The Assassins (7 page)

By this time, there can have been few convinced Ismailis left in Egypt. In other lands, however, the sect survived, in the two main branches into which it had divided on the death of al-Mustansir. The followers of al-Musta'li were - and still are - to be found mainly in the Yemen and in India, where they are known as Bohras. Their form of Ismailism is sometimes called the `old preaching' since it carried on the main doctrinal traditions of the Fatimid period.

While the Musta'lians stagnated in the remoter outposts of Islam, their rivals the Nizaris, the supporters of Nizar, entered on a period of intensive development, both in doctrine and in political action, and for a while played an important and dramatic role in the affairs of Islam.

In the eleventh century the growing internal weakness of the Islamic world was revealed by a series of invasions, the most important of which, that of the Seljuq Turks, created a new military Empire stretching from Central Asia to the Mediterranean. Associated with these invasions were important economic, social and cultural changes, of profound importance in the history of Islam. In the customary aftermath of conquest, vast lands and revenues were assigned to the officers of the victorious Turkish armies, who, with their officials, formed a new ruling element, displacing or overshadowing the Arab and Persian aristocracy and gentry of earlier times. Power, wealth and status belonged to new men - alien newcomers who, often, were still imperfectly assimilated to the urban civilization of the Islamic Middle East. The position of the old elite was further weakened by other factors - the movement of nomads, the shift of trade-routes, the beginnings of the great changes that led to the rise of Europe and the relative decline of Islam. In a time of trouble and danger, the new Turkish masters brought a measure of strength and order - but at a cost of higher military expenditure, firmer control of public life, and stricter conformity of thought.

The military power of the Turks was unshakable - the orthodoxy of the schools was no longer open to serious challenge. But there were other methods of attack, and to the many malcontents of the Seljuq Empire Ismailism, in its new form, once again brought a seductive critique of orthodoxy, now associated with a new and effective strategy of revolt. The `old preaching' of Ismailism had failed; the Fatimid Empire was dying. A `new preaching' and a new method were needed. They were devised by a revolutionary of genius, called Hasan-i Sabbah.

The New Preaching

Hasan-i Sabbah was born in the city of Qumm, one of the first centres of Arab settlement in Persia and a stronghold of Twelver Shi`ism., His father, a Twelver Shiite, had come from Kufa in Iraq, and was said to be of Yemeni origin - more fancifully, a descendant of the ancient Himyaritic kings of Southern Arabia. The date of Hasan's birth is unknown, but was probably about the middle of the eleventh century. When he was still a child, his father moved to Rayy - by the modern city of Tehran - and it was there that Hasan pursued his religious education. Rayy had been a centre of activity of the dais since the ninth century, and it was not long before Hasan began to feel their influence. In an autobiographical fragment, preserved by later historians, he tells his own story:

`From the days of my boyhood, from the age of seven, I felt a love for the various branches of learning, and wished to become a religious scholar; until the age of seventeen I was a seeker and searcher for knowledge, but kept to the Twelver faith of my fathers.

`In Rayy I met a man, one of the Comrades [Raf q, a term often used by the Ismailis of themselves] called Amira Zarrab, who from time to time expounded the doctrine of the Caliphs of Egypt ... as Nasir-i Khusraw had done before him ...

`There had never been any doubt or uncertainty in my faith in Islam; in my belief that there is a living, enduring, all-powerful, all-hearing, all-seeing God, a Prophet and an Imam, permitted things and forbidden things, heaven and hell, commandment and forbidding. I supposed that religion and doctrine consisted of that which people in general, and the Shia in particular, possessed, and it never entered my mind that truth should be sought outside Islam. I thought that the doctrines of the Ismailis were philosophy [a term of abuse among the pious], and the ruler of Egypt a philosophizer.

`Amira Zarrab was a man of good character. When he first conversed with me, he said: "The Ismailis say such and such." I said: "0 friend, do not speak their words, for they are outcasts, and what they say is against religion." There were controversies and debates between us, and he disproved and destroyed my belief. I did not admit this to him, but in my heart these words had great effect ... Amira said to me: "When you think in your bed at night you know that what I say convinces you".'

