Investigation of the Military Structure of the Ghaznavid Era

Subject Areas : Archaeology

Gholamreza Shahrian ¹ , Mahmood Seyyed ^{2 *}

1 - Department of History, Central Tehran branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran , Iran
2 - Assistant professor,central tehran branch. islamic azad university.

Received: 2024-10-29 Accepted : 2025-01-15 Published : 2025-09-25

Keywords: " Ghaznavids" Army" Military Structure" Abbasid", " Transformation",

Abstract :

After Arab invasions and territorial expansion in Sassanian-era Iran, Iranians resisted Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs due to bias and discrimination. Uprisings against biased Arab rulers reduced their control over the Islamic Caliphate's eastern borders, paving the way for local government formation and independence. The Abbasid caliphate, facing challenges in the west and engaging with the Byzantine Empire, was alarmed by emerging local governments like the Tahirids, Saffarids, and Samanids. To maintain influence, the Abbasid caliphate considered granting conditional independence to these regions. The Ghaznavid rulers, originally prominent commanders in the Abbasid army, grew and trained within its military structure. Supported by the people and their soldiers, they pursued independence, breaking allegiance to Baghdad and establishing their government. Initially part of the Abbasid army, these rulers, including Ghaznavid emirs, moved eastward due to conflicting interests with the Baghdad caliphate. There, they formed semi-independent structures to maintain influence.In the eastern borders, where political systems like the Ghaznavids relied on military power, the army (Sepah) and militarism played a crucial role in historical research. The central question explores how the military system and militarism in local governments, such as the Ghaznavids, contributed to their formation, development, and expansion during the early Islamic centuries. Research reveals the Ghaznavid government's military system and militarism were modeled after predecessors like the Abbasids, Umayyads, and Sassanians. Local governments like the Tahirids and Saffarids significantly influenced this evolution. Over time, Ghaznavid rule underwent fundamental changes in the army and militarism, reaching maturity in response to evolving needs.

References:

Aqili, S., (1985), Asar al Vozara, Correction and Commentary by Jalaluddin Hosseini Ermavi, Tehran, Institute of Etelaat. [In Persian]
Bosworth,E.C.,(1999), History of Ghaznavid, translated by Hassan Anoushe, Tehran, Amir Kabir. [In Persian]
Beyhaqi, A.M.H., (1995), History of Beyhaqi, Edited by Ali Akbar Fayyaz, Tehran, Nashr-e Elm. [ In Persian]
Damghani, M., (2015)., Divan Manuchehri Damghani., Publisher: Sokhan., Tehran, [In Persian]
Esfandiyar, B.M.H. (1987), History of Tabarestan, Publisher: Khavar, Tehran. [In Persian]
Fakhrmodaber, M., (1965), The correct usages of war and bravery (Adab al-harb wa al-Shuja'a), edited by Ahmad Soheili Khansari, Tehran, Iqbal. [ In Persian]
Gardizi, A.H.Z.M, (1968), Zayn al- Akhbar, Correction: Abdol Haie Habibi, Tehran, Publisher: Donyee Ketab.
Ghaffar Farsi., A. H.A, (1983), Al-Siyāq fī al-Tārīkh Nishapur, Publisher:Markaz Pazhoheshhaei Mirase Makton, Tehtan.[In Persian]
Ghaznavi Ashraf, H. (1983). Divan Sayyid Hasan Ghaznavi, Publisher: Asatir, Tehran. [In Persian]
Hanbali, I.I, (1998)., Mujmal al-Tawarikh wa al-Qisas, Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al- IImiya.
Hakin Nishaburi, A.A (1996), History of Nishabur, Publisher: Farhang Sabz, Tehran [In Persian]
Ibn Athir, I.A.A., (1985), History of Kamel, translated by Ali Hashemi Haeri & Abbas Khalili, Tehran, Ilmi publications. [ In Persian]
Ibn al- Jawzi, A.R.A, (1992)., Al-Muntazam fi Tarikh al-Muluk wa al-Umam. Edited by M. A. Ata and M. A. Ata. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyah. Ibn Jawzi, A. R. (1358 AH). Al-Muntazam.
Ibn al Ibri., (1998) Tarikh mukhtasar al duwal. Author, Bar Hebraeus; Publisher, Dār al-Rāíd.Syria.
---, (1987) History of Sistan, Corrected: Malek o Shoara Bahar Publisher: Asatir, Tehran. [In Persian].
Jarfadqani, A.Sh.N.Z., (1995), History of Yamini, corrected by Jafar Shaar, Tehran, Bongah Tarjomeh ve Nashr-e Ketab. [In Persian]
Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk Tusi (2011)., Sīr al-Mulūk., Publisher: Sokhan, Tehran. [In Persian]
Khalili, Kh., (1954). Ghaznavid Empire, Kabul, Tehran.Published by Amiri, [In Persian]
Mawardi, A.H.A.M.H., (2004), The Laws of Islamic Governance (Ahkam al Sultanieh), translated by Hossein Saberi, Tehran, Elmi va Farhangi publications. [In Persian]
Minhaj al-Din ibn Siraj al-Din Juzjani , (2012), Tabaqat Naseri, Publisher: Asatir, Tehran. [In Persian]
Narshaki., A.M.Z. (1984), History of Bukhara, Publisher: Tus, Tehran. [In Persian]
Nazim, M. (1939). The Life and Times of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazna, Translated by Abdul Ghafoor Amini, Kabul, Matbae omoomi. [In Persian]
Onsari Balkhi, A.H., (1984), Divan Onsari Balkhi., Publisher: Sanaee, Tehran. [In Persian]
Ozghandi., A. (1998). Army and Politic, Publisher: Ghomes, Tehran. [In Persian]
Rashid al-Din (1998). The Jami al Tawarikhh (Compendium of Chronicles), Tabriz, Iran.
Sanai Ghaznavi (2013). Divan Sana'i Ghaznavi, Publisher: Negah, Tehran. [In Persian]
Shabankarei, M.A., (1997), Majma Al-Ansab, edited by Mirhashim Muhaddith, Tehran, Amir Kabir. [In Persian]
Tabari, A.J.M. (1995), The History of al-Tabari, Translated by Jane Dammen McAuliffe, New York Press.

Full-Text:



 

 

Investigation of the military structure of the Ghaznavid Era

 

Abstract

After Arab invasions and territorial expansion in Sassanian-era Iran, Iranians resisted Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs due to bias and discrimination. Uprisings against biased Arab rulers reduced their control over the Islamic Caliphate's eastern borders, paving the way for local government formation and independence. The Abbasid caliphate, facing challenges in the west and engaging with the Byzantine Empire, was alarmed by emerging local governments like the Tahirids, Saffarids, and Samanids. To maintain influence, the Abbasid caliphate considered granting conditional independence to these regions. The Ghaznavid rulers, originally prominent commanders in the Abbasid army, grew and trained within its military structure. Supported by the people and their soldiers, they pursued independence, breaking allegiance to Baghdad and establishing their government. Initially part of the Abbasid army, these rulers, including Ghaznavid emirs, moved eastward due to conflicting interests with the Baghdad caliphate. There, they formed semi-independent structures to maintain influence.In the eastern borders, where political systems like the Ghaznavids relied on military power, the army (Sepah) and militarism played a crucial role in historical research. The central question explores how the military system and militarism in local governments, such as the Ghaznavids, contributed to their formation, development, and expansion during the early Islamic centuries. Research reveals the Ghaznavid government's military system and militarism were modeled after predecessors like the Abbasids, Umayyads, and Sassanians. Local governments like the Tahirids and Saffarids significantly influenced this evolution. Over time, Ghaznavid rule underwent fundamental changes in the army and militarism, reaching maturity in response to evolving needs.

