.
Anna Ivanovna.
429.
Muhammad Shah.
430.
As Bonneval noted in his memoirs, ‘Rédi-Massan, un des principaux officiers de la cour du Mogol, avait depuis long-temps une correspondence très-étroite avec le wély-pacha, seraskier de Constantinople et sous-visir. Rédi-Massan…avait envoyé…une relation circonstanciée des désordres que les Persans avaient commis dans les états du Mogol. Il marquait entr’autres que les soldats du Sophi, non contens du riche butin qu’ils avaient fait par leurs pillages, avaient encore mis le feu à la plupart des villes, et massacré un nombre prodigieux d’habitans.’ See Desherbiers (1806: 411–412).
431.
Particularly the massacre at Delhi described above.
432.
Haji Ivaz Mehmed Pasha.
433.
This is virtually verbatim what Bonneval (Desherbiers 1806: 412–413) gave in his memoirs, viz. ‘1°. de renoncer à toutes les conquêtes que les troupes ottomanes ont faites en Perse depuis l’an 1726; 2°. de se désister des avantages qu’il prétend à l’égard du négoce de ses sujets en Turquie; 3°. de retirer ses troupes des états du grand Mogol, en de lui restituer le Caboulistan, en compensation des désordres que son armée avait faits dans ce pays; 4°. de renoncer à l’alliance de la Czarine, en ce qui regarde les intérêts de la Porte; 5°. enfin, de cesser les innovations qu’il a dessein d’introduire dans les dogmes qui divisent les sectateurs d’Omar et d’Aly.’
434.
Qianlong .
435.
Muhammad Shah.
436.
Muhammad Shah.
437.
Rajapur. ‘Rajapoor…a town in the province of Aurungabad…belonging to the Siddee family, formerly the hereditary admirals of the Mogul empire.’ See Hamilton (1828: 446).
438.
This is unlikely to be Periapatam (mod. Priyapatna) in south India (Mysore).
439.
Kangra. ‘Nagorcote, Nagracout, or Cotgangra, a town with a fort called Kangerah, among the mountains, near the confluence of Banganga and Patalganga, two branches of the Rauvee.’ See Playfair (1813: 402). It is called ‘An ancient town and district in the Kohistan or hilly country of the Lahore province.’ See Hamilton (1828: 73).
440.
Le Margne stated that Nader Shah spread a false rumor that he intended to attack the Turks again in order to deceive the Uzbecks, the next target of his campaigning. See Lockhart (1926a: 244, n. 1).
441.
Kalushkin .
442.
Nader Shah did not return to Isfahan as reported here, but proceeded northwards from Delhi, reaching Kabul on 2 December 1739 and Naderabad on 4 May 1740. See Minorsky (1934: 22).
443.
Muhammad Shah.
444.
Muhammad Shah.
445.
Muhammad Shah. This contradicts earlier reports of Nader Shah having returned to Isfahan.
446.
Anna Ivanovna.
447.
Muhammad Shah.
448.
Cf. 5.6 on the elephants sent to St. Petersburg.
449.
Ernst Johann von Biron (1690–1772), Duke of Courland (Curland/Kurland). Later in 1740, ‘The Empress Ann died, and her sister’s grandson, Prince Iwan, or John III, a child of a year old, was declared Emperor, in virtue of the will of the deceased Empress. The duke of Courland, by his intrigues, and by the ascendancy which he had over this Princess, had caused himself to be nominated Regent of Russia, to the exclusion of the mother and father of the young Emperor.’ See Mannstein (1773: xiv).
450.
Mohammad Reza Khan.
451.
Mohammad Tayyib Khan.
452.
Anna Ivanovna.
453.
The ancient Turco-Mongol title qaghan/khagan. For a discussion with bibliography see Potts (2014: 133–134, n. 83).
454.
Alexey Mikhailovich Cherkassky (d. 15 November, 1742; see Anonymous 1749a: 960), a member of the Czarina’s cabinet since 1731.
455.
Cf. 4.10, the speech given by a departing Persian ambassador in 1736, and the reply by Czerkaskoi.
456.
Mahmud I.
457.
Another false report of Nader Shah’s return to Isfahan.
458.
