Pir Sadruddin, one of the best known and revered hujjats in Indian traditions, was born in Sebzewar probably in 700/1300. His name was Muhammad, the son of Pir Sahib'din bin Pir Nasiruddin bin Pir Shams Sebzewari. His early education followed customary lines at home. He was a man steeped in a thorough understanding of the mystical teaching and the Islamic science of tawil. He also visited Mecca several times on pilgrimage, and seems to have acquired a good command in Arabic. Pir Sadruddin is said to have visited India in 734/1335, and joined the mission of Pir Shams. He studied various religious traditions and tendencies of different cults, social customs of the inhabitants and mastered the local languages, and finally immersed in the Indian tradition.Brief mention must be made of the political cataclysm of Sind, which was the centre of the Ismaili mission down to the 18th century. After the end of the Sumra rule in Sind around 762/1361, the field was open for the Sammahs, who took possession of Sind and raised their chief, called Unar to the throne with the title of Jam. He died most probably in 768/1367 and was succeeded by his nephew, Jam Tamachi. He was followed by Jam Khairuddin, then Jam Babinah. Soon afterwards, Firuz Khan Tughlaq (1320-1388) invaded Sind after subjugation of Gujrat and some other parts of India. He defeated Jam Babinah, thus Sind fell into the hands of Firuz Khan. The Sammah rule ended in Sind in 926/1519, when Shah Beg Arghun (d. 928/1521) defeated Jam Firuz, the last ruler of the Sammah in 926/1519 and established Arghun dynasty in Sind.

The Arghun dynasty lasted till 961/1554, when their second ruler passed away during the war of succession. It was followed by a new dynasty of Central Asian origin; they were the Trakhans, whose monuments are still visible in Makli Hill. A certain Mirza Essa Trakhan (d. 974/1566) being the first ruler, took the reign in 961/1554. In 1000/1592, the Mughal emperor Akbar's friend, Abdur Rahim defeated Mirza Jani Beg Trakhan and annexed Sind to the Mughal empire. The trade from Afghanistan and Central Asia to the subcontinent was mainly in the hands of Hindu merchants in Shikarpur. This town was founded by Daudpotra in 1025/1616, a family who had assumed power in a large area of upper Sind. The Daudpotras were then defeated by another clan, the Kalhora. The first man to be known from this family was Adam Kalhora, who was executed in Multan in 965/1558. In the meantime, the British East India Company began to establish trade with Sind between 1045/1636 and 1073/1662. In 1112/1701, Yar Muhammad Khan Kalhora seized Shikarpur and the Mughal emperor Aurengzeb also granted the family large areas in Sind. He was succeeded by Nur Muhammad in 1131/1719, whose territory extended from Multan to Thatta. In the interim, the invasion of Nadir Shah in 1152/1739 proved as severe blow to the Kalhoras as it was to the Mughals. Nur Muhammad had to give up Shikarpur and Sibi and the Afsharids of Iran kept the whole western bank of the Indus. About fifteen years later, Ahmad Shah Durrani invaded Sind in 1167/1754, but, although Nur Muhammad was driven out from Jaisalmer, his son Muhammad Murad Yar Khan gained the kingdom. His brother Ghulam Shah founded Hyderabad in place of the old Nerankot in 1181/1768. The Kalhora period was important for the development of Sindhi literature, though its economic condition rapidly deteriorated towards the last quarter of the 18th century. The minister of the last Kalhora prince, Mir Bijar was killed in 1196/1781 after having defeated the invading Afghans near Shikarpur. Mir Bijar belonged to the Baluch clan of the Talpurs who were the disciples of the Kalhora, but after his death, fight between the two groups ensued and in 1197/1783, the Talpur Mir Fateh Ali defeated the last Kalhora, Abdun Nabi. The rule of the Talpur Mirs was divided among the branches of the family, therefore, the Talpurs were seated in Hyderabad, Mirpur and Khairpur. The Talpurs were plain blunt shepherds, who mostly relied on the power of their Baluchi clans to maintain order. The battle of Miami in 1259/1843 with the British India finally got an end of the rule of the Talpur Mirs in Sind.

Returning the thread of our narrative, the scrutiny of traditions suggests that Pir Sadruddin started his proselytizing mission between 757/1356 and 798/1396 under Pir Shams. Judging from bits and shreds of the accessible traditions, it is known that he selected twelve gifted surrogates from different tribes to assist him in his mission. He seems to have travelled from Uchh to the lower part of Sind as far as the regions adjoining the Indian ocean, and around the locality of present Karachi. The tradition has it that he hired a camel in that locality to travel into the interior Sind, and converted the owner of camel at first. Pir Sadruddin seems to have launched his brisk mission in the district Thatta, and converted a bulk of the Lohana and Bhatia castes. From lower Sind, he proceeded to the middle, and also visited Kutchh with a group of dais. His mission also penetrated in Gujrat and the regions between northern India and Deccan. He also tried to bring the lower castes into the Ismaili fold, who revered Ramdeo, wherein he cloaked his identity, assuming the name of Nizar - a familiar term among the followers of Ramdeo. It must be known that he composed few ginans bearing the name Nizar for the followers of Ramdeo. His mission also influenced other parts of Gujrat and Kathiawar.

Pir Sadruddin visited Iran in 798/1396 to report Imam Islam Shah the outcome of his endeavours. He was designated as the hujjat of Sind and Hind, or the pir according to the Indian tradition. With fresh directions, he returned to India and established prayer-halls (khana) and appointed mukhi (derived from mukhia means 'foremost'), the headman at Sind. Each community was administered by its headman (mukhi), who was an executive head and his office was no longer hereditary as he was periodically selected. His powers and duties were explicitly defined in the ginans. In small villages the executive powers were vested in the mukhi, and it was only on important matters that he summoned a meeting of the elders.

Pir Sadruddin also visited Punjab and Kashmir to build prayer-halls for the followers of Pir Shams, and also built a mausoleum of Pir Shams in Multan. His next visit to Patan, Gujrat was noted for giving a new life to the early unknown Khojas converted by Pir Satgur, whose condition since the time of giving up the Hinduism was yet unchanged. He breathed a new life into the dead class of these Khojas and brought them within the fold of new emerging Khoja community. It must be known that the new converts during the period of Pir Satgur were yet crude in their knowledge on Islam and Ismailism. No Ismaili dai is reported to have continued the mission after him during pre-Muslim era in Gujrat. The setback was due to the split of the Nizaris and the Must'alians in Egypt, resulting the Indian mission ignored for more than two centuries. Pir Sadruddin was the next dai to have launched his fresh mission in Gujrat when two to three generations of the original converts of Pir Satgur had passed away, and the third generation was almost more Hindus and less Muslims. They were getting the inspiration of the Satpanth from the old legends and miracles. Pir Sadruddin visited the different villages in Gujrat and also initiated them afresh on his own method and gave them a new lease of life and included them in the new emerging Khoja community.

Pir Sadruddin returned to Sind after a long journey. His principal area of activity certainly radiated from a base at Uchh, where he supervised the mission works.

Sayed Ahmad Islam Shah was also known as Islam Shah and is called as Salam Shah and Shri Islam Shah in the ginans of the Indian Pirs. Islam Shah assumed the Imamate in 771/1370 in Azerbaijan, ruled by Sultan Uways (757-776/1356-1374), the Jalayirid ruler. It seems that during the early 25 years of his Imamate in Azerbaijan, he visited Daylam several times in disguise, where he had erected a temporary mission centre for different regions. Summing up the sparsely recorded fragments of the ginans, it appears that Islam Shah was a man of middle height, radiant face having piercing eyes. He was a gifted man of sweet disposition and engaging manner. His mole on right cheek was an eye- catching mark. He was a generous, fond of hunting and passed sometimes a few months in woods on hunting excursion.The Mongol power ended with the death of Abu Sa'id, the last Ilkhanid ruler on November 30, 1335, and some months later, Taymur was born in Samarkand on April 8, 1336. It is said that Taymur had received an arrow wound while fighting in Sistan in 1363, making him permanently lame and accounted for his nickname lung (lame), or Taymur-lung (Taymurlame). He solidified his powers as an amir in Samarkand at the age of 30 years and conquered few regions of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Afghanistan and India. He had a vein of cruelty in his character, and so were his soldiers. Taymur's example so filled his soldiers with courage that, with one wild cheer, they made a desperate charge, rushed on the besieged and broke their lines. Wherever they went a crimson streak marked their trail and cultural centres were practically wiped out of existence, reducing them into shapeless ruins. As a matter of fact, greed together with avarice seems to have been the ruling passion of Taymur's life.

From 735/1335 when Abu Sa'id died to the year 782/1380, Iran was left to its own device in 45 years, and was divided into four to five petty rules. Taymur spurred his horses to Iran in 783/1381 and launched several terrible expeditions as if an engine of destruction like Halagu. He invaded Azerbaijan in 787/1385 when Imam Islam Shah was probably in Daylam. Taymur crushed the Muzaffarid of Ispahan and cost the lives of about 70,000 of its inhabitants, whose heads were piled in pyramids.

The Ismailis had hardly set up their livings that the Taymurid danger began to loom large on the Iranian horizon. He attacked Mazandaran, Sistan and Fars in 794/1392 and conducted bloody massacres of the local Ismailis. John Malcolm writes in 'History of Persia' (London, 1815, 1st vol., p. 18) that, 'Taymur had the merit of extirpating a band of Ismailis with which the north-western provinces of Persia were infested.' In 795/1393, Taymur swept the thick population of the Ismailis in Amul, the principal town of Tabaristan, lying along the south coast of the Caspian Sea; and also Astrabad, the city of Jurjan province to the north frontier of Mazandaran.

