mongol expansion & eurasian commercial axes 49
it is quite true that, just as the medieval sources state, this great com-
mercial capital of transcaucasia owed its preeminence over all the other
cities along the silk road to its geographical location. at tabriz, this east-
west highway of long-distance trade also absorbed goods transported
on two other major arteries: products from the caucasus and the eur-
asian steppes and forests arrived from the north via derbent, while from
the south goods came from the indian ocean via the persian gulf and
ormuz.52
given that the city was a veritable goose that laid the golden eggs, it is
understandable that it provoked strong feelings—and rivalries—in ching-
gisid times. the unending Mongol disputes about tabriz began with Batu
and the great Khan güyük.
when we compare other sources, it seems that Muslim authors were
mistaken in believing transcaucasia to have been legally part of the Jochid
share from the very beginning, confusing a de facto with a de jure situ-
ation.53 the misapprehension was widespread though, and became more
firmly rooted over time, and for some decades the Jochids themselves
used the argument to support their claims to the territories south-east
of the caspian.54
business, and they only use the dinar in their dealings, that is to say the dīnār rā’iǧ worth
six dirhems. this coin in used throughout the whole country except for the districts of
Baghdad and Khorasan. [.. .]. tabriz is thus the metropolis [umm] for all iran, which eve-
rybody visits. here the merchants and the travellers break their journey, and here almost
all the great emirs of the sultan’s court have their palaces.” the ilkhan Öljeitü’s attempt
to move the capital to soltaniyeh, a city founded by his father arghun, was not success-
ful in the long run and the political and economic centre of Mongol persia reverted to
tabriz shortly after his successor abū sa‛īd took the throne (cf. ibid. pp. 149, 323 note 30,
328 note 44).
52 cf. the section on ‘les routes par tabriz’ in Bautier, “relations,” pp. 280–285, where
however the French historian overlooks the city’s connection with the cuman steppe via
the pass which william of rubruck mentions, ubi est iter Sarracenorum omnium venientium
de Perside. ashtor, History, p. 264, argues that the Mamluk-ilkhanid war on the euphrates
during the period of Mongol rule necessarily diverted the commerce of Baghdad toward
tabriz, where it played a great role in the trade in indian ocean goods. Brătianu, Vicina,
p. 9, emphasises the importance of other branches of trade, such as the tabriz-Black sea
route via trebizond. For more detail on the two routes mentioned above, cf. chapter 3.4.2
below. For early fourteenth-century sources on the commercial capital of Mongol persia
and its connections to central asia, where the trade routes split to india and to china, see
an anonymous spanish Minorite in wyngaert, Sinica Francsicana, i, p. 569, and the arab
traveller ibn Baṭṭūṭa/defremery, sanguinetti, iii, pp. 16 ff.; cf. schwarz, Iran, p. 1285, spuler,
Mongolen, pp. 357–359, ashtor, History, p. 264; Balard, Romanie, i, p. 140, considers that
this grand convergence of asian routes is also an outpost for western merchants.
53 see above p. 47 notes 41–43.
54 cf. chapter 3.1.