It is unclear whether this was simply a rumor or not. According to Otter (1748/2: 130), around the time that Nader Shah was in Larkana, he sent an ambassador to the Porte. ‘afin que le Grand Seigneur ne doutât pas de son retour, il lui dépêcha en chemin faisant, un Ambassadeur, qu’il chargea de présenter à Sultan Mahmoud plusieurs éléphans, de ceux qu’il avoit pris dans l’Inde. Cet Ambassadeur arriva à Bagdad au mois d’Août 1740, & fut reçu d’Ahmed Pacha avec des honneurs extraordinaires.’ This ambassador is not to be confused with Haji Khan whom Nader Shah later dispatched to Constantinople from Daghestan. See Olson (2017: 117, 145).
459.
A false rumor. On 12 February 1740 Nader Shah was in Larkana (mod. Pakistan) where, after some campaigning, he stayed until 10 April. See Minorsky (1934: 23).
460.
Charles VI.
461.
Haji Ivaz Mehmed Pasha.
462.
Mahmud I.
463.
Muhammad Shah.
464.
Muhammad Shah.
465.
Haji Ivaz MehmedPasha.
466.
A longstanding worry. As Longrigg (1925: 149) noted, ‘Turkey from end to end discussed the ambitions of Nadir and the dubious loyalty of Aḥmad Pasha of Baghdad.’
467.
Mahmud I.
468.
This did not happen.
469.
Muhammad Shah.
470.
Mahmud I.
471.
Haji Ivaz Mehmed Pasha.
472.
This is presumably the fire described by von Hammer (1840: 371–372) when he wrote, ‘Der Großwesir bewirthete den Sultan im Lustpalaste Beharije, nachdem sein eigener Palast in zweymahligen Brande eingeäschert worden, so, daß er den alten Pfortenpalast vormahliger Großwesire beziehen mußte.’ Judging by the dates given in the margins of von Hammer (1840: 372), this must have occurred sometime before 21 April 1740.
473.
Muhammad Shah.
474.
Mohammad Khan Turkoman. Cf. 4.92 for the three ambassadors sent by Nader Shah to the Mughal court.
475.
For a ‘Copy of the Edict and Declaration of the Mogul Emperor, corresponding to Mr. Voulton’s letter of the 21st April,’ see Lockhart (1926a: 240–241). The Edict reads, ‘You have sent me an Ambassador to deal with certain affairs. I did what I had to do so as to secure promptitude, and you would not have been obliged to send Mamerlan Tourkam [Mohammad Khan Turkoman] to me but for the omission of my ministers and men of affair, who always delayed replying to your letters and sending off of your ambassador, preferring to entangle us and to sow discord between our States rather than to do what I ordered them. This has compelled you to come here to seek me; we have fought, you have obtained the victory, and fortune has protected you up to the point of making you master of my countries. You have entered Delhi and you have made yourself lord of it; you have secured my person; you have seized my treasures, precious stones and jewels, and have forced me to hand over to you the statement of all my revenues. However, supposing that you promise to restore my throne and Empire to me, I give you, make you, and declare you sovereign and lord of the lands on the eastern side (? on the western side of the Indus), of the country of Nandabek, of the Indian Ocean, and the river Santgaza, of the Horor, of Kābul, of the mountains of Batan and Jar, of the fortress of Yexelcoudabat and of all that appertains to Tatta and Lesta, reserving for myself all Hindustan.’ Le Margne also quoted this document which Lockhart (1926b: 330) referred to as ‘the remarkable document which Muḥammad Shāh, doubtless at Nādir’s dictation, addressed to him.’ La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 387–388), who used De Voulton extensively, paraphrased it as well.
476.
Very different figures were given by Hanway (1753/2: 188) whose estimates were as follows: ‘Jewels taken from the Great Mogul and the Indian lords—25 – 31,250,000 l.; the peacock throne, with nine others, also several weapons and utensils all garnished with precious stones—9 crores—11,250,000 l.; gold and silver plate, and money, which Nadir melted down into large ingots—30 crores—37,500,000 l.;… rich manufactures of many kinds—2 crores—2,500,000; cannon, warlike stores, furniture, and other valuable commodities—4 crores—5,000,000 l.’ for a total worth of 81,500,000 l. A much more detailed enumeration was given by De Voulton. See Lockhart (1926a: 243), where the total in French currency came to 2,000,775 million livres. More conservative estimates were given by Fraser (1742: 220–221) and La Mamie de Clairac (1750/3: 384–385).
477.
As Lockhart (1926a: 237, n. 1) noted, ‘This appears to refer to certain coins struck at Ahmedābād which bear on one side the Persian inscription… “Nadir, King of Kings and Lord of the (fortunate) conjunction (of the stars), is Sultan over the Sultans of the World.”’ Coinage was also minted at Delhi after his entrance on 26 March 1739. See Minorsky (1934: 21).
478.
Haji Beshir Agha was not strangled. Cf. 4.164.
479.
Mahmud I was not deposed.
480.
Ahmed III.
481.
Muhammad Shah.
482.
Nasrollah Mirza, Nader Shah’s second son. As noted above, Nader Shah did not return directly to Isfahan after the Indian campaign and his son was married to an Indian princess who was the daughter of Yazdan Bakhsh and a great-granddaughter of Aurengzeb. See Lockhart (1938: 151). Of Yazdan Bakhsh Fraser (1742: 41) wrote, ‘Iesdan Bukhsh, called also Rahman Bukhsh, whose Daughter has been lately married to Nesr allah Mirza, Nadir Shah’s Son.’
483.
Hoseyn Khan. See Hanway (1753/4: 213). Cf. 4.181. Edward Finch wrote from St. Petersburg to Lord Harrington on 13 September 1740 that, ‘I heard also the other day that the Persian ambassador is arrived on the frontiers.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1893: 199). Mannstein (1773: 285) wrote that he ‘was a near relation of Schah Nadir, and master of horse to him.’ In a subsequent letter of 1 November Finch reported, ‘The first of the Persian ambassadors died two or three days after he entered the territories of Russia, but as there are half a dozen of them to succeed each other in case of mortality, the embassy will proceed.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1893: 360). According to Hanway (1753/4: 213 and n. k), the deceased Persian ambassador was Saidar Khan, ‘an old man, and reputed very brave, and a lover of justice, but otherwise not tender of spilling blood,’ who died at Kizlyar in Daghestan. A week later Finch wrote, ‘Upon the death of the first Persian ambassador, half a dozen of the chief persons in his train would all have been either separate or joint ambassadors; but general Apraxin declaring that he had only orders to conduct one, so that if there should be more, he must retire, after great disputes among themselves, they either agreed or drew lots which of them should be the ambassador.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1893: 365). VOC sources, however, say that Serdaar/Sardar Khan had been sent to Constantinople by Nader Shah, while Haji Mejdi Khan had been sent to St. Petersburg. See Floor (2009a: 191). According to Finch’s letter to Lord Harrington of 10 January 1741, ‘The Persian embassy will winter at Tamboff [Tambov], a little town towards the Don.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1893: 454). Tambov is c. 460–487 km south/southeast of Moscow.
484.
This is the same figure given in Hanway (1753/4: 213). On 8 November 1740 Finch wrote to Lord Harrington, ‘The train consists of nigh 3,000 persons, the greatest part of which have neither shoes nor stockings, as general Apraxin writes, adding that, in order to provide themselves, they desired two or three days after they had entered these territories, that they might encamp, and that he would assemble a fair, which he did accordingly, but soon broke it up, upon seeing that in a week the whole train had not purchased for the value of a rouble entire.’ See Imperial Russian Historical Society (1893: 365). The size of the retinue was meant to be even greater. According to von Schmidt-Phiseldek (1784: 328–329), ‘Nadir Schah (Tähmas Kuli Chan) hatte nach der Eroberung von Hindistan im Jahr 1740 eine Gesandtschaft abgeschickt, um den russischen Hof von seinen Siegen zu benachrichtigen, und hatte derselben ein Gefolge von 16000 Mann nebst 20 Kanonen mitgegeben. Der Petersburger Hof, der hievon zeitig genug Nachricht bekam, ließ um Astrachanj Truppen zusammenziehen, die an der persischen Grenze ein Lager formiren mußten. Als die Gesandtschaft sich dem Flusse Kislar näherte, schickte der Generalmajor Apraxin, der fünf Regimenter infanterie und sechs Dragonerregimenter befehligte, ihr entgegen und ließ ihr sagen; da sie zwischen Astrachan und Moskau eine große Steppe passiren müßte, so würde es unmöglich fallen, ein so starkes Gefolge mit allen Erfordernissen zu versehen; er bäte daher, nicht mehr als 3000 Mann bey sich zu behalten. Der Gesandte machte auf diese Erklärung halt und schickte einen Courier an seinen Herrn, welcher ihm denn befahl, mit den russischen Kommissarien sich über die Anzahl der Personen, die ihn nach Petersburg begleiten sollten, zu vergleichen. Daher kam er erst itzo daselbst an.’
485.