Later Hasan and his mentor were separated, but the young disciple continued his search, and read Ismaili books, where he found some things that convinced him, and others that left him dissatisfied. A severe and terrible illness completed his conversion. `I thought: surely this is the true faith, and because of my great fear I did not acknowledge it. Now my appointed time has come, and I shall die without having attained the truth.'

Hasan did not die, and on his recovery he sought out another Ismaili teacher, who completed his instruction. His next step was to take the oath of allegiance to the Fatimid Imam; it was administered to him by a missionary who held his licence from Abd al-Malik Ibn Attash, the chief of the Ismaili da'wa, or mission, in Western Persia and Iraq. Shortly after, in May-June 1072, the chief in person visited Rayy, where he met the new recruit. He approved of him, gave him an appointment in the da'wa, and told him to go to Cairo and present himself at the Caliph's court - in other words, to report to headquarters.2

It was not in fact until several years later that Hasan went to Egypt. A story related by several Persian authors, and introduced to European readers by Edward Fitzgerald in the preface to his translation of the Rubaiyat, purports to give an account of the events leading to his departure. According to this tale, Hasan-i Sabbah, the poet Omar Khayyam, and the vizier Nizam a1-Mulk, had all been fellow-students of the same teacher. The three made a pact that whichever of them first achieved success and fortune in the world would help the other two. Nizam al-Mulk in due course became the vizier of the Sultan, and his schoolmates put forward their claims. Both were offered governorships, which they both refused, though for very different reasons. Omar Khayyam shunned the responsibilities of office, and preferred a pension and the enjoyment of leisure; Hasan refused to be fobbed off with a provincial post, and sought high office at court. Given his wish, he soon became a candidate for the vizierate and a dangerous rival to Nizam al-Mulk himself. The vizier therefore plotted against him, and by a trick managed to disgrace him in the eyes of the Sultan. Shamed and resentful, Hasan-i Sabbah fled to Egypt, where he prepared his revenge.

The story presents some difficulties. Nizam al-Mulk was born at the latest in 1020, and was killed in 1092. The dates of birth of Hasan-i Sabbah and Omar Khayyam are unknown, but the former died in 1124, the latter at the earliest in 1123. The dates make it very unlikely that all three could have been contemporaries as students, and most modern scholars have rejected this picturesque tale as a fable.3 A more credible explanation of Hasan's departure is given by other historians; according to this version, he fell foul of the authorities in Rayy, who accused him of harbouring Egyptian agents and of being a dangerous agitator. To escape arrest he fled from the city, and embarked on the series of journeys which were to bring him to Egypt.4

According to the autobiographical fragment, he left Rayy in 1076 and went to Isfahan. From there he travelled northward to Azerbayjan, and thence to Mayyafariqin, where he was driven out of town by the Qadi for asserting the exclusive right of the Imam to interpret religion, and thus denying the authority of the Sunni Ulema. Continuing through Mesopotamia and Syria, he reached Damascus, where he found that the overland route to Egypt was blocked by military disturbances. He therefore turned west to the coast, and, travelling southwards from Beirut, sailed from Palestine to Egypt. He arrived in Cairo on 3o August 1078, and was greeted by high dignitaries of the Fatimid court.

Hasan-i Sabbah stayed in Egypt for about three years, first in Cairo and then in Alexandria. According to some accounts, he came into conflict with the Commander of the Armies Badr al-Jamali because of his support for Nizar, and was imprisoned and then deported from the country. The reason given for the conflict must be a later embellishment, since the dispute over the succession had not yet arisen at the time, but a collision between the ardent revolutionary and the military dictator is far from unlikely. s

From Egypt he was deported to North Africa, but the Frankish ship on which he was travelling was wrecked, and he was saved and taken to Syria. Travelling through Aleppo and Baghdad, he reached Isfahan on io June io8i. For the next nine years he travelled extensively in Persia, in the service of the da'wa. In the autobiographical fragment he speaks of several such journeys: `From thence [i.e. from Isfahan] I proceeded to Kerman and Yazd, and conducted propaganda there for a while.'6 From central Iran he returned to Isfahan, and then turned south to spend three months in Khuzistan, where he had already spent some time while on his way back from Egypt.

