MILITARY SUPPLY IN THE BUKHARA KHANATE

Аннотация

This article covers military supply in the Bukhara Khanate based on historical sources and literature. Keywords and phrases: troop supply, navkars (military servants), material needs, treasury, military actions, booty, weapons, Shaybanids, clothing, horses, gold, silver items, nog‘ora (drum), tug‘ (banner), kuloh (helmet), camel, peshkash (tribute/gift), to‘bichoq (saddle), Abdullaxon The issueof troop supply in the Bukhara Khanate has always served to ensure the military power of the country throughout all historical periods. During the Shaybanid era, no sharp changes in troop supply or its improvement compared to previous periods were observed. The form of supply appropriate to the position of troops, typical for all medieval times, especially in Turkic statehood, isalso relevant to thehistoryofthe Bukhara Khanate during theShaybanid period. When discussing troop supply during the Shaybanid era, attention should also be paid to the sources and quantity of supply, and to theadherence to principles ofjustice introop provisioning. Naturally, as in all periods, the loyalty of the troops to the ruler (or central government) was directly linked to the level of their supply. From high-ranking administrative-military officials to ordinary navkars and auxiliary soldiers, their material needs determined their military service and loyalty to their duty. Shaybanid rulers, when envoys came from their subordinate estates, seriously inquired about theprosperity of theprovince and people, as well as thetroop supply.[2] When talking about troop supply, it is necessary to distinguish between times of military campaigns and peace (such peace was rarely observed during the Shaybanid rule) because there were some differences in supply matters. Of course, the main source of troop supply was funds allocated from the state treasury. From the treasury, troop leaders, military officials, and navkars were given a certain amount of annual salary. The amount depended on the rank of the salary recipient, their position in the administrative-military hierarchy, and their service to the state. Analysis of source data shows that military personnel were rewarded by the ruler according to their rank in the army as follows: 1) high-ranking officials received embroidered coats (zardo‘zi to‘n), belts decorated with precious stones, swords and daggers with hilts made of precious stones and metals, gold coins, tents, and saddles decorated with precious stones, to‘bichoq (horseback), saddles, drums (nog‘ora), banners (tug‘), helmets (kuloh), camels, and prisoners turned into slaves; 2) ordinary soldiers in the ranks were sometimes gifted swords or other weapons by their superiors for bravery, in addition to military equipment, footwear, coats and otherclothing, horses, gold and silveritems,porcelain dishes, and cash payments.[1] Besides the annual salary paid from the treasury, a portion of the booty gained during military campaigns was also distributed among troop leaders and ordinary navkars. The supply of https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi volume 4,issue5,2025 1191 weapons was also at the state's expense. Sources mention that during military actions, weapons were brought from Bukhara and distributed among thetroops.[1] In addition, booty obtained from military campaigns was a supplementary source of income for the soldiers. The collected property was divided among participants in the campaign, with mounted soldiers receiving more than foot soldiers.[6] One of the main incentives for soldiers to stay ready and encourage military actions was the permission to seize booty or loot following victories. Many historical sources mention cases where victorious soldiers were allowed to loot a captured city orregion foracertain period and to a certain extent.[2] Even before capturing cities, looting was allowed during siege to support the army and their horses with food found in nearby neighborhoods, as historian G‘iyosiddin Khondamir wrote. This practice was called “yurtovul rasmi” in historical sources.[2] After the city was captured, confiscated property was sometimes sold to the surviving city population at multiple times its valuetofund soldiers’salaries and purchasemilitary equipment andweapons. If looting was forbidden, tax collectors were appointed to conquered cities to record material wealth compensating for military and moral damages caused by the battle and to collect the due. For example, after the city of Herat was captured by Muhammad Shaybanid in May 1507, tax collectors were sent to seize hidden money and valuable items from the population (mainly the upper class). According to Khondamir, collectors seized precious jewels, rubies, sapphires, gold, and other shiny goods. Looting was often replaced by a “moli omon” tax. All wealth collected through “moli omon” was distributed among soldiers, taking into account the severity of injuries, with special attention given to the wounded.[1] If looting was not allowed, soldiers were forbidden from t