During his campaign in Iran in Rajab, 795/May, 1393 while going to Hamdan from Ispahan, Taymur spent few days in Anjudan inhabited by the poor Ismailis. His soldiers wildly butchered many Ismailis and pillaged their properties. According to Sharafuddin Ali Yazdi (d. 858/1454) in 'Zafar-nama' (1st vol., p. 577), 'The Ismailis of Anjudan attempted to seek protection in their underground tunnels but they mostly lost their lives when they were flooded out by the Taymur's soldiers.' Finally, Taymur returned to Samarkand in 798/1396 and died in 807/1405. His Taymurid empire divided into petty rules, but Turkey, Iraq and India restored their rules he devastated. Iran and Afghanistan however were dominated by the Taymurids, but their internecine strife had badly hit the Iranian economy.

In India, the Tughlaqs gained their power after Taymur's death, which ultimately had fallen to the hand of the Sayeds (816-855/1414-1451) and the Lodhis (855-933/1451- 1526). The Ottoman empire became powerful once again after Taymur's death and spread their influence in Islamic countries. The Mamluks of Egypt and Syria were dragged into their internal disputes. When Taymur invaded Turkey and Syria, the rule of Mamluks was confined only to Cairo. After Taymur, the Turkish ruler occupied Egypt.

Ali Shah, surnamed Mustansir billah, also known as Jalaluddin was born in Kahek. He seems to have known as Shah Qalandar among the Iranian mystics. He too resided in Kahek and sometimes in Shahr-i Babak. In 'Pandiyat-i Jawanmardi', we also find different terms for the Imam that became vogue among his followers, viz. Imam-i Zaman (Imam of the time), Imam-i Hazar (the apparent Imam), Sahibu'z Zaman (the master of the world), Ali Zaman (the Ali of the time), Sahibu'l Amr (the master of authority), Hazar Jama (the present bearer of light), and simply as Hazrat-i Mawlana Mustansir billah.

Muhammad or Mehmud Shah, generally called Muhammad bin Islam Shah is believed to have been born in Daylam. He was almost ten years old when his father arrived in Kahek in 798/1396. If this is a genuine tradition, it implies that he was born possibly in 788/1386, and was about 17 years old while assuming the Imamate. He mostly resided in Shahr-i Babak in Kirman.
The Iranian Ismailis began to revert to their former settlements in different villages. Most of them engaged in agriculture in Kohistan, Qain, Birjand, Nishapur, Khorasan, Sirjan, Jabal-i Bariz, Mahallat and Yazd.

Muhammad bin Islam Shah seems to have started communications from his headquarters to different Ismaili communities, and also accepted the gifts of the pilgrims. It is said that the Indian Ismaili pilgrims were invested the title of 'darwish' (daras).

Taymur designated his grandson Pir Muhammad as his heir, who was about 22 years old in 807/1405. But, his cousin Khalil Sultan occupied Samarkand and was proclaimed as sultan. He was overthrown in 811/1409. Meanwhile, Shah Rukh (1409-1447), the fourth son of Taymur, the then governor of Herat, ascended as the next Taymurid ruler of Iran and Central Asia. He died in 851/1447 and was succeeded by his son Olugh Beg (1447-1449), who was in turn followed by Abu Sa'id (1451-1469).

One seminal point should not omitted here in discussion that the office of the hujjat or pir in India from Pir Shams (d. 757/1356) to Pir Hasan Kabiruddin (d. 853/1449) was almost hereditary, and then the office seemed to be revered like the hereditary office of the Imams, and therefore, an effect was necessary to enforce in the line of the pirs before the time it might become an ingrained belief. Thus, after the death of Pir Hasan Kabiruddin, Imam Muhammad bin Islam Shah designated his brother Pir Tajuddin, as a next hujjat or pir for Hind and Sind instead of any son, and one can hardly deny the logic springs from such designation.

Pir Shams was born most probably at Sebzewar, a town in Khorasan, lying 64 miles west of Nishapur. His father Sayed Salauddin had been deputed in Baltistan by Imam Kassim Shah, who most probably came into the contact of Taj Mughal in Badakhshan. Kamaluddin Mujahri of Sebzewar writes in 'Malfuz-i Kamalia' that Pir Sayed Muinuddin Hasan of Sebzewar of Ajmer had a meeting with Sayed Salauddin in Sebzewar in 560/1165. It is recounted that Pir Shams had gone to Badakhshan with his father at the age of 19 years, and thence he proceeded to Tibet and returned back to Sebzewar.It is said that after the death of Sayed Salauddin, Imam Kassim Shah had commissioned Pir Shams as the hujjat of Sind and Hind at Daylam for the Indian mission, and he also refers to the Imam that: 'Adore sincerely the true guiding light manifested in the person of Kassim Shah, the Lord of the time.' (vide 'Garbi', 5:17).

The earliest description of Pir Shams is found in the treatise of the biographies of Sufis, entitled 'Nafahat al-Uns' (comp. 883/1478) by Nuruddin Abdur Rahman Jami (817-898/1414-1492), the last classic poet of Iran. Nurullah bin Sharif Shushtari (d. 1019/1610) in his 'Majalis al-Mominin' (comp. 1013/1604) traces his ancestry back to the Ismaili root. Some details are also found in 'Tarikh-i Firishta' (comp. 1015/1606). The great Sufi saint Bulleh Shah (1680-1758) also referred to Pir Shams in his Sufic poetry.

It is indeterminable point in the modern sources, when Pir Shams was born? The extant materials however do not allow one to draw a safe conclusion. His death in 757/1356 however is indisputable, based on the plaque at the mausoleum in Multan. The most confusing and unsolved point is to locate his date of birth. Most of the scholars concur in his age for 115 years, but it however seems that Pir Shams had lived to an advanced age beyond 115 years. Sayed Bawa Ahmad Ali Khaki writes in his 'Dar-i Khuld-i Bari' (Ahmadabad, 1905, p. 123) on the basis of an old manuscript that the span of Pir Shams's life was for 171 years. If the date of his demise in 757/1356 may be considered genuine, it means that his birth would have been taken place around 580/1175 during the period of Imam Ala Muhammad (561-607/1166-1210). The genealogy of Pir Shams given in the 'Shajara' which is preserved in the shrine at Multan, indicates the birth of Pir Shams in 570/1165, which also gives close support to this view.

Before we proceed, it must be noted that in India, there are many instances of the persons having long life-span in that period. The western scholars however should not surprise to know Pir Shams having lived to an advanced age of 171 years. The examples of long span of human life are also recorded in the annals of Europe. For instance, Catherine, the countess of Desmond, who died in 1604 at the age of 140 years. Thomas Parr died in 1635 at the age of 152 years. Henry Jenkins died in 1670 at the age of 169 years. Another documentation is that of Jacobsen Drakenberg (1626- 1772), whose age was 145 year and 325 days. Prof. E. Metchnikoff, an eminent biologist also admits 185 years age of St. Mungo of Glasgow. For further details, vide 'The New Encyclopaedia Britannica' (1990, 15th ed., 20th vol., p. 428) and 'Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics' (1959, 4th ed., 1st vol., p. 182). The readers may refer 'Akhbar al-Akhayar' (comp. 998/1590), in which the life-spans of Shaykh Shahi Mu'itab (d. 658/ ), Sayed Shamsuddin Zahir (d. 741/ ), Alaluddin Qoraishi (d. 730/ ), Makdum Jiv Qadri (d. 1000/ ), etc. have been mentioned above 150 years.

We will however touch here the contemporary activity of Pir Shams. He arrived from Daylam to Badakhshan, where he is said to have brought many followers of Momin Shahi sect into the Ismaili fold. He visited Gilgit and proceeded to Tibet and as far as the ranges of the Himalayas. He came back to Ghazna, where he deputed the local converted prince to Badakhshan on mission work.

Pir Shams also converted a bulk of the Hindus during their Dasera festival after singing 28 garbis (songs) in a temple for ten consecutive nights. According to the ginans, Pir Shams had sung the garbis in a village, called Analvad. W. Ivanow places its location in Gujrat, called Anilvad, not far from Ahmadabad. In fact, it is Annhilvad and not Anilvad, situated about 66 miles to the north of Ahmadabad. It is also recounted that the village was Anwalvad, named after a Jat clan, Anwal in Multan, whose glaring festival of Dasera was famous in Punjab. The garbis had been composed in Gujrati style, reflecting the culture of Gujrat, and therefore, the location of the village in Multan seems almost doubtful.

He had also visited Kashmir in 715/1316 and converted the Chak and Changad tribes, thence he proceeded to Multan in 725/1326 for the first time. Zakaria Qazwini writes in his 'Asar al-Bilad wa Akhbar al-Ibad' (comp. 661/1263) that, 'Multan is a large, fortified and impregnable city, with a temple which is to the Hindus a place of worship and pilgrimage as Mecca for the Muslims. The inhabitants are the Muslims and Hindus, but the government is in the hands of the former. The chief mosque is described as being near the temple.'

In Multan, many miracles of Pir Shams are reported, but these are not potential for historical value. It is therefore difficult to penetrate through the mist of legends, which formed even during the lifetime of Pir Shams and thickened rapidly after his death. The most popular miracle was the bringing down of the sun on earth, which earned him an epithet of taparez (burning) in Punjab. The word Taparez is so coherance with that of Tabriz that the former began to be pronounced as Tabriz, contriving a wrong theory to merge these two into one. Since Pir Shams and Shams-i Tabriz were proximate to each other in time, it is probable that Pir Shams, also known as Shams Taprez had been confounded with that of Shams-i Tabriz. It has been heretofore discussed that Shams-i Tabriz, the master of Jalaluddin Rumi was died in Koniya on 645/1247, engendering to the rise of a false tradition of Koniya to Multan, i.e., Shams-i Tabriz had gone to Multan. In sum, the nut of Koniya and the bolt of Multan had been patched to contrive a new tradition indicating these two figures same and one, which is absolutely untrue.

