Changing Concepts of Justice and Injustice from the 5th/11th Century to the 8th/14th
Century in Persia: The Saljuq Empire and the Ilkhanate
Author(s): A. K. Lambton
Source: Studia Islamica, No. 68 (1988), pp. 27-60
Published by: Maisonneuve & Larose
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1595757 .
Accessed: 30/12/2010 17:09
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mal. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Maisonneuve & Larose is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studia Islamica.
http://www.jstor.org
CHANGING CONCEPTSOF JUSTICEAND
INJUSTICEFROM THE 5th/llth CENTURY
TO THE 8th/14th CENTURY IN PERSIA:
THE SALJUQ EMPIRE
AND THE ILKHANATE
(1) See further D. O. Morgan, 'The Great 'Ydsd of Chingiz Khan' and Mongol
law in the Ilkhanate', BSOAS, XLIX, Part I (1986), 163-76.
30 A. K. LAMBTON
(2) The Islamic concept of justice is closer to the Aristotelian concept of justice,
on which see Sir Ernest Barker, The politics of Aristotle, Oxford, repr. 1952, 362ff.,
than to modern European concepts.
(3) See further, L. Gardet, La cite musulmane, Paris, 1954, 91ff.
32 A. K. LAMBTON
and a famous man, or a rich man and a poor man, with complete
equality when judging between them.(6) All might be equal
before the law of God, but all did not have equal power in
vindicating their rights. It was for the ruler, therefore, to see that
justice prevailed and to ensure that each was treated equally with
others. This consisted chiefly in making sure that the strong did
not oppress the weak and that the powerful did not transfer their
burdens to the poor and weak. Each was entitled to that
treatment which was his due according to the divine law. This
was not and did not imply social or economic equality, merely the
appropriate treatment of each according to his rank and status in
society. It was a kind of limited "legal" equality and implied
equity. Hence the term insdf is used interchangeably with 'adl.
Finally the concept of justice raises the issue of beneficence
(ihsdn). The basis for this is the Quranic phrase, 'Verily God
enjoins justice and beneficence', which is quoted by many
writers. (7)
For the most part, writers started with certain preconceptions:
the framework of the world in which they operated was
"given". In general they accepted that the aggressive nature of
man and his perennial tendency to encroach upon his fellows gave
rise to the need for temporal government, whether exercised by the
caliph or by the sultan. The existence of injustice in the world,
the result of the innate tendency of man to encroach upon his
fellows, imposed the need for a restraining influence, an idea for
which sanction is found in the Traditions. Al-GhazalT believed
that men were incessantly exposed to quarrels and conflict and
that they needed a principle of power (sultin) to guide them and
to arbitrate in their disputes.(8) Siraj al-Din Urmawi, who wrote
(6) Nas.hat al-muluk, ed. Jalal Humafi, Tehran, AHS 1351, 121. Cf. also a letter
from al-Ghazfal to Diya' al-Mulk b. Nizam al-Mulk in which he defines 'adl (justice)
as treating the people as he would wish to be treated himself were he in their place
(Fadd'il al-andm, 34), and a letter from Nizam al-Mulk to his son Mu'ayyid al-Mulk
urging him to be equitable (munsif) in all his dealings with the people (Aqili, Athdr
al-wuzard', ed. Mir Jalal al-Din jHusayni Urmawi, Tehran, AHS 1337, 213).
(7) Cf. for example the diplomas issued by Sanjar's diwan for the governor of
Balkh and the shihna of the Turkomans in Muntajab al-Din Badi' Atabak Juwayni,
'Alabat al-kalaba, ed. 'Abbas Iqbal, Tehran, AHS 1329, 74, 80-1.
(8) Ihyd' 'ulIm al-d(n, Cairo, n.d., i, 30. See also H. Laoust, La polilique de
GazalT, Paris, 1970, 196.
34 A. K. LAMBTON
culture, xi, 291-302 (also in Stanford J. Shaw and William R. Polk (eds.), Studies on
the civilization of Islam, London, 1962, 166-75), H. Laoust, La politique de Gazdlr,
and Lambton, State and government in medieval Islam.
(14) Siyasat-nama, ed. C. Schefer, Paris, 1891 (Persian text), 8, idem, ed.
H. Darke, Tehran, 1968, 15. See also Lambton, 'The dilemma of government in
Islamic Persia: The Siydsat-ndma of Nizam al-Mulk', Iran, xxii (1984), 55-66.