 

 

Keywords: Ghaznavids, Army, Military Structure , Abbasid, Transformation.

 

 

Introduction

Since many political systems that emerged in the eastern borders of the Islamic world, such as the Ghaznavids, relied on their military forces and the organizational structure of their military, the issue of the army (Sepah) and militarism holds significant importance in historical research. It played a crucial role in shaping local governments, particularly during the Ghaznavid era. The topic of the army and militarism in governments like the Ghaznavids is among the intriguing and captivating subjects in historical investigations and research. This article aims to explore and examine the issue of the army and militarism, investigating the adoption and emulation of other contemporary military structures by governments of the same period.

 

Literary of Research

Through the conducted investigations, it can be acknowledged that a considerable number of works have been written in the field of political history during the Ghaznavid era, some of which provide information on the issue of the army and militarism. These works can be categorized into several types, including general history, local history, political treatises, biographical and religious narratives, literary narratives, and recent research. Notable among these works is the book "Zin al-Akhbar" by Abdul-Hay ibn Zuhak Gurgizi (1968), which covers the life and times of the Ghaznavids from their inception to the reign of Mahmud bin Mas'ud.

Another significant work in this field is "Mujmal al-Tawarikh wa al-Qisas" (1939) by an anonymous author. This book, essentially a general history, was written around 520 and briefly outlines the history of the Ghaznavids up to its time, including their conflicts with the Seljuks. The book "Tabaqat Naseri" (2012) by Minhaj al-Din ibn Siraj al-Din Juzjani is another valuable source from the early 7th century Hijri in India. It contains information about the lost sections of Bayhaqi's history and some eventful narratives related to the Qarakhanids and Ghurids, adding to its significance.

The work "Al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh" by Ibn Athir (1992) and "Tarikh al-Tabari" (1996) are also important sources. Despite being written years after the fall of the Ghaznavids, these books are valuable resources for studying the history of Iran during the Ghaznavid period, incorporating lost sources such as Ibn Fadlan's experiences and possibly the "Malaknameh" (a book on the early history of the Seljuks), similar to Tabaqat Naseri.

In addition to these sources, some other general histories provide useful information about the Ghaznavids, including "Majma al-Ansab" by Shabankare'i (1984), "Jamal al-Tawarikh" by Rashid al-Din Hamadani (1998), "Al-Muntazam fi Tarikh al-Muluk wa al-Umam" by Ibn al-Jawzi (1992), and "Mukhtasar al-Duwal" by Ibn 'Ibri (1998).

Local histories also contribute to our understanding of the Ghaznavid era, such as the section on the history of the Ghaznavids in the book "Sistan" by an unknown author (1987). This book, composed in the late years of Ghaznavid rule and the beginning of Seljuk dominance in Iran, provides information about both Iranian ruling dynasties and is particularly valuable for its detailed descriptions of Sistan alongside Khorasan as the principal territories of the Ghaznavids. The author's depictions of Sistan in the 4th and 5th centuries can shed light on various political and social issues during the Ghaznavid era. The "Tarikh Bayhaqi" (1938) by Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn Zaid Bayhaqi, known as Ibn Funduq, is one of the works that vividly portrays the conditions during the Ghaznavid era. The detailed description and precise historical account in Bayhaqi's work contribute significantly to its importance. Among the historical books mentioned, Bayhaqi's history undoubtedly holds a valuable position. Bayhaqi himself was a writer in the Ghaznavid court.

"Tarikh Bayhaqi" essentially reflects the events of the reign of Amir Mas'ud, the son of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni. It covers the conflicts with the Turkmans, the defeat of the Dandanqans, the establishment of the Seljuk rule by Tughril, and the description of the Khwarazm region. The history extends from the extinction of the Al-Mamun dynasty to the fall of the land into the hands of Sultan Mahmud, and the rule of the Altun-Tash Hajib in the area up to the rise of the Seljuks.

Another significant work from this period is the "Tarikh Nishapur" (1996) by Abu Abdullah Muhammad Nishaburi, known as Al-Hakim Nishaburi, a renowned religious scholar from Nishapur. Additionally, historical reports scattered throughout the "Al-Siyāq fī al-Tārīkh Nishapur" (1983) by Abu al-Hasan Abdul-Ghaffar Farsi contribute some information about the Ghaznavid era.

Furthermore, local histories beyond the river, particularly the "Tarikh Bukhara" by Narshakhi (1984) and its additions, and local histories of Mazandaran, such as "Tarikh Tabaristan" by Ibn Esfandiyar (1987), contain valuable reports about the Ghaznavid period, especially the relationships between local governments and the Ghaznavid dynasty.

"Sīr al-Mulūk" or "Siyasatnama" (2011) by Khwaja Nizam al-Mulk Tusi is another work providing insights into the political and administrative structure of the Ghaznavid era, including reports on sultans, emirs, ministers, and events of that time.

Alongside historical sources, literary works, especially literary anthologies or "Divans," such as "Divan Ansari Balkhi" (1984), "Divan Manuchehri Damghani" (2015), "Divan Farrokh Sistani" (2013), "Divan Sana'i Ghaznavi" (2013), and "Divan Sayyid Hasan Ghaznavi" (1983), offer valuable information about the cultural and sometimes political situations of the Ghaznavid era.

Given the significance of the Ghaznavid period in Iranian and Islamic literature, literary sources, particularly literary anthologies related to this period, can provide useful insights into the cultural and political conditions of the time. These works, along with new research and investigations, contribute valuable information to our understanding of the Ghaznavid era, focusing on indicators such as the Ghaznavid army, its structure, battle tactics, practical weapons, composition, and the overall military strategies employed during that period.

 

Research method

The present article focuses on the issue of the army (Sepah) and militarism in the Ghaznavid government. To achieve a credible and well-supported conclusion, the author intends to investigate and examine the status of the Ghaznavid army and militarism through historical sources. Therefore, given the nature of the research topic, the most suitable method for this study is a descriptive-analytical approach, where data is collected through library research.

 

1. The Ghaznavids as a military-command government

 The Ghaznavids are one of the local ruling dynasties of Iran that emerged in the year 351 AH in the eastern borders of Iran, according to the historical texts left from this era, it is said that the ancestry of this local ruling family goes back to Yazdgerd Sassanid. The Abbasid caliphs were omnipotent in the eastern borders of Iran in 351 AH.

Due to the fact that the kings of this family have a special reputation and prestige as "Ghazi" in the history of Iran for opening the country and inviting other lands to Islam.

From the sources of this period, it appears that the person who was able to consolidate the rule of the Ghaznavids and was the foundation of Mahmud of Ghaznavid. Although it should not be forgotten that a number of noblemen of this family were previously present in the structure of the Samanid government and served this eastern ruling family, so that Alpetkin, the father of Mahmoud, was one of his court slaves during the period of Ahmad Samani, who was able to rise to the position of Khorasan army arrived. Alpetkin, according to historical data, kept this post and position until the period of Abd al-Malik bin Nuh Samani. After the death of Abdul Malik Alpetkin of Ghaznavi, he suggested that Abdul Malik's son should be the successor of Amir Samani. Because Mansour became aware of Alpetkin's opposition to his accession to the throne; First, he summoned him from Khorasan to Bukhara, but Alpetkin knew that if he went to Mansour's court, he would kill himself and his family, so he refused to go to Khorasan and did not accept this request. His demands are not compatible, he removed him from his position. When Alpetkin learned of his removal, he immediately went to Ghazni city and took refuge in that city, and after some time he was able to introduce the Ghaznavid government to the world. According to the historical narrative, Mahmud of Ghaznavi was first elected by the Samanids as the governor of Khorasan like his fathers. Mahmud first attacked Ghazna city and captured it, and then he turned to Khorasan and killed the famous Samanid generals named Bektuzin and Fayq. He defeated in a war and dominated Khorasan. After conquering Khorasan, Mahmoud Ghaznavi turned to the east and was able to conquer Sistan with a lightning strike. Mahmoud Ghaznavi also attacked Khorasan and India in addition to Sistan and got a lot of wealth from these attacks. Gained. Later, areas such as Peshawar - Vihand - Bhatia, Multan, Tanisar, Qanouj - Somnat were gradually added to the domain of Mahmud Ghaznavi. In addition, due to the weakness of this family, the center of Al-Buyeh became part of Mahmud Ghaznavi's possessions. The occupation of many territories by Mahmud Ghaznavi and his son Masoud Ghaznavi itself shows that the composition and structure of the Ghaznavid Corps was in some ways more regular and precise than other local governments, which during their rule prevented them from accessing resources and sources and other achievements help. Ghaznavid sultans such as Mahmud and Masoud and other survivors of the army were able to create a defensive and offensive war machine by using a combined structure of the army with the formation of military equipment and a different population structure, which they used in the conquest of many lands over time. It will be introduced for better identification.

From the sources of this period, it appears that the person who was able to consolidate the rule of the Ghaznavids and was the foundation of Mahmud of Ghaznavid. Although it should not be forgotten that a number of noblemen of this family were previously present in the structure of the Samanid government and served this eastern ruling family, so that Alpetkin, the father of Mahmoud, was one of his court slaves during the period of Ahmad Samani, who was able to rise to the position of Khorasan army arrived. Alpetkin, according to historical data, kept this post and position until the period of Abd al-Malik bin Nuh Samani. After the death of Abdul Malik Alpetkin of Ghaznavi, he suggested that Abdul Malik's son should be the successor of Amir Samani. Because Mansour became aware of Alpetkin's opposition to his accession to the throne; First, he summoned him from Khorasan to Bukhara, but Alpetkin knew that if he went to Mansour's court, he would kill himself and his family, so he refused to go to Khorasan and did not accept this request. His demands are not compatible, he removed him from his position. When Alpetkin learned of his removal, he immediately went to Ghazni city and took refuge in that city, and after some time he was able to introduce the Ghaznavid government to the world. According to the historical narrative, Mahmud of Ghaznavi was first elected by the Samanids as the governor of Khorasan like his fathers. Mahmud first attacked Ghazna city and captured it, and then he turned to Khorasan and killed the famous Samanid generals named Bektuzin and Fayq. He defeated in a war and dominated Khorasan. After conquering Khorasan, Mahmoud Ghaznavi turned to the east and was able to conquer Sistan with a lightning strike. Mahmoud Ghaznavi also attacked Khorasan and India in addition to Sistan and got a lot of wealth from these attacks. Gained. Later, areas such as Peshawar - Vihand - Bhatia, Multan, Tanisar, Qanouj - Somnat were gradually added to the domain of Mahmud Ghaznavi. In addition, due to the weakness of this family, the center of Al-Buyeh became part of Mahmud Ghaznavi's possessions. The occupation of many territories by Mahmud Ghaznavi and his son Masoud Ghaznavi itself shows that the composition and structure of the Ghaznavid Corps was in some ways more regular and precise than other local governments, which during their rule prevented them from accessing resources and sources and other achievements help. Ghaznavid sultans such as Mahmud and Masoud and other survivors of the army were able to create a defensive and offensive war machine by using a combined structure of the army with the formation of military equipment and a different population structure, which they used in the conquest of many lands over time. It will be introduced for better identification.

 

2. The structure of the Ghaznavid army

The military structure of the Ghaznavids was characterized by the significant role of the Sultan, who held high authority and decision-making power. The Sultan, being a central figure, played a crucial role in declaring war, making peace, appointing successors, and managing military-administrative elements (Mavardi, 2004: 59). The Ghaznavid rulers, including Sultan Mahmud and Sultan Masoud, were actively involved in military campaigns, personally leading and participating in battles, demonstrating their commitment to warfare (Shabankarei, 1997: 67). Historical records indicate that each Ghaznavid Sultan possessed specific skills in weaponry, such as Mahmud's swordsmanship, Masoud's proficiency in using a mace and throwing a rake, and Maudood bin Ghaznavi's expertise in archery (Fakhr Modbar, 1965: 284-264; Bosworth, 1992: 119).

The War Council, a vital component of Ghaznavid military strategy, consisted of nobles, chiefs, administrators, and military personnel. This council, presided over by the Sultan or his appointed representative, facilitated discussions on military-military crises, strengths, weaknesses, and plans. The Sultan's decision-making authority was paramount, but the council's input played a role in shaping final decisions (Beyhaqi, 1995: 19-735-848-881). The minister, holding a significant position, was consulted extensively in military affairs, influencing decisions related to commanders, military forces, and strategies during campaigns (Aghili, 1994: 161 & 168; Beyhaqi, 1994: 817-819). The minister, considered the vice-sultan, had substantial influence in political, civil, and military matters (Maverdi, 2003: 54).

 

The position of the great general, a high-ranking military role, was crucial in the Ghaznavid military hierarchy. The person selected for this role, often from the royal family or Turkish slaves, needed a strong military background, training, and experience, along with considerations of family relationships and other factors (Aqili, 1934: 195-195).

