Competing Sovereignties in Eighteenth-Century South Asia: Afghan Claims to Kingship

IF 0.5 1区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Neelam Khoja
{"title":"Competing Sovereignties in Eighteenth-Century South Asia: Afghan Claims to Kingship","authors":"Neelam Khoja","doi":"10.1163/15685209-12341519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAhmad Shah Abdali-Durrani’s court chronicle, Taʾrīkh-i Aḥmad Shāhī, written by Mahmud bin Ibrahim al-Husaini and completed soon after Ahmad Shah’s death in 1772, provides an eighteenth-century perspective on the criterion for kingship and sovereignty. Unsurprisingly, the only person who fulfills these requirements, according to the historian, is Ahmad Shah. While this is standard practice in most Persianate and Islamic histories about a king, the text deviates from a number of other literary conventions. The historian deemphasizes Ahmad Shah’s genealogy and connection to Sufi saints; instead, he focuses on Ahmad Shah’s inner piety and morality by attributing to him the concept of ilhām (direct revelation from God)—an attribute more generally characteristic of prophets and saints, not kings. The double move of deemphasizing lineage and Sufi connection while privileging personal, God-bestowed attributes is sharpened through comparison: Mughal governors and emperors are depicted by the author as descendants of noble, dynastic genealogies, but govern incompetently because they do not have the clarity of vision and fate of victory on their side, as God has not bestowed them with ilhām.","PeriodicalId":45906,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/15685209-12341519","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685209-12341519","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Ahmad Shah Abdali-Durrani’s court chronicle, Taʾrīkh-i Aḥmad Shāhī, written by Mahmud bin Ibrahim al-Husaini and completed soon after Ahmad Shah’s death in 1772, provides an eighteenth-century perspective on the criterion for kingship and sovereignty. Unsurprisingly, the only person who fulfills these requirements, according to the historian, is Ahmad Shah. While this is standard practice in most Persianate and Islamic histories about a king, the text deviates from a number of other literary conventions. The historian deemphasizes Ahmad Shah’s genealogy and connection to Sufi saints; instead, he focuses on Ahmad Shah’s inner piety and morality by attributing to him the concept of ilhām (direct revelation from God)—an attribute more generally characteristic of prophets and saints, not kings. The double move of deemphasizing lineage and Sufi connection while privileging personal, God-bestowed attributes is sharpened through comparison: Mughal governors and emperors are depicted by the author as descendants of noble, dynastic genealogies, but govern incompetently because they do not have the clarity of vision and fate of victory on their side, as God has not bestowed them with ilhām.
18世纪南亚的主权竞争:阿富汗对王权的要求
Ahmad Shah Abdali-Durrani的宫廷编年史,Ta al- r kh-i Aḥmad Shāhī,由Mahmud bin Ibrahim al-Husaini撰写,并于1772年Ahmad Shah去世后不久完成,提供了18世纪对王权和主权标准的看法。不出所料,根据这位历史学家的说法,唯一符合这些要求的人是艾哈迈德·沙阿。虽然这是大多数波斯和伊斯兰历史中关于国王的标准做法,但文本偏离了许多其他文学惯例。历史学家淡化了艾哈迈德·沙阿的家谱和他与苏菲派圣徒的联系;相反,他把重点放在艾哈迈德·沙阿内心的虔诚和道德上,把ilhām(来自上帝的直接启示)的概念归因于他——这是先知和圣徒的普遍特征,而不是国王的特征。通过比较,弱化血统和苏菲派联系,同时赋予个人、上帝赋予的属性特权的双重举动变得更加尖锐:作者将莫卧儿王朝的统治者和皇帝描绘成贵族、王朝谱系的后裔,但由于他们没有清晰的远见和胜利的命运站在他们一边,因为上帝没有赋予他们ilhām。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient (JESHO) publishes original research articles in Asian, Near, Middle Eastern and Mediterranean Studies across history. The journal promotes world history from Asian and Middle Eastern perspectives and it challenges scholars to integrate cultural and intellectual history with economic, social and political analysis. The editors of the journal invite both early-career and established scholars to present their explorations into new fields of research. JESHO encourages debate across disciplines in the humanities and the social sciences. Published since 1958, JESHO is the oldest and most respected journal in its field. Please note that JESHO will not accept books for review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信