In the very same year, the victor was obliged by another uncle of his, Takash, son of Aslan shah, to retire towards Ispahan. He was kindly received by his brother Mahmud, then free from the tutelage of his mother, who had died; both brothers appeared linked in the bonds of perfect amity; but the partizans of the younger seized the person of the elder, and imprisoned him in the castle. It was the sudden death of Mahmud by the small pox which liberated Barkiarok, and gave him the possession of the empire. This was not left undisturbed, but this is not the place to relate the events of his agitated reign, of about thirteen years, which terminated in the year of the Hejira 498 (A. D. 1104). I have said enough to show how, among such disturbances, the power of the Ismâilah could grow in the Persian provinces: to this I shall add that during the reign of Barkiarok, the European crusaders took Nicæa and Antiochia, and the cross was fixed upon the walls of Jerusalem, Akka, and Edessa.
[651] This was in the year of the Hejira 495 (A. D. 1101-2).
[652] Son of Malik shah, the fifth Sultan of the Seljucides, who reigned from the year of the Hejira 501 to 511 (A. D. 1107 to 1117).
[653] The edition of Calcutta reads erroneously 591.
[654] Mirkhond has Alabek Nushtékin Shergir.
[655] The sixth Sultan of the Seljucides, named Moezzeddin Abu ’l Hareth Sinjar, son of Malik shah. He governed the province Khorassan during twenty years, under the reigns of his brothers Barkiárok and Muhammed; after the death of the latter, he seized the whole empire, and, having overcome his nephew Mahmud, son of Muhammed, reigned with various vicissitudes of fortune during forty years and four months (from 1117 to 1157 A. D).
[656] This peace, according to Mirkhond (French transl., p. 48) was made under three conditions, to which the Ismâlíahs were held:—1, not to add any new work to their castles; 2, not to buy arms and warlike stores; 3, not to make new proselytes. The Muhammedan doctors, not having approved the treaty, the people suspected the Sultan of some hankering for the sect of the Ismâilahs. Notwithstanding the peace was concluded between Sinjar and them, who had even the revenue of some districts assigned to them, and were in others exempt from paying duties.
[657] Hossáin Fáni was the dáâi of Kohistan. Although, according to Mirkhond, his death was also ascribed to Hossáin Damawendi, we can but suppose that Hassan must, upon very strong grounds, have condemned his own son to death.
[658] The edition of Calcutta reads erroneously 580.
[659] Mirkhond says, that these two personages were to regulate the affairs of the state conjointly with Hossáin Káini.