The lieutenant-general only carried out the orders of the king or sultan and was only responsive to his questions, and no one or any other person was able to ask questions in military-state-administrative affairs. In fact, he was considered one of the main members of the war council after the king. His opinions and war plans played an essential and key role in the victory or defeat of the army and in the campaigns in which Sultan Mahmud of Ghaznavi himself was personally present. The great general was performing his duty under the sultan, otherwise he would personally take command of the army. The great general considered himself a man of war or a man of the sword, who did not shy away from the goals and ideals of the king or sultan in the way of fighting, and always did his best to fulfill them. When the king or the sultan was upset or in high-risk situations, when he felt that the king or the sultan was worried or upset because of his self-righteousness and autocracy, he refrained from expressing any opinion and contradicting the king's opinion and decisions. It was deferred to the future. It seems that in the event of Khwarazm, when the minister asked the opinion of Amir Nasr, the brother of the great general Mahmoud, he said that I do not speak in such a matter - I am saying that God is my brother and his circumstances and habits are not hidden from me, and I gave an earful in this regard. It is from him and the wise man that it was understood in every gesture I saw. Although he was considered a great general and after the Sultan, the commander-in-chief of the army; But he had a lower status and hierarchy than the first minister. The holder of five sepehsalarchies is like high civil and military positions. This position has signs and symbols such as a golden belt, a bifurcated hat, a drum, a kos, a science, a thousand-thousand-thousand-thousand-thousand-thousand-thousand-thousand-thousand-mothqali-dastar, and an elephant (Beyhaqi, 1968:347). The great general has always been with the Sultan in the court and in the royal army, and whenever he was sent on a mission by the king or the sultan, he returned to the court after the end of the period. Among the people who were assigned the position of great generals during the Ghaznavid period, we can mention Amir Nasr, Amir-Yusuf, Sons of Sabkatkin, Ali Qarib, Ali Dayeh, Sabashi-Hajib, General Tughrel the usurper or Kafir Nemat of the period of Abdul Rashid Qazvini. win. The first three people, Amir Nasr, Amir Yusuf, the sons of Sabkatkin, Ali Gharib, Ali Dayeh, Sabashi, Hajib, were from the royal or royal family, who had a special position and dignity in the eyes of the Sepahs and Diwans. In fact, a person called Kodkhoda was helping him, and Kodkhoda has been the master of all civil-financial- and military affairs. The position of Kodkhoda in the eyes of the general was similar to the position of the prime minister in the eyes of the sultan. Although Code of God acted as a consultant under the supervision of the great general, but it was chosen by the sultan at the discretion of the minister. Of course, in his dismissal and installation, the opinion of the general was also sought. Kodkhodaei is actually considered the launch pad of the ministry (Beyhqi, 1968: 554). Kodkhodae Amiryoussef Kodkhodae Bushel Lecture was one of these people (Beyhqi, 1968: 321). As it is mentioned in the historical sources and examples, every warlord had his own opponent.

As it is stated in the historical sources and examples, every sepehsalar had a hajibi for himself, one of the most famous of which was the merchant Amir Yusuf Tughrel (Beyhaqi, 1968: 325). According to its geographical extent, the Ghaznavid government is practically divided into several warlord regions. Even in the big politicians, the favorable opinion of the Sultan should have been obtained before. Also, they should have coordinated their plans with the grand lieutenant and financial court plans with the minister through Kadkhoda, so that when they left for the ruling region, in order to be safe from the increasing conspiracies and conspiracies of the court, they requested to issue positions. in which the limits and powers of their duties are included (Beyhqi, 1968: 374). According to the historical data, the powers of the general were limited, and in addition to maintaining the territory, the general was obliged to carry out territorial development campaigns, acquire war spoils, crush the infidels of other states, suppress internal rebellions, and also collect and gather for its preservation and security. (Beyhqi, 1968: 351) The economic importance and the military location of the mission has played a significant role in the political and military status of the sepahsalar. The fear of the court's conspiracy against them gradually created the grounds for their rebellion. In order to prevent the possible rebellion of this group of generals, the Ghaznavid sultans imprisoned one or more of their children and kept them as hostages (Beyhqi, 1995: 426-427). The warlordship itself required having the necessary and sufficient military skills, which is rightly called under the title of discipleship of warlords (Beyhqi, 1995: 349), but sometimes it happens that a Turkish slave who was previously a khazan had a civilian position and was involved in war affairs. He has not gained such experience and has reached this position. The best example of this claim can be referred to Ahmad Tekin, a general in the borders of India. Bihaqi mentions this from the words of Amir Masoud of Ghaznavi, although he was not a student of the generals, he was our father's capacitor and served in all his travels, and the conditions and habits of the Amir, He has seen and known the past (Beyhqi, 1995: 349). One of the things that is of interest is that Amir Masoud of Ghaznavi refused to send Ayaz to the province of Iraq due to his lack of experience in the legal affairs of Iranian provinces and his constant presence in his court. Although he was completely familiar with his sincerity, bravery and loyalty, it should not be forgotten that Ayaz's affiliation with his father's faction was also affected by this work.

As mentioned, every general had a financial officer with him, and the main duty of that person was to handle the financial affairs of the army and give advice on military affairs. He was also sent by the sultan with the opinion of the minister and the general general, also with a favorable opinion, whenever the sultan He wanted to limit the behavior and performance of the warlord, so he sent Kodkhoda without consulting him. In such cases, the occurrence of major differences was inevitable, even though Kadkhoda's vigilance, political ability, and prudence in the financial affairs of Lashkari's army sometimes contributed to the prosperity of the general. But most of the time, Kodkhodayan were employed as spies on behalf of the Shah to limit the scope of the general's authority, so as to convey the news and traditions of his work directly to the Shah or Sultan of Ghaznavi. According to the reports, Kodkhodayan was actually considered one of the secret and influential agents of the Ghaznavid kings who conveyed news and information to the king and helped the king in making final decisions. Usually, in such cases, the Kodkhodayans had more authority on behalf of the Sultan, so that they could more easily fulfill the Shah's wishes in this regard. The best example to prove this argument is the disagreement between Abul Hasan Ali Ghazi Shirazi and Ahmed Wazir Takin, the commander of the expedition to the lands of India, so that it can be seen that the rank and position of Kadkhoda was higher among the removal of the commander of the expedition. As it has been said, according to the order of Shah Sepahsalar, an expedition was issued in the name of Ahmad, and the judge insisted that Ahmad be placed under the supervision of Ali bin Obaidullah Sepahsalar. The tendency of the military and Ghazians towards Ahmad Tekin Baghazi did not convince Shirazi. In this regard, he was forced to correspond with the minister Khwaja Ahmad bin Hasan Maimandi and present a detailed report of the difference between his opinion and Ahmad Tekin, although the minister of Ghaznavi replied that you are the god of finance, what do you have to do with a monarchy and an army. Ahmed himself does what he considers expedient. The judge sent a detailed report against Ahmadinal Tekin during the general's campaign to the war province of today's Benares city and accused him of financial abuse. The same reports later led to the rebellion and the downfall of Sepahsalar Ahmadinal Tekin. (Beyhqi, 1968: 515-517-559-560).

