Paradoxes and Realities of the Iranian Politics of the First Romanovs

It has long been common understanding in corresponding historiography that Russian-Iranian economic relations in the 17th century were exceptionally important and mutually beneficialMatthee R. Safi, Shah of Persia. P 573-581.. The trade between Qizilbash power and Russia was fairly, to a large extent, defined by E. S. Zevakin as the main subject of the bilateral diplomatic contactsZevakin E. S. Persidskii vopros v russko-evropeiskikh otnosheniiakh XVII v. P 157; Kukanova N. G. Ocherki po istorii russko-iranskikh torgovykh otnoshenii... P 33..

The sources bear testimony that Russian merchants and those forced to travel with them (former Ottoman captives) often became the insiders who provided voivodas in Astrakhan and Terki with the latest information. For instance, news about the death of Shah Abbas I was communicated to the Astrakhan administration by "townsman Fed'ka Grigorev" and "Ivashka Ivanov, a peasant's son from Zakomaritskiy volost"Chelobitnaia Mikhailu Fedorovichu ot astrakhanskikh liudei. L. 34.. The particulars of how the "youngest grandson" (youngest son of the oldest son) of Abbas the Great came into power, perhaps "legendary" and unreliable, were conveyed to voivoda Y. P. Bu- inosov-Rostovskii by "Syuen Akhmatov, a Terki Kumik, a man of kniaz' Ildar"Ibid. L. 40-42..

His information could be compared to that related by historiographers of the Safavid times, which is the main source for contemporary researchers. Natives of the Terki relate that ".. .the previous Shah, Abbas I, died and left his youngest grandson, son of Sufimurz- in, to rule; the eldest grandson, Emshitsha, son of SufimurzinIn fact, this means Shah-Dzhemshid-khan, the son of the penultimate khan Biyya-pas (part of Gilan), which is described below., he blinded". Having been blinded, he was taken to Gilan lands and hidden there by his kinsmen, and "doctors of Gilan" recovered his eyesight. And when Abbas I died, citizens of Gilan made him their shah, after which Emshim-shah started a war against his brotherChelobitnaia Mikhailu Fedorovichu ot astrakhanskikh liudei. L. 40-42..

Evidently, this refers to the Gilan uprising of 1629 described in sufficient detail in Safavid sourcesFumani Abd al-Fatih. Tarikh-i Gilan. and studied by I. P. PetrushevskiiPetrushevskii I. P Narodnoe vosstanie v Giliane v 1629 g. // Uchenye zapiski Instituta vostokovede- niia AN SSSR. 1951. No. 3. P 226-256.. The narrative of legitimization of the Gilan ruler (albeit under a different name) is noteworthy. According to Syuen Akhmatov, he was the legitimate ruler by order of the line of succession. In fact, if Fumani and Munshi are to be believed, there was an attempt by the local aristocracy to return the status previously held by Biya Pas (part of Gilan), which was held by it prior to the definitive conquest of the given part of the Caspian region by Abbas I. This being said, among insurgents there was a Shiite form of legitimization of the uprising - proclamation of the real leader, Adil-shah, a ruler in the house of "sheikh of time"Petrushevskii I. P. Narodnoe vosstanie v Giliane v 1629 g. P. 226-256..

The uprising in Biya Pish (another part of Gilan) had an effect on the Russian-Iranian trade relations and was discussed in missive letters of both the tsar and the shah as well as their subjects. Property of Russian merchants suffered damage in the first hours of the uprising (according to I. P. Petrushevskii, it happened already on April, 14, 1629), when Lahijan was occupied. At the outset, the house of "kalantar" (town head appointed by the shah's government from among local feudal lords or prominent merchants) was burgledIbid. P. 240., then - houses of treasurers. Near the houses of the latter - according to a Gilan historian - "there were numerous goods brought in from Moskova by sea... and all government property and goods were plundered and ruined"Ibid; Fumani Abd al-Fatih. Tarlkh-i Gilan. P 51..