According to Hanway (1753/4: 213, n. l), ‘It was said, that this embassador made a demand for no less than 200 sheep, 2000 pounds of rice, and other provisions in proportion for his daily support.’
486.
Muhammad Shah.
487.
Hanway (1753/4: 213) wrote that the Russian ambassadors ‘convoyed ten elephants with several jewels and other rich presents.’
488.
Muhammad Shah.
489.
Muhammad Shah.

Bibliography

Anonymous. 1736b. Lettre écrite de Constantinople le 8. Septembre 1736, au sujet du nouveau Roy de Perse. Mercure historique et politique…(December): 2759-2763.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1738a. Russie. Petersbourg. Mémoires historiques pour le siècle courant…(January): 394-404.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1738c. Lettre de Constantinople de 12. Juillet 1738. Mercure de France (September): 2058-2063.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1738d. Nouvelles de Turquie, de Hongrie et d’Allemagne. De Constantinople. Lettre historique et politique (October) 105: 393-401.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1738e. Mémoires d’Italie, de Piémont & de Suisse. §I. Italie. Rome. Mémoires Historiques pour le siècle courant…(November): 483-488.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1738f. Von den Orientalischen Angelegenheiten. Europäischer Staats-Secretarius 43: 833-881.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1738g. Von gegenwärtigem Türcken-Kriege. Die neue europäische Fama, welche den gegenwärtigen Zustand der vornehmsten Höfe endecket 37: 149-186.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1739a. Extract of a letter from Smyrna, Nov. 1. (Giving an Account of the Turkish Rebellion in Natolia.). The Gentleman’s Magazine 9 (January): 50-51.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1739b. Foreign History. The Scots Magazine (May): 236-239.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1739c. Foreign History. The Scots Magazine (July): 333-336.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1739d. Foreign Affairs. Bombay in the E. Indies. The Gentleman’s Magazine 9: 387.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1742b. The History and Proceedings of the House of Commons from the Restoration to the Present Time, vol. 9. London: Richard Chandler.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1747a. Genealogisch-schematisches Staats-Handbuch vor das Jahr MDCCXXXVII. Frankfurt: Franz Barrentrapp.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1749a. Genealogisch-historische Nachrichten von den allerneuesten Begebenheiten, welche sich an den Europäischen Höfen zutragen…, vol. 133. Leipzig: Johann Samuel Heinsius.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1749e. History. The Scots Magazine (November): 549.
Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1751b. Des heiligen Römischen Reichs vollständiger genealogisch- und schematischer Kalender auf das Jahr nach Christi Geburt MDCCLI. Frankfurt: Franz Barrentrapp.
Google Scholar
Abeken, H. 1856. Der Eintritt der Türkei in die europäische Politik des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts. Berlin: Verlag von Wilhelm Hertz.
Google Scholar
Aimé-Martin, M.L. 1838. Lettres édifiantes et curieuses concernant l’Asie, l’Afrique et l’Amérique avec quelques relations nouvelles des missions et des notes géographiques et historiques, vol. 1. Paris: Auguste Desrez.
Google Scholar
Alberoni, G. 1736. Cardinal Alberoni’s Scheme for reducing the Turkish Empire to the obedience of Christian princes: And for a partition of the conquests…London: George Faulkner.
Google Scholar
Alderhold, G. 1739. Neue und accurate Vorstellung des großen Ottomannischen oder Türkischen Reichs…Nürnberg: Buggel und Seitz.
Google Scholar
Amburger, E. 1966. Geschichte der Behördenorganisation Russlands von Peter dem Grossen bis 1917. Leiden: Brill.
Google Scholar
Ateş, S. 2013. Ottoman-Iranian borderlands: Making a boundary, 1843-1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Book Google Scholar
Axworthy, M. 2010. The sword of Persia: Nader Shah, from tribal warrior to conquering tyrant. London: I.B. Tauris.
Google Scholar
Bain, R.N. 1897. The pupils of Peter the Great: A history of the Russian Court and Empire from 1697 to 1740. Westminster: A. Constable & Co.
Google Scholar
Bain, R.N. 1909. Russia under Anne and Elizabeth. Cambridge Modern History 6: 301-328.
Google Scholar
Battifol, P. 1912. History of the Roman Breviary. London: Longmans, Green and Co.
Google Scholar
Belfour, F.C. 1830. The life of Sheikh Mohammed Ali Hazin, written by himself… .London: The Oriental Translation Fund.
