by Will Durant
His son Malik Shah (1072–92) was the greatest of the Seljuq sultans. While his general Suleiman completed the conquest of Asia Minor, he himself took Transoxiana as far as Bokhara and Kashgar. His able and devoted prime minister, Nizam al-Mulk, brought to this and Arslan’s reign much of the brilliance and prosperity that the Barmakids had given to Baghdad in the days of Harun al-Rashid. For thirty years Nizam organized and controlled administration, policy, and finance, encouraged industry and trade, improved roads, bridges, and inns, and made them safe for all wayfarers. He was a generous friend to artists, poets, scientists; raised splendid buildings in Baghdad; founded and endowed a famous college there; and directed and financed the erection of the Great Dome Chamber in the Friday Mosque at Isfahan. It was apparently at his suggestion that Malik Shah summoned Omar Khayyam and other astronomers to reform the Persian calendar. An old tale tells how Nizam, Omar, and Hasan ibn al-Sabbah, when schoolmates, vowed to share with one another any later good fortune; like so many good stories it is probably a legend, for Nizam was born in 1017, while both Omar and Hasan died in 1123–4; and there is no indication that either of these was a centenarian.3
At the age of seventy-five Nizam wrote down his philosophy of government in one of the major works of Persian prose—the Siyasat-nama, or Book of the Art of Rule. He strongly recommended religious orthodoxy in people and king, considered no government secure without a religious base, and deduced from religion the divine right and authority of the sultan. At the same time he did not spare his divine monarch some human advice on the duties of a sovereign. A ruler must avoid excess in wine and levity; must detect and punish official corruption or tyranny; and must, twice a week, hold public audiences at which even the lowliest subject may present petitions or grievances. Nizam was humane but intolerant; he mourned that Christians, Jews, and Shi’ites were employed by the government, and he denounced the Ismailite sect with especial violence as threatening the unity of the state. In 1092 an Ismaili devotee approached him in the guise of a suppliant, and stabbed him to death.
The assassin was a member of the strangest sect in history. About 1090 an Ismaili leader—the same Hasan ibn al-Sabbah whom legend allied with Omar and Nizam—seized the mountain fortress of Alamut (“Eagle’s Nest”) in northern Persia, and from that stronghold, 10,000 feet above the sea, waged a campaign of terror and murder against the opponents and persecutors of the Ismaili faith. Nizam’s book charged the group with being lineally descended from the communistic Mazdakites of Sasanian Persia. It was a secret fraternity, with diverse grades of initiation, and a Grand Master whom the Crusaders called the “Old Man of the Mountain.” The lowest degree of the order included the fidais, who were required to obey, without hesitation or scruple, any of their leader’s commands. According to Marco Polo, who passed by Alamut in 1271, the Master had arranged behind the fortress a garden peopled like the Mohammedan paradise with “ladies and damsels who dallied with the men to their hearts’ content.” The candidates for admission to the order were given hashish to drink; when stupefied by it, they were brought into the garden; and on recovering their senses they were told that they were in paradise. After four or five days of wine, women, and good food, they were again drugged with hashish, and were carried from the garden. Waking, they asked for the lost paradise, and were told that they would be readmitted to it, and forever, if they should obey the Master faithfully, or be slain in his service.4 The youths who complied were called hashshasheen, drinkers of hashish—whence the word assassin. Hasan ruled Alamut for thirty-five years, and made it a center of assassination, education, and art. The organization long survived him; it seized other strongholds, fought the Crusaders, and (it is alleged) killed Conrad of Montferrat at the behest of Richard Coeur de Lion.5 In 1256 the Mongols under Hulagu captured Alamut and other Assassin centers; thereafter the members of the order were hunted and slain as nihilist enemies of society. Nevertheless it continued as a religious sect, and became in time peaceable and respectable; its zealous adherents in India, Persia, Syria, and Africa acknowledge the Agha Khan as their head, and yearly pay him a tenth of their revenues.6
Malik Shah died a month after his vizier. His sons fought a war of succession, and in the ensuing chaos no united Moslem resistance was offered to the Crusades. Sultan Sinjar at Baghdad restored the Seljuq splendor for a reign (1117–57), and literature prospered under his patronage; but after his death the Seljuq realm disintegrated into independent principalities of petty dynasties and warring kings. At Mosul one of Malik Shah’s Kurd slaves, Zangi, founded in 1127 the Atabeg (“Father of the Prince”) dynasty, which fought the Crusaders zealously, and extended its rule over Mesopotamia. Zangi’s son Nur-ud-din Mahmud (1146–73) conquered Syria, made Damascus his capital, ruled with justice and diligence, and plucked Egypt from the dying Fatimids.
