Hasan Sabbah, prominent IsmaāiliĀ »å²¹āiĀ and founder of the medieval Nizari Ismaāili state (b.ĢżQumA historic city in Iran to the south of Tehran. It is considered by many Shiāi Muslims as Iranās second holiest city after Mashhad. Qum is a leading centre of…, mid-440s AH/1050s CE, d.ĢżAlamutFortress of the Nizari Ismailis in northern Iran, which fell to the Mongols in 654 AH/1256 CE.. 518 AH/1124 CE). Little information is available on the early life of Hasan Sabbah, who was referred to asĀ ³§²¹²ā²ā¾±»å²Ō²¹Ģż(our master) by his contemporary Nizari lsmailis. The colourful story, according to which Hasan, Nizam al Mulk, and āUmar Khayyam had made a pact when they were classmates in their youth under the same master at Nishapur, should be dismissed as a legend (see RashidĀ al-Din, pp. 110-12; Kashani, pp. 146-48; Mirkhand [Tehran], IV. pp. 199-204; Bowen, 1931, pp. 771-82). The events of Hasanās career as the first ruler ofĀ AlamutĀ are better documented; these events were recorded in theĀ Sargudhasht-i sayyidna, the first part of which may have been autobiographical. Although this chronicle, which marked the initiation of a Nizari tradition of historiography in Persia during theĀ AlamutĀ period, has not survived, it was used extensively by Juwayni, RashidĀ al-DinĀ and Abuāl-Qasim Kashani, who are the chief authorities on Hasanās life and career (see Daftary, 1992, pp. 91-97).
Hasan Sabbah was born inĀ QumĀ into a Twelver Shiāi family. His father, āAli b. Muhammad b. Jaāfar al-Sabbah al-Himyari, a Kufan claiming Himyari Yemeni origins, had migrated from Kufa toĀ Qum. Subsequently, the Sabbah family settled down in Ray, where the youthful Hasan received his early religious education (in the Twelver Shiāi tradition). It was at Ray, a centre of Ismaāili activities since the middle of the 3rd AH/9th CE century, that Hasan was introduced to their teachings by Amira Zarrab, a local IsmaāiliĀ »å²¹āi. Later, Hasan learnt more about Ismaāili doctrines from Abu Nasr Sarraj and otherĀ »å²¹āisĀ in Ray, and consequently, after having just turned seventeen, Hasan converted to Ismaāilism and took the oath of allegiance (āa³ó»å) to the IsmaāiliĀ imamĀ of the time, the FatimidĀ CaliphĀ al-Mustansir (427-87 AH/1036-94 CE).
In Ramadan 464 AH /May-June 1072 CE, the newly initiated Hasan managed to impress āAbd al-Malik b. āAttash, the chief IsmaāiliĀ »å²¹āiĀ in theĀ SaljuqĀ territories, to such an extent that he appointed him to a position in theĀ »å²¹āw²¹Ģż(mission) organisation. In 467 AH/1074-75
CE, Hasan accompanied Ibn āAttash to Isfahan, the secret headquarters of the IsmaāiliĀ »å²¹āw²¹Ģżin Persia, where he stayed until 469 AH /1076-77 CE, when, on instructions from Ibn āAttash, he left for Cairo to further his Ismaāili education. Hasan reached Egypt in Safar 471 AH/August 1078 CE and spent three years there, first in Cairo and then in Alexandria, before returning to Isfahan. Almost nothing is known about Hasanās experiences in Egypt. According to the lost Nizari chronicles used by Persian historians, while in Egypt he clashed with the FatimidĀ vizierĀ Badr al-Jamali, who at that time had just succeeded al-Muāayyad fiāl-Din al-Shirazi as the chiefĀ »å²¹āiĀ (»å²¹āiĀ al-duāat). Whether or not this conflict revolved around Hasanās support for Nizar,Ā ImamĀ al-Mustansirās heir-designate, who was eventually deprived of succession to the FatimidĀ caliphateĀ by Badr al-Jamaliās own son and successor al-Afdal, Hasan was eventually banished from Egypt on Badrās instructions. He returned to Isfahan in Dhuāl-hijja 473 AH /June 1081 CE.
Hasanās subsequent travels over several years in the service of theĀ »å²¹āw²¹Ģżand to evaluate the military strength of the Saljuqs were limited to different localities in Persia. It was during this period that he formulated his own revolutionary strategy against the Saljuqs. By around 480 AH/1087 CE, Hasan was concentrating his efforts on the region ofĀ DaylamThe highlands in the province of Gilan, near the Caspian Sea in northern Iran., which was a stronghold ofĀ ³§³ó¾±āi²õ³¾See Shiāa., remote from the centres ofĀ SaljuqĀ control. He targeted for his headquarters the fortress ofĀ Alamut, located in the central Elburz Mountains of the Rudbar region. Hasan, who soon became theĀ »å²¹āiĀ ofĀ Daylam, reinvigorated theĀ »å²¹āw²¹Ģżactivities in northern Persia and finally seizedĀ AlamutĀ in 483 AH/1090 CE by a clever plan of infiltration. This marked the foundation of what was to become the Nizari Ismaāili state of Persia. Hasan made the fortress impregnable, and improved the cultivation and irrigation systems of theĀ AlamutĀ valley to make it self-sufficient in food production. Similar policies were later implemented in connection with other major Ismaāili strongholds. Hasan also established an important library atĀ Alamut, whose collections of manuscripts and scientific instruments had grown to impressive proportions by the time the Mongols destroyed the fortress in 654 AH/1256 CE.
Hasan Sabbah seems to have had a complex set of religio-political motives for his revolt against the Saljuqs. As Shiāi Ismaāili, he could not have tolerated the ardently SunniĀ SaljuqĀ Turksā hostility towardsĀ ³§³ó¾±āi²õ³¾Ā and their aim to uproot the FatimidĀ caliphateThe Muslim political institution or state centred around the caliph, which came to an end, historically, in 1924 with the disappearance of the Ottoman Empire.. Hasanās revolt was perhaps also an expression of the Persiansā resentment over the alien rule of theĀ SaljuqĀ Turks, since they accounted for a large proportion of the early popular support he received. It was also as an assertion of his ethnic identity that Hasan took the unprecedented step of replacing Arabic with Persian as the religious language of theĀ IsmaāilisĀ of Persia.
After firmly establishing himself atĀ Alamut, Hasan extended his influence in the region by winning more converts, taking over more strongholds in Rudbar, and building new fortresses wherever he found a suitable location.ĢżAlamutĀ was soon raided by the forces of the nearestĀ SaljuqĀ amir, marking the initiation of an endless series of Saljuq-Ismaāili military clashes. In 484 AH/1091 CE, Hasan sent theĀ »å²¹āiĀ Husayn Qaāini to his native land of Quhistan in southeasternĀ KhurasanĀ to mobilise support there. The early success of theĀ IsmaāilisĀ of Quhistan soon erupted into a popular uprising seeking independence from the oppressive Saljuqs. TheĀ IsmaāilisĀ thus seized control of several towns in Quhistan, which became another region, along with Rudbar, for their activities. In this way, in less than two years after the capture ofĀ Alamut, Hasan Sabbah had founded an independent territorial state for the PersianĀ IsmaāilisĀ in the midst of theĀ SaljuqĀ sultanate(salį¹ana, pl. salį¹anÄt) An Arabic word derived from the root s-l-į¹; it is a political office created by the Seljuk dynasty (1038ā1194 CE), somewhat parallel to a kingdom in Western….
In 485 AH/1092 CE, majorĀ SaljuqĀ expeditions were dispatched against theĀ IsmaāilisĀ in both Rudbar and Quhistan, but these operations came to a halt later in the same year on the assassination of the all-powerfulĀ SaljuqĀ vizierĀ Nizam al-Mulk, followed by Sultan Malikshahās death a few weeks later. Taking advantage of the prolonged disorder and the rivalries in theĀ SaljuqĀ camp after Malekshahās demise, Hasan consolidated and extended his power in Rudbar, where he seized the strategically located fortress of Lamasar (Lanbasar) to the west ofĀ Alamut. The PersianĀ IsmaāilisĀ now also captured a number of strongholds, including Girdkuh near Damgan, as well as in Arrajan, the border region between Kuzistan andĀ FarsA province in southwestern Persia, the capital of which is Shiraz..