Google Scholar
Berti, M. 2012. La vetrina del Re: il Duca di Saint-Aignan, Ambasciatore francese a Roma, tra musicofilia e politica del prestigio (1731-1741). Pp. 233-290 in Monari, G., ed. Studi sulla musica dell’età barocca. Vignanello: Miscellanea Ruspoli 2.
Google Scholar
Beveridge, A.S. 1902. The history of Humāyūn (Humāyūn-nāma) by Gul-Badan Begam (Princess Rose-Body). London: Oriental Translation Fund NS 1.
Google Scholar
Bougainville, J.-P. de. 1752. Parallèle de l’Expédition d’Alexandre dans les Indes avec la conquête des mêmes contrées par Tahmas-Kouli-Khan. [no place of publication or publisher].
Google Scholar
Bournoutian, G.A. 1999b. The Chronicle of Abraham of Crete. Costa Mesa CA: Mazda Publishers.
Google Scholar
Bratischev, V. 1763. Nachricht von denen traurigen Begebenheiten, die sich zwischen dem Persischen Schache Nadir und dessen ältestem Sohne Resa-Kuli-Mirsa in den Jahren 1741 und 1742 zugetragen haben. Pp. 459-503 in Müller, G.F. Sammlung Russischer Geschichte, vol. 8. St. Petersburg: Bey der Kaiserlichen Academie der Wissenschaften.
Google Scholar
Brosset, M.-F. 1857. Histoire de la Géorgie depuis l’Antiquité jusqu’au XIXe siècle, vol. 2, part 2. St. Petersburg: Imprimerie de l’Académie Impériale des Sciences.
Google Scholar
Brown, J.M. 1875. ‘Defender of the Faith.’ The American Bibliopolist 7: 16-17.
Google Scholar
Cerceau, J.A. 1740. Histoire de Thamas Kouli-Kan, Sophi de Perse, vol. 1. Amsterdam/Leipzig: Arkstee & Merkus.
Google Scholar
Cerceau, J.A. 1742. The compleat history of Thamas Koulikan, (At present called Schah Nadir) Sovereign of Persia, 2^nd ed. London: J. Brindley.
Google Scholar
Claustre, A. de. 1743. Histoire de Thamas Kouli-Kan, roi de Perse, new ed. Paris: Chez Briasson.
Google Scholar
Creasy, E.S. 1856. History of the Ottoman Turks: From the beginning of their empire to the present time, 2 vols. London: Richard Bentley.
Google Scholar
De la Barre de Beaumarchais, A. 1741. Amusemens littéraires: ou Correspondance politique, historique, philosophique, critique, & galante, vol. 3. The Hague: Jean van Duren.
Google Scholar
Desherbiers, G. 1806. Mémoires du comte de Bonneval, officier-général, Au service de Louis XIV, Roi de France…, new ed., vol. 2. Paris: Capelle and Renand.
Google Scholar
Dorn, B. 1875. Caspia. Über die Einfälle der alten Russen in Tabaristan nebst Zugaben über andere von ihnen auf dem Kaspischen Meere und in den anliegenden Ländern ausgeführte Unternehmungen. St. Petersburg: Mémoires de l’Académie Impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg 7th Ser. 23/1.
Google Scholar
Floor, W. 2009a. The rise and fall of Nader Shah: Dutch East India Company reports, 1730-1747. Washington DC: Mage.
Google Scholar
Floor, W. and Faghfoory, M.H. 2007. Dastur al-Moluk: A Safavid state manual by Mohammad Rafi‘ al-Din Ansâri (mostowfi al-mamâlek). Costa Mesa CA: Mazda Publishers.
Google Scholar
Forbiger, A. 1844. Handbuch der alten Geographie, aus den Quellen bearbeitet, 2 vols. Leipzig: Verlag von Mayer und Wigand.
Google Scholar
Fraser, J. 1742. The History of Nadir Shah, formerly called Thamas Kuli Khan, the present Emperor of Persia…London: W. Strahan.
Google Scholar
Gatenby, E.V. 1954. Material for a study of Turkish words in English. Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi 12: 85-144
Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. 1828. The East-India Gazetteer…, vol. 2. London: Parbury, Allen, and Co.
Google Scholar
Hammer, J. von. 1831. Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches, grossentheils aus bisher unbenützten Handschriften und Archiven. Siebenter Band. Vom Carlowiczer bis zum Belgrader Frieden. 1699-1739, vol. 7. Pest: C.A. Hartleben’s Verlag.
