Ikhwan, al-
Ikhwan, al- (“The Brothers”). Refers to the sedentarized bedouin soldiers for Ibn Saud. The term applies to the Arab tribesmen who joined a religious and military movement between 1912 and 1930 under the rule of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al Sa‘ud. The movement, which was inspired by the resurgence of Wahhabism and spread rapidly, was characterized by religious fervor and the settlement of nomadic tribesmen in military cantonments. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz‘s intention was to supersede the tribal tie with that of religion. Thanks to the prowess of the Ikhwan, most of the Arabian Peninsula was brought under the sway of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz. However, they at last revolted against their sovereign who checked and confined them. Ikhwan also refers to members of the Society of the Muslim Brothers.
The Ikhwan was the Islamic religious militia which formed the main military force of the Arabian ruler Ibn Saud and played a key role in establishing him as ruler of most of the Arabian Peninsula, in his new state of Saudi Arabia. The Ikhwan were made up of Bedouin tribes. According to Wilfred Thesiger, this militant religious brotherhood declared that they were dedicated to the purification and the unification of Islam. This movement had aimed at breaking up the tribes and settling the Bedu around the wells and oases. They felt that the nomadic life was incompatible with strict conformity with Islam. Ibn Saud had risen to power on this movement. Later the Ikhwan rebelled when they accused Ibn Saud of religious laxity when he forbade them to raid into neighboring states. After the conquest of the Hejaz in 1926 brought all of the current Saudi state under Ibn Saud's control, the monarch found himself in some conflict with elements of the Ikhwan. He crushed their power at the Battle of Sabilla in 1930, following which the militia was reorganized into the Saudi Arabian National Guard.
The Ikhwan, being irregular tribesmen, relied mainly on traditional weapons such as lances and swords and sometimes old fashioned firearms. Usually, they attacked in the forms of raids which is a style Bedouins had always used in the deserts of Arabia. Those raiders traveled mainly on camels and some horses. Their savage raids on others in and around Najd were merciless. Typically, every male captured was put to death by cutting his throat.
In August 1924, the Ikhwan militia traveled 1600 kilometers (1000 miles) from Najd in modern day Saudi Arabia to attack Transjordan; now Jordan which was at that time under British mandate. Just 15 kilometers off Amman, the raiders were spotted by the British RAF which in turn attacked the Ikhwan using airplanes. The Ikhwan army suffered heavy casualties. It is reported that out of the 1500 raiders, only 100 escaped. Without the help of the RAF, Amman would most likely have been captured by the Ikhwans.
Other raids include, the Ikhwan raid on Southern Iraq in November 1927, and on Kuwait in January 1928 in which they looted camels and sheep. On both occasions, though they raided brutally, they suffered heavy retaliations from RAF and Kuwaitis.
The Brothers see Ikhwan, al-
Society of the Muslim Brothers see Ikhwan, al-
Ikhwan, al- (“The Brothers”). Refers to the sedentarized bedouin soldiers for Ibn Saud. The term applies to the Arab tribesmen who joined a religious and military movement between 1912 and 1930 under the rule of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al Sa‘ud. The movement, which was inspired by the resurgence of Wahhabism and spread rapidly, was characterized by religious fervor and the settlement of nomadic tribesmen in military cantonments. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz‘s intention was to supersede the tribal tie with that of religion. Thanks to the prowess of the Ikhwan, most of the Arabian Peninsula was brought under the sway of ‘Abd al-‘Aziz. However, they at last revolted against their sovereign who checked and confined them. Ikhwan also refers to members of the Society of the Muslim Brothers.
The Ikhwan was the Islamic religious militia which formed the main military force of the Arabian ruler Ibn Saud and played a key role in establishing him as ruler of most of the Arabian Peninsula, in his new state of Saudi Arabia. The Ikhwan were made up of Bedouin tribes. According to Wilfred Thesiger, this militant religious brotherhood declared that they were dedicated to the purification and the unification of Islam. This movement had aimed at breaking up the tribes and settling the Bedu around the wells and oases. They felt that the nomadic life was incompatible with strict conformity with Islam. Ibn Saud had risen to power on this movement. Later the Ikhwan rebelled when they accused Ibn Saud of religious laxity when he forbade them to raid into neighboring states. After the conquest of the Hejaz in 1926 brought all of the current Saudi state under Ibn Saud's control, the monarch found himself in some conflict with elements of the Ikhwan. He crushed their power at the Battle of Sabilla in 1930, following which the militia was reorganized into the Saudi Arabian National Guard.
The Ikhwan, being irregular tribesmen, relied mainly on traditional weapons such as lances and swords and sometimes old fashioned firearms. Usually, they attacked in the forms of raids which is a style Bedouins had always used in the deserts of Arabia. Those raiders traveled mainly on camels and some horses. Their savage raids on others in and around Najd were merciless. Typically, every male captured was put to death by cutting his throat.
In August 1924, the Ikhwan militia traveled 1600 kilometers (1000 miles) from Najd in modern day Saudi Arabia to attack Transjordan; now Jordan which was at that time under British mandate. Just 15 kilometers off Amman, the raiders were spotted by the British RAF which in turn attacked the Ikhwan using airplanes. The Ikhwan army suffered heavy casualties. It is reported that out of the 1500 raiders, only 100 escaped. Without the help of the RAF, Amman would most likely have been captured by the Ikhwans.
Other raids include, the Ikhwan raid on Southern Iraq in November 1927, and on Kuwait in January 1928 in which they looted camels and sheep. On both occasions, though they raided brutally, they suffered heavy retaliations from RAF and Kuwaitis.
The Brothers see Ikhwan, al-
Society of the Muslim Brothers see Ikhwan, al-
Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al-
Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al- (“The Muslim Brethren”) (The Muslim Brotherhood) (The Society of the Muslim Brothers). Muslim movement both religious and political, founded in Egypt by Hasan al-Banna‘ in 1928. Dedicated to the service of Islam, the Brethren’s main objective was the struggle against western invasion in all its forms and the creation of an authentically Muslim state. Their ideas are still widely spread.