Astrakhan voivoda Y. P. Buinosov-Rostovskii and his associates S. I. Volynskii with G. Nechaev continued to observe the situation. Trade people ("teziks") Ibrahim Aivarov from Shemakhi and Khodji Nurmuratbekov who arrived on 12 August from Qazvin were specific and said that the insurgents "made shah out of a son of a. townsman named Kharip, but they say they called him // son of Gilan Yumshit-khanChelobitnaia Mikhailu Fedorovichu ot astrakhanskikh liudei. L. 78-79.". The fact that they call the leader of the Gilans "Kharip" ("garib" means "tramp" in Arabic) testifies that the informants were on the side of the new shah. "Yumshid" refers to Shah-Jemshid-khan, son of the last but one khan of Gilan (Biya-Pas) of the Iskhakhid dynastyPetrushevskii I. P Narodnoe vosstanie v Giliane v 1629 g. // Uchenye zapiski Instituta vostokovede- niia AN SSSR. 1951. No. 3. P 229.. Then the "teziks" give a relatively detailed and reliable account of how the uprising was stifled, which is outside the scope of the article.

We would only like to note that Russian merchants were robbed for the second time when "warriors" of the new shah took the towns of Rasht and Lahijan back by force. Terki voivoda knyaz Ivan Dashkov and his associate Bogdan Priklonskii passed on the words of Bagyshko Aliev, uncle of Kabardian knyaz Sholokh Sunchaleevich. The latter conveyed that the new shah "won over Gilan warriors just outside Lahijan", the town was taken over and "Russian trade people who happened to be there" were robbed by Qizilbash warriors. The robbed merchants complained to Shah Safi I, who then promised to return the goodsChelobitnaia Mikhailu Fedorovichu ot astrakhanskikh liudei. L. 43-45..

We do not have certain information that the losses were recompensed to the merchants. We only have "humble petition to Mikhail Fedorovich from the people of Astrakhan" dated August 1629 where they write about the good will of Shah Safi I to compensate the Russian merchants from his own treasury (it is safe to assume that the intention was realized some ten years later, which we will return to at the end of the article). The document in question cites the words of an Astrakhan townsman Martyn Kondratev who arrived from Shamakhi. The Russian merchants who were in Gilan went to complain to the new shah and he "asked cordially who was robbed of how many goods" and intended to give out a "note" ("skaska") from his own treasuryIbid. L. 88..

Martyn Kondratev also conveyed that Shah Safi I abolished silk duties. "And now they say, oh tsar, your Russian people who bought silk were not collected duties from according to the shah's order"Ibid. L. 87-88..

Abolition of duties and return of control over Gilan did not become the safety guarantee for Russian merchants. In the "List of insulting affairs" there is a whole list of complaints by the latter concerning arbitrary treatment by Shah Safi's I administration and subjects. The scale of mistreatment can be seen clearly from the document, in addition to the evident presence of a whole Russian trade network in the larger towns of the Safavid state. Unfortunately, exact dates of the events described are unknown but, judging from the context, it could be stated that the years referred to are 1628-1629, i. e., during the transition time in Iran: the last year of reign of Abbas I and the first year of reign of Safi I.

Cases of robberies and mistreatment were multiple. In particular, in Astrabad, "prikaz people of the shah" took duties from a citizen of Yaroslavl, Griaznov-Selivanov, "in Iranian and Russian money"Rospisi obidnym delam... L. 1.. The most rowdiness was displayed by the son of - evidently - vicarious ruler (governor) of Ardebil, "Sultan Allahul". He took from a citizen of Kazan, Semyon Deyev, his goods and paid less than due, closed down the shop and intended to murder the merchant himself Ibid. L. 2.. The aforementioned relative of the shah's official failed to pay the full price of the goods to another citizen of Kazan, Semen Tret'iakov, and when the former complained, he was beaten and put in jailIbid. L. 3.. A similar event occurred to yet another dweller of Kazan, Oleg Chernopenkov. This merchant was only set free after he paid a bribeIbid.. Such cases were not unseen in ArdebilIbid. L. 5, 6.. The town itself had sacred significance to the Safavid dynasty and was their own seignioryPetrushevskii I. P. Ocherki po istorii feodal'nykh otnoshenii v Azerbaidzhane i Armenii v XVI - nachale XIX veka. Leningrad, 1949. P. 68., from which we can assume that Shah Safi was aware of what was going on in town.