Google Scholar
Hammer, J. von. 1840. Geschichte des Osmanischen Reiches, grossentheils aus bisher unbenützten Handschriften und Archiven. Zweyte verbesserte Auflage. Neue Ausgabe. Vierter Band. Vom Carlowiczer Frieden bis zum Frieden von Kainardsche. 1699-1774. Pest: C.A. Hartleben’s Verlag.
Google Scholar
Hanway, J. 1753. An historical account of the British trade over the Caspian Sea…, 4 vols. London [no publisher given].
Google Scholar
Hathaway, J. 1992. The role of the Kizlar Ağasi in 17^th-18^th century Ottoman Egypt. Studia Islamica 75: 141-158.
Google Scholar
Hathaway, J. 2005. Beshir Agha: Chief Eunuch of the Ottoman Imperial Harem. London: Oneworld Publications.
Google Scholar
Hathaway, J. 2009. Eunuch households in Istanbul, Medina, and Cairo during the Ottoman era. Turcica 41: 291-303.
Article Google Scholar
Hathaway, J. 2019. Kızlar Ağası. Encyclopaedia of Islam 3: 114-115.
Google Scholar
Hedin, S. 1918. Eine Routenaufnahme durch Ostpersien, vol. 2. Stockholm: Generalstabens Litografiska Anstalt.
Google Scholar
Hurewitz, J.C. 1956. Diplomacy in the Near and Middle East, Documentary Record 1535-1914, vol. 1. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.
Google Scholar
Imperial Russian Historical Society. 1886a. Сборник Императорскаго русскаго историческаго общества, vol. 52. St. Petersburg: Imperial Academy of Sciences.
Google Scholar
Imperial Russian Historical Society. 1892. Сборник Императорскаго русскаго историческаго общества, vol. 80. St. Petersburg: Imperial Academy of Sciences.
Google Scholar
Imperial Russian Historical Society. 1893. Сборник Императорскаго русскаго историческаго общества, vol. 85. St. Petersburg: Imperial Academy of Sciences.
Google Scholar
d’Irumberry, C.M. [Marquis of Salaberry] 1813. Histoire de l’Empire ottoman, depuis sa fondation jusqu’à la paix d’Yassy, en 1792. Paris: Le Normant.
Google Scholar
Jones, D.M. 1966. Five Hungarian writers. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar
Jones, W. 1770. Histoire de Nader Chah, connu sous le nom de Tahmas Kuli Khan, Empereur de Perse…, 2 vols. London: P. Elmsly.
Google Scholar
Kakuk, S. 1973. Recherches sur l’histoire de la langue Osmanlie des XVIe et XVIIe siècles: Éléments osmanlis de la langue hongroise. The Hague: Mouton.
Google Scholar
Knolles, R. and Rycaut, P. 1704. The Turkish History…, vol. 1, 2^nd ed. London: Isaac Cleave.
Google Scholar
Korabinsky, J.M. 1788. Versuch eines kleinen Türkischen Wörterbuchs mit beygesetzten deutsch-ungrisch und böhmischen Bedeutungen, und einer kurzgefaßten türkischen Sprachlehre. Preßburg: im eigenen Verlag des Verfassers.
Google Scholar
Krones, F. 1879. Geschichte der Neuzeit Oesterreichs vom achtzehnten Jahrhundert bis auf die Gegenwart. Berlin: Verlag von Theodor Hofmann.
Google Scholar
La Mamie de Clairac, L.-A. de. 1750. Histoire de Perse, depuis le commencement de ce siècle, 3 vols. Paris: Chez Charles-Antoine Jombert.
Google Scholar
Laugier, M.-A. 1768. Histoire des négociations pour la paix conclue à Belgrade, le 18 Septembre 1739…, 2 vols. Paris: Chez la Veuve Duchesne.
Google Scholar
Legrand, É. 1881. Éphémérides daces ou Chronique de la Guerre de Quatre Ans (1736-1739), vol. 2. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Google Scholar
Lockhart, L. 1926a. De Voulton’s Noticia. BSOAS 4/2: 223-245.
Google Scholar
Lockhart, L. 1926b. Le Margne’s ‘Life of Nadir Shah.’ Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 12/3: 321-333.
Google Scholar
Lockhart, L. 1938. Nadir Shah: A critical study based mainly upon contemporary sources. London: Luzac & Co.
Google Scholar
Longrigg, S. 1925. Four centuries of modern Iraq. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar
Mackenzie, M. 1764. An account of the plague at Constantinople. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 54: 69-82.