The al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn (the Muslim Brotherhood) was religio-political organization founded in 1928 at Ismailia, Egypt, by Ḥasan al-Bannāʾ. It advocated a return to the Qurʾān and the Hadith as guidelines for a healthy modern Islamic society. The Brotherhood spread rapidly throughout Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, and North Africa. Although figures of Brotherhood membership are variable, it is estimated that at its height in the late 1940s it may have had some 500,000 members.
Initially centered on religious and educational programs, the Muslim Brotherhood was seen as providing much-needed social services, and in the 1930s its membership grew swiftly. In the late 1930s the Brotherhood began to politicize its outlook, and, as an opponent of Egypt’s ruling Wafd party, during World War II it organized popular protests against the government. An armed branch organized in the early 1940s was subsequently linked to a number of violent acts, including bombings and political assassinations, and it appears that the armed element of the group began to escape Ḥasan al-Bannāʾ’s control. The Brotherhood responded to the government’s attempts to dissolve the group by assassinating Prime Minister Maḥmūd Fahmī al-Nuqrāshī in December 1948. Ḥasan al-Bannāʾ himself was assassinated shortly thereafter; many believe his death was at the behest of the government.
With the advent of the revolutionary regime in Egypt in 1952, the Brotherhood retreated underground. An attempt to assassinate Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser in Alexandria on October 26, 1954, led to the Muslim Brotherhood’s forcible suppression. Six of its leaders were tried and executed for treason, and many others were imprisoned. Among those imprisoned was writer Sayyid Quṭb, who authored a number of books during the course of his imprisonment; among these works was Signposts in the Road, which would become a template for modern Sunni militancy. Although he was released from prison in 1964, he was arrested again the following year and executed shortly thereafter. In the 1960s and ’70s the Brotherhood’s activities remained largely clandestine.
In the 1980s the Muslim Brotherhood experienced a renewal as part of the general upsurge of religious activity in Islamic countries. The Brotherhood’s new adherents aimed to reorganize society and government according to Islamic doctrines, and they were vehemently anti-Western. An uprising by the Brotherhood in the Syrian city of Ḥamāh in February 1982 was crushed by the government of Ḥafiz al-Assad at a cost of perhaps 25,000 lives. The Brotherhood revived in Egypt and Jordan in the same period, and, beginning in the late 1980s, it emerged to compete in legislative elections in those countries.
In Egypt, the participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in parliamentary elections there in the 1980s was followed by its boycott of the elections of 1990, when it joined most of the country’s opposition in protesting electoral strictures. Although the group itself remained formally banned, in the 2000 elections Brotherhood supporters running as independent candidates were able to win 17 seats, making it the largest opposition bloc in the parliament. In 2005, again running as independents, the Brotherhood and its supporters captured 88 seats in spite of efforts by President Ḥosnī Mubārak’s administration to restrict voting in the group’s strongholds. Its unexpected success in 2005 was met with additional restrictions and arrests, and the Brotherhood opted to boycott the 2008 local elections. In the 2010 parliamentary elections the Mubārak administration continued to restrict the Muslim Brotherhood by arresting members and barring voters in areas where the organization had strong support. After Mubārak’s National Democratic Party won 209 out of 211 seats in the first round of voting, effectively eliminating the Muslim Brotherhood from the parliament, the organization boycotted the second round.
In January 2011 a non-religious youth protest movement against the Mubārak regime appeared in Egypt. After hesitating briefly, the Muslim Brotherhood’s senior leadership endorsed the movement and called on its members to participate in demonstrations. When protests forced Mubārak to step down as president in February, leaving a transitional military administration in control of the country, the Muslim Brotherhood signaled that it intended to begin officially participating in Egyptian politics. The Muslim Brotherhood announced that it would apply to become a recognized political party as soon as constitutional amendments allowing wider political participation were completed but stated that it did not intend to nominate a candidate for the presidential elections.
In late April 2011 the Muslim Brotherhood took further steps toward open participation in Egyptian politics, founding a political party called the Freedom and Justice Party and applying for official recognition from the Egyptian interim government. Leaders of the Freedom and Justice Party stated that the party’s policies would be grounded in Islamic principles but that the party, whose members included women and Christians, would be non-confessional. The party received official recognition in June, allowing it to enter candidates in upcoming elections.
The Muslim Brethren see Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al-
The Society of the Muslim Brothers see Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al-
The Muslim Brotherhood see Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al-
Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al- (“The Muslim Brethren”) (The Muslim Brotherhood) (The Society of the Muslim Brothers). Muslim movement both religious and political, founded in Egypt by Hasan al-Banna‘ in 1928. Dedicated to the service of Islam, the Brethren’s main objective was the struggle against western invasion in all its forms and the creation of an authentically Muslim state. Their ideas are still widely spread.
The al-Ikhwān al-Muslimūn (the Muslim Brotherhood) was religio-political organization founded in 1928 at Ismailia, Egypt, by Ḥasan al-Bannāʾ. It advocated a return to the Qurʾān and the Hadith as guidelines for a healthy modern Islamic society. The Brotherhood spread rapidly throughout Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, and North Africa. Although figures of Brotherhood membership are variable, it is estimated that at its height in the late 1940s it may have had some 500,000 members.
Initially centered on religious and educational programs, the Muslim Brotherhood was seen as providing much-needed social services, and in the 1930s its membership grew swiftly. In the late 1930s the Brotherhood began to politicize its outlook, and, as an opponent of Egypt’s ruling Wafd party, during World War II it organized popular protests against the government. An armed branch organized in the early 1940s was subsequently linked to a number of violent acts, including bombings and political assassinations, and it appears that the armed element of the group began to escape Ḥasan al-Bannāʾ’s control. The Brotherhood responded to the government’s attempts to dissolve the group by assassinating Prime Minister Maḥmūd Fahmī al-Nuqrāshī in December 1948. Ḥasan al-Bannāʾ himself was assassinated shortly thereafter; many believe his death was at the behest of the government.
With the advent of the revolutionary regime in Egypt in 1952, the Brotherhood retreated underground. An attempt to assassinate Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser in Alexandria on October 26, 1954, led to the Muslim Brotherhood’s forcible suppression. Six of its leaders were tried and executed for treason, and many others were imprisoned. Among those imprisoned was writer Sayyid Quṭb, who authored a number of books during the course of his imprisonment; among these works was Signposts in the Road, which would become a template for modern Sunni militancy. Although he was released from prison in 1964, he was arrested again the following year and executed shortly thereafter. In the 1960s and ’70s the Brotherhood’s activities remained largely clandestine.
In the 1980s the Muslim Brotherhood experienced a renewal as part of the general upsurge of religious activity in Islamic countries. The Brotherhood’s new adherents aimed to reorganize society and government according to Islamic doctrines, and they were vehemently anti-Western. An uprising by the Brotherhood in the Syrian city of Ḥamāh in February 1982 was crushed by the government of Ḥafiz al-Assad at a cost of perhaps 25,000 lives. The Brotherhood revived in Egypt and Jordan in the same period, and, beginning in the late 1980s, it emerged to compete in legislative elections in those countries.
In Egypt, the participation of the Muslim Brotherhood in parliamentary elections there in the 1980s was followed by its boycott of the elections of 1990, when it joined most of the country’s opposition in protesting electoral strictures. Although the group itself remained formally banned, in the 2000 elections Brotherhood supporters running as independent candidates were able to win 17 seats, making it the largest opposition bloc in the parliament. In 2005, again running as independents, the Brotherhood and its supporters captured 88 seats in spite of efforts by President Ḥosnī Mubārak’s administration to restrict voting in the group’s strongholds. Its unexpected success in 2005 was met with additional restrictions and arrests, and the Brotherhood opted to boycott the 2008 local elections. In the 2010 parliamentary elections the Mubārak administration continued to restrict the Muslim Brotherhood by arresting members and barring voters in areas where the organization had strong support. After Mubārak’s National Democratic Party won 209 out of 211 seats in the first round of voting, effectively eliminating the Muslim Brotherhood from the parliament, the organization boycotted the second round.
In January 2011 a non-religious youth protest movement against the Mubārak regime appeared in Egypt. After hesitating briefly, the Muslim Brotherhood’s senior leadership endorsed the movement and called on its members to participate in demonstrations. When protests forced Mubārak to step down as president in February, leaving a transitional military administration in control of the country, the Muslim Brotherhood signaled that it intended to begin officially participating in Egyptian politics. The Muslim Brotherhood announced that it would apply to become a recognized political party as soon as constitutional amendments allowing wider political participation were completed but stated that it did not intend to nominate a candidate for the presidential elections.
In late April 2011 the Muslim Brotherhood took further steps toward open participation in Egyptian politics, founding a political party called the Freedom and Justice Party and applying for official recognition from the Egyptian interim government. Leaders of the Freedom and Justice Party stated that the party’s policies would be grounded in Islamic principles but that the party, whose members included women and Christians, would be non-confessional. The party received official recognition in June, allowing it to enter candidates in upcoming elections.
The Muslim Brethren see Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al-
The Society of the Muslim Brothers see Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al-
The Muslim Brotherhood see Ikhwan al-Muslimun, al-
Ikhwan al-Safa‘, al-
Ikhwan al-Safa‘, al- (The Brethren of Purity) (The Brethren of Sincerity). Arabic phrase meaning “brethren of purity.” Al-Ikhwan al-Safa‘ was a secret philosophical-religious society which arose in the tenth century at Basra, in Iraq. They were associated with the Batini Isma‘ilis, who had engaged in secret political propaganda since the death of their imam, Isma‘il ibn Ja‘far al-Sadiq, in 760. The Brethren injected into this propaganda a new scientific and philosophical spirit and dedicated themselves to enlightening and spiritually purifying themselves. They propagated their ideas in various parts of the Islamic empire and produced fifty-two philosophical epistles and a compendium of their teachings. The so-called Epistles of
the Brethren of Purity conceal the identity of the brethren. Of Isma‘ili inspiration, the Epistles were composed in Basra around 960, and should be regarded as an attempt to reunite the non-Fatimid Isma‘ilis on a common doctrinal basis countering the ideological offensive of the Fatimids.
The Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ(Brethren of Purity) was a secret Arab confraternity, founded at Basra, Iraq, that produced a philosophical and religious encyclopaedia, Rasāʾil ikhwān aṣ-ṣafāʾ wa khillān al-wafāʾ (“Epistles of the Brethren of Purity and Loyal Friends”), sometime in the second half of the 10th century of the Christian calendar.
Neither the identity nor the period of the Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ has been definitively established, but the various authors of the Rasāʾil do seem to reflect the doctrinal position of the Ismāʿīlīyah, a radical Shīʿī Muslim sect influenced by Manichaeism and Neoplatonism, which preached an esoteric interpretation of the Qurʾān open only to initiates. The Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, like all other Islāmic philosophers, attempted to naturalize Greek philosophy in a way of their own. They chose to follow a fairly orthodox Neoplatonic position and admitted Hermetic, Gnostic, astrological, and occult sciences on a large scale in the belief that their absorption of ancient wisdom enabled them to fathom the esoteric meaning of revelation.
According to the Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, individual human souls emanate from the universal soul and rejoin it after death; the universal soul in its turn will be united with God on the day of the Last Judgment. The Rasāʾil are thus intended to purify the soul of misconceptions and lead it to a clear view of the essence of reality, which in turn will provide for happiness in the next life. To accomplish this enlightenment, the Rasāʾil are structured theoretically to lead the soul from concrete to abstract knowledge. There is also an important summary of the whole encyclopaedia, ar-Risālah al-jāmiʿah.
The Brethren of Purity see Ikhwan al-Safa‘, al-
The Brethren of Sincerity see Ikhwan al-Safa‘, al-
The Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ(Brethren of Purity) was a secret Arab confraternity, founded at Basra, Iraq, that produced a philosophical and religious encyclopaedia, Rasāʾil ikhwān aṣ-ṣafāʾ wa khillān al-wafāʾ (“Epistles of the Brethren of Purity and Loyal Friends”), sometime in the second half of the 10th century of the Christian calendar.
Neither the identity nor the period of the Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ has been definitively established, but the various authors of the Rasāʾil do seem to reflect the doctrinal position of the Ismāʿīlīyah, a radical Shīʿī Muslim sect influenced by Manichaeism and Neoplatonism, which preached an esoteric interpretation of the Qurʾān open only to initiates. The Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, like all other Islāmic philosophers, attempted to naturalize Greek philosophy in a way of their own. They chose to follow a fairly orthodox Neoplatonic position and admitted Hermetic, Gnostic, astrological, and occult sciences on a large scale in the belief that their absorption of ancient wisdom enabled them to fathom the esoteric meaning of revelation.
According to the Ikhwān aṣ-Ṣafāʾ, individual human souls emanate from the universal soul and rejoin it after death; the universal soul in its turn will be united with God on the day of the Last Judgment. The Rasāʾil are thus intended to purify the soul of misconceptions and lead it to a clear view of the essence of reality, which in turn will provide for happiness in the next life. To accomplish this enlightenment, the Rasāʾil are structured theoretically to lead the soul from concrete to abstract knowledge. There is also an important summary of the whole encyclopaedia, ar-Risālah al-jāmiʿah.
The Brethren of Purity see Ikhwan al-Safa‘, al-
The Brethren of Sincerity see Ikhwan al-Safa‘, al-
‘Ikrima
‘Ikrima (643-723). Successor and one of the main transmitters of the traditional interpretation of the Qur‘an, attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas.
‘Ikrima (643-723). Successor and one of the main transmitters of the traditional interpretation of the Qur‘an, attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas.
Ilat
Ilat (in singular form, Il). Turco-Persian term denoting nomadic or semi-nomadic tribes.
Il see Ilat
Ilat (in singular form, Il). Turco-Persian term denoting nomadic or semi-nomadic tribes.
Il see Ilat
Ildenizids
Ildenizids (Eldiguzids). Line of Turkish slave commanders who governed most of northwestern Persia and Azerbaijan (r.1150- 1225). They were patrons of poets and scholars.
Eldiguzids see Ildenizids
Ildenizids (Eldiguzids). Line of Turkish slave commanders who governed most of northwestern Persia and Azerbaijan (r.1150- 1225). They were patrons of poets and scholars.
Eldiguzids see Ildenizids
Ildeniz, Shams al-Din
Ildeniz, Shams al-Din (Shams al-Din Ildeniz) (Eldiguz) (d. 1175/1176). Qipcaq (Kipchak) Turk who, by 1146, made himself the virtually independent ruler of Azerbaijan and founded the dynasty of the Ildenizids.
Shams al-Din Ildeniz was an atabeg of Azerbaijan and founder of the dynasty of Atabegs of Azerbaijan, which held sway over Arran (Azerbaijan), Azerbaijan (Iran), and most of northwestern Persia from the second half of the 12th century to the early decades of the 13th.
A Kipchak by origin, Shams al-Din Ildeniz was formerly a freedman of Seljuk sultan Mahmud’s (1118-1131) vizier Kamal Din al-Simirumi and attained to the post of governor of Arran under Sultan Masud (1134-1152). His raise as the most powerful peripheral amirs of the Seljukid empire was aided by the necessity of having a large army against the frequent incursions from the neighboring kingdom of Georgia. He made himself virtually independent ruler of Azerbaijan by 1146. His marriage with the widow of the late Sultan Tughril II (1131-1134; Masud’s brother and predecessor) afforded him to intervene in the dynastic strife which erupted upon Masud’s death in 1152. He succeeded, in 1160, in deposing Sulayman Shah and installing his stepson Arslan ibn Tughril (1160-1175) as sultan. Conferred with the rank of atabek, Ildeniz now became a chief protector of the sultan’s authority. Ildeniz then arranged a marriage between his son Pahlawan and the daughter of Inanch, amir of Rayy, in order to secure the allegiance of this powerful dynast. Later Inanch allied himself with the amirs of Fars and Qazvin and attempted to depose Arslan in favor of his brother Muhammad. Ildeniz met the renegades on a battlefield and won a victory, but Inanch escaped to Rayy. Ildeniz then marched to Isfahan and forced the atabek of Fars, Zangi, into submission. Soon he proceeded northward to recover the city of Dvin from the Georgian attack in 1162. A coalition of Muslim rulers led by Ildeniz defeated the Georgian king Giorgi III and forced him to withdraw into his possessions. Back at Hamadan, he had to deal with another invasion – this time by the Khwarezmians who planned to annex Khurasan. The Khwarezminas avoided the confrontation and retreated in the face of the advancing army of Ildeniz. Their ally Inanch was murdered at the request of Ildeniz in 1169. It was not, however, until the death of the Khwarazmshah Il-Arslan in 1172, when the threats on this sector were finally eliminated.
By the time of his death around 1175-6, Ildeniz was arguably the undisputed de facto master of many parts of the already fragmentized Great Seljukid Empire, centered on Iraq. He was buried at Hamadan, at a madrasa which he had founded.
Shams al-Din Ildeniz see Ildeniz, Shams al-Din
Eldiguz see Ildeniz, Shams al-Din
Ildeniz, Shams al-Din (Shams al-Din Ildeniz) (Eldiguz) (d. 1175/1176). Qipcaq (Kipchak) Turk who, by 1146, made himself the virtually independent ruler of Azerbaijan and founded the dynasty of the Ildenizids.