To an increasing extent he began to concentrate his attention on the far north of Persia - on the Caspian provinces of Gilan and Mazandaran, and especially on the highland region known as Daylam. These lands, lying north of the mountain chain that bounds the great plateau of Iran, are markedly different in geographical configuration from the rest of the country, and were inhabited by a hardy, warlike and independent people, for long regarded by the Iranians of the plateau as alien and dangerous. In ancient times, the rulers of Iran had never been able effectively to subjugate them, and even the Sasanids had found it necessary to maintain border fortresses as defensive bastions against their incursions. The Arab conquerors of Iran fared little better. It is said that when the Arab leader al-Hajjaj was about to attack Daylam, he had a map of the country prepared, depicting the mountains, valleys and passes; he showed it to a Daylami delegation, and called upon them to surrender before he invaded and devastated their country. They looked at the map, and said : `They have informed you correctly concerning our country, and this is its picture - except that they have not shown the warriors who defend these passes and mountains. You will learn about them if you try.'7 In time, Daylam was Islamized - by peaceful penetration rather than by conquest.

Among the last to submit to Islam, the Daylamis were among the first to reassert their individuality within it - politically, by the emergence of independent dynasties, religiously, through the adoption of unorthodox beliefs. From the end of the eighth century, when members of the house of Ali, fleeing from Abbasid persecution, found refuge and support there, Daylam became a centre of Shiite activity, jealously guarding its independence against the Caliphs of Baghdad and other Sunni rulers. During the tenth century, under the Buyids, the Daylamis even succeeded in establishing their ascendancy over most of Persia and Iraq, and were for a while the custodians of the Caliphs themselves. The coming of the Seljuqs put an end to Daylami and Shiite rule in the Empire, and pressed hard on Daylam itself.

It was among these northern peoples - predominantly Shiite and already strongly infiltrated by Ismaili propaganda - that Hasan-i Sabbah made his main effort. For the warlike and disaffected inhabitants of the mountains of Daylam and Mazarandan, his militant creed had a powerful appeal. Avoiding the cities, he made his way through the deserts from Khuzistan to eastern Mazandaran, and eventually established himself in Damghan, where he stayed for three years. From this base he despatched dais to work among the mountain-dwellers, and himself travelled tirelessly to direct and assist their efforts. His activities soon attracted the attention of the vizier, who ordered the authorities in Rayy to capture him. They did not succeed. Avoiding Rayy, he travelled by the mountain route to Qazvin, the most convenient base for a campaign in Daylam.

During his interminable journeys, Hasan was not only occupied with winning converts to the cause. He was also concerned with finding a new kind of base - not a clandestine tryst in a city, in constant danger of discovery and disruption, but a remote and inaccessible stronghold, from which he could with impunity direct his war against the Seljuq Empire. His choice finally fell on the castle of Alamut, built on a narrow ridge on the top of a high rock in the heart of the Elburz mountains, and dominating an enclosed and cultivated valley, about thirty miles long and three miles wide at the broadest point. More than 6,ooo feet above sea-level, the castle was several hundred feet above the base of the rock, and could be reached only by a narrow, steep and winding path. The approach to the rock was through the narrow gorge of the Alamut river, between perpendicular and sometimes overhanging cliffs.

The castle is said to have been built by one of the kings of Daylam. While out hunting one day, he loosed a manned eagle, which alighted on the rock. The king saw the strategic value of the site, and at once built a castle upon it. `And he called it Aluh Amut, which in the Daylami language means the eagle's teach- ing.'8 Others, less convincingly, translate the name as the eagle's nest. The castle was rebuilt by an Alid ruler in 86o, and at the time of Hasan's arrival was in the hands of an Alid called Mihdi, who held it from the Seljuq Sultan.

The seizure of Alamut was carefully prepared. From Damghan, Hasan had sent dais to work in the villages around Alamut. Then `from Qazvin I again sent a da'i to the castle of Alamut ... Some of the people in Alamut were converted by the da'i and they sought to convert the Alid also. He pretended to be won over but afterwards contrived to send down all the converts and then closed the gates of the castle saying that it belonged to the Sultan. After much discussion he readmitted them and after that they refused to go down at his bidding.'9