village of Tarz, near Bayhaq, where the population was put to the sword and their leader killed himself by leaping from the minaret of the mosque, and a raid on Turaythith, where the troops `killed many, took much booty, and then returned'. It is clear that the results of the campaign were limited and inconclusive. In the north the offensive fared even worse. An expedition against Rudbar, led by the nephew of Shirgir, was driven back, and much booty taken from them. Another, launched with local help, was also defeated, and one of its commanders captured.
The vengeance of the Ismailis was not long delayed. Two fida'is wormed their way into the vizier's household in the guise of grooms, and by their skill and their display of piety gained his confidence. They found their opportunity when the vizier summoned them to his presence, to choose two Arab horses as a gift for the Sultan on the Persian New Year. The murder took place on i6 March 1127. `He did good deeds and showed worthy intentions in fighting against them,' said Ibn al-Athir, `and God granted him martyrdom.'2 The same historian records a punitive expedition by Sanjar against Alamut, in which more than 10,000 Ismailis perished. This is not mentioned by Ismaili or other sources, and is probably an invention.
The end of hostilities found the Ismailis rather stronger than before. In Rudbar, they had reinforced their position by building a new and powerful fortress, called Maymundiz,3 and had extended their territory, notably by acquiring Talaqan. In the East, Ismaili forces, presumably from Quhistan, raided Sistan in 1129.4 In the same year Mahmud, the Seljuq Sultan of Isfahan, found it prudent to discuss peace, and invited an envoy from Alamut. Unfortunately the envoy, with a colleague, was lynched by the Isfahan mob when he left the Sultan's presence. The Sultan apologized and disclaimed responsibility but, understandably, refused Buzurgumid's request to punish the murderers. The Ismailis responded by attacking Qazvin, where, according to their own chronicle, they killed four hundred people and took enormous booty. The Qazvinis tried to fight hack, but, says the Ismaili chronicler, when the comrades killed one Turkish emir, the rest of them fled.s An attack on Alamut by Mahmud himself at this time failed to achieve any result.
In 1' 31 Sultan Mahmud died, and the usual wrangle followed between his brothers and his son. Some of the emirs managed to involve the Caliph of Baghdad, al-Mustarshid, in an alliance against Sultan Masud, and in 1139 the Caliph, with his vizier and a number of his dignitaries, was captured by Masud near Hamadan. The Sultan took his distinguished captive to Maragha, where he is said to have treated him with respect - but did not prevent a large group of Ismailis from entering the camp and murdering him. An Abbasid Caliph - the titular head of Sunni Islam - was an obvious objective for the daggers of the assassins if opportunity arose, but rumour accused Masud of complicity or deliberate negligence, and even charged Sanjar, still the nominal overlord of the Seljuq rulers, as an instigator of the crime. Juvayni tries hard to exonerate both of them from these charges: `Some of the more short-sighted and ill-wishers to the House of Sanjar accused them of responsibility for this act. But "the astrologers lied, by the Lord of the Ka'ba!" The goodness of Sultan Sanjar's character and the purity of his nature as instanced in his following and strengthening the Hanafite faith and the Shari'a [holy law], his respect for all that related to the Caliphate as also his mercy and compassion are too plain and evident for the like false and slanderous charges to be laid against his person, which was the source of clemency and the fountain-head of pity.' 6
In Alamut, the news of the Caliph's death was received with exultation. They celebrated for seven days and nights, made much of the comrades, and reviled the name and emblems of the Abbasids.
The list of
The vengeance of the Ismailis was not long delayed. Two fida'is wormed their way into the vizier's household in the guise of grooms, and by their skill and their display of piety gained his confidence. They found their opportunity when the vizier summoned them to his presence, to choose two Arab horses as a gift for the Sultan on the Persian New Year. The murder took place on i6 March 1127. `He did good deeds and showed worthy intentions in fighting against them,' said Ibn al-Athir, `and God granted him martyrdom.'2 The same historian records a punitive expedition by Sanjar against Alamut, in which more than 10,000 Ismailis perished. This is not mentioned by Ismaili or other sources, and is probably an invention.
The end of hostilities found the Ismailis rather stronger than before. In Rudbar, they had reinforced their position by building a new and powerful fortress, called Maymundiz,3 and had extended their territory, notably by acquiring Talaqan. In the East, Ismaili forces, presumably from Quhistan, raided Sistan in 1129.4 In the same year Mahmud, the Seljuq Sultan of Isfahan, found it prudent to discuss peace, and invited an envoy from Alamut. Unfortunately the envoy, with a colleague, was lynched by the Isfahan mob when he left the Sultan's presence. The Sultan apologized and disclaimed responsibility but, understandably, refused Buzurgumid's request to punish the murderers. The Ismailis responded by attacking Qazvin, where, according to their own chronicle, they killed four hundred people and took enormous booty. The Qazvinis tried to fight hack, but, says the Ismaili chronicler, when the comrades killed one Turkish emir, the rest of them fled.s An attack on Alamut by Mahmud himself at this time failed to achieve any result.
In 1' 31 Sultan Mahmud died, and the usual wrangle followed between his brothers and his son. Some of the emirs managed to involve the Caliph of Baghdad, al-Mustarshid, in an alliance against Sultan Masud, and in 1139 the Caliph, with his vizier and a number of his dignitaries, was captured by Masud near Hamadan. The Sultan took his distinguished captive to Maragha, where he is said to have treated him with respect - but did not prevent a large group of Ismailis from entering the camp and murdering him. An Abbasid Caliph - the titular head of Sunni Islam - was an obvious objective for the daggers of the assassins if opportunity arose, but rumour accused Masud of complicity or deliberate negligence, and even charged Sanjar, still the nominal overlord of the Seljuq rulers, as an instigator of the crime. Juvayni tries hard to exonerate both of them from these charges: `Some of the more short-sighted and ill-wishers to the House of Sanjar accused them of responsibility for this act. But "the astrologers lied, by the Lord of the Ka'ba!" The goodness of Sultan Sanjar's character and the purity of his nature as instanced in his following and strengthening the Hanafite faith and the Shari'a [holy law], his respect for all that related to the Caliphate as also his mercy and compassion are too plain and evident for the like false and slanderous charges to be laid against his person, which was the source of clemency and the fountain-head of pity.' 6
In Alamut, the news of the Caliph's death was received with exultation. They celebrated for seven days and nights, made much of the comrades, and reviled the name and emblems of the Abbasids.
The list of
Similar Books