Shams al-Din Ildeniz was an atabeg of Azerbaijan and founder of the dynasty of Atabegs of Azerbaijan, which held sway over Arran (Azerbaijan), Azerbaijan (Iran), and most of northwestern Persia from the second half of the 12th century to the early decades of the 13th.
A Kipchak by origin, Shams al-Din Ildeniz was formerly a freedman of Seljuk sultan Mahmud’s (1118-1131) vizier Kamal Din al-Simirumi and attained to the post of governor of Arran under Sultan Masud (1134-1152). His raise as the most powerful peripheral amirs of the Seljukid empire was aided by the necessity of having a large army against the frequent incursions from the neighboring kingdom of Georgia. He made himself virtually independent ruler of Azerbaijan by 1146. His marriage with the widow of the late Sultan Tughril II (1131-1134; Masud’s brother and predecessor) afforded him to intervene in the dynastic strife which erupted upon Masud’s death in 1152. He succeeded, in 1160, in deposing Sulayman Shah and installing his stepson Arslan ibn Tughril (1160-1175) as sultan. Conferred with the rank of atabek, Ildeniz now became a chief protector of the sultan’s authority. Ildeniz then arranged a marriage between his son Pahlawan and the daughter of Inanch, amir of Rayy, in order to secure the allegiance of this powerful dynast. Later Inanch allied himself with the amirs of Fars and Qazvin and attempted to depose Arslan in favor of his brother Muhammad. Ildeniz met the renegades on a battlefield and won a victory, but Inanch escaped to Rayy. Ildeniz then marched to Isfahan and forced the atabek of Fars, Zangi, into submission. Soon he proceeded northward to recover the city of Dvin from the Georgian attack in 1162. A coalition of Muslim rulers led by Ildeniz defeated the Georgian king Giorgi III and forced him to withdraw into his possessions. Back at Hamadan, he had to deal with another invasion – this time by the Khwarezmians who planned to annex Khurasan. The Khwarezminas avoided the confrontation and retreated in the face of the advancing army of Ildeniz. Their ally Inanch was murdered at the request of Ildeniz in 1169. It was not, however, until the death of the Khwarazmshah Il-Arslan in 1172, when the threats on this sector were finally eliminated.
By the time of his death around 1175-6, Ildeniz was arguably the undisputed de facto master of many parts of the already fragmentized Great Seljukid Empire, centered on Iraq. He was buried at Hamadan, at a madrasa which he had founded.
Shams al-Din Ildeniz see Ildeniz, Shams al-Din
Eldiguz see Ildeniz, Shams al-Din
Ilek-Khans
Ilek-Khans (Qarakhanids) (Karakhanids). Turkish dynasty which ruled in both Western Turkestan (Transoxiana) and in Eastern Turkestan (Kashgharia or Sinkiang), from the tenth to the early thirteenth centuries. The Ilek-Khans gradually assimilated themselves to the Perso-Islamic cultural and governmental traditions and were patrons of scholars and literary men.
Qarakhanid Dynasty, also spelled Karakhanid, also called Ilek Khanid, was a Turkic dynasty (999–1211) that ruled in Transoxania in Central Asia.
The Qarakhanids, who belonged to the Qarluq tribal confederation, became prominent during the 9th century. With the disintegration of the Iranian Sāmānid dynasty, the Qarakhanids took over the Sāmānid territories in Transoxania. In 999 Hārūn (or Ḥasan) Bughra Khān, grandson of the paramount tribal chief of the Qarluq confederation, occupied Bukhara, the Sāmānid capital. The Sāmānid domains were split up between the Ghaznavids, who gained Khorāsān and Afghanistan, and the Qarakhanids, who received Transoxania. The Oxus River thus became the boundary between the two rival empires. During this period the Qarakhanids were converted to Islām.
Early in the 11th century the unity of the Qarakhanid dynasty was fractured by constant internal warfare. In 1041 Muḥammad ʿAyn ad-Dawlah (reigned 1041–52) took over the administration of the western branch of the family, centered at Bukhara. At the end of the 11th century, the Qarakhanids were forced to accept Seljuq suzerainty. With a decline in Seljuq power, the Qarakhanids in 1140 fell under domination of the rival Turkic Karakitai confederation, centered in northern China. ʿUthmān (reigned 1204–11) briefly re-established the independence of the dynasty, but in 1211 the Qarakhanids were defeated by the Khwārezm-Shāh ʿAlāʾ ad-Dīn Muḥammad and the dynasty was extinguished.
Qarakhanids see Ilek-Khans
Karakhanids see Ilek-Khans
Ilek-Khans (Qarakhanids) (Karakhanids). Turkish dynasty which ruled in both Western Turkestan (Transoxiana) and in Eastern Turkestan (Kashgharia or Sinkiang), from the tenth to the early thirteenth centuries. The Ilek-Khans gradually assimilated themselves to the Perso-Islamic cultural and governmental traditions and were patrons of scholars and literary men.
Qarakhanid Dynasty, also spelled Karakhanid, also called Ilek Khanid, was a Turkic dynasty (999–1211) that ruled in Transoxania in Central Asia.
The Qarakhanids, who belonged to the Qarluq tribal confederation, became prominent during the 9th century. With the disintegration of the Iranian Sāmānid dynasty, the Qarakhanids took over the Sāmānid territories in Transoxania. In 999 Hārūn (or Ḥasan) Bughra Khān, grandson of the paramount tribal chief of the Qarluq confederation, occupied Bukhara, the Sāmānid capital. The Sāmānid domains were split up between the Ghaznavids, who gained Khorāsān and Afghanistan, and the Qarakhanids, who received Transoxania. The Oxus River thus became the boundary between the two rival empires. During this period the Qarakhanids were converted to Islām.