Google Scholar
Malleson, G.B. 1893. History of the French in India: From the founding of Pondichery in 1674 to the capture of that place in 1761. London: W.H. Allen & Co.
Google Scholar
Malleson, H. and Tuker, M.A.R. 1897. Handbook to Christian and Ecclesiastical Rome, vol. 1. London: Adam and Charles Black.
Google Scholar
Manstein [sic, Mannstein], C.H. von. 1773. Memoir of Russia, from the year 1727, to the year 1744, 2nd ed. London: T. Becket and P.A. De Hondt.
Google Scholar
Martineau, A. 1916. Correspondance du Conseil Supérieur de Pondichèry avec le Conseil de Chandernagor, vol. 2. 1738-1747. Pondicherry: Archives de l’Inde Française.
Google Scholar
Matthee, R., Floor, W. and Clawson, P. 2013. The monetary history of Iran: From the Safavids to the Qajars. London/New York: I.B. Tauris & Co.
Book Google Scholar
Mingana, A. 1926. List of the Turkish Governors and High Judges of Aleppo from the Ottoman conquest to A.D. 1747. Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 10: 515-523.
Article Google Scholar
Minorsky, V. 1934. Esquisse d’une histoire de Nāder-Chāh. Paris: Publications de la Société des Études iraniennes et de l’Art persan 10.
Google Scholar
Montaiglon, A. de and Guiffréy, J. 1899. Correspondance des Directeurs de l’Académie de France à Rome…, vol. 9. Paris: Charavay Frères.
Google Scholar
Mottley, J. 1739. The history of the life of Peter the First, Emperor of Russia…London: Printed and sold by the Booksellers in Town and Country.
Google Scholar
Olson, R.W. 2017. The siege of Mosul and Ottoman-Persian relations, 1718-1743: A study of rebellion in the capital and war in the provinces of the Ottoman Empire. Costa Mesa CA: Mazda Publishers.
Book Google Scholar
Otter, J. 1748. Voyage en Turquie et en Perse. Avec une Relation des expéditions de Tahmas Kouli-Khan, 2 vols. Paris: Chez les Freres Guerin.
Google Scholar
Özel, M.N. 2018. Ambassadors, spies, captives, merchants and travelers: Ottoman information networks in the East, 1736-1747. Unpubl. MA thesis. İstanbul Şehir University.
Google Scholar
Picault, C. 1810. Histoire des révolutions de Perse, pendant la durée du dix-huitième siècle de l’ère chrétienne, 2 vols. Paris: Chez A. Égron, H. Nicolle and Lenormant.
Google Scholar
Pithander von der Quelle [Fassman, D.]. 1738. Herkunfft, Leben und Thaten, des persianischen Monarchens, Schach Nadyr vormals Kuli-Chan genannt… Leipzig/ Rudolfstadt: Verlegts Wolffgang Deer.
Google Scholar
Playfair, J. 1813. A System of Geography, ancient and modern…, vol. 5. Edinburgh: Peter Hill and London: J. Murray.
Google Scholar
Potts, D.T. 2014. Nomadism in Iran: From antiquity to the modern era. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Rabino, H.-L. 1917. Les Provinces caspiennes de la Perse. Le Guilân. Revue du Monde Musulman 32: 1-499.
Google Scholar
Rani, A. 2016. Socio-political life of Iranis and Turanis in Mughal India (1526-1707). Unpubl. PhD dissertation. Jammu University.
Google Scholar
Rocchi, L. 2017. Addenda from pre-Meninski transcription texts to Stanisław Stachowski’s “Osmanlı Türkçesinde yeni Farsça alintilar Sözlüğu”. Part IX. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 134: 123-142.
Article Google Scholar
Roider, K.A., Jr. 1976/77. Futile peacemaking: Austria and the Congress of Nemirov (1737). Austrian History Yearbook 12/13: 95-107.
Google Scholar
Rousselot de Surgy, J.-P. 1767. Mémoires géographiques, physiques et historiques sur l’Asie, l’Afrique & l’Amérique. Tirés des Lettres Édifiantes, & des Voyages des Missionnaires Jésuites, vol. 3. Paris: Chez Durand.
Google Scholar
Satow, E. 1922. A guide to diplomatic practice, vol. 2, 2nd rev. ed. London/New York/Toronto: Longmans, Green and Co.