The last ambassador sent by Abbas I, Magmet Sali-beck, who was in Russia in 16291630, was also notified about the increasing frequency of robberies and mistreatment - to which he replied that shah knew nothing about the situation that had developedRospisi obidnym delam. L. 21.. In this regard, it is of interest to draw a parallel between the tenure of clerk Alexei Savvich Romanchukov in Iran in 1636-1637, who on numerous occasions became a witness of mistreatment on the part of some of the shah's officials. The message about the "plundered government goods" and Shah Safi's promise to recompense all are found in his list (stateinyi spisok)Otryvok iz stateinogo spiska A. Romanchukova // RSAAA. F. 77. Op. 1: 1636. D. 1. L. 32, 35.. Concurrently, A. S. Romanchukov also reported that cases of unfair treatment of merchants were not known to Safi I, to the best of his knowledge. The same source bears evidence of a curious discussion he had with the head of the Holstein mission, Otto Brugman. The latter asserted that "previously, during the reign of Abbas shah, or currently, during the reign of Shah Safi, it happens that merchants of the great tsar are converted into Islam, and having taken their goods, ambassador suffers violence and dishonor, like you did". A. S. Romanchukov warded off - "it was done unbeknownst to the shah and his close circle by malefactors, and shah said to me that all the lost property's worth shall be sent to his majesty the tsar with a shah's ambassador". Otto Brugman offered the following line of defense in continuation of the discussion - "every ambassador or a messenger bears the person of their monarch upon them, and are to be honoured as their monarch, and the close circle should not act on their own will and only the monarch to whom he was sent should know about him, and he who trusts ambassadorial affairs with other states to his subjects and does not know about such himself cannot be considered true monarch"Otryvok iz stateinogo spiska A. Romanchukova. P. 91-92.. Taking into consideration the crime for which the head of the Holstein mission was executed upon his return, his reply is utterly ironic.

During A. S. Romanchukov's time as a message deliverer in Iran, there happened a curious case of "legal" theft of the tsar's property. A merchant named Savelii Arapov, being on a tsar's trade mission in Shamakhi, laid his hands on tsar's property ("15 pack loads of silk, some tents, and 13 camels"Ibid. P. 1.) and adopted Islam. The messenger, in addition to his "high" diplomatic goals, received the order to return Savelii to his homeland. The latter, in his turn, asked for protection of the local government, and they took the convert's side, whereas it was A. S. Romanchukov who had to deal with the difficulties which arose.

"...let those thieving Cossacks come to your bow so that they do not steal anymore, we are going to chasten them so that henceforth they no longer steal."Perevod gramoty shakha Sefi I... L. 333-337.

Already the first year of Shah Safi's reign was marked by massive assaults by Cossacks on Iranian Caspian shore. The case became so widely known that even the voivoda of Astrakhan received news about it. In the spring of 1629, Cossacks in four river boats approached the village of "Lengerkunen" (currently town of Lankaran, Republic of Azerba- idjan), debarked and presented themselves as people of Mikhail Fedorovich's ambassador. After that they killed the head of the village (kalandar), his wives and childrenChelobitnaia Mikhailu Fedorovichu ot astrakhanskikh liudei. L. 84.. Further on, two busas (trade boats) were plundered on the shore of Gilan, after which the Cossacks headed towards Baku, where after a short battle with the shah's "warriors" they left the Iranian shoreIbid..

Apparently, in the following years there were more raids with even more dire consequences. Judging by a humble petition from voivodas of Astrakhan sent to the tsar in the spring of 1631, some of the Cossacks of Don moved to Volga's estuary and began to prepare for a raid of the Caspian shore. The document also indicates dates and facts of assaults on Iranian trade busas[Sukhorukov V. D.] Istoricheskoe opisanie Zemli Voiska Donskogo: in 2 vols. Vol. 1. Novocherkassk, 1869. P. 225-226.. The Caspian parts of the Safavid state began to suffer assaults due to the change in external policy. In 1632, after Moscow removed its disfavor towards the Cossacks of Don, they were prohibited to "make war upon" the Black and Azov sea regionsIbid.. Insofar as it was not prohibited to make raids to the south and west of the Caspian Sea, the Cossacks began assaulting Iranian trade boats and settlements situated between Derbent and Gilan. In 1634, there was yet another prominent raid into the regions of Derbent, Baku and GilanIbid..

It is reasonably safe to suggest that it was exactly due to these raids that ambassador Khadji-beck, who arrived in Russia in 1634, brought the words of Shah Safi I calling to take measures against the Cossacks whose threats, apparently, implied shah's raids into the tsar's territories: "And if it is not your will to let those thieving Cossacks come to your bow so that they do not steal anymore, we are going to chasten them so that henceforth they no longer steal.. ."Perevod gramoty shakha Sefi I. L. 335.

Another obstacle in the way of maintaining friendly relations between the two sovereigns, apart from the Cossacks' raids, was arbitrary treatment on the part of representatives of the Russian administration. These incidents are described in detail in documents pertaining to shah's merchant, Kvadji Rakhmat, who stayed in Russia. His misfortunes, sometimes of rather comical nature, his complaints concerning them, the semantics and linguistic borrowings from the Russian language in his texts in the Persian language were studied in detail by O. M. Yastrebova and S. E. KostikovKostikov S. E., Yastrebova O. M. Chelobitnye iranskogo kupchiny Khvadzhi Rakhmata. P. 122145; Yastrebova O. M., Pischurnikova E. P, Kostikov S. E. Iz istorii russko-persidskikh iazykovykh kontaktov epokhi Sefevidov. P. 48-55.. We are only going to briefly touch upon the range of issues which the trade representative of Safi I had to face.

His problems began as early as Astrakhan. According to his own documents, the position that Kvadji Rakhmat held was that of "kirakyarak" (merchant), i. e., shah's trade representative whose mission was to sell the shah's goods and with the proceeds to purchase what was required by his sovereignKostikov S. E., Yastrebova O. M. Chelobitnye iranskogo kupchiny Khvadzhi Rakhmata. P. 122-145.. However, shah's letter contained no information about the number and names of the shah's goods. F. F. Kurakin, voivoda of Astrakhan, paid immediate attention to that fact ordering a pristav, a small landowner (son "boiarskii") Andrei Tarbeev to make a list of the shah's goods. The merchant did not allow the pristav in, made his own list and passed it on to voivoda without, however, letting him verify the property according to the list. As voivode put it, there was "great disobedience on his part in Astrakhan"Chelobitnaia astrakhanskogo voevody F. F. Kurakina // rSaAA. F. 77. Op. 1: 1630. D. 1. L. 18.. During Kvadji Rakhmat's stay in Astrakhan, the administration arrested 15 people of the merchant's party "per force". The list was not checked and the stubborn kirakyarak with twenty four of his people was sent to KazanIbid. L. 19.. Prior to his departure from Astrakhan, there was a fire in the caravanserai during which two Qurans were stolen from him. The theft was discovered later on in Kazan.

In Nizhniy Novgorod, the merchant had conflicts with other merchants in the stalls at a fair. The roof of his stand was brought down, goods were piled with snow, and, in addition, 30 roubles were stolenChelobitnaia Mikhailu Fedorovichu ot Ivana Voinova // Ibid. L. 60-61.. A fight with "muzhik Afanas" (that is how his opponent is referred to in a humble petition) that occurred in Moscow could be listed among Kvadji Rakhmat's comical adventures. The former did not let the latter and his people into a bania despite his status of a guest and the tsar's order. The fight was followed by beating of the merchant's dragoman, his falconer, the tsar's dragoman and watchmen; and then Kvadji Murat's emerald went missing. He found the insult so great that the shah's representative asked that the perpetrator be punished in as many as 5 humble petitions addressed to the tsarChelobitnaia Mikhailu Fedorovichu ot Ivana Voinova // RSAAA. F. 77. Op. 1: 1631. L. 167, 180, 187..

The beating case was studied thoroughly by clerks Fedor Likhachev and Maksim Matyshkin. They paid immediate attention to the fact that the emerald was not on the list, i. e., in contemporary terms, was not "declared". Moreover, according to a "trade man of Sukonnaia sotnia Ofonas Dmitriev", the merchant and his people broke into the yard and upset the lock. Then "that merchant's murza and his people beat me, your orphan child, and foul-mouthed me"; other guests of the court listed in the humble petition also received their share of the beating. A famous participant of the First Volunteer Army and the Second Volunteer Army - Boris Stone necklaceChelobitnaia Afanasiia Dmitrieva // Ibid. L. 170-171. was among the beaten guests.

Following the results of investigation, the emerald was returned to its owner, and Afanasii Dmitriev was, upon the clerks' petition, released on recognizance, and no penitentiary measures were applied to him.

Conclusion