It however seems that Pir Shams visited lower Sind, and travelled through the riverline belt of the Indus, and reached Uchh Sharif most probably in 727/1328, which was his mission centre. He deputed many dais in China, Tibet, Badakhshan, Kashmir and Gujrat. His mission was mobile, and is said to have gone as far as Nepal, known among the Indian Buddhists as Chinab-Nagari, designating the northern India as a part of China.

Pir Shams also visited Rajasthan, and according to his one ginan (no. 70), he embarked from Uchh with his two disciples, Vimras and Surbhan. He alighted at Gudi Vilod, near Gujrat, and thence proceeded to a forest, and preached a bulk of the untouchables. He identified himself as Satgur Shams and the Light of Pir Satgur to give coherence to his mission, where the name of Pir Satgur was almost familiar. He then arrived in a barren land and reached in the middle of Malwa, where he initiated the servile caste and the Abheras and Bhils. Pir Shams also converted the Hindu Bhambi, and spread his mission as far as Ganges. The oral tradition tells us that a certain Ransi, whose family adhered Pir Satgur, also became a disciple of Pir Shams. His son, Ajmal (or Ajay Singh), the father of Ramdeo, continued to revere Pir Shams. After visiting Junjala, Jaitgarh and Karel, Pir Shams proceeded to Bichun and Sakhun in Jaipur-Ajmer region. After having initiated Khiwan and Ransi, he went back to Multan. The Nyariya (perhaps Nizaria) of Rajasthan still claim that they originated from Multan and regard Pir Shams as their master (guru). In the 15th century, the Sirvi caste of the Jaitaran, Bilara, Pali region, had accepted the teachings of a female saint, known as Jiji Devi, who was also a disciple of Pir Shams. The Prahlad panthi in Jodhpur, Nagaur and Bikaner as well as the Jasnathi in Bishnoi have a devotional literature, showing the Ismaili traits and seal (chhap) of Pir Shams and Pir Sadruddin etc.

The Ismaili dawa in Rajasthan is almost blanketed in mist. The French scholar, Dr. Dominique Sila Khan of Jaipur, however, is working on the Ismaili dawa in Rajasthan, and gathered very useful historical clues. It is hoped that her labour shall procure worthy informations, and throw a possible flood of light. Meanwhile, the readers may refer her write-up, entitled, 'Ramdeo Pir and the Kamadiya Panth' (cf. 'Folk, Faith and Feudalism' ed. by N.K. Singhi, Jaipur, 1995, pp. 295-327), and 'L'Origine Ismaelienne du culte Hindou de Ramdeo Pir' (cf. 'Revue de L'Histoire des Religions', Paris, 1993, ccx-1, pp. 27-47). The most prominent among them was Ramdeo of the low castes. Being influenced with the teachings of Ismaili Pirs, he preached in Gujrat the doctrines of Satpanth (true path), but due to a setback in the mission, the followers of Ramdeo retraced their steps towards the fold of their former creed, or cultivated a different cult in India. For details, refer 'Ramdeo Pir: A Forgotten Ismaili Saint' (Sind Review, Hyderabad, vol. 32, April, 1995, pp. 24-29) by Mumtaz Ali Tajddin S. Ali.

The influx of Muslim immigrants into India increased greatly as a result of the Mongol incursions on the Islamic world. We hear of large colonies of these Muslim migrants in different quarters. With the settlement of the Muslims in India, conciliation and concord between the various culture-groups was not only a moral and intellectual demand, but an urgent social necessity. The Muslim conquerors had established their political supremacy, but they could not continue to rule while the majority of their subjects differed from them in race, language, religion and culture. The ulema class rarely appreciated the change in the moods of time and seldom tried to reconstruct their religious tendencies according to the needs of the hour. The Muslim mystics, however, rose to the occasion and released syncretic forces which liquidated social, ideological and linguistic barriers between the various culture-groups of India. The mystics adopted an attitude of sympathy and understanding between all cults and creeds. This broad outlook helped in breaking that spirit of mistrust and isolation which honeycombed relations between the various culture-groups of India and paved way for reapproachment at all levels. The mystics looked upon all religions as different roads leading to the same destination and never approved of any discrimination or distinction in human society which was one organism for them. The use of large number of Indian words, phrases, idioms and similes in the contemporary literature indicates the extent to which social contacts had developed. Prof. Gibb writes in 'An Interpretation of Islamic History' (cf. 'Journal of World History', 1st vol., no. 1, p. 59) that, 'From the 13th century, Sufism increasingly attracted the creative social and intellectual energies within the community, to become the bearer or instrument of a social and cultural revolution.' Perhaps in no other country were the effects of this social and cultural revolution so marked and so far reaching as in India.

The early Indo-Muslim mystics believed in a pacific and non-violent approach towards all problems of human society. Forces, they said, created more problems than it solved. They tried to impress, both by precepts and examples, upon the minds of their followers the fact that a true mystic should always strive for creating love and affection in the hearts of men. 'Placate your enemies,' was the advice which Shaykh Farid gave to his disciples. 'Do not give me a knife,' he once told a visitor, 'Give me a needle. The knife is an instrument for cutting and the needle for sewing together.' Ziauddin Barani thus very significantly remarks in his 'Tarikh-i Firuz Shahi' (p. 344) that as the result of the teachings of these mystics, 'vices among men had been reduced.' Hence, the eagerness of the Muslim mystics to establish closer relations with the Hindus, had faciliated a fertile ground for the Ismaili dais to propagate their faith in India.

Among the Sufis, there existed four principal orders in India, viz. Chisti, Qadari, Suharwardi and Naqashbandi. The period of Pir Shams was thus noted for the several skilled exponents of Sufi thought, therefore, he launched his brisk and pervasive mission during the eve of the growing Sufi circles in Punjab. In the villages of Punjab, he mostly converted the Aror or Rohra, a leading caste in south-western part of the Punjab, i.e., of the lower reaches of the five rivers and below their junction, extending through Bahawalpur into Sind. They were mostly cultivators, and their large portion on the lower Chinab were purely agricultures, while in the western Punjab, they were mostly tailors, weavers of mats and baskets, makers of vessels of brass and copper and goldsmiths. Pir Shams appointed musafir (one who travels) in different regions to collect the religious dues, and also built prayer-halls (khana) and appointed their mukhis (derived from mukhia means 'foremost'). He also introduced certain rituals, and his followers mostly in Punjab and Kashmir recognised themselves as gupti (secret ones).

Pir Shams passed away in 757/1356 and was buried at Multan. His mausoleum is located about half a mile to the east of the fort site, on the high bank of the old bed of the Ravi river. His shrine was built by his grandson and was rebuilt by one of the Ismailis in 1718. The tomb is square, 300 feet in height surmounted by a hemispherical dome. It is decorated with ornamental glazed tiles.

Pir Shams is acclaimed as a great preacher and composed many ginans in different Indian dialects. It is also possible that his local disciples had received the first hand marrow of his teachings in few places, and transformed them creatively into the ginanic form. These are the rich reservoir of religious teachings and great treasure house of Sufi thought, giving a very comprehensive idea of the prodigality of Sufi symbolism. He used with supreme skill the languages of the country folk and employed them to interpret ideas of natural beauty and of religious philosophy. In fact, Pir Shams was a man steeped in an understanding of the mystical teaching of Islam. The recent diligent research has brought to light that he was the most earliest, rather the first Punjabi poet, and also made rich contribution in the growth of Urdu language during its infancy. He had a faculty of expressing the truth in the local languages with appropriate turn of phrase and picturesque metaphor.

After Pir Shams, his son Pir Nasiruddin (625-764/1228-1362) continued the mission mostly in Punjab and died in Uchh. He was followed by his son Pir Sahib'din (650- 775/1212-1373), who lived in the garb of a Hindu saint, and made a large proselytism. He had seven sons, viz. Pir Sadruddin, Sayed Ruknuddin, Sayed Badruddin, Sayed Shamsuddin II, Sayed Nasiruddin, Sayed Ghiasuddin and Sayed Nasiruddin Qalandar Shah.

Returning the thread of our narrative, it appears that Kassim Shah passed a darwishlife in the mountainous regions of Azerbaijan. He was fond of hunting in the woods, and used to travel in different towns and villages, sometimes for a long time. Upon his death, most probably in 771/1370, the Imamate devolved upon his son, Islam Shah.

In Gilgit sub-region, the Trakhan was the leading dynasty of local rulers, and it was the main branch, from which the rules of Nagar and Hunza radiated during the mediaeval period. The rulers of Yasin, Punial and Chitral had also close ties with them, and the tribal regions of Gor, Darel, Chilas, Tangir and Herban, including Nuristan on the west had their origin and history linked with the Trakhan dynasty.The extant traditions sound more romantic than real for the historical purpose. Summing up the accessible materials, it is however known that during the second period of the Trakhan dynasty (387/997 to 640/1241), Shah Mirza, also known as Mirza I, was formally enthroned in 521/1127 and ruled until 602/1205. He is said to have died at the age of 109 years, and was succeeded by his son Tartorra Khan at the age of 31 years. He had two queens, one of his own royal family, and another hailed from Darel. The first queen Shah Begum gave birth to Torra Khan, and the second gave birth to Shah Rais. Torra Khan was brought up in the valley of Hodur under the care of a local chief. While Shah Rais had several maternal uncles in Darel, who being supported with his mother, intended Shah Rais to be the next ruler; but the king preferred Torra Khan. This succession wrangle led to trouble. The Darel queen and her brothers conspired against the king and the prince. Once upon a time, they invited Tartorra Khan at Darel for playing polo. The king won the game and caused all the seven brothers executed when he was assailed. The Dareli queen became forlorn, and poisoned the king in 635/1236, and herself took the power. She intended to kill Torra Khan, but his step-father, who was the chief of Hodur, sent Torra Khan away in Khanberi and hid him in an unknown place. The queen made all arrangements to pass on the throne to her own son, Shah Rais. In the meantime, she died in 640/1241, and it was followed by a war of succession between the two brothers. The local people ultimately confessed Torra Khan (1310-1335) as their ruler.

