Читать книгу The Heart of Asia - Sir E. Denison Ross - Страница 18

Table of Contents

During the Caliphate of Mutawakkil218 the government of the province of Sīstān was usurped by a man named Sālih ibn Nasr, who, under the pretext of putting down a rising of the Khārijites, had gathered round himself a large body of adherents. The then governor of Khorāsān, Tāhir II., hearing of the disorders in Sīstān, took the field in person in order to put an end to the hostilities between the Khārijites and Sālih’s adherents. This he succeeded in doing, but scarcely had he returned to his residence when news reached him that Sālih had again taken the field. Among the lieutenants of the latter was a certain Ya`kūb ibn Layth, who was destined to play an important part in the history of his time, and to establish a powerful though short-lived dynasty. He is one of the most popular heroes of Persian history, and so many anecdotes have clustered round his name that it is difficult to separate truth from romance. His origin was certainly obscure, and he appears to have been the son of a coppersmith,219 though authorities are divided as to whether he ever plied that trade himself.220 Many tales are told of his reckless generosity as a boy, and his consequent popularity among his schoolfellows. His Persian biographers tell us, without apology or comment, that on reaching the age of adolescence he became a highway robber; and he was doubtless followed by those whom his masterful bearing had attached to his person during childhood. “The number and character of his followers, and the success of his enterprises, soon gave him fame and wealth, and his generous and humane usage of those whom he plundered added to his renown and popularity. In such a state of society the transition from the condition of a successful robber to that of a chief of reputation was easy and natural. A man who possessed activity and courage, and who was able to command a number of adherents, could not fail of early attaining rank and consequence.”221 Sālih was only too glad to obtain the services of the bold highwayman, who rose so rapidly to power that the governor’s successor, Dirham ibn Nasr, in A.H. 247 (861), gave him command of his army, which henceforth became the terror of the surrounding countries. Meanwhile the Tāhirides remained inactive in Nīshāpūr, and followed a policy of laissez-faire which wrought their downfall.

Ya`kūb soon set upon a career of extended conquest, and made himself master of Herāt (A.H. 253 (867)), Kirmān, and Shīrāz. In A.H. 257 (871) he sent a message to Muwaffak, the Caliph Mu`tamid’s brother, declaring himself one of the Caliph’s most humble slaves, and proposing to pay him a visit. The Caliph, wishing at any cost to keep this redoubtable warrior at a safe distance, sent him an investiture of the government of Balkh, Tokhāristān, and all the country as far as the Indian frontier. These districts were inhabited by widely different races, and included the Turks of Kābul and their neighbours the Afghans. Ya`kūb now crossed the passes of the Hindu Kush and entered the Kābul valley. For the past hundred years or so it had never entered the mind of any Eastern governor to disturb the independence of the Turkish king of Kābul.222 But Ya`kūb succeeded where the early Moslem conquerors had failed, for he carried off the king and all his idols, and was the first to establish Islām in a district hitherto under the influence of Buddhism. In A.H. 259 (872) he administered a crushing defeat to the last of the Tāhirides, and thus became master of Khorāsān and the East. He died in A.H. 265 (878), leaving nearly the whole of Persia to his brother `Amr, who for some years enjoyed a prosperous rule and remained obedient to the Caliph at Baghdād. But in A.H. 271 (884), owing to the complaints of the inhabitants of Khorāsān, the Caliph Mu`tamid deprived `Amr of the governorship of that province, which was apparently given to Rāfi` ibn Harthama, and sent an army to attack him. In the first encounter `Amr was defeated, and fled to his native state of Sīstān by way of Shīrāz and Kirmān. At this point we must for a time leave `Amr, and revert to the story of the Sāmānides.

A JEWISH CHILD OF BOKHĀRĀ

It has been stated above that the province of Māvarā-un-Nahr, or Transoxiana, had been held during the supremacy of the Tāhirides by various members of the house of Sāmān. At the time of the overthrow of the Tāhirides by Ya`kūb ibn Layth, Nasr ibn Ahmed was governor of Samarkand. We are told223 that, after the fall of the Tāhirides, Muwaffak sent a regal mandate to Nasr ibn Ahmed appointing him to the government of all Transoxiana, from the banks of the Oxus to the farthest East.224 It is not apparent how he became independent of the new masters of Khorāsān;225 but in the year 261 we find Nasr, with the help of his brother Isma`īl, engaged in the direction of affairs in Transoxiana. Narshakhi tells us that the names of both were mentioned in the public prayers, while that of Ya`kūb ibn Layth was omitted. Nasr appears to have had a natural predilection for the town of Samarkand, and on this account, perhaps, on receiving his appointment from the Caliph, he did not proceed to the then capital, Bokhārā, but sent thither a deputy in the person of his brother Isma`īl, who was then but twenty-seven years of age. Bokhārā was at this period in a state of great disorder owing to the dissensions of political and religious factions, and partly to the rapine caused by organised robber-bands which infested the country. Isma`īl, who shone as a general and an administrator, and possessed the rarer faculty of winning men’s hearts by his justice and clemency, soon established order throughout the country, and succeeded in extirpating the banditti, whose numbers, we are told, even between Rāmtīna and Barkad, amounted to 4000.226 All would have gone well in Nasr’s dominions had not his jealousy, or proneness to listen to the voice of slander, led him to quarrel with his brother. It is not necessary to recount the various phases of these one-sided disputes. Suffice it to say that while, on the one hand, Isma`īl always remained loyal to his brother, Nasr himself was too prudent to withdraw him abruptly from Bokhārā, where he had won the esteem and affection of the people. But in A.H. 272 (885) he succumbed to the wiles of self-interested advisers and marched against his brother, who fled from Bokhārā and called upon his friend Rāfi` ibn Harthama,227 the viceroy of Khorāsān, for aid.228 Nasr soon brought most of the towns of Bokhārā to submission, and forbade their citizens to furnish supplies to Isma`īl and his army, who soon felt the stress of famine. So pitiable, indeed, was their plight by the time that Rāfi` arrived, that the governor of Khorāsān, rather than embark upon so losing a venture, suddenly declared to Nasr that he was not come to make war, but peace, between the brothers. Terms were soon arrived at by which the government of Bokhārā was given to Ishak, while Isma`īl was appointed tax-collector (`āmil-i-kharāj), A.H. 273 (886). These matters being settled, Nasr returned to Samarkand, and Rāfi` to Khorāsān. But in the following year Nasr, dissatisfied with the accounts rendered by Isma`īl, and perhaps suspecting treachery on the part of Isma`īl and Ishak, again prepared to attack Bokhārā. To this end he drew large reinforcements from Farghāna. Isma`īl, determined on this occasion to be better prepared to encounter his brother, raised a powerful contingent in Khwārazm. After suffering a few slight reverses, Isma`īl, at the end of the year A.H. 275 (888), administered a crushing defeat on his brother and took him prisoner. At this crisis, as on many other occasions,229 if we are to believe the historians, Isma`īl displayed an almost incredible degree of generosity, for he treated his fallen brother with the utmost deference and kindness, and sent him back to Samarkand without suggesting any change in their relative positions. Nasr seems from this date to have ruled peacefully until his death in A.H. 279 (893).