By this time, the revolt of the PersianĀ IsmaāilisĀ against the Saljuqs had already acquired its distinctive pattern and methods of struggle designed by Hasan himself in view of the decentralised nature of political and military power in theĀ SaljuqĀ sultanate. Hasanās plan was to uproot the Turks one by one from their separate strongholds by sending instructions fromĀ AlamutĀ to his followers in each locality. He is famed for his decision to use assassination as an effective technique of struggle against the decentralisedĀ SaljuqĀ opposition with its vastly superior military strength. This policy soon became identified with the NizariĀ IsmaāilisĀ in an exaggerated manner, even though it had been adopted by many before them as well as their contemporaries. The actual Nizari assassinations of their prominent enemies were carried out by targeting key leaders and were never aimed at civilian populations. Invariably, they were countered by massacres ofĀ IsmaāilisĀ by the Saljuqs.
The dispute over the succession to the Fatimid Imam-caliph al-Mustansir, who died in 487 AH/1094 CE, led to a permanent schism, splitting theĀ IsmaāilisĀ into rival Nizari and Mustaāli factions. Hasan Sabbah, who was by then the undisputed leader of the PersianĀ IsmaāilisĀ and had already adopted an independent policy, supported the cause ofĀ ImamĀ Nizar, Imam-caliph al-Mustansirās eldest son and designated successor, who had nonetheless been denied the FatimidĀ caliphate. RecognizingĀ ImamĀ Nizar as his fatherās successor to the IsmaāiliĀ imamat, Hasan now severed his ties with the Fatimid regime and the IsmaāiliĀ »å²¹āw²¹Ģżheadquarters in Cairo, which had transferred their own allegiance toĀ ImamĀ Nizarās younger brother, appointing him to the FatimidĀ caliphateĀ with the title of al-Mustaāli biāllah. Hasan Sabbah had now in effect founded an independent Nizari IsmaāiliĀ »å²¹āw²¹, and his decision to supportĀ ImamĀ Nizarās cause was endorsed by all theĀ IsmaāilisĀ of Persia and Iraq, who came to be known as the Nizariya.
From the early years of the 6th AH/12th CE century, Hasan began to sendĀ »å²¹āis fromĀ AlamutĀ to Syria, an early Ismaāili centre of activity, to propagate the NizariĀ »å²¹āw²¹. As a result of the activities of theseĀ »å²¹āis, an expanding Nizari community soon emerged in Syria which eventually became the sole representation ofĀ IsmaāilisĀ there. However, almost half a century of continuous efforts were needed before theĀ NizarisĀ could gain possession of a group of permanent strongholds in central Syria, which was affiliated to the Nizari state in Persia.
AfterĀ ImamĀ Nizar was killed in Cairo in 488 AH/1095 CE, the NizariĀ IsmaāilisĀ were left without an accessibleĀ imamIn general usage, a leader of prayers or religious leader. The Shi’i restrict the term to their spiritual leaders descended from ŹæAlÄ« b. AbÄ« į¹¬Älib and the Prophet’s daughter, Fatima.. Indeed,Ā ImamĀ Nizarās own name and caliphal title (al-Mustafa li-Din Allah) continued to be mentioned for almost seventy years after his death on coins struck atĀ AlamutĀ (see Miles, 1972, pp. 155-62). In the absence of a manifestĀ imam, Hasan himself served as the head of the NizariĀ »å²¹āw²¹Ģżand state, with the rank ofĀ ³ó³ÜĀįĀį²¹Ģż(chief representative of the hidden imam). The NizariĀ imamĀ assumed authority four decades after Hasanās own death (see Ivanow, 1933 [Haft bab-i Baba Sayyidna], p. 21; Tusi, 1950, text p. 148, tr. p. 173; Quhistani, 1959, text pp. 23, 43).
Outsiders from early on gained the impression that the movement of the PersianĀ IsmaāilisĀ led by Hasan Sabbah represented a new teaching, and it became designated as the ānew preachingā (al-»å²¹āw²¹ al jadida) in contradistinction to the āold preachingā (al-»å²¹āw²¹ al-qadima) of the FatimidĀ Ismaāilis. However, the ānew preachingā was no more than the reformulation of the established Shiāi doctrine ofĀ ³Ł²¹āl¾±³¾Ģż(authoritative instruction). This doctrine was restated more vigorously by Hasan in a Persian treatise entitledĀ Chahar fasl, āThe Four Chaptersā (Arabic:Ā al Fusul al-arbaāa) which, although not extant, has been preserved fragmentarily by, amongst others, his contemporary Abuāl-Fath Shahrastani (d. 548/1153), who may have had Ismaāili leanings (see Shahrastani, 1968. II, pp. 195-98; idem, 1984, pp. 165, 167-70; Juwayni, 1912- 37, III, pp. 195-99; idem. 1958, II, pp. 671-73; RashidĀ al-Din, pp. 105-7; Kashani, pp. 142-43). In a series of four propositions, Hasan argued for the inadequacy of human reason in knowing God and for the necessity of an authoritative teacher (muāallim-i sadiq) as the spiritual guide of men, who would be none other than the IsmaāiliĀ imamĀ of the time. Henceforth, the PersianĀ NizarisĀ became known also as theĀ °Õ²¹āl¾±³¾¾±²ā²¹. The anti-Ismaāili polemics of the contemporary Sunni establishment, led by Muhammad Ghazali and endorsed by Nizam al-Mulk, were focused directly against this doctrine of taālim, which served as the central teaching of the NizariĀ Ismaāilis.
