Özet:

 The most controversial historical source related to Timurid history is Tuzukat-i Timuri, allegedly written by the conqueror Timur (Tamerlane) himself and was presented to Baburid emperor Shah Jahan in 1636. The book was translated into English by Major William Davy under the title Timour’s institutes: political and military (year), with the claim that the source was authentic.Beginning in the second half of the 19th century, criticisms have arisen in Western scholarly circles and the book was regarded as a forgery by some researchersbecause of the absence of the original Turkish manuscript, which was never mentioned in the works of official chroniclers such as Yazdi and Şami and because of the conflict betweenTimur’s memories and the historical facts mentioned in the book. Today, academic historians who work on Timurid historydeny the authenticity of Tüzükat-iTimuri and do not use it as a primary historical source. However, the book continues to be areference for popular historians who aim to romanticize Timur’slife. The campaign to create a Timur cult was launched in the 1990s by Islam Karimov, first president of independent Uzbekistan, thereby bringing the issue to a different dimension. Uzbek scholars required to support this political project have been obliged to conductmany studies on the authenticity of Tüzükat-iTimuri without making any scientific assessment of its authentication. With this development, a new concept has begun to spread among scholars: even if the Tuzukat was not written by Timur himself, it still reflects the political, administrative, and military characteristics of his reign, and therefore, it is a valuable reference on Timurid history. The interesting point is that despite continued discussions of Tuzukat-iTimurifor almost 200 years, nohistorian has conducted any comprehensive study on the authenticity of the book by comparing ittothe works of Timurid era chroniclers.In our opinion, to decide on theTuzukat-i Timuri’s authenticityand determine whether the book reflects the characteristics of Timur’s reign or not, the historical background of the book must be examined in detail in the light of contemporary sources. Furthermore, the fidelity of its content must be analyzed in relation to Şami’s Zafarnâma, which was written under the supervision of Timur himself and Zafarnâma of Yazdi, who had access to all materials in Timur’s estate. Investigatingthe sources used by the author of the Tuzukatis also important. Thus, this study aims to examine the authenticity of the Tuzukat-ı Timuri in the light of original sources from the Timurid period and to determine whether or not this book can be used as a primary historicalreference.

Anahtar Kelimeler: