久久久福利国产

This article was originally published under the title 鈥楧ezkuh鈥� in Encyclopaedia Iranica, Vol. VI, p. 354, ed. 听Ehsan Yarshater, Costa Mesa, California, 1996.

Dezkuh (or Sahdez), a medieval mountain fortress situated in central Persia on the summit of Mount Soffa, about 8 km south of Isfahan. No information is available on the construction date of this strategically situated fortress, which guarded the routes to Isfahan, but, like some other ruins in the same region, it may have been built as early as the Sasanian period (Minasian, pp. 17-18, 20,61-62, pls. 1-45).

Ibn al-Atir attributed (X, pp. 109-10) the construction of this fortress, which he called the “fortress (qal鈥榓) of Isfahan,” to the听Saljuq听Sultan Maleksah (465-85/1072-92), but this attribution does not seem reliable. It is more likely that Maleksah merely rebuilt the fortress as a major military outpost of Isfahan, the chief听Saljuq听capital; it was from his time that the fortress became more generally designated as Sahdez, reflecting his reconstruction of the existing Dezkuh (Zahir-al-Din, p. 40: Ravandi, p. 156).

The historical importance of Dezkuh

The historical importance of Dezkuh is particularly related to the activities of the听Nizari听IsmailisAdherents of a branch of Shi’i Islam that considers Ismail, the eldest son of the Shi’i Imam Ja士far al-峁⒛乨iq (d. 765), as his successor. in Persia during the early听Alamut听period (487-654/ 1094-1256). Ismaili da鈥榠s (missionaries) had been active in the region of Isfahan during the 11th century, and by the 460s/1170s 鈥楢bd-al-Malek b. 鈥楢ttas, the chief听da鈥榠听of Persia and Iraq at the time, had established his headquarters at Isfahan. Hasan Sabbah鈥檚 seizure of听Alamut听in 483/1090, which marked the effective foundation of the Nizari state in Persia, further encouraged the听da鈥榳a, or missionary activities, of Ahmad b. 鈥楢bd-al-Malek b. 鈥楢ttas who had succeeded his father as听da鈥榠听of Isfahan. Ahmad, posing as a schoolmaster, gradually succeeded in converting the garrison of Dezkuh, comprised mostly of Deylami soldiers with听Shi鈥榠te听tendencies.

By 494/1100, or possibly a few years earlier, Ahmad had gained possession of Dezkuh, which he fortified like other Nizari mountain castles in Persia (Zahir-al-Din, pp. 40-41; Ravandi, pp. 155 ff.; Rasid-al-Din, 1338 S./1959, p. 120; idem, 1960, pp. 69-74; Kasani, p. 156; Mirkand, Tehran, IV, pp. 306 ff.; Hodgson, pp. 85-86; Daftary, pp. 354-55). The Nizari capture of Dezkuh was a serious blow to the Saljuqs, especially as soon afterward Ahmad b. 鈥楢bd-al-Malek began to collect taxes in the districts around the fortress. Accordingly, the chief focus of the anti-Nizari campaign conducted by Sultan Mohammad b. Maleksah (498-51 1/1105-18) was Dezkuh.

The sultan with a large force besieged the fortress in 500/1107, but the tactics of Ahmad, who involved the Sunnite 鈥榰lama鈥� of Isfahan in a long religious disputation, in which he argued that the Ismailis were also true Muslims, delayed the conquest for almost a year, until the 鈥榰lama鈥� had rendered their judgment. Eventually battle was joined; Ahmad and his small band of nizar听fought the Saljuqs gallantly from tower to tower. In the final assault, most of the Nizari defenders of Dezkuh were killed; Ahmad was captured and later executed in Isfahan (Zahir-al-Din, pp. 41-42; Ravandi, pp. 158-161; Bondari, pp. 90-91; Ibn al-Atir, X, pp. 151-52; Ibn al-Qalanesi, pp. 151-56, containing the text of the victory statement issued on the occasion; Rashid-al-Din, 1338 S./1959, pp. 121-22; Kasani, pp. 156-57; Hodgson, pp. 95-96; Lewis, pp. 53-55: Daftary, pp. 361-62). The conquest of Dezkuh is celebrated in one of the versions of the introduction to the Bahman-nama (Storey-de Blois, V, 564-65).

Dezkuh was demolished soon after on the Sultan鈥檚 orders, as he feared its recapture by the听NizarisAdherents of a branch of the Ismailis who gave allegiance to Nizar, the eldest son of the Fatimid Imam-caliph al-Mustansir (d. 1094) as his successor.. The extensive ruins have been investigated and described by Caro O. Minasian (1897-1972), who was evidently the first person to identify and study the site in modern times (pp. 21-39, 52-54).