Early in the 11th century the unity of the Qarakhanid dynasty was fractured by constant internal warfare. In 1041 Muḥammad ʿAyn ad-Dawlah (reigned 1041–52) took over the administration of the western branch of the family, centered at Bukhara. At the end of the 11th century, the Qarakhanids were forced to accept Seljuq suzerainty. With a decline in Seljuq power, the Qarakhanids in 1140 fell under domination of the rival Turkic Karakitai confederation, centered in northern China. ʿUthmān (reigned 1204–11) briefly re-established the independence of the dynasty, but in 1211 the Qarakhanids were defeated by the Khwārezm-Shāh ʿAlāʾ ad-Dīn Muḥammad and the dynasty was extinguished.
Qarakhanids see Ilek-Khans
Karakhanids see Ilek-Khans
Ileri, Jelal Nuri
Ileri, Jelal Nuri (Jelal Nuri Ileri) (Celal Nuri Ileri) (1877-1938). Turkish modernist, writer, publicist and journalist. He wrote about the legal system, the emancipation of women, the causes of Ottoman decline, the alphabet and language reform and reform in Islam.
Jelal Nuri Ileri see Ileri, Jelal Nuri
Celal Nuri Ileri see Ileri, Jelal Nuri
Ileri, Jelal Nuri (Jelal Nuri Ileri) (Celal Nuri Ileri) (1877-1938). Turkish modernist, writer, publicist and journalist. He wrote about the legal system, the emancipation of women, the causes of Ottoman decline, the alphabet and language reform and reform in Islam.
Jelal Nuri Ileri see Ileri, Jelal Nuri
Celal Nuri Ileri see Ileri, Jelal Nuri
Ilghazi I, Najm al-Din
Ilghazi I, Najm al-Din (Najm al-Din Ilghazi I) (Najm ad-Din Ilghazi ibn Artuq) (d. November 8, 1122). Saljuq ruler and founder of the Mardin and Mayyafariqin branch of the Artuqid dynasty. He ruled from 1104 to 1122.
Najm ad-Din Ilghazi ibn Artuq was the Turkish Artukid ruler of Mardin from 1104 to 1122.
His father Artuk was the founder of the Artukid dynasty, and was appointed governor of Jerusalem by the Seljuk emir Tutush. When Artuk died, Ilghazi and his brother Sökmen succeeded him as governors of Jerusalem. In 1096, Ilghazi allied with Duqaq of Damascus and Yaghi-Siyan of Antioch against Radwan of Aleppo. Duqaq and Radwan were fighting for control of Syria after the death of Tutush. Ilghazi and Dukak eventually quarrelled and Ilghazi was imprisoned, leading to the capture of Jerusalem by his brother Sökmen, but Ilgazi recovered the city when he was released. He held it until the city was captured by the Fatimid vizier of Egypt, al-Afdal Shahanshah, in 1098. After this, he sought to make a name for himself in the Jezirah, where his brothers had also established themselves. He then entered the service of the Seljuk Sultan Mahmud I, who granted him Hulwan and made him shihna of Baghdad, an office which oversaw the affairs of the caliph on behalf of the sultan.
Ilghazi was dismissed as shihna in 1104 and became leader of the Artukid family after the death of Sökmen that year. This was disputed by Sökmen's son Ibrahim, but Ilghazi took Mardin from him in 1108. As head of the Artukids he made no lasting alliances and frequently switched sides, allying with both fellow Muslims and Christian crusaders whenever he saw fit. In 1110, he participated in an unsuccessful siege of Edessa. In 1114, he and his nephew Balak (future emir of Aleppo) defeated the Seljuk governor of Mosul, Aksungur al-Bursuki, and captured Mas'ud, son of the Seljuk sultan. In 1115, Ilghazi besieged Hims, but was captured briefly by its governor Khir-Khan. Later that year, Roger of Antioch, Baldwin I of Jerusalem, Pons of Tripoli, and Baldwin II of Edessa defended Antioch against the Seljuk general Bursuk (not to be confused with al-Bursuki), with the aid of Ilghazi, Toghtekin of Damascus, and Lulu of Aleppo, all enemies of Bursuk. These two armies did not come to battle, although Bursuk was later defeated by Roger at the Battle of Sarmin.
Ilghazi gained control of Aleppo after the assassination of Lulu in 1117. In 1118, he took control of Mayyafiriqin and pacified the surrounding countryside. In 1119, Ilghazi defeated and killed Roger at the Battle of Ager Sanguinis. Ibn al-Qalanisi describes the victory as "one of the finest of victories, and such plenitude of divine aid was never granted to Islam in all its past ages." The Antiochene towns of Atharib, Zerdana, Sarmin, Ma'arrat al-Nu'man and Kafr Tab fell to his army. Il Ghazi, however, was unable to extract full profit from his victory. His prolonged drunkenness deprived his army of leadership, and left the Turkmen free to scatter after plunder.
Baldwin II (Baldwin II of Jerusalem) soon arrived to drive Ilghazi back, inflicting heavy losses on the Turks in the hard-fought Battle of Hab on August 14, 1119. The next year Ilghazi took Nisibin, and then pillaged the County of Edessa before turning north towards Armenia. In 1121, he made peace with the crusaders, and with supposedly up to 250 000 - 350 000 troops, including men led by his son-in-law Sadaqah and Sultan Malik of Ganja, he invaded Georgia. David IV of Georgia met him at the Battle of Didgori and Ilghazi was defeated. According to Matthew of Edessa 400 000 Turks were killed, though there were not even that many at the battle. Among the various leaders, only Ilghazi and his son-in-law Dubais escaped.
In 1122, Ilghazi and Balak defeated Joscelin I of Edessa and took him prisoner, but Ilghazi died in November of that year at Diyarbekir. He was buried at Mayyafariqin (Silvan today). Balak succeeded him in Aleppo and his sons Sulaiman and Timurtash succeeded him in Mardin.