The same decadence that had subjected the Abbasids to Buwayhid and Seljuq domination had, two centuries later, debased the caliphs of Cairo to the role of Shia priests in a state actually ruled by their soldier viziers. Immersed in a numerous harem, hedged in by eunuchs and slaves, emasculated by comfort and concubines, the Fatimids allowed their prime ministers to take the title of kings, and to dispense at will the offices and perquisites of government. In 1164 two candidates competed for this royal vizierate. One of them, Shawar, asked the help of Nur-ud-din, who sent him a small force under Shirkuh. Shirkuh slew Shawar, and made himself vizier. When Shirkuh died (1169) he was succeeded by his nephew al-Malik al-Nasir Salahed-din Yusuf ibn Ayyub—i.e., the King, the Defender, the Honor of the Faith, Joseph, son of Job—known to us as Saladin.
He was born (1138) at Tekrit on the upper Tigris, of Kurd—non-Semitic—stock. His father Ayyub rose to be governor first of Baalbek under Zangi, then of Damascus under Nur-ud-din. Saladin, brought up in those cities and courts, learned well the arts of statesmanship and war. But with these he combined orthodox piety, a zealous study of theology, and an almost ascetic simplicity of life; the Moslems number him among their greatest saints. His chief garment was a coarse woolen cloth, his only drink was water, and his sexual temperance (after some early indulgence) aroused all but the emulation of his contemporaries. Sent with Shirkuh to Egypt, he gave so good an account of himself as a soldier that he was put in command over Alexandria, which he successfully defended against the Franks (1167). Made vizier at thirty, he devoted himself to restoring orthodox Mohammedanism in Egypt. In 1171 he had the name of the Shia Fatimid caliph replaced in the public prayers by that of the Abbasid caliph—now merely the orthodox pontiff of Baghdad. Al-Adid, last of the Fatimids, was at the time ill in his palace, and did not notice this ecclesiastical revolution; Saladin kept him fully uninformed, so that the wastrel “might die in peace.” This the Caliph did presently, and as no successor was appointed, the Fatimid dynasty came to a quiet end. Saladin made himself governor instead of vizier, and acknowledged Nur-ud-din as his sovereign. When he entered the caliphal palace at Cairo he found there 12,000 occupants, all women except the male relatives of the Caliph; and such wealth in jewelry, furniture, ivory, porcelain, glass, and other objects of art as could hardly be rivaled by any other dignitary of that era. Saladin kept nothing of all this for himself, gave the palace to his captains, and continued to live, in the vizier’s chambers, a life of fortunate simplicity.
On Nur-ud-din’s death (1173) the provincial governors refused to acknowledge his eleven-year-old son as king, and Syria verged again on chaos. Alleging fear that the Crusaders would take the country, Saladin left Egypt with a force of 700 horsemen, and in swift campaigns made himself master of Syria. Returning to Egypt, he took the title of king, and thereby inaugurated the Ayyubid dynasty (1175). Six years later he set out again, made Damascus his capital, and conquered Mesopotamia. There, as at Cairo, he continued to display the stern orthodoxy of his faith. He built several mosques, hospitals, monasteries, and madrasas or theological schools. He encouraged architecture, discountenanced secular science, and shared Plato’s disdain for poetry. All wrongs that
came to his knowledge were speedily redressed; and taxes were lowered at the same time that public works were extended and the functions of government were carried on with efficiency and zeal. Islam gloried in the integrity and justice of his rule, and Christendom acknowledged in him an infidel gentleman.
We shall not detail the medley of local dynasties that divided Eastern Islam after his death (1193). His sons lacked his ability, and the Ayyubid rule in Syria ended in three generations (1260). In Egypt it flourished till 1250, and reached its zenith under the enlightened Malik al-Kamil (1218–38), friend of Frederick II. In Asia Minor the Seljuqs established (1077–1327) the sultanate of “Rum” (Rome), and for a time made Konya (St. Paul’s Iconium) the center of a lettered civilization. Asia Minor, which had been half Greek since Homer, was now de-Hellenized, and became as Turkish as Turkestan; there, today, Turkey holds its precarious seat in a once Hittite capital. An independent tribe of Turks ruled Khwarizm (1077–1231), and extended its power from the Urals to the Persian Gulf. It was in this condition of political atomism that Jenghiz Khan found Asiatic Islam.