Henceforward, the name Torra Khan, or Trakhan was applied to this dynasty after his name. Before him, the dynasty was known as Kisra or Kiyani. During his rule, his cousin Raja Rais Khan had left Gilgit and took refuge in Badakhshan with an Ismaili dai, Taj Mughal, the son-in-law of the ruler. According to Dr. Ahmad Hasan Dani in 'History of Northern Areas of Pakistan' (Islamabad, 1991, p. 170), 'Taj Mughal is said to be a follower of Ismaili sect and very ardent in its propagation. He received Raja Shah Rais Khan with great pomp and made him stay in an elegant place. Shah Rais is said to have accepted Ismaili faith alongwith his followers.' Shah Rais Khan also married to the daughter of Taj Mughal, and after some years, he persuaded Taj Mughal to invade Gilgit. Preparations were made for one full year. First Chitral was conquered and annexed, and then the regions of Yasin, Koh Ghizr and Punial were subdued and finally entered in Gilgit ruled by Torra Khan, who at length accepted Ismailism. He also made necessary arrangements to preach Ismailism in Gilgit. The rule of Torra Khan had been restored, and Shah Rais Khan was made the ruler of Chitral, where he founded the Raisia dynasty, and promulgated the Ismaili faith.

It was at this time that the Ismaili faith penetrated in Gilgit and Hunza with the proselytizing mission of Taj Mughal. He is said to have built a Mughlai Tower at Jutial, and another on the way to Hunza, near Thol. Taj Mughal is said to have proceeded to Sikiang through Pamir, and thus he dominated most of the prominent regions of Central Asia. The historians place an extensive territory under his domination. On the north greater part of Turkistan, on the west the whole area including the city of Herat, and on the south-east right upto the border of Chitral. The biography of Taj Mughal is shrouded in mist, and nothing else is known. He died most probably in 725/1325. It seems likely that Gilgit had been ruled by the local Ismaili rulers from 710/1310 to 973/1565, and they remained in close contact with the Ismailis of Badakhshan.

Naimuddin bin Jalaluddin bin Muhammad Nizari Kohistani was born in Birjand in 645/1247. He got the rudiments of his formal education at home from his father, who was also a poet himself and a devout Ismaili. Later on, Nizari attended school in Birjand and Qain, and studied Persian and Arabic literature. His father was a land- lord in Birjand, but lost his estate during the Mongol onslaught in Kohistan and subsequently, Nizari had to serve at the court of Shamsuddin Muhammad I (643- 684/1245-1285), the founder of the Kurt dynasty of Herat; and became a court-poet.Nizari travelled excessively for supervising the revenue and expenditure of Azerbaijan and Arran. He set out from Khasp in Birjand on a long journey with a certain Tajuddin Amid in Shawal, 678/February, 1280. He fell ill in Tabriz, and resumed his journey in Safar, 679/June, 1280 with a certain Shamsuddin Juvaini, who was also travelling there for same purpose. Nizari visited Azerbaijan, Arran, Georgia, Armenia and Baku, which lasted for two years (678-679/1280-1281). Muqaddasi had reported earlier in 'Kitab al-Akalim' (comp. in 375/985) that Azerbaijan, Arran and Armenia formed part of a single province, which he designated as Iklim ar-Rihab(the region of high plains). It was during this journey that Nizari did see Shamsuddin Muhammad and his successor. He recounted the account of his journey in his 'Safar-nama' in mathnawi form, comprised of 1200 verses. Nizari has termed the Ismailis significantly as 'Ikhwan as-Safa'.

After his return, Nizari got married and entered the service of Kurt rulers, who had penetrated their influence in Afghanistan and Khorasan. His enemies aroused the Kurt ruler and was dismissed and his properties were confiscated. He composed 'Munazara-i Shab-i Rauz' (conflict of day and night) wherein he described the troubles he had faced. Nizari took up agriculture during retiring life and died in Birjand in 720/1320 during the reign of Ghiasuddin (d. 729/1328). He also composed 'Mathnawi Azhar-u-Mazhar' in 700/1300, narrating the terrible operations of the Mongols in Iran. His another famous work, 'Dastur-nama' (book of rule) which he composed for his son, reflecting the doctrines of Sufism and Ismailism. According to Daulatshah (d. 900/1494) in 'Tazkertu'sh Shu'ara' that, 'This is a book to be treasured by gifted and intellectual minds.' In 'Mathnawi' (verse 43), Nizari Kohistani writes eloquently in praise of Shamsuddin Muhammad that:-

'He is the prince of the universe, the crown of the faith. He is the son of Ali, who is the light of the eyes of the great king (Muhammad). He (Shamsuddin) Muhammad is the father of spiritualism, and the sweetest fruit of the eternal garden of creation.'

One can hardly paint a true picture of the condition under which the Ismailis lived in different regions after an end of their power. The overt hostility of the general Muslims continued to be unchanged in all corners on one side, and the Mongol sword was hunting them on other. The survived Ismailis were forced to exist in various cloaks, that had made the ostensible appearances so conclusive as if there had been not a single Ismaili on the surface. The underground existence of the Ismailis had become congenial condition for the contemporary historian, like Juvaini (1226-1283) and the traveller, like Marco Polo (1254-1324) to shift the fictions and cheap stories to the account of the Ismailis to win the hearts of their pagan masters. Hence, Iran for the most part became a breeding ground of fictions for bigoted historians. Henceforth, whatever was salvaged of various types of Ismaili works came to be preserved secretly and in private collections. As a result, the history of the Ismailis and doctrines came almost exclusively from the pens of Sunni historians who, as a rule, were hostile towards the Ismailis. Thus, numerous distortions and negative biases are contained in the tracts of these chroniclers.

Previously indicated that in the time of Imam Alauddin Muhammad (d. 653/1255), the Mongols were spurring to their operations against Alamut. Shamsuddin, the chief Qadi of Qazwin had also lodged false allegations against Alamut at the court of Mongke (1251-1258) in Mongolia. Halagu therefore had been charged the main Mongol expedition across Central Asia to Iran, where he did not arrive before 654/1256. But already in 650/1252, he had dispatched an advance army of 12000 men under the command of Ket-Buqa, who reached Iran in 651/1253 and began his onslaught on the Ismaili strongholds in Kohistan; and sent raiding parties into Rudhbar and Tarum. On other side, Shamsuddin, the chief Qadi of Qazwin, immediately after returning from Mongolia, assailed in bitter sarcasms against Alamut in Qazwin and the surrounding regions, giving also high tidings for the coming of the Mongols in Iran. The scrutiny of the sources indicates that a bulk of the frightened Muslims calmly began to evacuate the vicinity of Rudhbar and Kohistan during the period of Alauddin Muhammad to escape the main brunt of the Mongols. The stampede of the Muslims had also carried away with them the then latest report that 'Alauddin Muhammad is the ruler of Alamut, and the Mongols are about to come to reduce Alamut.' These Muslims ultimately settled down in Qazwin, Daylam and Tabriz; where they came to know the fall of Alamut. On that juncture, they seem to have generalized an image in minds that the Alamut's fall would have been taken place in the time of Alauddin Muhammad, incorporating the then report they had brought from their villages. This tradition received credence in some circles, ingnoring palpably the one year rule of Ruknuddin Khurshah followed by Alauddin Muhammad. When the Mongol storms diffused in Iran, the historicity of Ruknuddin Khurshah itself began to be floated. But, it seems that the above idea continued to remain prevailed many years in Qazwin, Daylam and Tabriz, making Alauddin Muhammad as the last ruler of Alamut, which also curiously sounds in the account of Marco Polo (1254-1324), who had most possibly heard these fantastic stories from these orbits in 671/1272. For instance, Marco Polo narrates: 'I will tell you his story just as I Messer Marco, have heard it told by many people.... The Shaikh was called in their language Alaodin.... So they were taken, and the Shaikh, Alaodin, was put to death with all his men.' (vide 'The Travels of Marco Polo' by Ronald Latham, London, 1958, pp. 40-42).

When Shamsuddin Muhammad had been in Tabriz once or more times, he became known as Shams Tabriz. There had been another Shams-i Tabriz, the master of Jalaluddin Rumi (d. 672/1273) in the same period, who was not tracable after 645/1247 in Koniya. It is therefore possible that Shamsuddin Muhammad had chosen to cloak his identity in Tabriz for some times under the name of the master of Jalaluddin Rumi in the Sufic circles. Rida Quli Khan (d. 1872) writes in 'Majmau'l Fusaha' that, 'Shaikh Abu Hamid Awhadu'ddin Kirmani had seen and met Shams-i Tabriz in Tabriz.' To this we must add the likelihood that Shaikh Abu Hamid had veritably seen Shamsuddin Muhammad in the mantle of Shams-i Tabriz. When Shamsuddin Muhammad was identified as the 'son of the last ruler of Alamut', he was ultimately considered as the 'son of Alauddin Muhammad,' incorporating him in the above tradition.

