ṬUSI, NAṢIR-AL-DIN i. Biography



i. Biography

Abu Jaʿfar Moḥammad Ḵᵛāja Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi (b. Ṭus, 11 Jomādā I 597/17 February 1201; d. Baghdad, 18 Ḏu’l-Ḥejja 672/25 June 1274), was a philosopher, physician, astronomer, vizier of the founder of the Il-Khanid dynasty, Hulāgu (Hülegü) Khan (r. 1256-65), and the chronographer of the succeeding Il-Khan, Abaqa (r. 1265-82). “One of Hülegü Khan’s greatest distinctions was that he was a contemporary of and knew Ḵˇāja Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi” (Ḵᵛāndamir,III,p. 105; tr. pp. 59-60). Ṭusi was a towering contemporary of the Jovaynis (see ʿALĀʾ-AL-DIN JOVAYNI and ṢĀḤEB DIVĀN JOVAYNI), revered more for his intellectual prowess than for his considerable political influence, who slid, seemingly without difficulty, from being a student in Nishapur under the rule of the Khwarazmshahs to service with the Ismaʿili warlords of Qohestān, through elevation to the court of the Neẓāri Imam, ʿAlāʾ-al-Din Moḥammad III, in his fortified eyries of Alamut and Maymundez, and lastly to an honored and very influential position in the inner sanctum of Hulāgu Khan’s government (divan; Daftary, 2007, pp. 378-79; Lane, p. 213). Described by the historian Rašid-al-Din Fażl-Allāh (ca. 1247-1318) as “the most learned and wisest man in the world” (tr., III, p. 985) and more recently by Edward Browne as a “double-dyed traitor” (II, p. 457), Ṭusi has earned sharply conflicting judgments over the centuries. The common factor underpinning the many epitaphs and epithets associated with him is the intensity of the emotion that his name invariably excites.

Ṭusi was born into a family that followed “the exoteric aspects of the shariʿat” and whose profession was “to promulgate the exoteric sciences” (Ṭusi, Sayr wa soluk, p. 3, tr. p. 26), which suggests that they were Twelver Shiʿite clerics. His father, Wajih-al-Din Moḥammad b. Ḥasan Ṭusi, was a respected Imami jurist and he made sure that his son received a sound educational background in Arabic, the Qurʾan, Hadith, and in Shiʿite jurisprudence following the teachings of ʿAlam-al-Hodā al-Šarif al-Mortażā (355-436/966-1044), a noted adversary of the Muʿtazilite theologian ʿAbd-al-Jabbār b. Aḥmad (d. 415/1024-25). Like his father, Ṭusi had a wide range of interests in which he was encouraged to indulge, particularly the sciences and philosophy. It was at Nishapur, between 1213 and 1221 and during his pursuit of knowledge under the tutelage of Kamāl-al-Din Moḥammad Ḥāseb, that he first encountered references to Ismaʿili doctrines, which intrigued and attracted him. “It is possible that the truth may be found among people who are, in the eyes of [your contemporaries], the most contemptible people” (Ṭusi, Sayr wa soluk, p. 3, tr., p. 27).  Along with his fellow pupils Qoṭb-al-Din  Meṣri and Farid-al-Din Dāmād, he continued his studies in mathematics, natural sciences, Avicenna’s philosophy, and medicine. He received his training in jurisprudence after leaving Nishapur for ʿErāq-e ʿArab, where he studied under the Shiʿite scholar Moʿin-al-Din Sālem b. Badrān Māzini. The mathematician and astronomer from Mosul, Kamāl-al-Din Yunes (1156-242), a former pupil of the scholar Bābā Afżal-al-Din Kāšāni (d. 1213), also contributed to his well-rounded classical education. It was recognized from an early age that Ṭusi was to be an exceptional scholar.

In 1233 and after completing his formal education, Ṭusi found a patron who was to have an immense influence on his future. This was the Ismaʿili governor of Sartaḵt in Qohestān, Moḥtašam Nāṣer-al-Din ʿAbd-al-Raḥim b. Abi Manṣur (d. 655/1257), and it was to him that Ṭusi dedicated perhaps his most well-known book, Aḵlāq-e nāṣeri. Both men had a deep interest in ethics, and two years earlier Tusi had, on his patron’s behalf, translated into Persian the Adab al-wajiz le’l-walad al-ṣaḡir, a treatise on the correct behavior of children attributed to Ebn al-Moqaffaʿ. He followed this translation with Aḵlāq-e moḥtašami, which was based on the Moḥtašam’s own concept and notes, even though Ṭusi published it under his own name. What is significant about this period is that Ṭusi later on he claimed that the dedication in his book and the work he had carried out at the time were all conducted under duress and did not reflect his true feelings (Tusi, Šarḥ al-Ešārāt II, p. 145; tr. in Dabashi, 1996b, p. 334; see also Lane, pp. 221-23). After his falling out with the Ismaʿilis, Ṭusi republished Aḵlāq-e nāṣeri with a different introduction and different conclusions, but without the dedication to Moḥtašam Nāṣer-al-Din.

Shortly after the appearance of the two Aḵlāq studies (ca. 1246), Ṭusi published his spiritual autobiography, Sayr wa soluk, in which he describes how he came to turn away from exoteric kalām and to immerse himself in esoteric philosophy. This same year he is recorded as being in Alamut, the headquarters of the Ismaʿilis (Badakhshani, p. 10; Daftary, 2007, p. 379).  It is unclear whether his initial presence there was for pleasure, reward, or punishment, since there had been unease at his secret contacts with the Abbasid caliph al-Mostaʿṣem (r. 1242-58) in Baghdad.  Waṣṣāf records how the caliph’s Shiʿite vizier Ebn al-ʿAlqami had revealed the existence of a complimentary qaṣida addressed to al-Mostʿaṣem penned by Ṭusi, which caused considerable suspicion at the time (Waṣṣāf, p. 29, ed. Āyati, pp. 24-25).  However, Jalal Badakhchani (Ṭusi, Sayr wa soluk, tr., p. 5) is dismissive of these stories because the various dates do not tally. Ṭusi spent in all twenty years in the fortresses of Alamut and Maymundez, during which time he was able to immerse himself in the renowned libraries access to which would have been a major motivation in his apparent acceptance of Ismaʿili doctrine.

Ṭusi’s own renown as a scientist and thinker was the reason that he was chosen to lead negotiations with Hülegü Khan, Čengiz Khan’s grandson and the founder of the Il-khanid dynasty (1256-1336), when he arrived in Iran demanding submission from all those who would claim authority in the region. Ṭusi immediately realized that it was his task to convince the young Ismaʿili Imam, Rokn-al-Din Ḵoršāh, that resistance was pointless and that his only option was to negotiate for the survival of his own family, possibly abandoning his followers to their fate (Rašid-al-Din, p. 398).