The fortunes of the PersianĀ IsmaāilisĀ continued to rise in Barkyaruqās reign (487-98 AH/1094- 1105 CE), when they achieved new gains closer to the seat ofĀ SaljuqĀ power in Isfahan, seizing the fortress ofĀ ShahdizThe name of a Nizari Ismaili fortress near Isfahan in the 13th century CE., also known as Dizkuh. Having grown weary of the general threat of theĀ IsmaāilisĀ toĀ SaljuqĀ rule, Barkyaruq and Sanjar now agreed to check, in their respective territories, the rising power of theĀ Ismaāilis. This strategy was more effectively pursued, however, by Muhammad Tapar (498-511 AH/1105-18 CE) who, in 503 AH/1109 CE, initiated a major and prolonged campaign againstĀ AlamutĀ itself. Hasanās defence ofĀ AlamutĀ during this period was a blow to the Saljuqs, who failed to take the fortress by assault or attrition despite their superior military power. By the time of Muhammad Taparās death, Saljuq-Ismaāili relations had entered a new phase of stalemate, with the PersianĀ IsmaāilisĀ successfully defending important territories, including mountain strongholds, villages and towns in Rudbar, Quhistan and Kumesh (Arabic: Qumis). Although Hasan Sabbah had failed to overcome the Saljuqs, he did succeed in founding both a state and the independent Nizari IsmaāiliĀ »å²¹āw²¹, which survived the downfall of the Nizari state.
An organiser and a political strategist of the highest calibre, Hasan Sabbah was at the same time a trained theologian. He led an austere life and is said to have observed theĀ ²õ³ó²¹°ł¾±āaĢżvery strictly himself as well as imposing it on his Nizari community; equally strict with friend and foe, he had both his sons executed, one for alleged murder, the other on suspicion of drinking wine. He is also said to have sent his wife and daughters away permanently to Girdkuh, where they earned a living by spinning. The Persian historians relate that during all the thirty-four years that Hasan lived atĀ Alamut, he never descended from the castle. RashidĀ al-DinĀ (pp. 133-34) reports that he spent most of his time inside his personal quarters reading books, committing the teachings of theĀ »å²¹āw²¹Ģżto writing and administering the affairs of his realm.
When he sensed that he was reaching the end of his life, Hasan summoned Kia Buzurg-Umid, his capable lieutenant at Lamasar, and designated him as his successor inĀ Alamut. He died, after a brief illness, on 26 Rabiā II 518 AH/12 June 1124 CE (or possibly twenty days earlier), and was buried nearĀ Alamut. Hasan Sabbahās mausoleum was regularly visited by the NizariĀ IsmaāilisĀ until it was demolished by the Mongols in 654 AH/1256 CE.
Primary SourcesĀ
Hafiz Abru.ĢżMajmaā al-tawarikh al-sultaniya: qismat-i khulafaā āAlawiya-yeĀ MaghribĀ wa Misr wa Nezariyan, ed. M. Mudarresi-Zanjani. Tehran, 1364 S/1985, pp. 191-226.
Ibn al-Athir.Ģżal-Taārikh al-kamil. Cairo, 1303/1885, IX, pp. 266-73, 311-12, 358, 385; X, pp. 161-62, 216, 217, 299-302, 369-70.
Ibn al-Qalanisi.ĢżDhayl tarikh Dimashq, ed. H. F. Amedroz. Leiden, 1908, pp. 151-56; ed. S. Zakkar. Damascus, 1983, pp. 244-50.
āAta Malik Juwayni.ĢżTaārikh-i jahan-gushay, ed. M. Qazvini. Leiden/London, 1912-37, III, pp. 186-216, 269-73; tr. John A. Boyle, Cambridge, MA, 1958; II, pp. 668-83, 719-21.
Abuāl-Qasim āAbd Allah b. āAli Kashani.ĢżZubdat al-tawarikh: bakhsh-i Fatimiyan wa Nizariyan, ed. M. T. Daneshpazuh, 2nd ed. Tehran, 1366 S/1987, pp. 133-72, 186-90.
Hamd Allah Mustawfi.ĢżTarikh-i gozida, ed. āAbd al-Husayn Navaāi. Tehran, 1339 S/1960, pp. 445-46, 518-21.
øé²¹²õ³ó¾±»åĢż²¹±ō-¶Ł¾±²Ō.ĢżJamiā al-tawarikh: qismat-i Ismaāiliyan, ed. M. T. Daneshpazuh and M. Mudarresi-Zanjani. Tehran, 1338 S/1959, pp. 97-137, 149-53.
Muhammad b. āAli al-Rawandi.ĢżRahat al-sudur, ed. M. Iqbal, London, 1921, pp. 155-62.
Abuāl-Fath Shahrastani.ĢżKitab al-milal waāl-nihal, ed. āA. M. al-Wakil. Cairo, 1968, II, pp. 195-98.
Idem.ĢżMuslim Sects and Divisions, tr. A. K. Kazi and J. G. Flynn. London, 1984.
ZahirĀ al-DinĀ Nishapuri.ĢżSaljuq-nama. Tehran, 1332 S/1953, pp. 40-42.
NasirĀ al-DinĀ Tusi.ĢżRawdat al-taslim, ed. and tr. W. Ivanow. Leiden, 1950.
Abu Ishaq Quhistani.Ģż±į²¹“Ś³ŁĢż²ś²¹²ś, ed. and tr. W. Ivanow. Bombay, 1959.
Secondary SourcesĀ
Harold Bowen. āTheĀ sargudhasht-i sayyidna: The Tale of the Three Schoolfellows and theĀ ·É²¹²õ²¹²ā²¹Ģżof the Nizam al-Mulk,āĀ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1931, pp. 771-82.
Farhad Daftary.ĢżThe Ismaāilis: Their History and Doctrines. Cambridge, 1990, pp. 324-71, 669-81 (citing further references).
Idem.ĢżThe Assassin Legends: Myths of theĀ Ismaāilis. London, 1994, index.
Idem. āPersian Historiography of the Early NizariĀ Ismaāilis,āĀ ±õ°ł²¹²ŌĢż30, 1992, pp. 91-97.
Idem. āHasan-i Sabbah and the Origins of the Nizari Ismaāili Movement,ā in F. Daftary, ed.ĢżMediaeval Ismaāili History and Thought. Cambridge, 1996, pp. 181-204.
Carole Hillenbrand. āThe Power Struggle between the Saljuqs and theĀ IsmaāilisĀ ofĀ Alamut, 487-518/1094-1124: theĀ SaljuqĀ Perspective,ā in F. Daftary, ed.ĢżMediaeval Ismaāili History and Thought. Cambridge, 1996, pp. 205-220.
Marshall G. S. Hodgson.ĢżThe Order of Assassins. The Hague, 1955, pp. 41-98.
Idem. āThe Ismaāili State,ā inĀ Cambridge History of Iran, IV, pp. 424-49.
Wladimir Ivanow, ed.ĢżTwo Early Ismaāili Treatises. Bombay, 1933.
Bernard Lewis.ĢżThe Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam. London, 1967, pp. 38-63, 145-52.
Wilferd Madelung.ĢżReligious Trends in Early Islamic Iran. Albany, NY, 1988, pp. 9-12, 101- 3.
George C. Miles. āCoins of the Assassins ofĀ Alamut,āĀ Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 3, 1972, pp. 155-62.
Ismail K. Poonawala.ĢżBiobibliography of Ismaāili Literature. Malibu, CA, 1977, pp. 251-54.
This is an edited version of an article that was originally published inĀ , Vol. XII, Columbia University, New York, 1996. pp. 34- 37.
Author
Dr Farhad Daftary
Co-Director and Head of the Department of Academic Research and Publications
An authority in Shi’i studies, with special reference to its Ismaili tradition, Dr. Daftary has published and lectured widely in these fields of Islamic studies. In 2011 a Festschrift entitledĀ Fortresses of the IntellectĀ was produced to honour Dr. Daftary by a number of his colleagues and peers.