A cloud of mystery has surrounded the life of another contemporary Shams-i Tabriz, the master of Jalaluddin Rumi after 645/1247. Shamsuddin Aflaki, who wrote in 754/1353 that the death of Shams-i Tabriz took place in Koniya in 645/1247. It seems that a group of the Sufis had cultivated a story that after leaving Koniya, Shams-i Tabriz had gone to Tabriz, and there Shamsuddin Muhammad, known as Shams Tabriz had been identified as same Shams-i Tabriz after few years. Thus, Shamsuddin Muhammad began to be equated with that of Shams-i Tabriz, and henceforward, two Shams Tabriz at one period were confounded.

When the people conclusively identified Ruknuddin Khurshah as the last ruler, most probably after 671/1272, one another tradition seems to have been originated to distinguish these two characters. Shamsuddin Muhammad had been deleted from that story from being the son of Alauddin Muhammad, but Shams-i Tabriz was made known as the son of Alauddin Muhammad instead. Being influenced with this tradition, Daulatshah (d. 900/1494) was the first to show Shams-i Tabriz, the master of Jalaluddin Rumi as the son of Alauddin Muhammad, in his 'Tazkertu'sh Shu'ara'. A question then arises, who was Shams-i Tabriz? He indeed was an Ismaili, the master of Jalaluddin Rumi, but not the son of Alauddin Muhammad. As to the early life of Shams-i Tabriz, we are yet in dark. Shamsuddin Aflaki (710-754/1310-1354) in 'Manaqibu'l Arifin' and Abdur Rahman Jami (d. 898/1493) in 'Nafhatu'l Uns' concur that Shams-i Tabriz was the son of a certain Muhammad bin Ali bin Malikad. Rida Quli Khan (d. 1872) in his 'Majmau'l Fusaha' also relied on Aflaki and Jami. According to 'Silsilatu'ad-Dhahab', it is wrong to allege Shams-i Tabriz to have been the son of Alauddin Muhammad. It was only Daulatshah (d. 900/1494) who made him the son of Alauddin Muhammad being influenced by the wrong tradition. Prof. Muhammad Iqbal of Punjab University, who prepared the Lahore edition of Daulatshah's work, makes his remarks that: '...it is evident that Daulatshah has not written historical facts carefully in his book. He has accepted all sorts of traditions, right or wrong, owing to which several errors have crept into his work.' Edward G. Browne writes in 'A Literary History of Persia' (3rd vol., p. 436) that, 'This is an entertaining but inaccurate work, containing a good selection of historical errors.'

It is also worthy of notice, however, that Daulatshah quoted another tradition of parentage of Shams-i Tabriz that, 'Some people say that he was originally a native of Khorasan and belonged to the town of Bazar. His father had settled in Tabriz for the purpose of doing business in cloth.' It is probable that Shams-i Tabriz was the son of Muhammad bin Ali bin Malikad according to Aflaki and Jami, and he seems to be a native of Khorasan as per another tradition cited by Daulatshah. Nurullah Shustari (d. 1019/1610) in his 'Majalis al-Mominin' (6th vol., p. 291) states that Shams-i Tabriz descended from 'Ismaili headman' (da'iyani Ismailiyya budand). His father had settled in Tabriz, and was a cloth merchant. Shams-i Tabriz was indeed an Ismaili like his father, but it needs further scholarly scanning to trace his biography.

There is also a reason to believe that Jalaluddin Rumi must have been known both Shams-i Tabriz and Imam Shamsuddin Muhammad, but did not described palpably in his Diwan. He however addresses Shams as the heir of the Prophet (verse no. 2473) and compares him to Ali (verse no. 1944), which seems to have been referred only to the Imam.

Shamsuddin Muhammad is reported to have betrothed to a Sufi lady at Daylam in 675/1276, or next year. His sons, Momin Shah and Kiya Shah penetrated Ismaili dawaas far as Gilan. Momin Shah also travelled in Syria and served many years as a hujjat of the Imam. When he returned to Gilan, a section of the Syrian Ismailis, considered him the Imam's successor, who later on, became known as the Momin-Shahis. Muhibb Ali Qunduzi however writes in 'Irshadu't Talibin' (comp. in 929/1523) that, 'The schism took place after the death of Momin Shah in 738/1338.' The descendants of Momin Shah mostly lived in Khwand, a village in Qazwin, where they became known as Sadat-i Khwandia.

Shamsuddin Muhammad died in 710/1310 in Azerbaijan after vesting the office of Imamate in Kassim Shah.

It appears that the Ismaili sources have designed the history of the Imams in a sequence of father to son, emanating each succeeding Imam being the son of the preceding Imam. We have been told in this context that Kassim Shah was the son and successor of Shamsuddin Muhammad. But, the scrutiny of the sources and the fragments of the traditions, reveals starkly a different story, suggesting that Kassim Shah was the successor, but not a son, rather a grandson of Shamsuddin Muhammad. In other words, he was Kassim Shah bin Momin Shah bin Shamsuddin Muhammad. The chronicles of Momin Shahi sect, such as 'Irshadu't Talibin' (comp. 929/1523) by Muhibb Ali Qunduzi and 'Lamat al-Tahirin' (comp. 1110/1698) by Ghulam Ali bin Muhammad; contain variations in the names of the descendants of Shamsuddin Muhammad. 'Tarikh-i Firishta' (comp. 1015/1606) by Muhammad Kassim Firishta, and few other sources also offer a diverse account of the sons of Shamsuddin Muhammad. These sources however divulge some traces that Shamsuddin Muhammad was succeeded by his grandson, Kassim Shah bin Momin Shah. It is worthwhile that 'Haft Bab' of Abu Ishaq Kohistani, who died in the beginning of the 10th/16th centuries, places Momin Shah in the list of Imams, making him the successor of Shamsuddin Muhammad, and Kassim Shah as the successor of Momin Shah. It ensues from the episode that Abu Ishaq Kohistani must have identified Kassim Shah being the grandson of Shamsuddin Muhammad in his period, and had inserted the name of Momin Shah between them, to adjust the succession list in an order, and to give coherence to the traditional notion.

Later on, it seems that the Ismailis, after knowing Kassim Shah being followed by Shamsuddin Muhammad, had omitted the name of Momin Shah in the list to distinguish themselves from Momin Shahi sect. It resulted possibly the historicity of a grandsontransformed into a son, and one can find the like effect in India in 'Satveni'ji Vel' by Sayed Nur Muhammad Shah (d. 940/1534).

In sum, it ensues that Shamsuddin Muhammad seems to have succeeded by his grandson, Kassim Shah. Besides, the tradition of the succession of a grandson can be seen equally potent in the famous Will of the Aga Khan III, who has unmasked the succession of the grandson in the light of the past tradition while appointing his grandson to succeed him. It reads: 'Ever since the time of my ancestor Ali, the first Imam, that is to say over a period of thirteen hundred years, it has always been the tradition of our family that each Imam chooses his successor at his absolute and unfettered discretion from amongst any of his descendants, whether they be sons or remote male issue....' This would thus tend to be a safe conclusion that the appointment of a grandson (the remote male issue) was enfoced in view of the tradition of last 1300 years, and thus it was not a new effect in this age. It unveils in a question that a like effect most probably had been taken place in the line of Shamsuddin Muhammad, who seems to have been succeeded by his grandson, Kassim Shah bin Momin Shah. W.Ivanow (1886-1970) and Farhad Daftary and other modern scholars have also shown almost pertinent possibility. The ardent students must investigate this field to unearth further historical truth.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The great Khan Kubilai (1260-1294), absorbed in the administration of China, had lost interest in the western provinces and was happy that Iran should be governed by his brother Halagu (1256-1265), on whom he bestowed the title of Il-Khan(tribal khan, local khan or subordinate khan), which all the descendants of Halagu were to assume. Halagu thus founded in Iran the Il-Khanid dynasty (1265- 1335). He died in February 8, 1265 and was succeeded by his seven successors one after another, namely Abaqa (1265-1282), Takudar (1282-1284), Arghun (1284-1291), Gaykhatu (1291-1295), Ghazan (1295-1304), Uljaytu (1304-1316) and Abu Sa'id (1317-1334). With the death of Abu Sa'id the Illkhanid dynasty in Iran virtually came to an end. One key aspect of the Mongol conquest however was that for the first time, Iran and other large areas of the Muslim world founded themselves governed from 1221 to 1295.The fall of Alamut must have had a tremendous impact upon the Syrian Ismailis, and greatly impaired their morale. They were now deprived of the leadership and occasional practical guidance formerly given to them from Alamut. The Mongols had constituted befalling and perennial distress to the Ismailis in Syria. During the Mongol's incursion in Syria, the Ismailis were under the leadership of dai Radi al-Din Abul Ma'ali (d. 659/1261), who had punished the Ismaili chiefs who had surrendered their castles to the Mongols. Ibn Muyassar (1231-1278) writes in 'Tarikh-i Misar' (p. 68) that, 'Radi al-Din had become the chief dai in Syria in 656/1258, and before succeeding to that office, he had gone to Mamluk Egypt as an Ismaili envoy in 655/1257.' The Syrian Ismailis established friendly relations with sultan Baybars (658-676/1260-1277). Ibn Abd al-Zahir (d. 692/1293) writes in 'Sirat al-Malik al-Zahir' (pp. 138-9) that, 'In 659/1261, sultan Baybars granted rights to the Ismaili territories to al-Malik al-Mansur (642-683/1244- 1285), the Ayyubid prince of Hammah.' Meanwhile, the Syrian Ismailis sent an embassy to sultan Baybars, demanding successfully the privileges they had enjoyed under the Ayyubids. Baybars appointed Jamaluddin Hasan bin Thabit as the head of the Ismailis in place of Radi al-Din, which was evidently opposed and scourged to death. Radi al-Din died and the aged Najmuddin Ismail bin al-Sharani (d. 672/1274), who was probably above 80 years old, became the head of the Syrian mission in 660/1262. He was later on assisted by his son Shamsuddin and his son- in-law Sarimuddin Mubarak, the son of Radi al-Din. The Syrian Ismailis continued to hold possession of eight strongholds, namely, Masiyaf, Qadmus, Kahf, Khwabi, Rusafa, Maynaqa, Ulayqa and Qulaya.

In 661/1263, when sultan Baybars was engaged in his campaign against the Franks, an Ismaili deputation under Shamsuddin and Sarimuddin is reported to have come to the sultan with gifts. According to 'Sirat al-Malik al-Zahir' (comp. in 663/1264) by Ibn Abd al-Zahir (d. 692/1293), 'Ambassadors of the Ismailis arrived with presents, and the two sons of the rulers, who were the commanders of the Ismailis, also came; the sultan treated them with kindness, after which they departed.' In 664/1265, however sultan Baybars ordered the collection of taxes on the gifts being sent to the Ismailis by the Frankish kings and the ruler of Yamen. Soon afterwards, the Ismailis began to pay tribute to Baybars, following the truce concluded in 664/1266 between the Mamluk sultan and the Hospitallers, the terms of which stipulated that the latter must renounce the tribute hitherto they used to levy upon the Ismailis and other Muslim rulers in the districts of Hammah and Hims. In 665/1267, the Ismailis became tributaries of Mamluk sultan, paying him what was paid previously to the Hospitallers.

In 669/1271, when sultan Baybars was besieging the Frankish castle of Hisn al- Akrad, two Ismaili fidais from Ulayqa were alleged to have joined hands with Bohemond IV of Tripoli to kill sultan Baybars, Thus, Baybars took swift action, and ordered that the stronghold of Ulayqa should be besieged. Ulayqa and Rusafa were reduced at first, and Khwabi, Qulaya, Maynaqa and Qadmus also capitulated in 671/1273. Only the garrison of Kahf mustered some resistance. Having taken the control of the Ismaili territories, sultan Baybars, however tolerated the Ismailis and did not eliminate them. The Ismailis were allowed to exist as loyal subjects of the Mamluks.

Indeed, there are however, some historical reports that sultan Baybars and his successors used to employ the services of the Ismaili fidais against their own enemies, whose benefit was acquired by the Mamluks, and the defamations were put on the Syrian Ismailis. Hence, the Ismaili fidais had been used as an instrument to threaten the enemies of the Mamluks. The historians however have painted it in gloomier colours than it merits. The Mamluk sultan Baybars (d. 676/1277) subjugated the Ismailis since 671/1273, making them devoid of any political significance, and existed as the loyal subjects of the Mamluks and later the Ottoman of Turkey. In sum, with the surrender of Kahf, the last Ismaili castle, on 22nd Zilhida, 671/July 10, 1273 and the elimination of the Ismaili power in Syria, sultan Baybars I completed what Halagu Khan had began in Iran in 654/1256.

The Ismailis in Khorasan and Badakhshan including upper Oxus were relatively not accessible to the Mongol sword during the turbulent period. They continued to develop a distinctive tradition of their own and played prominent role in preserving the Nizari Ismaili literature. It is important to note that the Ismailis of the upper Oxus considered Aziz Nasafi as a co-religionist. He was a celebrated Sufi master and a prolific writer in Central Asia, who later emigrated to Iran and died there around 661/1262. His famous Sufic treatise, 'Zubdat al- Haqaiq' (Quintessence of Metaphysical Truth) is preserved still in Badakhshan being an Ismaili work, which was lithographed in Tehran in 1903.

The Indian Nizari Ismailis, designated chiefly by the term Khoja since the time of Pir Satgur Nur, also continued to retain their own traditions under the leadership of local elders in Gujrat until they merged with the growing Ismaili community in India.

The Ismailis in Iran, however, became absolutely disorganized and disoriented immediately with the destruction of their state. Despite the repressions and debacles, the Ismailis' fortune continued to rise gradually in Iran during the turbulent years. Those who managed to survive the Mongol massacres in Rudhbar and Kohistan, had entered a new era of their history. They mostly had taken refuge in obscurity, cloaked by the forms of a Sufi tariqah, and most of them referred to their spiritual leader not as an Imam but as a Pir for many years. The underground existence of the Ismailis in whole Iran did not attract the attention of the historians, who did not have any direct link or approach with them and who, like Juvaini, also wrote that the Mongols had completely extirpated the Nizari Ismailis in Iran. It however appears that many of them had escaped the main brunt of the Mongol onslaughts and did exist in Kohistan, Daylam, Rudhbar etc. A facsimile of a manuscript dating 690/1290 composed by Wahid al-Muluk, unearthed by Sir E. Denison Ross (cf. Royal Asiatic Society, London, 1931, 2nd vol., p. 202), indicating that, 'In Persia, the Ismaili communities were decimated by massacre, but survived after the surrender of Alamut and other fortresses in Daylam and Kohistan.' Poet Nizari Kohistani (d. 720/1320) very watchfully describes the survival of the Ismailis in Kohistan, Birjand, Rudhbar etc. in his 'Kulliyat', a manuscript in the Institute of Language and Literature of the Academy of Science of the Tajik. Mustapha Qazwini compiled his 'Nuzhat al-Qulub' in 740/1340 also gives a condensed account of Rudhbar in Mazandaran, whose inhabitants were Ismailis. The Ismailis also lived in Gilan, probably in the mantle of the local Sufis. H.L. Rabino writes in 'Rulers of Gilan' (JRAS, 1920, vol., III, p. 294) that, 'It is generally believed that the fall of castle of Alamut in 654/1256 marks the end of the Ismaili influence in Gilan. This is a great mistake. Either the destruction of Alamut cannot have a complete as reported by the Persian writers, or the castle was rebuilt.'

Yet, Lamasar held out for another year before cholera broke out and killed the bulk of garrison. The few who survived the epidemic had no alternative but to surrender in 655/1258. The valiant garrison of Girdkuh however continued to resist its Mongol besiegers for 13 years after the reduction of Alamut. In the biography of Kuo K'an, the Chinese officer in Mongol forces, it is recorded that Girdkuh was situated on the top of the mountain Tan-han (i.e., Damghan), and was only accessible by ladders, which were guarded by the most valiant troop, vide 'Mediaeval Researches from Eastern Asiatic Sources' (London, 1888, 1st vol., p. 122) by E. Bretschneider. In another Chinese source, 'Hsi Shin Chi', we find a record of the journey of a Chinese envoy, Chang Te, sent by Halagu in 1259; wherein it is described Girdkuh as a mountain fortress 'on a very steep rock, which could not be reached by arrows or stones. The rock was so steep that when one looked up, his cap fell off.' Haython however writes in 'Flos Historianrum Terrae Orientis' that, 'Tigado (Girdkuh) was an impregnable castle, well furnished with all necessaries, and was so strong that it had no fear of attack on any side.' At length, the garrison came down not due to starvation, but it was the lack of adequate clothing against the severe winter cold that ultimately broke their spirits. The final surrender reported to have taken place on 29th Rabi II, 669/December 15, 1270.

It has been learnt that when Halagu quitted Iran for his operations against Baghdad, the Ismaili commanders at remote distance had also surrendered their castles upon receipt of official orders without knowing veritable picture. Few among them are reported to have treked in Rudhbar after the massacre of the Ismailis in 656/1257. They made an intensive search of the succeeding Imam after being known locally that Ruknuddin Khurshah had been also killed. With the help of few local fidais, the Ismaili commanders obtained possession of Alamut around 674/1275, about five years after the fall of Girdkuh. The fortress underwent temporary construction and renovation. The reason for re-occupation, as we have been informed, was to give an inkling to the hiding Imam and the Ismailis to come out of concealment. If this version certainly embodies grain of truth, it implies that the Ismailis of Rudhbar were not yet acquainted with the whereabouts of the Imam. According to 'Tarikh-i Guzida' (1st vol., p. 583), 'They retained Alamut for almost one year before they were dislodged by a force sent against them by Halagu's son and successor Abaqa (d. 680/1282).' It is also related that the Ismaili dais of Rudhbar had communicated a report to some unknown dais, and the latter had transmitted it onwards till it reached to the Imam. Shamsuddin Muhammad is reported to have instructed his Iranian followers to observe taqiyaand adjust themselves in pursuant of the conditions of their localities. Henceforward, the Iranian Ismailis came to know of Shamsuddin Muhammad as their Imam.

Virtually, nothing else is known about the activities of Shamsuddin Muhammad in northern Azerbaijan. Certain allusions in the still unpublished 'Safar-nama' of poet Nizari Kohistani indeed indicate that Shamsuddin Muhammad and possibly his successor lived in concealment in Azerbaijan, or southern Caucasus.

Muhammad, surnamed Shams al-Din, the elder son of Imam Ruknuddin Khurshah is said to have born probably in 646/1230 in the fortress of Maimundiz during the time of Imam Alauddin Muhammad. He was known as Agha Shams in Syria, and Shah Shams in India. He is also known as Shamsu'l Haq in few Iranian poems. Poet Nizari Kohistani (d. 720/1320) called him Shamsuddin Shah Nimroz Ali and Shah Shams. He is also said to have been known as Shams Zardozi owing to residing in the village, called Zardoz in Azerbaijan, but another tradition suggests that he had adopted profession of embroidery and silk to sustain his family, therefore, the term zardoz (embroiderer) became his title.The butchery of the Ismailis conducted by the Mongols in Qazwin and Rudhbar following the reduction of Alamut, is taken by Ata Malik Juvaini conclusively as an end of the Ismailis and the unbroken line of the Imamate as well. There appears however vacuous reports for the descendants of Ruknuddin Khurshah and his followers in the work of Juvaini. He writes in his 'Tarikh-i Jhangusha' (tr. J.A. Boyle, Cambridge, 1958) that, 'Ruknu-ad-Din now saw what he had to expect and realize that he could not resist. The next day (November 16, 1256), he sent out his son, his only one, and another brother called Iran-Shah with a delegation of notables, officials and leaders of his people' (p. 717). This was Juvaini's first narrative when Alamut was being reduced, but while describing the brutal massacre of the Ismailis after about a year, he writes, 'And Qaraqai Bitikohi went to Qazwin with the order that Rukn-ad-Din's sons and daughters, brothers and sisters and all of his seed and family should be laid on the fire of annihilation' (p. 723).

Juvaini writes in the first phrase, 'his son, his only one' (pesr khudra ki hama'n yak pesr), and then writes in contrast in the second phrase, 'sons and daughters' (banin wa bannat). It implies clearly that Juvaini contradicts his own account, as he had no knowledge of an exact figure of the sons of Ruknuddin Khurshah. Moreover, Juvaini was not present during the fall of Maimundiz on November 19, 1256 where the family of Ruknuddin Khurshah resided, and therefore, his account cannot be trustworthy and reliable. It is however, known from few Iranian manuscripts that Shamsuddin Muhammad had steathily escorted out of the fortress of Maimundiz most probably on 11th Shawal, 654/November 1, 1256; and the Mongols reached there on 17th Shawal, 654/November 7, 1256; while Juvaini himself joined the Mongol after 12th Zilkada, 654/December 2, 1256. The extermination of the descendants of Ruknuddin Khurshah, as boasted by Juvaini is not to be trusted.

According to Bernard Lewis in 'The Assassins' (London, 1967, p. 63), 'The extirpation of the Ismailis in Persia was not quite as thorough as Juvaini suggests. In the eyes of the sectarians, Rukn al-Din's small son succeeded him as Imam on his death and lived to sire a line of Imams.' Marshall Hodgson also writes in 'The Order of Assassins' (Netherland, 1955. pp. 270 and 275) that, 'Juvaini assures himself that every Ismaili was killed; yet even if all the members of garrison were in fact killed, a great many other will have escaped.' He further adds, 'but their spirit was more nearly indomitable; as it is from among them that the great future of Nizari Ismailism sprouted again. It is said the child Imam was carried to Adharbayjan, where the Imams lived for some time.' According to W. Montgomery Watt in 'Islam and the Integration of Society'(London, 1961, p. 77), 'In 1256, Alamut was surrounded, and was destroyed and in the following year the Imam met his death and there was a widespread massacre of the Nizaris. It may be further mentioned that, despite this catastrophe and the fact that it has never since had a territory of its own, the community was not exterminated and the line of Imams was maintained unbroken.' In the words Farhad Daftary, 'The Nizaris of Persia, contrary to the declarations of Juwayni and later historians, did in fact survive the destruction of their state and strongholds at the hands of the Mongols. Despite the Mongol massacres, the Persian Nizari community was not starkly extirpated during 654-655/1256-1257, and significant numbers escaped the Mongol debacle in both Rudbar and Quhistan. And while Rukn al-Din Khurshah was spending the last few months of his life amongst the Mongols, the Nizari leadership evidently managed to hide his son and designated successor, Shams al-Din Muhammad, who became the progenitor of the Nizari Imams of post-Alamut period. The Nizari Imamate was thus preserved.' (Ibid. p. 435)

It may be surmised in a question that Nasiruddin Tusi was the only person in the fortress of Maimundiz, from whom the internal affairs during the reduction of the Alamut can be well expected. It seems that he divulged nothing about it, suggesting his strictness in taqiya. Halagu however, included him in his forthcoming operations, impelling some scholars to draw a conclusion that he had given up Ismailism. Granted that Nasiruddin Tusi had abandoned, the Mongols must have known the trace of Shamsuddin Muhammad from him, but it cannot be ascertained. It appears almost conclusively that the prime objective of Halagu was to reduce the Ismaili powers, and the family members he had seen with Ruknuddin Khurshah dismounting from Maimundiz was enough for him to understand them as an entire family. It is however worth noting that Shahanshah, Iranshah and Shiranshah; the brothers of Ruknuddin Khurshah had personally come into the contact of Halagu during negotiations, and the whole family members later on were detained at Qazwin, where Shahanshah was significantly absent as he had fled with Shamsuddin Muhammad. No investigation had been made for Shahanshah, which transpires that the Mongols aimed mainly on the reduction of the Ismaili powers without taking notice of the descendants of Ruknuddin Khurshah. To summarize briefly, the Mongols were quite unknown with the other side of the coin.

Scanning the meagre chains of few anonymous manuscripts, and the sparsely records of the traditions, it seems fairly certain that after leaving the fortress, Shamsuddin Muhammad arrived safely in Daylam with his uncle Shahanshah in eastern Gilan. The famous Ismaili dai Pir Shams (d. 757/1356) had seen him in his early life at Daylam, which he has recounted in his 'Chandrabann' (p. 40).

It has been indicated in the previous chapter that Imam Jalaluddin Hasan (d. 618/1221) was quick to diagnose the gushing forth of the Mongol storms in Iran, and therefore, he had taken few precautionary measures. He had commanded his army and gone to Arran and Azerbaijan to help Muzaffaruddin Uzbek, the Ildenizid ruler to fight against Nasiruddin Mengali in 610/1214. Jalaluddin Hasan seems to have prolonged his stay deliberately for 3 to 4 months, and selected most suitable zone to seek refuge for himself, or any other Imam in his descent during the time of Mongol's massacres. It seems probable that he had designed a safe route from Alamut to Azerbaijan. His great grandson, Shamsuddin Muhammad was finally destined to repair in Azerbaijan, most possibly on the tract mapped out in 611/1215.

Shamsuddin Muhammad would have arrived in Daylam before fall of Alamut, and thence he is reported to have stayed in the house of Kai-Ka'us bin Shahanshah at Kutum, a district of Gilan lying to the west of Safid-Rud. Kai-Ka'us was the brother of the wife of Imam Jalaluddin Hasan, and the hereditary ruler of Kutum, who lived till 658/1260. It seems likely that Shamsuddin Muhammad had been well treated at Kutum before resuming his onward journey.

Shamsuddin Muhammad further moved to Ardabil and in the surrounding towns. It is said that he also lived in Ahar, lying about 150 miles west of Ardabil. He is reported to have lived also in Tabriz, which he most possibly evacuated in the early months of 1257 as Halagu invaded Tabriz on July 26, 1257. He seems to have been known as Shams Tabriz by the local Sufis in Tabriz. Pir Shihabuddin Shah (d. 1884) writes in 'Khitabat-i Alliya' (Tehran, 1963, p. 42) that, 'Shamsuddin Muhammad who lived in Tabriz, was compared by the local people to the sun, because of his handsome countenance, and thus he came to be called Shams (the sun) of Tabriz. This gave rise to the confusion between him and Shams Tabrizi, the master of Jalaluddin Rumi, but they were always in reality two different persons.'

It is also related that he passed considerable time in Angoda, lying on the old route linking Ispahan and Hamdan. In sum, the accessible fragments suggest that Shamsuddin Muhammad most probably lived from one to another place under different mantles in the province of Azerbaijan. The veritable locality of his residence, however, has not been substantiated. Azerbaijan was a big province spread over 104000 square kilometers, bounded on the south-east by Jibal, on the south-west by the eastern Jazira, on the west by Armenia, on the north by Arren, and on the east by shore-lands of the Caspian Sea and Gilan. The most famous towns in Azerbaijan were Tabriz, Ardabil, Ahar, Angoda, Urmiya, Marand, Khwai, Dilman, Miyana, Taruj, Laylan, Julfah, Nakjawin, etc. The north-eastern part of the province was thickly populated by the Turkomans, and the south-western was inhabited by the Kurds. Azerbaijan was a fertile land for the growing Sufi circles, and Shamsuddin Muhammad had settled in northern region with his family, where he professed in silk and embroidery works, for which the region was noted at that time. Abul Fida (d. 732/1331) writes in 'Taqwin al-Buldan' that, 'The northern region of Azerbaijan was rich with the products of silk and embroidery works. The silkworms fed on the oak trees and that the women went out to gather it up, and afterwards dried it in an oven on brass pans.'

Summing up the travel of Shamsuddin Muhammad from Maimundiz to Azerbaijan, it seems certain that there were hardly four to five main stations where he had effected junctions during the whole journey. He seems to have left behind at least two trusted dais at each station before he embarked, so that the necessary information be communicated from one to another station. It is most certain that poet Nizari Kohistani (d. 720/1320) had reached the residence of Shamsuddin Muhammad at Azerbaijan after getting information very privily from the above daisat any station, most probably at Tabriz. It was however most difficult for him to trace out the hidden Imam in a big province, had he not known the clues.

The period under review is noted to have left the Ismaili mission in disarray and it appears that in many regions, it was conducted passively and that too very secretly in accordance with the directives of the elder persons. However, the period between 1257 and 1265 was possibly barren for the dawa, but was noted for the Ismailis in searching peaceful regions. They had absolutely lost their contact with the Imam. The Syrian Ismailis seem to have acquired few clues of Imam's whereabouts, and some of them had travelled towards Azerbaijan by taking routes of Jazira and Mosul in the cloaks of the Sufis or traders. The deprivation of regular guidance from the Imam had compelled the surviving Ismailis to observe strict taqiya by taking a flood of inspiration and fillip from the events of their past history.