Ilghazi married first Farkhunda Khatun, the daughter of Radwan of Aleppo, but he never actually met her and the marriage was never consummated. He then married the daughter of Toghtekin of Damascus and had the following children:
* Ayaz
* Guhar Khatun, married Dubais
* al-Bazm
* Shams ad-Daula Sulaiman
* Safra Khatun, married Husam ad-Din Qurti ibn Toghlan Arslan
* Yumna Khatun, married Sa'd ad-Daula Il-aldi of Amid
* al-Sa'id Husam ad-Din Timurtash
He also had a son, Umar, by a concubine, and Nasr, by a slave; another possible son was named Kirzil.
Najm al-Din Ilghazi I see Ilghazi I, Najm al-Din
Najm ad-Din Ilghazi ibn Artuq see Ilghazi I, Najm al-Din
Ilghazi I, Najm al-Din (Najm al-Din Ilghazi I) (Najm ad-Din Ilghazi ibn Artuq) (d. November 8, 1122). Saljuq ruler and founder of the Mardin and Mayyafariqin branch of the Artuqid dynasty. He ruled from 1104 to 1122.
Najm ad-Din Ilghazi ibn Artuq was the Turkish Artukid ruler of Mardin from 1104 to 1122.
His father Artuk was the founder of the Artukid dynasty, and was appointed governor of Jerusalem by the Seljuk emir Tutush. When Artuk died, Ilghazi and his brother Sökmen succeeded him as governors of Jerusalem. In 1096, Ilghazi allied with Duqaq of Damascus and Yaghi-Siyan of Antioch against Radwan of Aleppo. Duqaq and Radwan were fighting for control of Syria after the death of Tutush. Ilghazi and Dukak eventually quarrelled and Ilghazi was imprisoned, leading to the capture of Jerusalem by his brother Sökmen, but Ilgazi recovered the city when he was released. He held it until the city was captured by the Fatimid vizier of Egypt, al-Afdal Shahanshah, in 1098. After this, he sought to make a name for himself in the Jezirah, where his brothers had also established themselves. He then entered the service of the Seljuk Sultan Mahmud I, who granted him Hulwan and made him shihna of Baghdad, an office which oversaw the affairs of the caliph on behalf of the sultan.
Ilghazi was dismissed as shihna in 1104 and became leader of the Artukid family after the death of Sökmen that year. This was disputed by Sökmen's son Ibrahim, but Ilghazi took Mardin from him in 1108. As head of the Artukids he made no lasting alliances and frequently switched sides, allying with both fellow Muslims and Christian crusaders whenever he saw fit. In 1110, he participated in an unsuccessful siege of Edessa. In 1114, he and his nephew Balak (future emir of Aleppo) defeated the Seljuk governor of Mosul, Aksungur al-Bursuki, and captured Mas'ud, son of the Seljuk sultan. In 1115, Ilghazi besieged Hims, but was captured briefly by its governor Khir-Khan. Later that year, Roger of Antioch, Baldwin I of Jerusalem, Pons of Tripoli, and Baldwin II of Edessa defended Antioch against the Seljuk general Bursuk (not to be confused with al-Bursuki), with the aid of Ilghazi, Toghtekin of Damascus, and Lulu of Aleppo, all enemies of Bursuk. These two armies did not come to battle, although Bursuk was later defeated by Roger at the Battle of Sarmin.
Ilghazi gained control of Aleppo after the assassination of Lulu in 1117. In 1118, he took control of Mayyafiriqin and pacified the surrounding countryside. In 1119, Ilghazi defeated and killed Roger at the Battle of Ager Sanguinis. Ibn al-Qalanisi describes the victory as "one of the finest of victories, and such plenitude of divine aid was never granted to Islam in all its past ages." The Antiochene towns of Atharib, Zerdana, Sarmin, Ma'arrat al-Nu'man and Kafr Tab fell to his army. Il Ghazi, however, was unable to extract full profit from his victory. His prolonged drunkenness deprived his army of leadership, and left the Turkmen free to scatter after plunder.
Baldwin II (Baldwin II of Jerusalem) soon arrived to drive Ilghazi back, inflicting heavy losses on the Turks in the hard-fought Battle of Hab on August 14, 1119. The next year Ilghazi took Nisibin, and then pillaged the County of Edessa before turning north towards Armenia. In 1121, he made peace with the crusaders, and with supposedly up to 250 000 - 350 000 troops, including men led by his son-in-law Sadaqah and Sultan Malik of Ganja, he invaded Georgia. David IV of Georgia met him at the Battle of Didgori and Ilghazi was defeated. According to Matthew of Edessa 400 000 Turks were killed, though there were not even that many at the battle. Among the various leaders, only Ilghazi and his son-in-law Dubais escaped.
In 1122, Ilghazi and Balak defeated Joscelin I of Edessa and took him prisoner, but Ilghazi died in November of that year at Diyarbekir. He was buried at Mayyafariqin (Silvan today). Balak succeeded him in Aleppo and his sons Sulaiman and Timurtash succeeded him in Mardin.
Ilghazi married first Farkhunda Khatun, the daughter of Radwan of Aleppo, but he never actually met her and the marriage was never consummated. He then married the daughter of Toghtekin of Damascus and had the following children:
* Ayaz
* Guhar Khatun, married Dubais
* al-Bazm
* Shams ad-Daula Sulaiman
* Safra Khatun, married Husam ad-Din Qurti ibn Toghlan Arslan
* Yumna Khatun, married Sa'd ad-Daula Il-aldi of Amid
* al-Sa'id Husam ad-Din Timurtash
He also had a son, Umar, by a concubine, and Nasr, by a slave; another possible son was named Kirzil.