Yet even in these declining years Islam led the world in poetry, science, and philosophy, and rivaled the Hohenstaufens in government. The Seljuq sultans—Tughril Beg, Alp Arslan, Malik Shah, Sinjar—were among the ablest monarchs of the Middle Ages; Nizam al-Mulk ranks with the greatest statesmen; Nur-ud-din, Saladin, and al-Kamil were the equals of Richard I, Louis IX, and Frederick II. All these Moslem rulers, and even the minor kings, continued the Abbasid support of literature and art; at their courts we shall find poets like Omar, Nizami, Sa‘di, and Jalal ud-din Rumi; and though philosophy faded out under their cautious orthodoxy, architecture flourished more splendidly than before. The Seljuqs and Saladin persecuted Moslem heresy; but they were so lenient to Christians and Jews that Byzantine historians told of Christian communities inviting Seljuq rulers to come and oust oppressive Byzantine governors.7 Under the leadership of the Seljuqs and Ayyubids Western Asia again prospered in body and mind. Damascus, Aleppo, Mosul, Baghdad, Isfahan, Rayy, Herat, Amida, Nishapur, and Merv were in this period among the best adorned and most cultured cities in the white man’s world. It was a brilliant decay.
II. THE ISLAMIC WEST: 1086–1300
In 1249 al-Salih, last Egyptian sultan of the Ayyubid line, passed away. His widow and former slave, Shajar-al-Durr, connived at the murder of her stepson, and proclaimed herself queen. To save their masculine honor, the Moslem leaders of Cairo chose another former slave, Aybak, as her associate. She married him, but continued to rule; and when he attempted a declaration of independence she had him murdered in his bath (1257). She herself was presently battered to death with wooden shoes by Aybak’s women slaves.
Aybak had lived long enough to found the Mamluk dynasty. Mamluk meant “owned,” and was applied to white slaves, usually strong and fearless Turks or Mongols employed as palace guards by the Ayyubid sultans. As in Rome and Baghdad, so in Cairo the guards became the kings. For 267 years (1250–1517) the Mamluks ruled Egypt, and sometimes Syria (1271–1516); they incarnadined their capital with assassinations, and beautified it with art; their courage saved Syria and Egypt—even Europe—when they routed the Mongols at Ain-Jalut (1260). They received less wide acclaim for saving Palestine from the Franks, and driving the last Christian warrior from Asia.
The greatest and least scrupulous of the Mamluk rulers was al-Malik Baibars (1260–77). Born a Turkish slave, his brave resourcefulness raised him to high command in the Egyptian army. It was he who defeated Louis IX at Mansura in 1250; and ten years later he fought with fierce skill under the Sultan Qutuz at Ain-Jalut. He murdered Qutuz on the way back to Cairo, made himself sultan, and accepted with winning grace the triumph that the city had prepared for his victorious victim. He renewed repeatedly the war against the Crusaders, always with success; and for these holy campaigns Moslem tradition honors him next to Harun and Saladin. In peace, says a contemporary Christian chronicler, he was “sober, chaste, just to his people, even kind to his Christian subjects.”8 He organized the government of Egypt so well that no incompetence among his successors availed to unseat the Mamluks till their overthrow by the Ottoman Turks in 1517. He gave Egypt a strong army and navy, cleared its harbors, roads, and canals, and built the mosque that bears his name.
Another Turkish slave deposed Baibars’ son, and became Sultan al-Mansur Sayf-al-Din Qalaun (1279–90). History remembers him chiefly for the great hospital that he built at Cairo, and which he endowed with an annuity of a million dirhems ($500,000). His son Nasir (1293–1340) was thrice enthroned but only twice deposed; built aqueducts, public baths, schools, monasteries, and thirty mosques; dug with the forced labor of 100,000 men a canal connecting Alexandria with the Nile; and exemplified Mamluk ways by slaughtering 20,000 animals for the marriage feast of his son. When Nasir traveled through the desert forty camels bore on their backs a garden of rich earth to provide him with fresh vegetables every day.9 He depleted the treasury, and condemned his successors to a slow decline of the Mamluk power.
