was permitted to retain the trappings of royalty. In 1784, however, Ma'sum had rendered intrigue and overt opposition to his rule hopeless, and felt strong enough to deprive the forlorn descendant of Chingiz of his shadowy crown. From that year dates the commencement of the reigning house, although the founder eschewed the title of king and adopted that of "Dispenser of Favours." Ma'sum, secure at home, turned his eyes to foreign conquest. Khorasan, the richest province of Persia, was powerless to resist his encroachments; but the road thither was blocked by Bahrām ‘Alī Khān, a Persian of the Kajar tribe to which the present Shāhs belong. This remarkable man had established himself in the chief strategical position of Central Asia in 1781.1 He had built for himself a citadel out of the ruins of Old Merv, which, even in its decay, conveys the impression of overwhelming strength; and his stern rule had reduced his kinsmen, the Turkoman tribes, to abject submission.2 In vain did he attempt to propitiate the ruthless Amir by an embassy, and offering prayers for the repose of the soul of Dāniyāl Bi. In 1785 Ma'sum set out for Merv at the head of 6000 Uzbeg horsemen. After lulling Bahrām 'Ali into security by one of those ruses in which he was so great an adept, he suddenly appeared before Merv, and drew its defenders into an ambuscade, in which Bahram 'Ali was slain. But the royal city defied his forces, secure in the wealth poured into her lap by a system of irrigation, the work of the Sultan Sanjar of the Seljuk line. Its headworks were a mighty barrage on the Murghāb, thirty miles above Merv, which was guarded by a strong castle. The governor of these defensive works quarrelled desperately with Mahammad 1'Abd ul-Kerim, p. 132. 2 His mother belonged to the noble Salor tribe, ibid. 3'Abd ul-Kerim, p. 137. For descriptions of ancient Merv the reader is Khān,1 the son and successor of Bahrām Khān; the causa teterrima belli being, as is generally the case, a woman. In the torments of disappointed love he had recourse to the Amir Ma'sum, to whom he delivered his charge. Thus Merv's relentless foe was enabled to strike at the root of its prosperity. He destroyed the Sultan Band, as the barrage was called, and turned the most fertile spot on the world's surface into a desert. Famine stared the inhabitants in the face, and they had no other resource but to submit to the ruthless Amir. He obtained possession of the coveted prize without striking a blow, and transported the bulk of its population to Bokhārā, where they have left indelible traces in the population.2 Ma'sum's thirst for conquest was not stayed by this splendid capture. He carried his raids far into Persia, laid Khorāsān waste, and swept off so many of its wretched inhabitants that the price of Persian slaves fell in the Bokhārā bazaar to a few pence.3 His conduct towards other princes who had the misfortune to be his neighbours was equally devoid of mercy and good faith; and at his death, in 1799, the people of Khiva, Kokand, and Balkh felt that Central Asia had been delivered from a scourge almost as terrible as that wielded by Chingiz Khan. Amongst his own subjects Ma'sum left behind him a reputation of piety and virtue. "Under his reign," referred to vol. v. Dictionnaire géographique de la Perse, by C. Barbier de Meynard, p. 526; Burnes' Travels into Bokhara, London, 1834; Khanikoff's Mémoire sur la partie Méridionale de l'Asie Centrale, pp. 53, 57, 113, and 128; and Prof. Shukovski's exhaustive work referred to on p. 144-note 3, supra. 1'Abd ul-Kerim assures us that this prince was the Plato of the century, a man full of wisdom and knowledge (p. 135). 2'Abd ul-Kerim tells us that the number of families then deported was 17,000, which would give a total of about 85,000 individuals (p. 142). & Vambéry, History of Bokhara, p. 354. 