(15) Schefer, 44, Darke, 65.
(16) Schefer, 209-10, Darke, 329-30. Darke's ed. reads heresy for the shedding
of blood unlawfully.
36 A. K. LAMBTON
(17) Nasihat al-muluk, 131-2. Cf. also Yfsuf Khass Hajib, Wisdom of royal
glory (Kutadgu Bilig), tr. R. Dankoff, Chicago and London, 1983, 142. The
Kutadgu Bilig was written for Tavghach Bughra Khan, the ruler of Kashghar,
shortly after the Saljuqs took Nishapfir.
(18) Bahr al-fawd'id, ed. Muhammad Taqi Danish-Pazhiih, Tehran, AHS 1345,
478.
(19) Op. cit., 82.
(20) Ibid., 83.
CHANGING CONCEPTS OF JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE 37
The author of the Bahr al-fawai'id, like Ibn Balkhi, accepts the
view that justice led to the continuation of the rule of the
king. Kingship, he states, depended upon three things, the army,
the treasury, and agricultural development and these were to be
secured by justice.(24) But he was not only concerned with the
results of justice in the world. He states that the sultan was to
act justly so that he might gain salvation in the next world. If he
committed tyranny, he would be driven from the courts of
God.(25) Kingship, further, brought responsibility for the conduct
of others. The king was to restrain the tyrannical because he
would be called to account on the last day, not only for his own
actions but also for their tyranny.(26)
To Afdal al-Din Abf Hamid Ahmad b. Hamid KirmanT, who
wrote the 'Iqd al-'ula in 584/1188-9, the prospect of the establish-
ment of order by a strong government must have seemed an
attractive alternative to the ravages of the lawless bands of Ghuzz
who had laid the province of Kirman waste after the fall of
Sanjar.(27) He holds up absolute justice as the ideal and
maintains that kings as guardians of that ideal were entitled to
absolute obedience. He cites the story of Moses, related in the
Traditions and quoted by many other writers before and after him
with slight variations,(28) in which justice is associated with "legal"
justice, security, effective rule and morality. Moses is said to
have complained to God saying, "0 God, how long wilt thou leave
Pharaoh in his unbelief and disobedience?" The answer came
back, "0 Moses, during his rule he keeps the roads safe; he does not
commit injustice when he gives decrees; he does not listen to the
words of plaintiffs in the absence of the other party; and he does
not look upon the sons and daughters of his subjects with the eye
of desire."(29) In another saying, which Afdal al-Din attributes to
Anushlrawan, he emphasizes the importance and strength brought
by justice in words which will have appealed especially to the
people of Kirman. "Let the cities be made strong by justice,
(30) Ibid.
(31) Tdrtkh-i Afdal, reconstructed text by Mihdi Bayani, Tehran, AHS 1326, 71.
(32) Bahr al-fawd'id, 481-2.
(33) Ibid., 434.
(34) Lafd'if al-hikma, 232.
(35) Ed. Ahmad Suhayli Khwansari, Tehran, AHS 1346, 64-5.
40 A. K. LAMBTON
such lengths that the justice of one hour is equal to the worship of
one hundred years".(36)
Siraj al-Din Urmawi is unequivocal on the need to curb injustice
if only because it led to a dispersal of the population and therefore
to a decline in the revenue. He states that the result of tyranny
was ruin and when a country was ruined the following year nothing
would be obtained from the tax districts; and because the revenues
had dried up the muqla's would have to be paid by the treasury
and this would lead to great corruption. For this reason the ruler
must not be negligent with regard to the affairs of the tax-
collectors(37). If he was vigilant, tyranny would not be practised
against the subjects and the country would remain flourishing, the
muqla's happy and the army powerful.(38) He also states that if
any one of the subjects demanded the redress of a grievance from
the ruler, he must be held in honour, for he would then believe
that the ruler did not commit injustice or tyranny himself and
would not allow anyone else to do so.(39)
Siraj al-Din argues that justice was tantamount to worship, but
a worship the benefit of which was general ('dmm) and not
personal, and upon which the order of the world depended. To
exercise such justice was to exercise the vicegerency of God, and to
protect the people from destruction and ruin; and to emphasize the
connection between justice and morals, he states that life and
chastity were protected by justice, and immoral intercourse and
the corruption of the species was thereby prevented. Innumerable
matters depended upon the justice of the king. When anyone
undertook the duties of leadership (imarat), this was for him
worship, and by his actions the order of the world and the well-
being of the people (in the public and the private sphere) were
achieved.(40) Siraj al-Din then attempts to associate this con-
ception of justice with shar't justice also, pointing out that justice
was the balance of God, the mean laid down by the sharf'a. This
(51) See further, Lambton, op. cit., 249, 61. For a rather different view see
W. Madelung, 'Authority in Twelve Shi'ism in the absence of the imam' in
G. Makdisiet al. (eds.), La notion d'autoriteau moyendge, Colloquede la Napouli...
1978, Presse de France, 1982, 163-71.
(52) Ihya' 'ulum al-din, ii, 124, tr. as in H. A. R. Gibb, 'Constitutional
organization'in Majid Khadduriand Herbert J. Liebesny (eds.), Law in the Middle
East: origin and developmentof Islamic law, Washington D.C., 1955, i, 19.
(53) Nasihat al-muliik, 131-2. Ibn Jama'a, writing later in different circum-
stances considers that the tyranny of a sultan for 40 years was preferableto the
subjects (ra'iyyat) being left without a master for a single hour ('Handbuch des
IslamischenStaats- und Verwaltungsrechtes von Badr-al-Din Ibn 6ama'ah', text
and tr. in H. Kofler, Islamica vi, 1934, 355).
44 A. K. LAMBTON
existence would be, as a rule, greater than the evil which might
come from it.(57)
During the rule of the Khwarazmshahs there was an increase in
arbitrary action by the government and its military forces were
notorious for their brutality towards the population. It is not
without interest that Nasir al-Din Munshi Kirmani attributes the
fall of the Khwarazmshahs to their turning aside from the path of
equity: "unbelief and Islam joined hands and overthrew that
house".(58) It is perhaps partly because of the unsatisfactory
state of affairs under the Khwarazmshahs that Rawandi, who grew
up during the reign of Toghril b. Arslanshah, the last of the Saljuqs
of 'Iraq, and was an eyewitness of the occupation of 'Iraq by the
troops of the Khwarazmshah, considered the establishment of
justice to lie not in abstract terms but in the appointment of just
officials. He writes that four persons ensured the stability of the
kingdom: (i) a just qddi who shows respect towards God in the
execution of the decrees of the sharl'a and is not influenced by
praise or blame from the people-the praise of the khawass or the
blame of the 'awamm (which perhaps implies that the judgements
of qddfs tended to be supported by the former and opposed by the
latter); (ii) a sahib dfwdn who obtains justice for the oppressed from
the oppressor and for the weak from the strong; (iii) a wise wazir
who puts into operation the laws of the public treasury, such as the
proper levy of kharij and of jizya from the Jews and does not
permit tyranny; and (iv) a chamberlain who reports news accurate-
ly and truthfully.(59) The anonymous Trfkh-i shaht, commission-
ed by Padishah Khatun, the daughter of Qutlugh Terken, the ruler
of Kirman, and probably written about 680/1281, was also familiar
with this formulation and rightly attributes it to the caliph al-
Mansuir.(60) Rawandi's statement carries the implication
that justice in its several senses-shar'f justice and the implement-
(57) Ed. Muhammad Khan Malik al-Kuttab Bambai, lith., Bombay, A.H. 1323,
218.
(58) Simf al-'ula, ed. 'Abbas Iqbal, Tehran, AHS 1328, 5.
(59) Rdaha al-sudar, ed. Muhammad Iqbal, London, 1921, 386-7. Rawandi
began the Rahat al-sudir in 599/1202 and dedicated it first to Rukn al-Din
Sulaymanshah, the Saljuq of Rum, who had usurped the throne of his elder brother
Ghiyath al-Din Kay Khusraw in 597/1200-1. After Rukn al-Din's death in
601/1204-5 Rawandi rededicated his book to Ghiyath al-Din (ibid., xix).
(60) Ed. Muhammad Ibrahim Bastani Parizi, Shahinshahi 2535, 8, and see
Tabari, pt. 3, 398, Anno 158.
46 A. K. LAMBTON
(61) Mirsad al-'ibdd min al-mabda' ila'l-ma'dd, ed. Husayn al-Husayni al-
Ni'matallihi, Tehran, AHS 1312, 246-7. For further details on Najm al-Din's life
see H. Algar's translation of the Mirsdd al-'ibdd, entitled The path of God's bondsmen
from origin to return, New York, 1982, Introduction, 8.
CHANGING CONCEPTS OF JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE 47
strong over the weak, and not to place the load of the rich upon the
poor; to show courtesy and generosity to the subjects; to treat the
strong with civility and to succour the poor and those with large
families with alms and daily bread; and to accept responsibility for
the welfare of travellers. The remainder of the actions imposed
upon the ruler by beneficence hardly concern the dispensation of
justice except so far as this is seen in religious and ethical terms-
though in a sense because of the connection between public finance
and just government they form part of a coherent system. These
actions included treating the abstinent and learned with respect
and seeing that they had sufficient allowances; stimulating the
students of the religious sciences to study; enquiring after them
and giving them what they needed by way of allowances; holding
the righteous and the servants of God in respect; so acting that the
thoughts of the Sfifs and the devout might support him; relieving
their needs and consulting them concerning the affairs of the
kingdom; respecting the sayyids and seeing that they received the
dues to which they were entitled, and giving them, if they could
not be given sadaqa,(62) gifts and allowances; associating with
darvishes and mystics, giving help to them in a lawful way and
ensuring that they were free from anxiety, so that they might
occupy themselves with God with collected minds, because the
world was made stable by the blessing which derived from their
activities. This group had (a right to) a share in the public
treasury, which it was incumbent to give them even if they did not
demand it because of the loftiness of their religion and high
aspirations. (3)
Justice, thus meant full and perfect obedience to God; and
beneficence, seen as the dispensation of justice, carried with it wide
implications of a public and private nature. The ruler, after the
performance of his obligatory religious duties, was to turn his
attention to the affairs of the kingdom, to investigate the condition
of the country and the people, and to exert himself in according to
the people the rights which they enjoyed as Muslims.
In his personal relations the just ruler would refrain from sin
(fisq wa fuqur wa fisad). In public affairs he would not institute
bad customs, increase the taxes or farm offices; and false charges
would not be trumped up against the people, or mulcts taken from
their presence in the ddr al-isldm. The real conflict lay in the
relation of the needs and interests of the Mongols to the local
population. We do not, therefore, find (and should not, perhaps,
expect to find) new formulations of the theory of justice but only
allegations of its absence in political, economic and social
affairs. Writers do not in general discuss the ideas of the invaders
but merely deplore their methods of conquest and the tyranny of
their government.
ShiF jurists continue to discuss justice in an absolute sense,(71)
but this had little influence on their attitude towards the temporal
government. So far as the holding of office on behalf of an unjust
sultan and cooperation with an unjust government are concerned,
the theoretical basis of the Shri position remained little
changed. Najm al-Din Ja'far b. Yahya al-Muhaqqiq (602-
76/1205-1277), like Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Tusi (d. 460/1067),
holds that the exercise of authority on behalf of a just sultan is
permissible and might in some circumstances be obligatory. In
the case of unjust sultans, he is equally convinced of the need for
co-operation, and like al-Tfsi, has recourse to the principal of
Iaqiyya to justify this. He states that tradition permitted the
exercise of authority on behalf of an unjust sultan provided that he
who did so was certain that he would be safe from the commission
of forbidden acts and would be able to enjoin the good and forbid
evil. Further, if he was forced to accept office by an unjust imam,
it was permissible for him to do so in order to prevent harm (daf'-i
madarral), and while doing so to indulge in taqiyya, even if what he
was required to do was forbidden, always excepting the case of the
killing of Muslims.(72) In practice, dislike and hatred of Sunni
government led to a favourable, or at least ambivalent, attitude
towards the Mongols among Shris, especially those of southern
'Iraq. Nasir al-Din Tusi, as stated above, accepted office from
Hiilegii and was with him during his attack on Baghdad. Later
he was head of the observatory built by Abaqa at Maragha and
was also placed in charge of the awqif of the empire. Both al-
(73) Cf. Muhammad b. Hindushah b. Nakhchivan, Dastir al-kaiib. ed. A.A. 'All-
zadeh, ii, Moscow, 1972, 29-30.
(74) Ibid., 30ff., 35.
(75) Cf. ibid., 35, 36, 37.
52 A. K. LAMBTON
king, who has the status of the Shadow of God upon Earth, so that
by reason of the awe inspired by his punishment and his display of
equity and justice, he keeps [his] many subjects firm and constant
in perpetuating his commands and prohibitions and obliges them
to perform those things which are approved by the shart'a, such as
devotion and worship, so that the truth of the hadith "religion and
kingship are twins" is demonstrated".(76)
Ibn Tiqtaqa who wrote the Kitcb al-fakhrf in 701/1302 and
dedicated it to Fakhr al-Din 'Isa b. Ibrahim, the malik of Mawsil,
included in it a mirror. In this he states that justice and
intelligence were among the qualities required by the ruler; he also
needed coercive power. Intelligence, for Ibn Tiqtaqa, included
resolution (hazm) and was the basis upon which the security of the
kingdom rested. By justice the ruler caused the revenue from the
taxes to be abundant and the country prosperous, and by coercive
power he prevented bloodshed, preserved the wealth of others,
protected morals, prevented evil, suppressed wrongdoers and
forestalled injustice which led to civil war and disturbance. It
was his duty to protect the country, to make the fortifications
of the frontier strong, to ensure the security of the roads and to
put down the wicked. In return he was entitled to the obedience
of his subjects. The kingdom was made fertile by generosity,
prosperous by justice and stable by intelligence, and it was
protected by bravery and administered by authority (ri'isa).(77)
The Tdrtkh-i shahL, referred to above, was written in Kirman for
Padishah Khatun, who had a varied and turbulent life during
which she was married to the Ilkhan Abaqa. It is devoted largely
to an account of the reign of her mother, Qutlugh Terken Khatun,
who ruled Kirman in succession to her husband Qutb al-Din
Muhammad, who died in 655/1257. Apart from its value for the
history of Kirman, it shows the familiarity of its author with
earlier works on the theory of government. It also contains some
original insights. The author, who has not been identified, quotes
from the Jcawddn Khirad (probably in the version of Ibn
Miskawaih), the works of Ibn al-Muqaffa', the Akhldq-i Ndsir( of
Nasir al-Din TUsi, and Nasir al-Din's essay on finance written
probably for Hiilegii, or possibly for Abaqa. He was also familiar
with the Mirsdd al-'ibdd of Najm al-Din Razi, and probably also
The author of the Tdarkh-i shiahl discusses the duties of the just
king, which has implications for the meaning which he attaches to
justice. Unfortunately the text appears to have lacunae at the
beginning of this discussion. It seems likely that the omissions
concern the treatment of the different classes of people, possibly on
the basis of various types of city (following al-Faragi and Nasir al-
Din TUsi). The text as published starts with a short passage on
the treatment of craftsmen and then goes on to a discussion of the
fiscal and economic measures which a just ruler should take-thus
implicitly relating justice to the financial administration of the
state. It was incumbent upon him to levy dues on the circulation
of goods, the fruits of the earth, and the natural increase of flocks
and herds, and to spend the proceeds on the public interest, as for
example in the provision of troops and the defence of the
frontiers. It was also incumbent upon him to keep himself
informed about inheritance and what the people of the city
acquired (through trade, etc.) and to extract any residue in
accordance with the sharC'aand place it in the public treasury, and
order the proceeds to be devoted to the livelihood of those whose
trade was meagre and those who were in need by reason of illness
or some other constraint.(80) It was also incumbent upon the just
ruler to fix wages and the hire charged by muleteers, the prices of
foodstuffs and garments and other goods from which merchants
and tradespeople gained profit or suffered loss, according to rules
and regulations which would ensure that they would receive their
due reward and that no harm or injustice would be suffered by
employers and wholesale merchants (bdrsaldrain) or purchasers so
that justice and equity might be observed with regard to both
parties. The duties of the muhlasib were to be laid down and lists
of goods available for sale in the shops of the merchants with their
prices were to be recorded on tablets or on a piece of paper affixed
to the wall above the door of the shop, so that the interest of both
buyer and seller would be protected. Usury was to be
forbidden. (81)
No distinction is made between politics and morals, and the just
ruler was required to intervene in moral affairs, to prevent
forbidden things such as gambling and immoral actions, and he
was to encourage the people of the city to marry several spouses
(80) Ibid., 5.
(81) Ibid., 6.
CHANGING CONCEPTS OF JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE 55
Ghazan the statement that God had appointed him (Ghazan) over
the people to administer their affairs and to maintain justice and
equality between them.(91)
In a letter to his son Shihab al-Din, the governor of Tustar and
Ahwaz, Rashid al-Din interprets justice to be an all-embracing
concept comprising a variety of qualities, most of them of an
ethical nature. To spread justice and equity was the greatest
quality and highest virtue of kings and governors and was
incumbent in financial affairs (dar mil), in action and in
speech. He then sets out the meaning of justice in these three
fields. First, in financial affairs, his son was to distribute to the
deserving poor all that he acquired lawfully (az wajh-i halal). To
give to the undeserving was prodigality and waste, and in doing so
he would be acting unjustly. Secondly, justice in speech consisted
in making the tongue the touchstone and measure of truth. He
enjoins his son to say what should be said and to keep silence in
what should not be said and not to praise anyone except to the
extent that he deserved. Thirdly, justice in action lay in
enjoining the good and forbidding evil and in protecting the
subjects and striving to improve their conditions and to secure
their happiness. Negatively it meant that he would not inflict
punishment on the innocent, listen to false accusations or
defamatory statements, covet the wealth and position of others,
allow himself to be influenced by the blame of sinners and corrupt
persons or to listen to their advice. Justice meant that he would
not fall short in doing God's work, that he would not transgress the
limits set by God, and would in all things observe the
mean. Further justice demanded that he should order his
servants not to transgress their limits because, if they did, they
would become bold towards him and covet the goods and positions
of other men, trouble persons of high birth (idzdagdn) and stir up
sedition, so that great weakness would appear in the affairs of the
kingdom and they would incite the people to rebel against
him. Lastly, he should not make his inner and outer garment
pride, anger, violence, vengeance, false pretences (talbfs), deceit,
lying, deviation from righteousness (fisq), avarice, peculation
(khiyanat), covetousness, greed, envy, rancour, flattery, hypocrisy,
impudence, haughtiness, and cruelty, but that he should make
clemency, forgiveness, sincerity, abstinence, generosity, bravery,
(92) Muklaabat-i rash_id, ed. Muhammad Shaf', Lahore, A.H. 1364, 112ff.
(93) Tajziyat al-amsar wa tazjiyal al-a'sar, commonly known as the Tadrkh-i
Wassaf, ed. N. M. Isfahan!, lith., Bombay, A.H. 1269, 486.
(94) The Nasirean ethics, 233.
(95) Tarnkh-i Wassaf, 486.
(96) Ibid., 491.
CHANGING CONCEPTS OF JUSTICE AND INJUSTICE 59
To sum up, the shar'( theory of justice, laid down in the early
centuries of Islam, and associated primarily with moral probity,
was supplemented during the Saljuq period by theories deriving
from conceptions which had been current (or were believed to have
been current) under the pre-Islamic Persian kings. A central core
of maxims for which sanction was sought in the Qur'an and the
Traditions was evolved and repeated by generations of writers
over the centuries. In the light of this body of received wisdom,
which had to a great extent, been formulated before the Saljuq
period, obedience to the just ruler, the Shadow of God upon earth,
was justified as obedience to God and His prophet. Justice did
not justify the law; the law justified justice. The purpose of the
government of the just ruler was the establishment of conditions in
which right religion could be lived and Islamic virtues
practised. His task was to maintain the balance of mundane
society by giving each group within society its due place and
function. The fact that conversely obedience to an unjust ruler
must have implied disobedience to God and His prophet receives
less attention, similarly the question of the duty of disobedience
towards an unjust ruler is seldom discussed. This was because of
the fear that disorder might accompany, or result from, attempts
to overthrow an unjust ruler-an attitude which also long predates
the Saljuq period. Experience had taught men to value stability
and to fear that which threatened it. Partly because of this,
emphasis is laid on the need for the just ruler to possess coercive
force-a requirement which both al-Ghaz5al and Nizam al-Mulk
laid down. Increasingly justice came to be seen not in specific
terms of shart' justice but ideally as the harmonious relationship of
society in a divinely appointed system; and at a lower or more
practical level as the maintenance of the different groups of society
in their proper station. Nasir al-Din Tfsi interpreted this to
mean that each would attain to that perfection which lay within
him, but in effect the interpretation of justice as the maintenance
of equipoise led not to a harmonious relationship of society but to a
continuance of the status quo. How far this interpretation of
justice was accepted by the common people (however much they
may have acquiesced in it), is a matter for conjecture.
I have given considerable space to two works belonging to the
middle of the 7th/13th century, the Mirsdd al-'ibdd of Najm al-Din
Razi and the Tdirkh-i shaht, because they seem to me to contain
certain insights not found in the other works discussed. As I
60 A. K. LAMBTON
(97) 'Justice in the medieval Persian theory of kingship', Studia Islamica, xvii
(1962), 112. Also in Theory and practice in medieval Persian government, Variorum
Reprints, London, 1980.