These sultans do not impress us as favorably as the Seljuqs or Ayyubids. They undertook great public works, but most of these were accomplished by peasants and proletaires exploited to the limit of human tolerance, and for a government completely irresponsible to either the nation or an aristocracy; assassination was the only known form of recall. At the same time these brutal rulers had good taste and a large spirit in literature and art. The Mamluk period is the most brilliant in the history of medieval Egyptian architecture. Cairo was now (1250–1300) the richest city west of the Indus.10 Markets teeming with all the necessaries and many of the superfluities of life; the great slave mart where one could buy and sell men and maidens; little shops nestling in the walls, and crowded with goods of flexible price; alleys crawling with men and beasts, noisy with pedlars and carts, deliberately narrow for shade and crooked for defense; homes hidden behind stern façades, rooms dark and cool amid the glare and heat and bustle of the streets, and breathing from an inner court or garden close; interiors lushly furnished with hangings, carpets, embroideries, and works of art; men chewing hashish to produce a dreamy intoxication; women gossiping in the zenana, or furtively flirting in a window bay; music strummed from a thousand lutes, and weird concerts in the Citadel; public parks redolent with flowers and picnicking; canals and the great river dotted with cargo barges, passenger vessels, and pleasure boats: this was the Cairo of medieval Islam. One of its poets sang:
Beside that garden flowed the placid Nile.
Oft have I steered my dahabiya there;
Oft have I landed to repose awhile,
And bask and revel in the sunny smile
Of her whose presence made the place so fair.11
Meanwhile in North Africa a succession of dynasties had their day. Zayrids (972–1148) and Hafsids (1228–1534) ruled Tunisia; Hammadids (1007–1152) governed Algeria; Almoravids (1056–1147) and Almohads (1130–1269) held sway in Morocco. In Spain the victorious Almoravids, once the frugal warriors of Africa, rapidly learned the luxurious ways of the Cordovan and Sevillian princes whom they had replaced. The discipline of war gave way to the blandishments of peace; courage yielded to money as the standard of excellence and the goal of desire; women won by their grace and charms a power rivaled only by theologians promising like joys in paradise. Officials became corrupt, and administration, which had been competent under Yusuf ibn Tashfin (1090–1106), was already debased under Ali his son (1106–43). As governmental negligence grew, brigandage spread; roads became unsafe; commerce languished, wealth declined. The kings of Catholic Spain seized their opportunity, and raided Cordova, Seville, and other cities of Moorish Spain. Again the Moslems turned to Africa for deliverance.
There, in 1121, a religious revolution had raised a new sect to power and violence. Abdallah ibn Tumart denounced both the anthropomorphism of the orthodox and the rationalism of the philosophers; he demanded a return to simplicity of life and creed; and ended by proclaiming himself the
Mahdi or Messiah promised in the Shia faith. The barbarous tribes of the Atlas range flocked to him, organized themselves under the name of Almohads or Unitarians, overthrew the Almoravid rulers in Morocco, and found it an easy matter to do the like in Spain. Under the Almohad emirs Abd al-Mumin (1145–63) and Abu Yaqub Yusuf (1163–84) order and prosperity returned to Andalusia and Morocco; literature and learning once more raised their heads; and philosophers were protected on the quiet understanding that they would make their works unintelligible. But Abu Yusuf Yaqub (1184–99) yielded to the theologians, forsook philosophy, and ordered all philosophical works to be burned. His son Muhammad al-Nasir (1199–1214) cared for neither philosophy nor religion; he neglected government, specialized in pleasure, and was overwhelmingly defeated by the united armies of Christian Spain at Las Navas de Tolosa in 1212. Almohad Spain broke into small and independent states, which were conquered by the Christians one by one—Cordova in 1236, Valencia in 1238, Seville in 1248. The harassed Moors retired to Granada, where the Sierra Nevada, or Snowy Ridge, provided some defense; and well-rivered fields flowered into vineyards, olive orchards, and orange groves. A succession of prudent rulers sustained Granada and its dependencies—Xeres, Jaen, Almeria, and Malaga—against repeated Christian assaults; commerce and industry revived, art flourished, the people gained renown for their gay dress and joyous fetes; and the little kingdom survived till 1492 as the last European foothold of a culture that had made Andalusia for many centuries an honor to mankind.