'Abd ul-Kerim (p. 151) gives the date as Friday, 14th Rajab A.H. 1214. Vambéry is apparently in error in placing it as 1802 (p. 360). writes 'Abd ul-Kerim,1 " the prosperity of Bokhārā excited the envy of Paradise. Religion had then taken a new lease of life. The prince was occupied only in good works, in prayers and practising devotion. He had renounced the pleasures and pomps of this world; he touched neither gold nor silver, and he spent on his own needs only the proceeds of the capitation tax levied from Jews and infidels." Historians who are not blinded by religious prejudice give us a very different estimate of his character and the influence of his reign. Under this cruel and hypocritical bigot Bokhārā lost the last semblance of national spirit, and succumbed to a terrorism such as that which sapped the power of Spain. Ma'sum it was who revived the office of Ra'is-i-Shari'at, or religious censor, which had fallen into desuetude in the rest of Islam. These officials drove the people to prayer with whips, visited neglect of outward observances with severe floggings, and, on its repetition, with death. The use of wine and tobacco was forbidden under the like penalties, and thieves and prostitutes were delivered over without trial to the executioner. Spoliation and the levy of blackmail were carried by these pests to the height of a fine art, and the sanctity of the harem itself was not respected.2 No system can be conceived which was better calculated to repress all independence of thought and action, and encourage the growth of hypocrisy and even darker vices. Ma'sum had designated his son Sayyid Haydar Tūra as his successor; but the new sovereign had to reckon with three paternal uncles, 'Omar Bi, Fazil Bi, and Mahmūd Bi, who raised the standard of revolt in the northern 1 P. 151. 2 See Meyendorff's Voyage d'Orenbourg à Boukhara en 1820, p. 281; Bokhara: its Amir and People, by Khanikoff, p. 248; Vambéry, History of Bokhara, p. 360. provinces. Amir Haydar1 marched against them at the head of an army so powerful as to render resistance impossible. The rebels threw themselves into strong places, but were driven from these retreats by concentrated artillery fire. Two of them, 'Omar Bi and Fazil Bi, were tracked to a village by the Amir's troops, were captured and put to death; while Mahmud Bi, the third, sought safety in Kokand.2 Amir Haydar's store of energy was apparently exhausted by this early test. He permitted Iltuzar Khān of Khiva to ravage the suburbs of his capital, and not until the cry of his suffering subjects could no longer be disregarded did he give orders for an expedition to avenge their woes. It consisted of 30,000 Uzbegs under the command of a general of distinction named Mahammad Niyaz Bi. The avenging host followed the course of the Amu Daryā until the confines of Khiva had been reached. In the meantime, Iltuzar, overjoyed at the prospect of victory, crossed the Amu Darya in the enemy's rear and established himself in an entrenched camp with 4000 chosen men. The invaders were on the horns of a dilemma. To leave the river was to enter a waterless desert, wherein none would emerge alive; while retreat to Bokhārā was barred by the Khivans' entrenchments. In desperation they attacked the foe with suddenness and vigour, driving them into the Amu Darya and securing a decisive victory. Khiva lay open to their attack, but the pusillanimous Haydar was content to rest on his vicariously won laurels, and to pass the rest 1 Amir Haydar was the first of the present dynasty to assume the title of Pādishāh. 2 'Abd ul-Kerim, pp. 154-156. Vambéry gives a different version (History of Bokhara, p. 462), but we prefer to follow the native chronicler, who held high diplomatic posts in Bokhārā at the commencement of the century, and may be presumed to have had personal knowledge of the events which he records (see M. Charles Schefer's Introduction to his Chronicle, p. iii). 3'Abd ul-Kerim, pp. 163, 164. of his reign in the practice of a pharisaical piety and association with priests, who ruled the people in his name with a rod of iron. As is too frequently the fate of Oriental princes, he was unable to resist the enervating influence of the harem, and lost his power of initiative He died in 1826, by wallowing in licensed debauchery. 1 "He always has four legitimate wives: when he wishes to espouse a new wife he divorces one of her predecessors, giving her a house and pension corresponding with her condition. Every month he receives a young virgin, either as wife or slave. He marries the slaves who have not given him children, either to priests or soldiers" ('Abd ul-Kerim, p. 163). |