Among other cases of this kind, we can refer to Abdul Jabbar Ahmad bin Abdul Samad Shirazi Kodkhodai's spying on Ghazi Sepahsalar (Beyhqi, 1968: 283-284). Although with a little patience in the characteristics and characteristics of the general and general general, it can be seen that the characteristics and indicators of both positions are similar to each other; However, due to some privileges such as going to the court, visiting the sultan's bedside without permission, a higher pension than other officials, and also in addition to this position and position, he could do some other jobs such as Hajib Ghulamman Khaseh and secretary, etc. to have at your service. For this reason, it has been superior to Sepehsalar. Another military position in the Ghaznavid period is Salar or Moghadam. This position and position was actually given to the person who commanded a number of corps of more than 1,000 to 5,000 people. Although Beyhaqi did not specify the dividing line or even the clear border between its chiefs and generals, and sometimes these two officials were synonymous with each other. But what emerges from the content of the historical texts of its martial era regarding the removal of the Beyhaqi history book, the position of rulers in the base of power and political pyramid of the Ghaznavids has a lower position than its generals. Although it should not be forgotten that the position of general was actually a stepping stone for people to go to the position of general and most generals of the Ghaznavid Dargah must have held the position of general for a long time and reach this position after gaining a lot of experience and savings. But what makes the difference and difference in the position and importance of these two positions and military posts even more definite is that the generals are selected by the sultan to important regions and sent there, and there are several generals in each region. They were under the supervision of the generals and they executed the orders and orders issued by them. The main task of the generals was to command the military forces in small and big wars for the benefit of the Sultan of Ghaznavi. In the tradition of each group of Ghaznavid soldiers, there was a leader of that tribe, so Bayhaqi mentions that the Turks, Indians, Kurds, Segzians, Kajatans, Dilmans, Khwarezmians, Guzgans were among the ethnic groups that made up the Ghaznavid army, each of They were administered and supervised under the titles of Turkan chief, Indian chief, Kurd chief, Ghazian chief, Dog chief, Ziyan chief, Kajatan chief, Dilman chief, Khwarezmian chief. In addition to the co-ethnics of these groups, other ethnic groups were placed under the guardianship of these ethnic groups. According to historical data, rulers were actually divided into two basic categories, which were divided into Turkish rulers and provincial rulers. These two groups were different in terms of privileges, authority and influence. Dargah rulers were far more powerful and influential than provincial rulers. Another post of Ghaznavid period is colonel.

This position in the military structure and its hierarchy were under his supervision after the salar. These people, i.e. the colonels, had a group of 100 to 500 people under their command. In addition to war missions, these people held positions such as guarding the castles, and each of them had signs and symptoms that were identified by the people. (Beyhaqi, 1995: 294). Another position of the Ghaznavid period is Saruthaq. In the historical sources and sources of Ghaznavid works, the chief of ten Ghulam Saruthaq was said to be Saruthaq, the last military base in the military structure of Ghaznavids. While on a horse, he was commanding a group of infantry (Beyhqi, 2004: 451). Another position in the Ghaznavid court is Hajib Bozor, who was also called Hajib Salar because he had access to the Sultan and had verbal influence. He was responsible for court ceremonies, responsible for loading, responsible for protecting and guarding the life of the emir and courtiers, and was placed in the military hierarchy after the great general. Among the characteristics and signs of Hajib Bazar in the community, we can refer to the two-horned hat, the black hood, the golden belt, the elephant, the flag, the drum, and the drum (Beyhqi, 1995: 614-648). Due to the fact that the post of Hajibi is apparently a court job, it has a military nature and one of the Turkish slaves with military experience was considered important to hold this position. During the period of Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi, Hajbans refused to express political opinions due to the tyranny of this king's vote. And usually, in these days, the Amir or the Wazir was in charge of planning political affairs and military plans (Beyhqi, 1995: 575). These comments show that Hajib's position generally had a military exemption, Hajib Bozor was always with the Sultan in the campaigns and he was usually in charge of the left wing of the army, and the general was placed on the right wing of the army, Hajib Bozor in Jang-ha has been a part of a movie and in military affairs, Hajib has assisted him in the financial affairs of Kadkhoda, among other positions, he was Hajib in the Ghaznavid period. It seems that the person holding the position of Hajib was the assistant of Hajib Bozor and helped him in the advancement of court and military affairs. The number of Hajib in the Ghaznavid court is not exactly known, and usually their political and social prestige and prestige depend on individual ability, wealth. And their influence has been in government institutions, and this means that sometimes Hajibi has achieved successive successes among his peers due to this correct performance.

It has been important to go through the hierarchy of slavery to obtain the position of hajibi, but in the promotion to this position, it has not always followed a personal process, rather, the granting of this position and position has been assigned by the sultan, his vizier and his great hajib, and sometimes the sultan has taken action based on personal or emotional and even political issues and encouraging and persuading him to hand over this position. For example, Amir Masoud of Ghaznavi intended to win the opinion of Sultan Masoud of Ghaznavi by handing over the position of Hajibi to Alton Tash's son. He did not take any action (Beyhqi, 1995: 421). In the Ghaznavid government hierarchy, Hajib was lower than the salar and above the colonel, and in the military operations and campaigns of the Ghaznavid kings, the great Hajib was usually not present, and the Hajib were under the command of the salar, and whenever Hajib reached the position of a salar, the colonels were under his supervision. They were engaged in serving. A number of generals of the Ghaznavid period previously held opposition positions. In the meantime, Ghulam Sarayan had a better chance to reach the position of Hajibi. Among the signs and symptoms of Jabi were the black coat, the fork hat, and the golden belt (Beyhqi, 1995: 377). According to their description, they are actually divided into two categories. There were Hajban Sarai and Hajban Velayati. Hajban originally had people under their command such as guards, saddlers, servants, and weapon bearers. These court positions served in military affairs according to Hajban. Another position of the Ghaznavid period was the position of Khiltash. This position in the military hierarchy of the Ghaznavids was supposed to be the only task of delivering letters, orders and decrees and news about the capital and the king to other people or other regions. And the court to the provinces and states in this era were under the supervision of the guards, and sometimes these forces were used in war missions. The head of Khiltashan was named as Naqib Khiltash, he was the coordinator between the activities and performance of Khiltashan. In fact, he can be considered as Khiltash, the representative of Hajib, who has been supervising the movements of his subordinates. According to historical data, 500 Khiltas were present in the battle of Dandanghan in the advance of the Ghaznavid army (Beyhqi, 1995: 805). According to historical documents and evidence, Altuntash is one of the Khiltas of the Ghaznavid era.

From the examination of the documents and texts of this period, it appears that he was first Khiltash Mahmud of Ghaznavi, and with the passage of time and gaining many experiences, he reached the position of a Hajibi and Sepahsali (Beyhaqi, 1995: 936). In addition to this position, there was another position in the Ghaznavid era, which was called the position of Naqibi. In fact, Naqeeb was in charge of communicating orders to the army in the camps and military camps, and he was also in charge of delivering the orders of the higher authorities to the police officers during the campaign or the stay of the army in the camps and military camps, as well as the coordinator of relations between the commanders in all parts of the army, such as the introduction, Maimaneh, Misera, Qalb, branches, stems, Talaiyehs, and seized the wrong and law-breaking troops. (Beyhqi, 2014: 293). The post of Gholaman Sarai chief is another position of the Ghaznavid period, as it was mentioned in the previous pages, the core of the Army during the Ghaznavid period was made up of the same group of people, and these people are actually the most important elements of the Army. They were Ghaznavids. Because the position of Ghulaman Saraei commander was very important in the Ghaznavid army, the commander was chosen by the Sultan with the advice of the minister of the court, as well as the position of commander of the army and the position of Hajib Bozur from among all groups of the Turkish army. The most important duty of the slave master was to buy new slaves for the court, to select and appoint the slaves that should be given to the minister of the general Hajban and other military figures. Supervising and dealing with the affairs of education and training of slaves and maintaining and supervising the records of slaves, which includes their names in the administrative offices of the Ghaznavid state (Beyhqi, 1995: 882).