Ṭusi’s fate was assured because Hülegü Khan had been asked by his brother, Möngke, to send the famed “astrologer” back to Mongolia to build the Great Khan an observatory (Saliba, 2006, p. 359; Ḵˇāndamir, p. 58). Though Ṭusi considered himself an astronomer rather than an astrologer, he was quite willing to play any part to safeguard his future, and with the Qāʾān Möngke having expressed dissatisfied with the work of his own court astrologer, Jamāl-al-Din Moḥammad-Ṭāher b. Zaydi Boḵāri, an immense opportunity was open to Ṭusi. His immediate task was to ingratiate himself with Hülegü Khan and salvage what he could from the shattered Ismaʿili stronghold. Reprieved with him from supposed Ismaʿili bondage were the sons of physicians Raʾis-al-Dawla and Mowaffaq-al-Dawla ʿAli, the latter being the grandfather of Rašid-al-Din Fażl-Allāh (p. 483).

Ṭusi claims that Hülegü had him “brought forth from that place (Alamut) and ordered me to observe the stars” (cited in Boyle, p. 247). Hülegü later called upon Ṭusi to assess the danger, as foretold in the stars, in assailing the caliph and Baghdad, since he had already been warned that the heavenly portents were inauspicious. Ṭusi reassured his new master, whose “heart lit up like a tulip in spring,” that the only dramatic event to take place would be Hülegü replacing the caliph on his throne (Rašid-al-Dīn, p. 1007; tr. p. 493). Among Hülegü’s party, Ṭusi found many admirers including the Jovayni brothers, one of whom, ʿAlāʾ-al-Din ʿAṭā-Malek, the author of Tāriḵ-e jahāngošāy, was to become the Il-khanid governor of Baghdad, while the other one, Šams-al-Din Moḥammad, became the chief of secretariat (ṣāḥeb[-e] divān) of the new state. An anecdote claims that Ṭusi’s diplomatic action once saved ʿAṭā-Malek from the potentially fatal displeasure of Hülegü (Jovayni, I, introd., pp. xc-xci).

The last days of Baghdad are detailed in Ṭusi’s own hand in the account added to Jovayni’s history of Čengiz Khan and the Mongols, which covers the period up to the fall of the Ismaʿilis (Jovayni, III, pp. 280-92). Ṭusi witnessed first hand the events surrounding the siege of Baghdad and the death of the Caliph al-Mostaʿṣem on 14 Ṣafar 656/20 February 1258 (Jovayni, III, pp. 290-91), and accompanied Hülegü Khan on his campaigns in the west. Ṭusi along with the last vizier of the ʿAbbasid caliph, the Shiʿite Ebn al-ʿAlqami (d. June 1258), would have been instrumental in the decision to spare the Shiʿite holy sites of Iraq while placating and gaining the support of the local Shiʿite notables such as Ebn Ṭāwus.

During the final stages of the siege of Baghdad, Ṭusi was entrusted with delivering personal messages to the caliph and, stationed at the Halba Gate, with receiving and checking those that would surrender. In Ṭusi’s viewpoint, the caliphate and indeed the Sunni Mamluks and their feuding Syrian warlords were the deviators from the true path and the “parsimonious Caliph,” a sectarian and fanatical blasphemer (Waṣṣāf, p. 43; Āyatī, p. 24, from Ṭusi’s letter to the Mamluks; Ḵᵛāndamīr, III, p. 106, tr. p. 61; Lane, p. 220).  That the Shiʿites welcomed the toppling of the ʿAbbasid dynasty is well attested by the “treachery” of the caliph’s minister Ebn al-ʿAlqami in the sparing of the lives of the Shiʿite clergy in Baghdad and the readiness of the mainly Shiʿite inhabitants of Ḥella and Najaf to welcome the Mongol armies (Rašid-al-Din, pp. 1019-20; Lane, p. 221). It has been suggested that this could have been due to rumors circulating that Naṣir-al-Din had succeeded in converting Hülegü Khan to Shiʿism and to the Hadiths that predict that the final victory of the expected Mahdi would be achieved with the help of the armies from Turan. “There will come the sons of Kantura, …  they have faces like leather-covered shields and noses like the trunks of elephants; they will not enter a land without conquering it, and approach no flag without overturning it” (Lane, p. 221; Waṣṣāf, p. 36).

The early death of Möngke removed the necessity of Ṭusi’s dispatch to China and, in recognition of his services in procuring the relatively peaceful submission of the Ismaʿilis and his advice to Hülegü on the overthrow of the last ʿAbbasid caliph, al-Moʿtaṣem Be’llāh (r. 1242-58), the Il-khan awarded him the libraries of Iraq and of the Ismaʿilis and the proceeds of some of Baghdad waqfs to finance an observatory (raṣad-ḵāna) and a seat of learning in the Mongols’ new capital at Marāḡa. It was Ṭusi’s appropriation of these waqfs that earned him the ire of Sunni Arab chroniclers such as Ebn Aybak Ṣafadi (1296-1363) as much as his involvement in the events in Baghdad. Ṭusi’s role in the fall of Baghdad is fully recorded by Rašid-al-Din Fażl-Allāh (pp. 1007-9), Ḥamd-Allāh Mostawfi (pp. 94-96), Ḵˇāndamir (II, pp. 338-41, tr. pp. 59-60), and even Maḥmud Aqsarāʾi (p. 49), as well as most other Persian chroniclers: “Hülegü Khan commanded him to construct the observatory here in this country, for he had become aware of the goodness of his character and the sincerity of his heart and wished him to be in attendance on him” (Rašid-al-Din, pp. 1024-25).

The Zij al-ilḵāni is the one major literary work that remains from this period and provides a unique insight to his life and work at the seat of learning that he could call his own. Ṭusi was ordered to complete the Zij al-ilḵāni in twelve years rather than the thirty years it required. The tables of planetary cycles were based wherever possible on original observations, though existing astrological knowledge was incorporated whenever appropriate. He was able to isolate several serious shortcomings in Ptolemy’s astronomy and foreshadowed the later dissatisfaction with the system that culminated in the Copernican reforms. The Zij al-ilḵāni retained its position as the most popular astrological table for at least two hundred years. He finished it at the age of about seventy under Hülegü’s successor, Abaqa. The introduction to his treatise is indicative of the wide international audience for Ṭusi’s scholarship. Written in Persian, the lingua franca of the empire from China to Arabia, the language is plain and simple and explains such basics as a brief outline of the rise of Islam and the fact that Prophet Moḥammad was a native of Mecca, details which would have been unnecessary for local consumption. He translated the date 1203, the year of the Pig, not only to the Muslim calendar, but also to the calendar of the Zoroastrians, the Eastern Christians, and the Chinese. He also made extensive use of Chinese technical jargon in, for example, describing the three cycles of the sexagenary system and using the Chinese names for the ten celestial stems and twelve earthly branches of the sexagenary cycle (Allsen, pp. 162-65; Lane, p. 218).