After Alamut operations, Halagu marched on Baghdad and reached on January 18, 1258. On January 30, the Mongols opened a heavy bombardment. On the morning of Wednesday, February 13, 1258, the Mongols entered Baghdad. The citizens were mercilessly massacred, and the city was plundered and then set on fire. Thus, Baghdad, the proud capital of the Abbasids, was razed to dust, groaning under the pagan heels of the Mongols. Diyarbakri (d. 982/1574) writes in 'Tarikh-i Khamis'that, 'The massacre continued in Baghdad for 34 days during which 1,80,000 persons were put to the sword. For four days, the blood ran freely in the streets and the water of Tigris was dyed red for miles.' The savage massacres can be further judged from the example quoted by Steven Runciman in 'A History of the Crusades' (London, 1954, p. 303) that, 'One Mongol found in a side-street forty new born babies, whose mothers were died. As an act of mercy, he slaughtered them, knowing that they could not survive with no one to suckle them.' The victorious army pursued and attacked at full gallop. The 37th Abbasid caliph al-Mustasim (640-656/1242-1258) was destined to be the last caliph, and was beaten to death on Halagu's orders, and according to another version, trampled on by horses. Abul Faraj writes in 'Tarikh Mukhtasar al-Duwal' (pp. 445- 6) that, 'The Abbasid caliph al-Mutasim was devoted to entertainment and pleasure, passionately addicted to playing with birds, and dominated by women. He was a man of poor judgement, irresolute, and neglectful of what is needful for the conduct of government. When he was told what he ought to do in the matter of the Tatars, either to propitiate them, enter into their obedience and take steps to gain their goodwill, or else to muster his armies and encounter them on the borders of Khorasan before they could prevail and conquer Iraq, he used to say, `Baghdad is enough for me, and they will not begrudge me if I renounce all the other countries to them. Nor will they attack me when I am in it, for it is my house and my residence.' Such baseless fancies and the like prevented him from taking proper action, and so he was stricken by calamities which he had never imagined.'

In sum, Prof. Masudul Hasan writes in 'History of Islam' (Lahore, 1987, 2nd vol., p. 192) that, 'The gravest fault of the Abbasid caliphs was that they suffered the state to be fragmented thereby weakening the power structure and exposing the state to foreign attack. Thus our value-judgement is that the Abbasid caliphs were themselves responsible for their fall.' According to Vladimir Minorsky in 'Iran: Opposition, Martyrdom and Revolt' (Chicago, 1955, p. 192), 'Ata Malik Juvaini sheds tears over the misfortunes of the Muslims, and at the same time attributes to his infidel masters the role of those of whom God said: `They are My troops through whom I take My vengeance upon the rebels.''

Halagu's third major campaign was directed against the Ayyubids in Syria. He seized Aleppo in 658/1260, while his commander, Ket-Buqa made his triumphal entry in Damascus on Rabi I, 658/March, 1260. It was the same year that four Ismaili strongholds, including Masiyaf were surrendered to the Mongols. Halagu had to return to Iran upon hearing the news of Mongke's death in 657/1259. On 25th Ramdan, 658/September 3, 1260, the Mongols suffered a drastic defeat at Ayn Jalut (Goliath's Spring) near Nazareth in Palestine at the hands of the Mamluk armies of Egypt. Ket-Buqa was taken prisoner and scourged to death. Ayn Jalut was one of the world's decisive battles. The Muslim Asia seemingly on the verge of ruin, made a surprising recovery. Ayn Jalut destroyed the Mongol power and kept the pagan hordes out of Egypt and the Maghrib. Soon afterwards, the Mongols were expelled from all of Syria, where the Mamluk sultan Baybars rapidly emerged as the ruling power, and became an unchallenged ruler of Egypt and Syria. The Ismailis evidently collaborated with the Mamluk sultan and other Muslim rulers in repelling the Mongols from Syria, and after the battle of Ayn Jalut in 658/1260, they recovered their four strongholds.

If a balance sheet of the merciless massacres is drawn up, the most modest estimate reveals that the Mongols during the period between 1228 and 1260 had slaughtered at least eight million Muslims in cold blood for the establishment of their political authority over the Muslim lands.

Kassim Shah, known as Sayed Kassim Muhammad was most probably born in Daylam. He is said to have lived shortly in Armenia and Anatolia in the orbit of Bekhtashahis, a growing Sufi order among the Kurds and Turkomans.The tradition most possibly of later period indicating that Kassim Shah had flourished a small village in Azerbaijan, called Kassimabad, seems almost doubtful. It is however probable that the village, in which Kassim Shah either resided, or where he used to see his followers, had been customarily termed, Kassimabad by the Iranian followers. It is also believed that when his son, Islam Shah had arrived at Kahek in Iran in 798/1396, the Iranian Ismailis had also termed Kassimabad being an abode of the embarking place of the Imam, or the abode of Islam Shah's father.

Ghazan Khan (1295-1304), the sixth Ilkhanid ruler had embraced Islam, and restored peace in Iran. He was succeeded by his brother Uljaytu (1304-1316), who professed Christianity like his mother. He invaded Gilan, Mazandaran and Khorasan, putting many Ismailis to sword. He at last became a Shia Muslim, and was succeeded by his twelve years son, Abu Sa'id (1316-1334). The Mongols became so weak that their principal power was divided into their generals. Finally, Amir Hussain founded the Jalayirid dynasty at Tabriz in 736/1336, which also ended practically in 812/1409. In Ispahan and Shiraz, Muzaffaruddin Muhammad, the son of Sharafuddin Muzaffar (d. 754/1353) founded the Muzaffarid dynasty in 713/1313, which lasted till 795/1393. The Kurts of Herat also rose in 643/1245, and Taymurlame belonged to this place, also became a powerful ruler in 783/1381 by conquering Iran.

In India, the three centuries of Muslim rule (603-933/1206-1526), generally known as the Sultanate period, witnessed the rise and fall of five dynasties, namely the Slaves (603-690/1206-1290), the Khaljis (690-720/1290-1320), the Tughlaqs (720- 816/1320-1413), the Sayeds (816-855/1414-1451) and the Lodhis (855-933/1451-1526). Then, the Mughal empire was founded in India in 933/1526. Like the Mamluke sultanate at Cairo, the Delhi sultanate grew out of the tradition of slave soldiery during 13th century, who slaughtered many Ismailis in Delhi between 607/1230 and 634/1236. Alauddin Khalji (695-715/1296-1316) did not tolerate in India the very interference of the ulema class in the state affairs, but gave them in his reign a free rope and licence to massacre the innocent Ismailis. Maulana Isami writes in 'Futuhu's-Salatin' (Madras, 1948, p. 201) that, 'The Sultan Alauddin ordered the heads of the residents of Alamut to be cut down through saw.' It ensues the bitterest attitude of the Khalji ruler towards the Ismailis, and one can understand from it that few Ismailis of Iran had migrated as far as India, where the bigoted rulers gave them no respite. The Tughlaq ruler was followed by the Khalji in 720/1320, and Firuz Khan Tughlaq (1320-1388) had a merit to have killed many innocent Ismailis in 752/1351 in India. The Tughlaq ruler, Muhammad Shah III (d. 795/1393) is reported to have sent his forces in command of Zafar Khan to conquer Gujrat in 793/1391. He established an independent Sultanate of Gujrat in 810/1407, and was the first Muslim ruler of Gujrat to suppress Shiism in his domains. It was under Ahmad I (d. 846/1442) that the Ismailis began to be severely domineered, and were forced to observe taqiya.

Towards the end to 13th century, an akhi movement had united the Turks in Anatolia, and at last Uthman bin Ertoghrul (1288-1326) succeeded as a chief of a semi-nomad Turkish clan in the valley of Kara Su. In the first phase of his career, he extended the cradle of his power to the north. The second phase in his career is that in which from his base at Yeni Sheir, he continued his conquests in the western towards Brusa and in the north towards Iznik. The third phase is that in which he no longer took part personally in the military expeditions, but his commanders continued the expansions. During his 38 years of leadership, he increased his dominion from its very narrow limits at Sugut and Yeni Sheir to a territory extending thence northward to the Bosphorus and Black Sea, a distance of about 125 miles by an average breadth of 60 miles. At length, Uthman established the Turkish empire in Turkey in 700/1300.

The scattered Ismailis slowly began in settling down in the towns and villages of Iran. Few among them in northern area had concentrated their efforts at Daylam, one of the largest districts of Gilan. Daylam was occupied and ruled by Kiya Saifuddin Kushayji in 760/1360 at Marjikuli. He was deep-rooted in Ismaili faith like his forefathers since the period of Imam Alauddin Muhammad. He was however forced to abandon Ismailism by the Zaidi Sayed Ali Kiya, the neighboring ruler. Kiya Saifuddin totally declined the proposal, therefore, a force of Gilan was dispatched against him in 779/1378 by Sayed Ali Kiya bin Amir Kiya Malati, the chief of Biyapish in eastern Gilan since 769/1368. Sayed Ali Kiya occupied Daylam, and founded the Zaidi dynasty of Amir Kiya'i Sayeds, and extended his influence in Ashkawar, Kuhdum and as far as Tarum and Qazwin. The lieutenant Amir Ali of Sayed Amir Kiya had domineered the Ismailis in Daylam, and the local theologians also chimed in and started their customary propaganda. In 781/1379, Sayed Ali Kiya chased the Ismailis in Qazwin, and retained control of that region for seven years until 788/1386, when he was compelled to surrender Qazwin, Tarum and its castle to Taymurlame (771- 807/1370-1405), the founder of the Taymurid dynasty in Iran and Transoxiana.

It appears from the fragments of 'Risala-i Dilgusha' by Ubayd-i Zakani (1300-1372) that the trends in the hostile Muslims in Qazwin against the Ismailis of Daylam and Gilan remained continued, and it reflected also in the local novels.

.