 The chief of the serfs was always present in the wars and took command of the serfs. Together with Hajib Bozor, he was used to protect the lives of the nobles and other dignitaries of the court, and he was even responsible for the security of the court and the lives of the courtiers. have as Beyhaqi reports, the number of Sarai slaves in the Ghaznavid army in 428 AH was over four thousand (Beyhaqi, 1995: 688). Salar Gholaman Saraei was not invited by the court to participate in the war councils, and related to this area, he gave advice to the king and the vizier Sepahsalar and Hajib Bozor due to his business in war affairs. In the administrative and state hierarchy of the Ghaznavid era, Ghulaman Sarai had a lower position than Hajeb the Great, and all Ghulaman leaders, including the Turks, Hindus, Segzians, Balkhians, etc., served under the supervision of Ghulaman Sarai. The famous Salar Gholaman Sarai by Masoud Ghaznavi can be called Baktaghdi. He commanded the army against the Seljuks in 426 AH. A person named Kodkhodaei was in charge of the financial affairs and consulting of the holder of this position. As it has been said, Abu Abd Allah held the post of Kadkhodai Baktaghdi and he constantly advised him in all matters.

Another position of the Ghaznavid period is that of Akhor Salar. As can be seen from the name of this office, it has always been of a courtly and military nature, and the person holding the office was responsible for providing horses, camels, elephants and other animals that were needed by the Ghaznavid army at a certain time. Since he was the supplier and producer of cattle for the army and the court, his presence in the battlefields was very necessary and he was considered a part of the key officials of the administrative and military structure of the Ghaznavids. The position of adhar is considered among other positions in the Ghaznavid period, the person holding the position was available to the Arab court and this position actually had a civilian function, according to the documents and evidence obtained from the Ghaznavid period, an Iranian held a position of adhar. According to the historical data, the Court of Commons was under the administrative structure of the ministry and this person was chosen by the sultan or personal minister. In the administrative hierarchy of the country and the army of the Ghaznavid era, he was placed after the great Hajib and the chieftain of Gholaman Sarai. He had to provide the King's visit ceremony to the military forces and the order and discipline of the army in the army, and also among his other tasks was to register the names of the army personnel such as the heads of the army, to handle the twenty-gun affairs, and to arrange the regular payment of them, to supervise the arsenal, to supervise Over the weapons, there was the supervision of the soldiers' uniforms, the preparation and supply of food and fodder for the army, and the provision of food and fodder for the cattle of the Ghaznavid troops, etc. Arad recorded and recorded all the affairs related to the Army in a book called Jari Divan Wide (Beyhqi, 1995: 182). In every expedition, a person called the officer and vice president of the Ad hoc Diwan moved along with it, and in fact, these people removed the employees or employees of the Ad hoc Diwan and under the authority of the Ad Hoc Diwan, which according to the above description, due to their duties Many and key that this person had in the military and administrative structure of the Ghaznavids, had a very high and important position. Among these people, we can mention Bushel Zozni, who served as a minister for a short period of time. Although the conflict was a civilian person, but due to the close relationship between the army and the army and the principles and methods of war in the Ghaznavid era, this person and people were chosen based on their extensive experience in this field to be appointed to this position by the court and the king and other officials. It has been assigned. Among the famous figures of the Ghaznavid era, we can mention Bushel Zozni and Abolfazl Razi. Due to his shrewd personality and high tact, Bushel Zozni was able to gain a lot of influence in the Ghaznavid court and government apparatus, so that his comments on various issues had a great impact on the Sultan, the Prime Minister, the Secretary of Missions, and the Chief of Staff, so that Due to the position and high position of this official, Beyhaqi introduces him as a person who is a scheming person (Beyhaqi, 1995: 404-402). And during his absence, his deputy had the duty to take his place and settle the situation. Also, Kodkhodai also helped the owner of the temporary court in the financial affairs of the court.

 

3.The battle tactics of the Ghaznavids

 The tools, methods and military skills of any government are subject to the conditions of the fields and lines of economic power, the monetary system and its population composition, which human geographical factors, the type of outlook, wealth, vision and thinking of the people and society play a significant role in its formation. And Kochero are fundamentally different from urban and settled societies in terms of the composition and arrangements of cavalry, infantry, fighting and defense methods with regard to the demographic structure and also the composition of ethnic groups. So that the historical documents and evidence show that the societies of a successor and urban and rural heavy infantry corps are formed with the method of regular wars and heterogeneous texture and they have this type of combination in themselves, the natural and geographical conditions of being close to the plains and mountains of the sea. Each river has a significant effect on weapons and military skills. Also, the amount of access to cheap weapons, the ability to manage and organize, is very effective in the size and smallness of the Army institution. (Ozghandi, 1998: 16-17), also, naturally, military weapons and military skills create the special composition of the Army. By examining the historical sources and sources left by the Ghaznavid work, it can be seen that the weapons and military skills of the Ghaznavid army are diverse and numerous, and this issue itself is affected by the presence of various conditions in the geographical area and the increase in wealth. But due to the lack of adaptation of the high military management and also the use of weapons and military dynamics skills of the Ghaznavids, it did not lead to this. The military equipment and climatic and geographical conditions of the tools and animals used not only did not lead to the new mobility and dynamism of the Ghaznavids, but also led to the decline or loss of the military superiority of the Ghaznavids in the battlefields. The formation of the Ghaznavid Corps in the battlefields was like this, the groups of elephants were placed in front of the corps, and most of the corps were in the rear, and the infantry were behind them.

However, the elephants had a lot of destructive power in the opposing army. But this huge animal in dry deserts without water, grass and shelter has not been able to react quickly against offensive weapons as well as the enemy's skirmishes and skirmishes equipped with fast and agile horses, even sometimes the enemy's military skills in fighting against Elephants have caused heavy damage to the army and camp of the Ghaznavid army. The heavy weight of the elephants and their lack of mobility in the ranks of the military caused the Ghaznavid army to move very slowly and heavily in front of the rival armies that were equipped with fast and agile horses. To make up for this, they used the camel regiment to equip the army, although the Tezru horses, with their high speed and quick reaction, did not have much place in the ranks of the Ghaznavid army, as they are interviewed in the battle of Dandanghan. Basis should use horsemen in wars and refrain from using huge elephants and slow moving camels in the formation of the army, so that it can be seen that one of the main factors of the inefficiency of the Ghaznavid army in the war with the Karakhanids as well as the Seljuks and other swift and agile forces On the northeast of Iran, due to the use of the huge animal elephant in the army and also the use of two-humped camels in the wars with them, (Beyhaqi, 1995: 86) due to the incompatibility of forces and equipment in the military structure of the Ghaznavids, as well as its incompatibility with The natural and geographical conditions and the lack of dynamism and quick reaction of the Ghaznavid army in moving quickly against the agile Seljuk army made the heavy and slow-moving Ghaznavid army unable to resist as it should and perhaps against other forces, including the Seljuks, and failed. prefer over victory. Now, one must ask, considering the weakness of the Ghaznavid troops, how could the Ghaznavid troops achieve great victories in India with all these qualities? By examining the historical sources of this period, it seems that the society is also divided due to internal conflicts and contradictions. Multiplicity and multiplicity in the political structure has made the Ghaznavids take advantage of this opportunity to crush the local governments and achieve great victories there with this combination of corps.

Therefore, according to the characteristics of the Ghaznavid army, it can be seen that this army did not have much impact on the victories of the Ghaznavids in India, because regarding the victory of the Ghaznavid army against the rulers of Al-Buyya, it should be said that the rule of Al-Buyya is comparable to the rule of the Ghaznavids in the era. He has passed the last days of his life and lost his authority at this time in front of the heavy and lesser Ghaznavid army. Historical documents and evidence show that this heavy armed corps has consistently preferred defeat over victory in confronting other ethnic groups and nationalities, so that later these same factors caused the fall of the Ghaznavid government in the future (Gardizi, 1984: 405-388; Jarfadghani, 1995: 392 275; Ibn Athir, 1985 events of the years 405-416; Nazim 1939 300 Khalili, 1954: 54 100). The use of military equipment, the use of pristine military designs, the use of weapons, and the design of maps and other essentials that predict events and the use of key factors play a large role in the victory of the IRGC against rivals and enemies, as the sources of the Ghaznavid period show that in the period of Mahmud Ghaznavi, as well as the period of Masoud Ghaznavi, some of these skills were used in the army and militia. As it can be seen, the military skill of elite people like Mahmud plays a significant role in their military victories, and this issue is considered apart from the military structure - an army – (Jarfadghani 1995: 393 - 391; Khalili, 1954: 83-118-75). In the era of Masoud Ghaznavi, due to the bravery and fearlessness of this Ghaznavid prince, he experienced a severe defeat in three consecutive wars with the Seljuks by using the mentioned equipment and tools, and the roots of this defeat should be found in the structure of the heavy corps of weapons and the inactivity of the Ghaznavids searched.

 

4. Weapons in use

 According to historical data, the Ghaznavids used two types of light and heavy weapons, these weapons can be considered

 Historical sources and sources from the description of the events of the wars and battles of the Ghaznavid kings with their rivals and enemies listed the weapons used in the Ghaznavid army, including arrows and bows, shields, spears, swords, scabbards, daggers, Najag knives or Qalachur swords (a long and curved sword like Each of the Ghaznavid kings was very skilled in using war weapons. As mentioned in the previous pages, Mahmud Ghaznavi was the leader in using the sword, followed by Masoud Ghaznavi in ​​using the mace among the troops of the Ghaznavid era. Zanzed has been special and general, and also the use of arrows and bows was very famous during his rule. The heavy weapons used in the Ghaznavid army can be mentioned as Arade catapults, elephant oil-droppers, which Mahmud Ghaznavi used in his attack on India was able to transfer a lot of wealth from this land with him to the fort in Afghanistan, and in the meantime he was able to loot two thousand films from the Indians and fit them into the structure of the Ghaznavid army. The elephants were completely under the supervision of the Ghaznavid sultan, usually at the front of the army. They were placed and the person who led the elephant was known as Phil Banan, and all these elephants were under the supervision of one person named the head of Phil Banan in the Ghaznavid period and was called Moghadam Pilbanan. As it can be seen from the historical documents and evidence of the Ghaznavid era, the Sultan of Ghaznavid personally took care of the elephants every year, and when he found that the elephants were emaciated or had lost their strength and ability to move, he sent them to India returns after growth and breeding and fattening And(Nazem, 1939: 148) to gain the necessary strength and energy to enter Iran again in the Jirga of the Ghaznavid troops. Each of the armies that have the weapons mentioned above with titles such as - Archers - Archers, Qalachurians - Catapult shooters - Arada holders, sword holders, oil holders - Najaq holders - Flakhan holders, Spear holders, Archers, Lasso throwers, Mace throwers - Shield holders - Kashan is mentioned in history texts; However, there is not much information about the number of Ghaznavid troops in numerous historical texts, and if there is such information, it seems that different opinions have been recorded about them. So that in some texts, the number of Mahmoud Ghaznavi's troops is written as over 100,000 people, and some other researchers estimate the number of Mahmoud Ghaznavi's troops to be at most fifty thousand and Masoud Ghaznavi's troops to be up to forty or thirty thousand people (Nazim 1939: 147; Bosworth, 1999 /1: 127-126)

 

 

5. The composition of the Ghaznavid army

 According to historical data, the Ghaznavid Corps is actually divided into two categories: cavalry and infantry, and at the same time, this corps is divided into two categories: heavy cavalry and light cavalry, and heavy infantry and infantry.

 According to historical data, the heavy horse riders were usually from the group of Turks and Indians, as well as Arabs. The heavy armed infantry is usually made up of ethnic groups from the eastern regions of Iran, such as Segzians, Ghaznichis, Khorasanians, and Gozganians. Along with these forces, people such as Ghazians Mutua Ayaran and Saeidan Hasher were also present and helped the Ghaznavid army in the war. They used the reason why they use the old and traditional war plan of the ancient Iranians, that is, the combination of Segal by means of a heavy army and a group of elephants. This family has been the ruling family in the eastern borders of Iran. which is divided into multi-layered units organization, the Ghaznavid Corps is a part of other military units under the influence of Indians and Turks and Iraq, these multi-layered military units are actually a kind of multiple support umbrella in the left and right ranks of the Corps and In the heart of the corps, it was introduced that the elephants were stationed in the back of the heart of the corps. In order to protect the elephants from the arrows and spears of the enemy, the Ghaznavid military commanders covered them with steel armors, which were usually called Bargostovan.

which completely covers the head and body of the elephant. One of the reasons for using elephants or camels in the Ghaznavid army is that due to the large size of these animals and wildlife, they stood in front of the enemy army and also their strength and attraction. These animals are very useful and effective weapons in breaking the ranks of the enemy on such city walls and castle walls. The existence of these strange and heavy animals in the ranks of the Ghaznavid army causes a kind of confusion in the hearts of the opposing army. On the other hand, next to the elephants of the corps, the horsemen were equipped with iron shields, and the shield bearers said that these forces, with their large and strong iron shields, actually protected them from the arrows and spears that were thrown towards the ranks of the corps. They did so that no harm would come to the ranks, and if these harms were received by the enemy forces, they were not very serious and effective. Behind these people, there was a group of infantry shooters known as snipers. This group had the task of shooting arrows at the enemy soldiers by drawing their bows, and also some people had the task of being the commanders, designers of the battlefield, the brave people and the vanguard of the rival corps. to target and destroy the effectiveness of the opposite army. Behind the soldiers in each narrow bay were horse riders and camel riders, and the location of the sultan or the commander in chief of the Ghaznavid forces was located among them. It supports the army or the corps, sometimes it is possible that only one or two elephants are placed on the left and right sides, and that is for the commander and the left and right parts of the corps were allocated. Behind them, the arsenals were carried by camels and the tents of the draft animals were placed at the end of the stem.

 

In the quadrangle of the corps, the left and right front and rear platoon leaders were stationed. According to a description of the formation of the Ghaznavid corps, the following plan can be designed in this way. The introduction of the heart - the army - the elephants, the shield bearers, the spearmen, the horsemen, the camel riders, the guards of the sultan's place, on the left side, the two elephants, the commander on the left, on the elephant, the armorers, the beasts of burde On the right side of the table - two elephants - the commander on the right side riding on the main elephant - the arsenals - beasts of burden. In the historical sources of this period, it is stated that the Ghaznavid Corps with all its formations was very weak and because the composition of the Corps was very weak. It has not been strong and strong in front of the attacks of the enemy troops, especially the Seljuqs, it has been very weak and fragile and vulnerable, so that it has been seen that this army was attacked by other rivals after the end of the campaign and when it returned, such as offensive operations, war and flight operations. Guerrilla operations, operations similar to night bloods by fast and agile forces on northeastern tribes such as the Seljuks and other agile tribes across the river suffered a lot of losses, so this weakness can be seen in most of the military operations of the Ghaznavid troops in the conquests of the Ghaznavid sultans in India. War against Bajata, war against Karakhanids, war with Seljuks, war with Amol warriors, war with Kerman warriors, he observed well that the wide, long and heavy army of Ghazni carried out several operations during the period of Mahmud of Ghazni, and these victories were undoubtedly due to The existence of his bravery and courage has been established, because it appears from the documents that the Ghaznavid army has continuously been heavy and has left the Avardagas with defeats and heavy casualties.

The composition of the Ghaznavid army as a whole has meant the rule of slaves and its army chief, because it was mentioned in the previous pages that the formation, development and expansion of the army and the empire of these people played a fundamental role.

 

  6. Conclusion

 The Ghaznavids are one of the local ruling families of Iran that settled in the eastern borders of Iran in the year 351 AH, namely in the city of Qazvin, as it was mentioned in the previous pages that this family was actually one of the soldiers of the Samanid court, who because of the services they rendered to the Samanid family. They were able to reach the important military positions of this era. One of the most important figures of this Al-Takin family is the father of Mahmoud Ghaznavi, who was one of his court slaves during the period of Ahmad Samani. After carrying out many activities, he was able to reach the position of governor of Khorasan, and due to his orientation in the government and involvement in the affairs of succession and favoring Abd al-Malik bin Samani, the son of Samani, he was removed from his position and dignity by Mansur, the brother of Ahmad Samani, and since he was a He was a military person, he moved from Bukhara to Ghazni city with some of his relatives and established the first foundations of the Ghaznavid government in this city, and later he was able to expand the political borders of this local ruling family, the Ghaznavids, to other places. Mahmoud Ghaznavi can be mentioned among the famous figures of Ghaznavid family. As explained in the above pages, the Ghaznavid emirs grew up in the Samanid court and reached high positions, imitating the Samanid and other local governments, they considered having a strong military organization as the basis and power to maintain their system. Mahmoud Ghaznavi was basically a military person and he valued the military very much. As it was mentioned in the previous pages, the army and the militia were one of the most fundamental foundations of the Ghaznavid government in the political structure of the Ghaznavid army, as shown in the previous reviews. The king or sultan had the highest position, and other officials followed him, so that in the Ghaznavid period, the people of knowledge were considered to be the people of the pen, and the military officials were considered to be the people of the sword. As mentioned, the foundation of Ghaznavid rule was based on the presence of the Ghaznavid Shah or Sultan.

So that the Ghaznavid emirs were the best people in the military field. As mentioned in the historical sources, Mahmoud Ghaznavi, Massoud Ghaznavi, and Maudood Ghaznavi were among those who were famous for swordsmanship, mace, arrows and bows, respectively. Even Maudood Ghaznavi had made an arrow in the meantime, which was called Tir Maududi. They called in the preceding discussions, it was shown that the Ghaznavids imitated their army and militia system from their other contemporary families, namely the Samanids, the Safarians, the Tahirians, and the Abbasids, in which the nobles, the chiefs of the tribes, and their nobles played a key role in this structure. The main composition of the Ghaznavid army was cavalry and infantry, according to the investigations carried out, in this structure, the infantry was divided into two categories: heavy weapons and light weapons, and the Ghaznavid armies used many weapons against the enemy, which in These weapons and tools have been common in most of the local governments, which include swords, swords, arrows, bows, and shields. They were among the war tools used by Ghaznavids in the battlefields, and the use of elephants and catapults were among the war tools of the kings. In the Ghaznavid army, animals such as elephants and camels were used in the Ghaznavid army, so that in the selection of transfers, the elephants and elephants in the Ghaznavid army were handled directly by the king. became. Based on this, the structure of the Ghaznavid Corps can be considered as follows. The introduction of the army and accompanied by a group of elephants and elephant drivers, shield bearers, archers, horsemen, camel riders, and the sultan was on both sides of the Maimaneh and Misera army, each one or two elephants along with the elephant drivers and the commander of the left and right wing and Behind them are the riders and the shadow bearers of their particles. According to the description above, the Ghaznavid army used to be heavy animals. Due to the use of the elephant, which was a heavy and huge animal, it moved very little and was heavy and did not have much power to move and maneuver.

References 

Aqili, Saifuddin Haji bin Nizam(1985), Asar al vozara, correction and commentary by Jalaluddin Hosseini Ermavi, Tehran, Institute of Etelaat.

Bosworth Edmund Clifford (1999), Tarikh-e Ghaznaviyan, translated by Hassan Anoushe, Tehran, Amir Kabir.

Beyhaqi, Abulfazl Muhammad bin Hossein (1995), Tarikh-e Beyhaqi, Edited by Ali Akbar Fayyaz, Tehran, Nashr-e Elm.

Ibn Athir, Izz aldin Ali (1985), Tarikh-e Kamel, translated by Ali Hashemi Haeri & Abbas Khalili, Tehran, Ilmi publications.

Jarfadqani, Abul Sharaf Naseh bin Zafar (1995), Tarjomey-e Tarikh-e Yamini, corrected by Jafar Shaar, Tehran, Bongah Tarjomeh ve Nashr-e Ketab.

Fakhrmodaber, Mubarakshah(1965), Adab al-harb wa al-Shuja'a, edited by Ahmad Soheili Khansari, Tehran, Iqbal.

 Khalili, Khalilullah(1954) Seltenat-e Ghaznaviyan, Kabul, Anjoman-e Tarikh-e

 Afghanistan.

 Shabankarei, Mohammad Bin Ali (1997), Majma Al-Ansab, edited by Mirhashim Muhaddith, Tehran, Amir Kabir.

 Mawardi, Abul Hasan Ali bin Muhammad bin Habib (2004), Ahkam al Sultanieh, translated by Hossein Saberi, Tehran, Elmi va Farhangi publications.

 Nazim, Mohammad (1939) Hayat va oqat-e Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi, translated by Abdul Ghafoor Amini, Kabul, Matbae omoomi.

 

 

 

18

 

---