The milieu in which Ṭusi wrote was highly conducive to scholarship and the Ismaʿili academics were cocooned from the horrors without the walls of their sanctity so much so that the fame of the libraries and the treasure trove of scientific equipment encouraged scholars, Muslim and non-Muslim, to seek refuge in their fortresses.

Among the more famous names that are known to have availed themselves of the facilities at Marāḡa are Bar Hebraeus (Ebn al-ʿEbri of Islamic sources), Faḵr-al-Din Ḵialāṭi from Tibilisi, Faḵr-al-Din Marāḡi Mawṣeli, Ebn al-Fowaṭi (ʿAbd al-Razzāq), Moʾayyad-al-Din ʿOrżi Demašqi, Yaḥyā’l-Din Maḡrebi (Ebn Abi-’l-Šokr), and the metaphysician, Najm-al-Din Dabirān Qazvini (Saliba, pp. 358-67; Ḵᵛāndamir, pp. 58-59). The mirthful astronomer Qoṭb-al-Din Širāzi (d. 1311), who was the closest colleague and student of Ṭusi at the observatory, was not included in this distinguished list of names compiled by Ṭusi in his Zij al-ilḵāni, apparentlydue to his rather joking response to Abaqa’s question reported by Ḵᵛāndamir (III, p. 116, tr., p. 66), which resulted in a serious break in their friendship. Ṭusi was able to cast off the sectarian parochialism, which plagued so many of his contemporaries, and cast his aspirations towards wider horizons.  He adapted comfortably into this new intellectual milieu with the rich and nourishing intellectual climate he had helped create and which has been reflected in his work.

Bar Hebraeus describes Ṭusi as “a man of vast learning in all branches of philosophy. ... Under his control were all the religious endowments in all the lands under Mongol rule” (cited in Browne, III, p. 18) The Syrian Divine’s Chronography devotes a warmly laudatory paragraph to Ḵᵛāja Naṣir and his words suggest a personal acquaintance:  “He constructed instruments for the observations of stars, and the great brass spheres that were more wonderful than those that Ptolemy set up in Alexandria, and he observed and defined the courses of the stars. And there were gathered together about him in Marāḡa ... a numerous company of wise men from various countries. And since the councils of all the mosques and the houses of instruction (i.e., colleges) of Baghdad and Assyria were under his direction he used to allot stipends to the teachers and to the pupils who were with him” (Bar Hebraeus, p. 451; Lane, pp. 213-14).

In addition to his duties regarding the observatory (raṣad-ḵāna), Ṭusi, already sixty years old by 1259, was entrusted with the administration of the religious endowments and foundations (waqf) and the finances of the new kingdom.

Ṭusi ended his days in Baghdad, where he had moved along with many of his pupils and followers some months before his death, and at his request he was buried near the tomb of the seventh Shiʿite Imam Musā al-Kāẓem (d. 183/799). Ḵᵛāndamir records that while digging the burial site for Ṭusi, a hidden unused chamber was found. It had once been intended for the caliph al-Nāṣer and its date of completion was the birthday of Ḵᵛāja Naṣir-al-Din, 17 February 1201 (according to Ḵᵛāndamir, III, p. 106; tr. p. 60), just one of the many legends and stories which began to accumulate around this unique figure.

Ṭusi was foremost a seeker after intellectual and academic truth and he would apparently serve any master who could provide him with the facilities to indulge his passion and his art. He had always relished scholarly confrontation “for he held fast to the opinions of the early philosophers, and he combated vigorously in his writings those who contradicted them” (Bar Hebraeus, p. 452; Lane, p. 214).

Ṭusi’s three sons went on to serve the later Il-Khans after their father’s death, Ṣadr al-Din ʿAli took over his father’s positions, and Aṣil-al-Din Ḥasan initially went with Ḡāzān Khan to Syria where he was given the governorship of Damascus, while another son, Faḵr-al-Din Aḥmad, eventually met his death at the hands of the same reformist Khan (Waḥid Dāmḡāni, p. 14; Lane, p. 215).

As well as being a prolific writer with 150 treaties and letters attributed to him, Ṭusi was one of the greatest scientists, philosophers, mathematicians, astronomers, theologians, and physicians of the time. He wrote mostly in Arabic, although his most famous works are in Persian. A treatise on geomancy was composed in Arabic, Persian, and Turkish demonstrating his proficiency in all three languages (Nasr, 1996, p. 208). He made significant contributions to many academic fields and he wrote several treatises on different sciences and subjects including geometry, algebra, arithmetic, trigonometry, medicine, metaphysics, logic, ethics, and theology.  Five major works on logic have survived with his Asās al-eqtebās, which is considered one of the most important works on the subject, while his treatise on Shiʿite theology, the Tajrid, has attracted over 400 commentaries and glosses (Naṣr, 1996, p. 209). Ṭūsī also found time to explore, practice, and advise on the promotion of a healthy and an active sex life researching medicines that can be “rubbed on the penis so that it can be lengthened and strengthened, as you desire”; additives and recipes that can render pounded pistachios with honey such that “you will see a miracle”; and finally the saliva produced after ingesting cubeb, pellitory, Chinese cinnamon, ginger, and coconut, kneaded with thick bee’s honey that, when applied to the erect penis, will cause “indescribable rapture experienced by both the man and the woman”  (Tusi, al-Bāb al-bāhiya, ff. 56a, 61a, tr., pp. 116, 121). He is also credited with the composition of poetry, mostly in Persian, and also chronograms in Persian. Many of these were recorded by Moḥammad Jājarmi (II, pp. 834-35).

His major contribution in mathematics (Nasr, 1996, pp. 208-14) is said to be in trigonometry, which for the first time was compiled by him as a new discipline in its own right. Spherical trigonometry also owes its development to his efforts, and this includes the concept of the six fundamental formulas for the solution of spherical right-angled triangles. His mathematical training is very evident in the order and system that he used in his classification and breakdown of the Il-Khan’s revenue compiled when he was appointed as a financial overseer, but prior to his later appointment as inspector of religious endowments (waqf; Minorsky, pp. 64-85).

In philosophy, his contribution to logic and metaphysics has been recognized, particularly his treatise on logic, Asās al-eqtebās, but it was his work on ethics entitled Aḵlāq-e nāṣeri and the earlier Aḵlāq-e moḥtašami that became the most well known books on the subject, and remained popular for centuries.  Both works were originally dedicated to his Ismaʿili patrons though he rescinded these dedications later. However, they remain arguably Ismaʿili ispired books. In the thirteenth century Islamic world, the distinction between philosophy, still sometimes a suspect field of study, and kalām was not always clear and was indeed often very blurred. During the thirty-year long period, he spent as “captive” of the Ismaʿilis, he also produced another major work, the Rawżat al-taslim in addition to a number of shorter treatises which unequivocally reflect Ismaʿili ideology (Daftary, 2007, p. 379; Badakhchani, pp. 15, 18-19).

Rawżat al-taslim, composed at Alamut and completed in 1243, is Ṭusi’s major Ismaʿili work. It covers a variety of themes including the nature of the imamate, prophethood, eschatology, ethics and human relationships, the cosmos, religion in general, God, and the nature of existence. The work is arranged to lead the reader progressively from an understanding of the physical world to the spiritual world with the penultimate of the twenty-eight chapters dealing with pre-Islamic beliefs including Sabaenism and Indian practices. The final chapter or taṣawworāt (notions) is a unique question/answer session with the Ismaʿili Imam, ʿA1āʾ-al-Din Moḥammad, which is extant only by reference in the tables of content and in fragments. In the latest English translation these fragments of the Imam’s responses have been included as an annex. The significance of this work lies in its comprehensive treatment of Ismaʿili thought, articulation of Ṭusi’s thoughts on recognition of the Imam of the day, and the teachings of Imam Ḥasan ʿAlā Ḏekrehe’l-Salām concerning the resurrection. The language and imagery are both highly technical and very simple. In explaining the necessity of submission (taslim), he concludes “Therefore he will wholeheartedly … renounce all that was the source of his worldly comfort, choosing to abide by his teacher’s will rather than follow his own preference” (ed. and tr. Badakhchani, p. 108, no. 314).

Ṭusi believed that there were limits to speculative reason and that the metaphysical and supra-rational nature of knowledge that he was attempting to realize were unattainable without the presence of an authoritative teacher. Once he had converted and submitted to the words of his teachers he experienced a series of unveilings. He explains methodically through a series of proofs and arguments that divine knowledge is only attainable through the mediation of a universal teacher who must be extant and recognizable amongst humankind (Sayr wa soluk, nos. 8-13, 17-37, 39-49, 50-57 …, tr., introd., p. 13).

In his Tawallā wa tabarrā, Ṭusi explores the Quranic concept of solidarity and dissociation by which is meant closeness and identification with Imam ʿAli b. Abi Ṭāleb and the Imams while distancing oneself from the negative and destructive instincts and emotions of lust, anger, and hatred. Through uniting these two processes the passions of human nature can be transmuted into love, yearning, and gnosis or maʿrefat. The aim of the process brought about through rational reasoning and the intellect is contentment (reżā), submission (taslim), and certitude (iqān). For Ṭusi, it is certitude that can transform hatred into love and the ‘primordial past’ into the ‘subsequent future’ between which two states Man exists corresponding to the physical world and the spiritual realm or from another perspective, predestination and free-will (Rawżat al-taslim, ed. and tr. Badakhchani, p. 249, no. 13).

Maṭlub al-moʾmenim was written at the request of a close female associate of the Imam who wanted a summary in four chapters of Ismaʿili eschatological doctrine, esoteric exegesis of religious law, tawallā wa tabarra (solidarity and dissociation), and the defining traits of an Ismaʿili. The observance of the shariʿat has often been a controversial subject with Ismaʿilis, and in this work Ṭusi makes it plain that for him the ideal, the “man of truth” (mard-e ḥaqiqat), is one who is able to combine adherence to the esoteric and exoteric Islamic law, ẓāher and bāṭen.

There also exist certain compositions ascribed to Ṭusi, which are believed to have been altered to cover up or re-orientate their message in order to make them more acceptable in a twelve-Shiʿite milieux. A philosophical treatise, the Resāla-ye jabr wa qadar, which has had all quotations from the Imam Ḥasan ʿAlā Ḏekrehe’l-Salām, has been omitted while a manual of instructions on conducting ceremonies to accompany conversion to Ismaʿilism has simply been attributed to another author.

The list of Ṭusi’s known treatises is exhaustive; Carl Brockelmann lists 56 and George Sarton 64. About a quarter of his listed works are concerned with mathematics, a fourth astronomy, another fourth philosophy and religion, and the remainder a variety of other subjects including his detailed explanation of the tax system under the Il-Khans (see Minovi and Minorsky). Not so well-known are some minor works that Ṭusi undertook, presumably at the behest of his Mongol masters. The Fāl-nāma, the Resāla-ye raml, and the Resāla-ye esteḵrāj-e ḵabāyā deal with divination and the esoteric. Many of his books, originally written in both Arabic and Persian, were translated into Latin and other European languages in mediaeval times.

For many, the main controversial point surrounding Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi is the sincerity of his adherence to or rejection of Ismaʿilism. In his spiritual autobiography, the Sayr wa soluk, he states unequivocably his belief in taʿlim and the necessity of an authoritative and infallible teacher (ed. and tr. Badakhchani, tr., pp. 29-30; text, pp. 5-6). Ṭusi claims that it was his dissatisfaction with kalām (scholastic theology) and ḥekmat (philosophy) that led him to the belief in the Ismaʿili doctrine of submission(taslim). However, it is not unreasonable to assume that actual contact with this infallible Imam, especially the youthful Rokn-al-Din Ḵoršāh, might have eventually caused him to revert to his more conservative Imami beliefs. A revealing anecdote concerning Ṭusi is reported by the Arab court official Ebn Fowaṭi, who served the Il-Khans in Baghdad. Asked by Hülegü, ca. 1260, to explain a group of qalandars that the Il-Khan had encountered on the plain of Ḥarrān, Ṭusi had answered that they were “the uncounted (surplus) of the world,” leading Hülegü to order immediately the unfortunate dervishes’ execution. Elaborating, presumably after the slaughter, Ṭusi expounded to his master that mankind was divided into four categories; rulers, traders, craftsmen and agriculturalists. Those who did not fall within these categories “were a burden [on the people]” (Ebn Fowaṭi, p. 343; Lane, p. 223).  Clearly, Ṭusi viewed his fellow citizens with a dangerous degree of arrogance and it cannot be thought surprising if his encounter with the Ismaʿili Imam of the Age, the young Ḵoršāh, left him disappointed. He was a thinker and a searcher after truth and he did not confine his associates or his sources of knowledge to the narrow limits of sectarian dictates or even of Islam. His own role in the court as Hülegü’s ‘meanest slave’ is clearly elucidated in a short essay quoted in the Tāriḵ-i šāhi, in which he explains the historical role in Iran of the king, the men of the sword and the men of the pen, and the advantages for each if these roles and duties are observed. He includes the ʿolamāʾ as one of the four categories of men of the pen but specifies that by ʿolamāʾ he means only philosophers, astronomers, and physicians (Tāriḵ-e šāhi, pp. 39-41; Lane, p. 223).

Ṭusi had served and gained acclaim in the courts of an Ismaʿili prince, two Ismaʿili imams and two non-Muslim Mongol kings, and had retained the trust and respect of them all. He had also, reputedly, been in correspondence with the Sunni ʿAbbasids, presumably in order to sound out Baghdad as a potential haven. Ṭusi remained loyal throughout his life to his true calling and did not deviate from his role as ḥakim.


Biobibliographical Studies.

Carl Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur, 2nd. ed., 2 vols, Leiden, 1943-49, Supplement (S), 3 vols, Leiden, 1937-42, I, pp. 670-76; S I, pp. 924-33; S III, pp. 1245-47.

ʿAbd-al-Razzāq Ebn al-Fowaṭi, al-Ḥawādeṯ al-jāmiʿa wa’l-tajārob al-nāfeʿa fi’l-meʾa al-sābiʿa, ed., M. R. Šabibi, Baghdad, 1932.

Moʿaẓẓama Eqbāli Aʿẓam, Šeʿr wa šāʿeri dar āṯār-e Ḵˇāja Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi, Tehran, 1991.

Moḥammad-Bāqer Ḵᵛānsāri, Rawżāt al-jannāt fi aḥwāl al-ʿolamāʾ wa’l-sādāt VI, Qom, 1973, pp. 300-309.

Galina P. Matvievskaya and Boris A. Rozenfeld, Matematikĭ i astronomi musulmanskogo srednevekovĭ i ikh trud (VIII-XVII vv.), Moscow, 1983, I, pp. 415-16; II, pp. 392-408; III, p. 368.

Moḥammad Modarres Rażawi, Aḥwāl wa-āṯār... Naṣir al-Din, Tehran, 1976.

Ṣalāḥ-al-Din Ḵalil b. Aybak Ṣafadi, Ketāb al-wāfi be’l-wafayāt I, ed. H. Ritter, Leipzig, 1931, pp. 179-83.

Aydin Sayi̇li̇, The Observatory in Islamand Its Place in the General History of the Observatory, Ankara 1960.

Charles A. Storey, Persian Literature: A Bio-bibliographical Survey II/1, pp. xl, xlii-xliv, 6-7, 52-60; II/2, pp. 216-17; III/3, pp. 449-50, 455, 480 (see also sources listed in Strothmann, pp. 8-15; Hairi, pp. 255-66).

Ṭusi’s Printed works.

Ādāb al-motaʿallemin wa’l-moḥaṣṣelin, Tehran, 1883 (Brockelmann, I, p. 928, no. 22a).

Afʿāl al-ʿebād bayn al-jabr wa’l-tafwiż, in Ṭusi, Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 477-78; also in Modarresi Zanjāni, Sargoḏašt wa ʿaqāyed-e falsafi …, pp. 187-88.

Āḡāz wa anjām dar mabdaʾ wa maʿād yā Ketāb-e taḏkera , ed. Iraj Afšār, Tehran 1956; also ed. Ḥasan Ḥasanz̦āda Āmoli, Tehran, 1987.

Ajwebat masāʾel al-Sayyed Rokn-al-Din al-Astarābādi, ed. ʿAbd-Allāh Nurāni, in Mahdi Mohaqqeq and Toshihiko Izutsu, eds., Collected Texts and Papers on Logic and Language, Tehran, 1974, pp. 249-76.

Aḵlāq-e moḥtašami, ed. (with three other treatises) Moḥammad-Taqi Dānešpažuh, Tehran, 1960; 2nd ed., Tehran, 1982 (the Ar. version, which preceded in the ms.; the Pers. tr., printed separately, Beirut, 1981).

Aḵlāq-e nāṣeri, lith. Lucknow 1883; ed. Mojtabā Minovi and ʿAli-Reżā Ḥaydari, Tehran 1977; tr. G. M. Wickens as The Nasirean Ethics, London, 1964 (Ṭusi’s second version, without the dedication, printed, Lahore 1952; for the preface of the first version, see Jalāl Homāʾi, “Moqaddama-ye qadim-e Aḵlāq-e nāṣeri,” Majalla-ye Dāneškada-ye adabiyāt-e Dānešgāh-e Tehrān 3/3, 1956, pp. 8-9; repr. in Modarresi Zanjāni, Sargoḏašt, pp. 126-28.)

Aqall mā yajibo eʿteqādoho, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, 471-2; also in Modarresi Zanjāni, Sargoḏašt, pp. 191-93 (= Resāla moḵtaṣṣ ārāʾ fi’l-ʿaqāʾed).

al-ʿAql layṯa be-jesm wa lā jawhar wa lā ʿaraż, in Talḵiṣ al-Moḥaṣṣal, pp. 521-22.

Aqsām al-ḥekma, in Talḵiṣ al-Moḥaṣṣal, pp. 526-28.

Asās al-eqtebās, ed. Moḥammad-Taqi Modarres Rażawi, 3rd ed., Tehran, 1988.

Awṣāf al-ašrāf, ed. Naṣr-Allāh Taqawi, Berlin 1929; also Tehran, 1966, with introd. by Moḥammad Modarresi; ed. Najib Māyel Heravi, Mashhad, 1982.

al-Bāb al-bāhiya fi′l-tarākib al-solṭānia, ed. and tr. Daniel L. Newman, as The Sultan’s Sex Portions: Arab Aphrodisiacs in the Middle Ages, London, 2014.

Baqāʾ al-nafs, see Resāla baqāʾ al-nafs: Borhān fi eṯbāt al-wājeb, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, p. 519.

al-Dostur wa daʿwat al-moʾmenin le’l-ḥożur, in Arbaʿ rasāʾel esmāʿiliya , ed. ʿĀref Tāmer, 2nd rev. ed., Beirut, 1978, pp. 51-73.

al-ʿElal wa’l-maʿlulāt al-morattaba, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, p. 516 (different from Resāla fi’l-ʿelal wa’l-maʿlulāt).

al-ʿEṣma, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 14-21.  

Eṯbāt al-ʿaql al-mofāreq, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 479-81; also in Modarresi Zanjāni, Sargoḏašt, pp. 169-71 (as Resālat eṯbāt jawhar mofāreq); the text is commented upon by Jalāl-al-Din Davāni, Šarḥ resālat Ṭusi fi eṯbāt jawhar al-mofāreq al-mosammā be’l-ʿAql al-kolli (ed. Recep Duran, Nefsü’l-emr risaleleri, in Bilim ve felsefe metinleri 1/2, Ankara, 1992, pp. 77-102), pp. 83-92, together with Ardabili’s Glosses al-ḥāšia al-ardabiliya be’l-tamām wa’l-kamāl, pp. 93-102).

Eṯbāt al-wāḥed al-awwal, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 475-76.

Eṯbāt waḥdat Allāh jalla jalāloho, in Modarresi Zanjāni, Sargoḏašt, pp. 189-90.

Eʿteqādiya, in Modarresi Zanjāni, Sargoḏašt, pp.191-93.

Fawāʾed ṯamāniya ḥekmiya, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, p. 517.

Feʿl al-ḥaqq wa amroho: Fāʾeda, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 7-17, 520.

Foṣul-e Ḵˇāja-ye Ṭusi (together with the Arabic tr., Foṣul naṣiriya/Resāla al-naṣiriya, by Rokn-al-Din Moḥammad-ʿAli Jorjāni Astarābādi), ed. Moḥammad-Taqi Dānešpažuh, Tehran, 1956; Ar. tr. also in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 501-06.

Goftār-i [band-i] az Ḵˇāja-ye Ṭusi ba raweš-e Bāṭeniān, ed. Moḥammad-Taqi Dānešpažuh, in Majalla-ye Dāneškada-ye adabiyāt 3/4, Tehran, 1956, pp. 82-88.

Gošāyeš-nāma, ed. Moḥammad-Taqi Dānešpažuh, Tehran, 1962.

Ḥall-e moškelāt al-ešārāt, in Ebn Sinā, al-Ešārāt wa’l-tanbihāt, 3 vols., Tehran, 1377-79/1957-60; also ed. as a separate text by Dānešpažuh, Tehran, 1956; for other editions, see Heer, pp. 123-24.

al-Kamāl al-awwal wa’l-kamāl al-ṯāni, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 1-16.  

Meʿyār al-ašʿār, ed. Jalil Tajlil, Tehran, 1990; reviewed by Amir-ʿAli ʿAẓimzāda, “Negāh-i ba Meʿyār al-ašʿār,” Majalla-ye Daneškada-ye ʿolum-e ensāni, no. 58, 1995, pp. 137-45.

Qawāʿed al-ʿaqāʾed, in Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, pp. 434-68. Resāla baqāʾ al-nafs baʿd fanāʾ al-jasad, Cairo, 1923.

Šarḥ al-ešārāt, Qom, 1983.

Sayr wa soluk, ed. and tr. S. J. Badakhshani, as Contemplation and Action: The Spiritual Autobiography of A Muslim Scholar, London, 1998.  

Shiʿi Interpretations of Islam (three Pers. treatises: Āḡāz wa anjām, Tawallā wa tabarrā, and Maṭlub al-moʾmenin), ed. and tr. S. J. Badakhshani, London, 2010.

Talḵiṣ al-moḥaṣṣal, ed. ʿAbd-Allāh Nurāni, Tehran, 1980.

Published scientific works.

John A. Boyle, “The Longer Introduction to the Zīj-i Īlkhānī of Naṣīr ad-Din Ṭūsī,” Journal of Semitic Studies 8, 1963, pp. 244-54.

Ali al-Daffa and John Stroyls, “Naṣir al-Din al-Ṭusi’s Attempt to Prove the Parallel Postulate of Euclid,” in idem, Studies in the Exact Sciences in Medieval Islam, Chichester, New York, 1984.  

John Greaves, Binae Tabulae geographicae una Nassir Eddini Persae, altera Ulug Beigi Tatari, London 1652 (extract from the Ilḵāni zij).

Ḥall-e moškelāt-e moʿiniya, Tehran, ed. Moḥammad-Taqi Dānešpažuh, 1956 (ms. facs.).

Majmuʿ al-rasāʾel, 2vols., Hyderabad 1358-59/1939-40.

Rawżat al-taslim, ed. and tr. Wladimir Ivanov, as The Rawdatut-Taslim: Commonly Called Tasawurrat, Leiden, 1950; ed and tr. S. Jalal Badakhchani, as The Paradise of Submission: A Medieval Treatise on Ismaili Thought (Ismaili texts and translations), London and New York, 2005.

Resāla-ye bist bāb dar maʿrefat-e asṭorlāb, Persia (!), 1276/1859 (also containing Madḵal-e manz̦um, sometimes ascribed to Ṭusi), also Tehran, 1956.

Resālat al-jabr wa’l-moqābala, Tehran, 1956.  

Resāla fi ʿelm al-musiqā, ed. Yusof Zakaiyā, Cairo 1964.

Resāla-ye moʿiniya, ed. Moḥammad-Taqi Dānešpažuh, Tehran, 1956 (ms.facs.).

A. I. Sabra, Borhān: Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi ʿalā moṣādarāt Oqlides al-ḵāmesa,” in Majallat kolliyāt al-ādāb, al-jāmeʿa eskandariya 13, 1959, pp. 133-70.

Aḥmad Saʿidān, “Jawāmeʿ al-ḥesāb fi’l-taḵt wa’l-torāb,” al-Abḥāṯ  20/2, 1968, pp. 91-164, 213-92.

al-Šakl al-qaṭṭāʿ, tr. Alexandre P. Carathéodory, as Traité du quadrilatēre, Constantinople, 1891.

Si faṣl dar maʿrefat-e taqwim, Tehran, 1291/1874, 1311/1893, etc.

Al-Taḏkera fi ʿelm al-hayʾa, ed. and tr. Fayiz J. Ragep, as Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsi’s Memoir on Astronomy: Al-Tadhkira fi ʿelm al-hayʾa, 2 vols., New York, 1993 (contains extensive biography and references).  

Taḥrir al-majesṭi, Sanskrit tr. by Jagannātha, as Samrat-siddhantah, New Delhi, 1967.

Taḥrir oṣul al-handasa le Oqlides, Istanbul, 1216/1801; Calcutta, 1824; Fez, 1293/1876; Tehran, 1298/1881(?) (this title printed in Rome, 1594, is not by Ṭusi).

Tajrid al-eʿteqād, ed. Moḥammad-Jawād Jalāli, Tehran, 1986.

Tansuḵ-nāma-ye ilḵāni (on mineralogy), ed. Moḥammad-Taqi Modarres Rażawi, Tehran, 1969.

Tarjama-ye Ṣowar al-kawākeb (Ṭusi’s Pers. tr. of ʿAbd-al-Raḥmān Ṣufi’s work on constellations), Tehran, 1969 and 1972.

“Yantrarājavicāraviá ādhyāyi ” (al-Tusi’s [?] work on the astrolabe translated into Sanskrit), Vārāṇasyām, Benares, 1979.

Zobdat al-edrāk fi hayʾat al-aflāk, ed. ʿAbbās Moḥammad-Ḥasan Solaymān, Alexandria, 1994.


Thomas T. Allsen, Culture and Conquest in Mongol Eurasia, Cambridge and New York, 2001.

Karim-al-Din Maḥmud Āqsarāyi, Mosāmerat al-aḵbār: Tāriḵ-e Salājeqa, Ankara, 1944.

B. Scarcia Amoretti, “La ‘Risālat al-Imāma’ de Nasir al Din Ṭusi,” Rivista degli studi oientali 47, 1972, pp. 247-74.

ʿAbd-al-Amir Aʿsam, al-Faylasuf Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi: Moʾasses al-manhaj al-falsafi fi ʿelm al-kalām al-eslāmi, Beirut, 1980.

ʿA.-M. Āyati, see Waṣṣāf.

Jalal Badakhshani, see Ṭusi.

Bertrand Badie, “La philosophie politique de l’héllenisme musulman,” Rev. Française de Science Politique 27, 1977, pp. 290-304.

Bar Hebraeus (Ebn al-ʿEbri), The Chronography of Gregory Abu’l-Faraj ... Bar Hebraeus, being the First Part of His Political History of the World, tr. E. A. Wallis Budge, 2 vols., London, 1932.

John A. Boyle, “Dynastic and Political History of the Īl-Khāns,” in idem, ed., The Cambridge History of Iran V., Cambridge, 1968, pp. 303-421.  

Carl Brockelmann, Geschichte der Arabischen Literatur, 2 vols., Berlin, 1902, I, pp. 508-9, 2nd. ed., 5 vols., 1937-49.

Edward G. Browne, A Literary History of Persia II, Cambridge, 1928, pp. 484-86.

William C. Chittick, “Mysticism Versus Philosophy in Earlier Islamic History: The al-Ṭūsi, al-Qūnawi Correspondence” Religious Studies 17, 1981, pp. 87-104.  

Juan R. I. Cole, “Ideology, Ethics, and Philosophical Discourse in Eighteenth Century Iran,” Iranian Studies 12/1, 1989, pp. 7-34.   

Hamid Dabashi, “Khwājah Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi: The Philosopher/Vizier and the Intellectual Climate of His Times,” in Seyyed Hissein Nasr and Oliver Leaman, eds., History of Islamic Philosophy, 2 vols., London and New York, 1996a, I, pp. 527-84.

Idem, The “Philosopher/Vizier Khwāja Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī and the Ismaʿilis,” in Farhad Daftary, ed., Medieval Ismaʿili History and Thought, Cambridge, 1996b, pp. 231-45.

Farhad Daftary, The Assassins Legends: Myths of the Ismaʿilis, London and New York, 1995.

Idem, “Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi and Ismailis of the Alamut Period,” in N. Pourjavady and Z. Vesel, eds., Nasir al-Din Ṭusi: Philosophe et savant du XIIIe siècle, Tehran, 2000, pp. 59-67.

Idem, The Ismāʿilis: Their History and Doctrine, Cambridge, 1990; 2nd ed., 2007, pp. 378-82.

Moḥammad-Taqi Dānešpažuh, “Ḵˇāja-ye Ṭusi wa Ebn Maymun Esrāʾili,” Našriya-ye Dāneškada-ye adabiyāt-e Tabriz 8, 1956, pp. 258-62.

H. Daiber and F. J. Ragep, “Al-Ṭūsī, Naṣīr al-Dīn, Abu Djaʿfar Muḥammad,” in EI2, X, pp. 746-52.

Muso Dinorshoev, Filosofiya Nasriddina Ṭusi, Dushanbe, 1968.

Dwight M. Donaldson, Studies in Muslim Ethics, London, 1953.

Abdulhadi Hairi, “Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭusī: His Alleged Role in the Fall of Baghdad,” in Proceedings Ve Congrès international  d’arabisants et islamisants, Brussels, 1970, pp. 255-66.

Heinz Halm, Shiʿism, Edinburgh, 1995.

P. Hardy, “Unity and Variety in Indo-Islamic and Perso-Islamic Civilization: Some Ethical and Political Ideas of Ḍiyāʾ al-Din Baranī of Delhi, of al-Ghazālī and of Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsi Compared,” in Iran 16,1978, pp. 127-35.

Angelika Hartmann, “Ismāʿilitische Theologie bei sunnitischen ʿUlamāʾ des Mittelalters,” in Ludwig Hagemann and Ernst Pulsfort, eds., Ihr alle aber seid Brüder: Festschrift für A. Th. Khoury zum 60. Geburtstag, Würzburg, 1990, pp. 190-206.

Nicholas Heer, “al-Rāzi and Ṭusi on Ibn Sinā’s Theory of Emanation,” in Parviz Morewedge, ed., Neoplatonism and Islamic Thought, New York, 1992, pp. 111-25.

Jalāl-Din Homāʾi,“Ḥekmat-e ʿamali az naẓar-e Ḵˇāja Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi,” in Majmuʿa-ye soḵanrānihā-ye ʿomumi-e Dāneškada-ye adabiyāt wa ʿolum-e ensāni-e Dāešgāh-e Tehrān, 1969, pp. 37-80.

Max Horten, Die philosophischen Ansichten von Razi und Tusi (1209† und 1273†), Bonn, 1910.

Idem, Die spekulative und positive Theologie des Islam nach Razi (1290†) und ihre Kritik durch Tusi (1273†), Leipzig, 1912.  

K. A. Howard, “The Theology of Imamate in the Work of Nasir al-Din Tusi,” in Al-Serat 6/2, 1980, pp. 20-27.

Wladimir Ivanow, “An Ismailitic Work by Nasiru’d-din Tusi,” JRAS, 1931, pp. 527-64.

Moḥammad Jājarmi, Moʾnes al-aḥrār fi daqāʾeq al-ašʿār, ed. Mir-Ṣāleḥ Ṭabibi, Tehran, 1958.

ʿAlāʾ-al-Din ʿAṭā Malek Jovayni, Tāriḵ-e jahāngošāy, 3 vols., Leyden, 1912-37.  

Ḡiāṯ-al-Din Ḵˇāndamir, Tāriḵ-e ḥabib al-siar, ed. Moḥammad Dabirsiāqi, 4 vols., Tehran, 1974, III, tr. Wheeler M. Thackston, as Habibu’s-siyar, Tome Three: The Reign of the Mongol and the Turk, in idem, Classical Writings of the Mediaval Islamic World: Persian Histories of the Mongol Dynasties II, London, 2012.

Hermann Landolt, “Khwāja Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi: Ismāʿilism and Ishrāqi Philosophy,” in N. Pourjavady and Z. Vesel, eds., Naṣir al-Dīn Ṭusī: Philosophe et savant du XIIIe siècle, Tehran, 2000, pp. 13-30.

Idem, “Aṭṭār, Sufism and Ismāʿilism,” in C. Shackle and Leonard Lewisohn, eds, ʿAṭṭār and the Persian Sufi Tradition: The Art of Spiritual Flight, London and New York, 2006.

George E. Lane, Early Mongol Rule in Thirteenth Century Iran: A Persian Renaissance, London, 2003, pp. 213-25.

Wilferd Madelung, “Ahrastānis Streitschrift gegen Avicenna und ihre Widerlegung durch Naṣir al-Din aṭ-Ṭusi,” in Albert Dietrich, ed., Akten des VII Kongresses für Arabistik und Islamwissenschaft, Abh. Ak. Wiss. Gött., phil-hist. Kl., series 3, no. 98, Göttingen, 1976, pp. 250-59.

Idem, “Aspects of Ismāʿili Theology: The Prophetic Chain and the God beyond Being,” in Seyyed Hossein Nasr, ed., Ismāʿīlī Contributions to Islamic Culture, Tehran, 1977, pp. 51-65; repr. in idem, Religious Schools and Sects in Medieval Islam, London, 1985.

Idem, “Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi’s Ethics between Philosophy, Shiʿism and Sufism,” in Richard G. Hovannisian, ed., Ethics in Islam, Malibu, 1985, pp. 85-101.

Idem, “To See All Things Through the Sight of God: Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi’s Attitude to Sufism,” in N. Pourjavady and Z. Vesel, eds., Naṣīr al-Din Ṭūsī: Philosophe et savant du XIIIe siècle. Tehran, 2000, pp. 1-11.

Raymond Mercier, “The Greek ‘Persian Syntaxis’ and the Zīj-i Èlkhānī,” Archives internationales d’histoire des sciences 34, 1984, pp. 35-60.

Faizollah Mesbah, “Les idées morales de Nacir-id-Din Toussi,” Ph.D. diss., University of Paris 1954.

T. Michel, “Ibn Taymiyya’s Critique of Falsafa,” Hamdard Islamicus 6/1, Karachi, 1983, pp. 3-14.

Vladimir Minorsky, “Naṣīr al-Dīn Ṭūsī on Finance,” Iranica, 1964, pp. 64-85.

Mojtaba Minovi and Vladimir Minorsky, “Naṣir al-Dīn Ṭūsī on Finance,” BSOAS 10, 1940-42, pp. 755-89.

Farouk Mitha, Al-Ghazālī and the Ismailis: A Debate on Reason and Authority in Mediaeval Islam, London, 2001.

Moḥammad-Taqi Modarres Rażawi, Yādbud-e haftṣadomin sāl-e Ḵˇāja Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi, Tehran, 1956.

Idem, Aḥwāl wa āṯār-e Ṭusi, Naṣir-al-Din, Tehran, 1975.

Moḥammad Modarresi Zanjāni, Sargoḏašt wa-ʿaqāʾed-e falsafi-e Ḵˇāja Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi, Tehran, 1956; repr., with changed pagination, 1984.

Moḥammad Moʿin, “Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi wa zabān wa adab-e pārsi,” Majalla-ye Dāneškada-ye adabiyāt-e Tehrān 3/4 1956, pp. 30-42.

Parviz Morewedge, “The Analysis of ‘Substance’ in Ṭusi’s Logic and in the Ibn Sinian Tradition,” in George F. Hourani, ed., Essays in Islamic Philosophy and Science, Albany, 1975, pp. 158-88.

Idem, The Metaphysics of Ṭusi, New York, 1991 (texts and trs. of three treatises).

Ḥamd-Allāh Mostawfi, Ẓafar-nāma, Tehran, 1999 (facs. of British Library MS Or 2833); tr. L. J. Ward, as “Zafarnama of Mustawfi,” Ph.D. diss.. Manchester University, 3 vols., 1983.

Seyyed Hossain Nasr, “Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi,” in Charles Gillispie, ed., Dictionary of Scientific Biography XII, New York, 1976, pp. 508-14; repr. in idem, The Islamic Intellectual Tradition in Persia, Richmond, Surrey, 1996, pp. 207-15.

Idem, “Afdal al-Din Kashani and the Philosophical World of Khwaja Nasir al-Din Tusi,” in Michael E. Marmura, ed., Islamic Theology and Philosophy: Studies in Honor of George F. Hourani, Albany 1984, pp. 249-64.

Seyyed Hossain Nasr and Mehdi Aminrazavi, eds, An Anthology of Philosophy in Persia, 5 vols., Oxford, 1999-2001.

Moshe Perlmann, “Ibn Qayyim and the Devil,” in Studi orientalistici in onore di Giorgio Levi della Vida, 2 vols., Rome, 1956, II, pp. 330-07.

N. Pourjavady and Z. Vesel, eds., Naṣir al-Dīn Ṭūsī: Philosophe et savant du XIIIe siècle, Tehran, 2000.

A. Q. and M. Qarāʾi, “Post-Ibn Rushd Islamic Philosophy in Iran,” Al-Tawḥid 3/3, April-June 1986, pp.24-54.

Rašid-al-Din Fażl-Allāh, Jāmeʿ al-tawāriḵ, ed. Moḥammad Rawšan and Moṣṭafā Musawi, Tehran, 1994; tr. Wheeler Thackston, as Rashiduddin Fazlullah’s Jamiʿu’t-tawarikh: Compendium of Chronicles, in Wheeler Thackston, Classical Writings of the Mediaval Islamic World: Persian Histories of the Mongol Dynasties III, London, 2012.

Ḏabiḥ-Allāh Ṣafā, ed., Yād-nāma-ye Ḵᵛāja Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi, Tehran, 1957.

Idem, Tāriḵ-e adabiyāt dar Irān, 5 vols. in 8, Tehran, 1959-92, III, pp. 229-31, 252-54, 257-71, 1198-205.

George Saliba, “The Role of the Almagest Commentaries in Medieval Arabic Astronomy: A Preliminary Survey of Ṭūsī Redaction of Ptolemy’s Almagest,” Archives Internationales d’histoire des sciences 37, 1987, pp. 3-20.

Idem, “Horoscopes and Planetary Theory: Ilkhanid Patronage of Astronomers,” in Linda Komaroff, Beyond the Legacy of Genghis Khan, Leiden, 2006, pp. 357-68.

Muhammad T. Salik, “Ethics of Nasir al-Din Tusi,” Iqbal Review 18/3, Lahore, 1971, pp. 65-82.

George Sarton, Introduction to the History of Science II/2, Washington, D. C., 1931, pp. 1001-12.

Bakhtiyar H. Ṣeddiqi, “Naṣir al-Din Ṭusi,” in Mian Mohammad Sharif, ed., A History of Muslim Philosophy, 2 vols., Wiesbaden, 1963, I, pp. 564-80.

Rudolf Strothmann, Die Zwölfer-Schiʿa: Zwei religionsgeschichtliche Charakterbilder aus der Mongolenzeit, Leipzig 1926, pp. 16-87.

Heinrich Suter, Die Mathematiker und Astronomen der Araber und Ihre Werke, Leipzig, 1902, pp. 146-47.

ʿĀref Tāmer, Naṣir-al-Din Ṭusi fi marābeʿ Ebn Sinā, Beirut, 1983.

Šehāb-al-Din ʿAbd-Allāh Waṣṣāf, Tajziat al-amṣār wa tazjiat al-aʿṣār, ed. ʿAbd-al-Moḥammad Āyati as Taḥrir-e Tāriḵ-e Waṣṣāf, Tehran, 1993.

Eilhard Wiedemann, Aufsätze zur arabischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte II, Hildesheim and New York, 1970, pp. 677-93, 701-28.

(George E. Lane)

Originally Published: April 19, 2018

Last Updated: April 19, 2018

Cite this entry:

George E. Lane, “ṬUSI, NAṢIR-AL-DIN,” Encyclopædia Iranica, online edition, 2018, available at http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/tusi-nasir-al-din-bio (accessed on 19 April 2018).