Google Scholar
Schmidt-Phiseldek, C. von. 1784. Materialien zu der russischen Geschichte seit dem Tode Kaisers Peter des Großen, vol. 2. Riga: Johann Friedrich Hartknoch.
Google Scholar
Schumann, G. 1733. Jährliches genealogisches Hand-Buch…Leipzig: Joh. Friedr. Gleditschens Handlung.
Google Scholar
Scott, J. 1794. Ferishta’s History of Dekkan, from the first Mahummedan conquests…, vol. 2. Shrewsbury: J. and W. Eddowes.
Google Scholar
Sefatgol, M. 2005. From Dār al-Salṭana-yi Iṣfahān to Dār al-Khilāfa-yi Ṭihrān: Continuity and change in the Safavid model of state-religious administration during the Qajars (1795-1895/1209-1313). Pp. 71-83 in Gleave, R., ed. Religion and society in Qajar Iran. London/New York: RoutledgeCurzon.
Google Scholar
Seraphim, A. 1904. Livländische Geschichte von der “Aussegelung” der Lande bis zur Einverleibung in das russische Reich, vol. 3, 2nd ed. Reval [Talinn]: Verlag von Franz Kluge.
Google Scholar
Stopka, K. 2016. Armenia Christiana: Armenian religious identity and the churches of Constantinople and Rome (4^th-15^th century). Kraków: Jagiellonian University Press.
Google Scholar
Storch, H. 1801. The Picture of Petersburg. London: T.S. Longman & O. Rees.
Google Scholar
Sykes, P.M. 1940. A history of Afghanistan, 2 vols. London: Macmillan and Co.
Google Scholar
Tafażżoli, A. 1999/2012. Ferēdūn. EnIrOE.
Google Scholar
Tavernier, J.B. 1684. Collections of Travels through Turky into Persia, and the East-Indies…, vol. 1. London: Moses Pitt.
Google Scholar
Telfer, J.B. 1879. The bondage and travels of Johann Schiltberger, a native of Bavaria, in Europe, Asia, and Africa. 1396-1427. London: Hakluyt Society.
Google Scholar
Thogmartin, C. 1998. The National Daily Press of France. Birmingham AL: Summa Publications, Inc.
Google Scholar
Tolmacheva, M. 1992. Recent publications on Central Asia and the Caucasus. Turkish Studies Association Bulletin 16: 117-125.
Google Scholar
Tucker, E. 1993. Explaining Nadir Shah: Kingship and royal legitimacy in Muhammad Kazim Marvi’s Tārīkh-i ‘ālam-ārā-yi Nādirī. IrSt 26: 95-117.
Google Scholar
Tucker, E. 1996. The peace negotiations of 1736: A conceptual turning point in Ottoman-Iranian relations. Turkish Studies Association Bulletin 20: 16-37.
Google Scholar
Uebersberger, H. 1913. Russlands Orientpolitik in den letzten zwei Jahrhunderten, vol. 1. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt.
Google Scholar
Vandal, A. 1885. Le Pacha Bonneval. Paris: Au Cercle Saint-Simon.
Google Scholar
Vandal, A. 1887. Une ambassade française en Orient sous Louis XV. La mission du Marquis de Villeneuve 1728-1741, 2nd ed. Paris: Librairie Plon.
Google Scholar
Vanina, E. 1997. Of Russian spies and itinerants: Different perspectives on eighteenth century India. India International Centre Quarterly 24: 32-47.
Google Scholar
Yule, H. and Burnell, A.S. 1903. Hobson-Jobson: A glossary of colloquial Anglo-Indian words and phrases, and of kindred terms, etymological, historical, geographical and discursive, ed. W. Crooke. London: John Murray.
Google Scholar
Zenker, J.T. 1861. Bibliotheca Orientalis. Manuel de bibliographie orientale, vol. 2. Leipzig: Guillaume Engelmann.
Google Scholar
Zinkeisen, J.W. 1857. Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches in Europa, vol. 5. Gotha: Friedrich Andreas Perthes.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

New York University, New York, USA
D. T. Potts

Authors

D. T. Potts
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

New York University, New York, USA
D.T. Potts

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Potts, D.T. (2022). The Career of Nader Shah, Up to and Including the Conquest of India (1736–1741). In: Potts, D. (eds) Agreeable News from Persia. Universal- und kulturhistorische Studien. Studies in Universal and Cultural History. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-36032-0_4

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-36032-0_4
Published: 07 September 2022
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-36031-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-36032-0
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics