DESPITE his imposing titles, Tamerlane or Timur, known as the “Sword of Islam” and “Conqueror of the World” is hardly remembered. In this unusual biography, a travelogue laced with history, Justin Marozzi attempts to understand why the legendary emperor of the Tartars is lingering in a state of semi-oblivion. He also follows in Timur’s footsteps visiting the places that have been neglected since his death on Feb. 18, 1405.
In his last audience, Timur warned his relatives: “If discord and disunity creep in, ill fortune awaits you. Enemies will start wars which will be difficult to end and irreparable damage will befall the state and religion.”
Timur’s fears about family divisions turned out to be true and within a 100 years of the emperor’s death, the Timurid dynasty ceased to exist. Timur’s autocratic rule caused the downfall of this short-lived empire. In a detailed study of his life Beatrice Forbes Manz explains: “His government was that of an individual who interfered at will in the affairs of his subordinates and demanded direct and complete loyalty from his subjects, loyalty not to his office nor to his government, but to his person. For the period of his life this administration served its purpose well.”
Little is known of Timur’s childhood, but we can easily imagine him learning the skills of the rugged steppe on horseback. When he was 12 years old he was supposed to have said that he perceived in himself all the signs of greatness and wisdom. Twelve years later, he was the undisputed leader of the Barlas tribe. Taking advantage of his new status, he struck an alliance with Amir Husayn, the grandson of the ruler of Balkh. This relationship, however, ended when Timur refused to be second in command. During the following years, he became a highway bandit and around that time, he received the injury that left him lame and became part of his name: “Timur the Lame.” However, his strong personality was shaped by the first part of his name Timur (iron).
When he reached the age of 30, he ruled over a Central Asian empire from Samarkand. From there he fought to become master of the world. His multicultural army was made up of Arabs, Turks, Tajiks, Persians, Georgians, Indians and Tartars. Within three decades, he ruled over India, Russia, the Ottoman Empire and a great part of the Middle East.
Timur’s character has been judged differently, some remembered only his cruelty while others praised his bravery, his genial war tactics, and his lifelong respect for learned men, religious scholars and his generosity. To have a better idea of the true nature of Tamerlane, it is interesting to know what his contemporaries thought of him. One of the most impartial portraits of the emperor comes from the Syrian writer Arabshah, who witnessed the destruction of his native Damascus. Despite his hatred, he recognized the undisputed qualities of the mighty conqueror:
“A debater, who by one look and glance comprehended the matter aright, trained, watchful for the slightest sign; he was not deceived by intricate fallacy nor did hidden flattery pass him; he discerned keenly between truth and fiction, and caught the sincere counselor and the pretender by the skill of his cunning, like a hawk trained for the chase, so that for his thoughts he was judged a shining star.”
The great Arab historian Ibn Khaldun also met Timur: He stayed for one month at his camp during the siege of Damascus. When he left, he paid tribute to “one of the greatest and mightiest of kings.” He reached that status with the help of his loyal soldiers, ruled by iron discipline and lavish reward. Promotion under the Timurid rule depended mainly on one’s military conduct and acts of outstanding bravery were registered in the official court chronicles. Timur also gave birth to one of the most glorious architectural epochs that continued more than a 100 years after he died, especially in Samarkand and Bukhara situated in today’s Uzbekistan. Timur’s fate has gone through an amazing reversal. Neglected by historians, ignored by the Soviets, he is now revered as the father of his nation thanks to the Uzbek president, Islam Karimov who said: “If someone wants to understand who the Uzbeks are, if somebody wants to comprehend all the power, might, justice and unlimited abilities of the Uzbek people, their contribution to the global development, their belief in future, he should recall the image of Amir Timur.”
Justin Marozzi traveled extensively while researching the life and legacy of Tamerlane. He is far more at ease as a travel writer than a historian. This biography, despite its fascinating subject, lacks unity and coherence. It is very often so tedious and fuzzy that one loses interest and we are left hoping that someone will eventually write a biography worthy of this exceptional statesman and brilliant military strategist.