Najm al-Din Ilghazi I see Ilghazi I, Najm al-Din
Najm ad-Din Ilghazi ibn Artuq see Ilghazi I, Najm al-Din
Ilghazi II, Qutb al-Din
Ilghazi II, Qutb al-Din (Qutb al-Din Ilghazi II). Member of the Artuqid dynasty in Mardin and Mayyafariqin (r.1171-1184).
Qutb al-Din Ilghazi II see Ilghazi II, Qutb al-Din
Ilghazi II, Qutb al-Din (Qutb al-Din Ilghazi II). Member of the Artuqid dynasty in Mardin and Mayyafariqin (r.1171-1184).
Qutb al-Din Ilghazi II see Ilghazi II, Qutb al-Din
Ilkhanids
Ilkhanids (Il-Khanids). Mongolian dynasty in Persia, Iraq, parts of Syria, eastern Anatolia, and the Caucausus during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries (c.1256-1355). Their main capitals were Tabriz, and from 1307 Sultaniya. Hulagu (r. 1252-1265), a grandson of Jenghiz Khan, conquered Iran in 1256 on behalf of his brother, the Great Khan Mongke, and launched the Mongol attack on Baghdad in 1258. He assumed the title Ilkhan (“subordinate or peaceful khan”) in recognition of the leadership aspirations of the Great Khan of the Mongols. In 1260, he was defeated by the Mamelukes, under Sultan Baybars at Ain Jalut (in Palestine), hindering the expansion westward. Hulagu’s son, Abaqa (r. 1265-1282), consolidated his authority via the battle against the Mamelukes and subdued the Caucasus, after a political alliance with Christian Europe failed. During the short-lasting governments that followed, the economic and financial systems went into decline. Under Khan Ghazan (r. 1295-1304), who made Islam the state religion, and his brother, Uljaitu (Oljeytu Khudabanda) (r. 1304-1316), who converted to Shi‘ism in 1310, the empire experienced its political and cultural zenith. The last Ilkhanid, Abu Said (Abu Sa‘id) (r. 1316-1335), a Sunnite, declared peace with the Mamelukes (1323), restored Mongol sovereignty over Anatolia, and successfully advanced into the Caucasus. After this, the empire broke up into different dominions, which developed separately.
The Il-Khanids showed a tendency toward Buddhism and Christianity, Nestorianism in particular, and were tolerant of the Shi‘a until Arghun (r.1284-1291) embraced Sunni Islam, which set the seal on the fusion of Mongols and Turks in Persia. Oljeytu Khudabanda, however, embraced Shi‘ism in 1310 but his son and successor Abu Sa‘id (r.1316-1335) reverted to Sunni Islam. The period of Il-Khanid rule was economically and politically difficult but rich in cultural achievements.
The Mongols conquered the northeastern Islamic world in the 1220s. In 1251, Genghis Khan’s grandson, Great Khan Mongke, gave the vice-regency of Southwest Asia to his brother Hulegu and sent him to complete its subjugation. In 1256 and 1257, Hulegu destroyed the strongholds of the Isma‘ili sect that had plagued the leaders of Sunni Islam. In 1258, his troops took Baghdad and killed the Abbasid caliph.
Hulegu reigned from 1256 to 1265. During his rule he established the boundaries and many of the policies of the Ilkhanid realm. Hulegu’s forces tried to attack Syria, but in 1260 the Mamelukes defeated them at the battle of Ain Jalut. Despite numerous campaigns, the Ilkhans were never able to gain control over Syria. Their territories thus reached their full extent, bounded by the Euphrates in the west, the Caucasus Mountains to the north, and the Oxus and the Punjab Rivers in the east. Having destroyed the powers within the center of the realm, Hulegu left local dynasties intact within the Ilkhanid borderlands, demanding tribute and interfering occasionally in their affairs.
The Ilkhans maintained unfriendly relations with their neighbors, including the Mongol states to the north. The Mamelukes, who threatened the Ilkhans in the west, soon found a useful ally in the khans of the Golden Horde, who declared war on the Ilkhans in 1262. Their attack failed, but the Caucasian frontier remained contested throughout the Ilkhanid period. In 1270, the Chagatai khans of Central Asia invaded Khurasan. This was the first of many such invasions. Since the Mamelukes also threatened the crusader states of the Levant, Hulegu sent envoys to the Western powers suggesting a joint campaign. The European rulers were eager to cooperate, and over the next forty years the Europeans and Ilkhans repeatedly discussed campaigns but never actually coordinated one.
Hulegu’s son Abaqa (r.1265-1282) continued his father’s policies, strengthening the European alliance and again attempting the conquest of Syria. Abaqa’s death 1282 from excessive drinking, a common problem among the Ilkhans, began the first of several succession struggles. He was succeeded by his brother Teguder (Ahmad), the first Muslim Ilkhan, but in 1284 Abaqa’s son Arghun seized power. Arghun (r.1284-1291) suffered from the rebellion of one of his greatest Mongol commanders, and from this time internal discord remained an almost constant problem for the Ilkhans. The next ruler, Abaqa’s son Geikhatu (r.1291-1295), is best remembered for his debauchery and his disastrous experiment with paper currency -- known from China -- which he introduced briefly in 1294 to alleviate his financial straits. In 1295, Geikhatu’s cousin Beidu deposed him, to be overthrown the same year by Arghun’s son Ghazan.
Most early Ilkhans were Buddhist or Christian and often favored their Christian and Jewish subjects at the expense of the Muslims. Ghazan (r.1295-1304), however, converted to Islam and reinstated it as the official religion, a move accompanied by unusual manifestations of religious hostility. At Ghazan’s accession, the fiscal administration and the economy were in chaos. He reorganized the currency, the tax structure, and the system of military support. These reforms did much to restore prosperity, and by Ghazan’s death in 1304 Ilkhanid rule approximated the traditional patterns of Islamic government.
Ghazan’s brother and successor, Oljeitu (r.1304-1316), attempted to expand Ilkhanid power within Southwest Asia. He annexed what is now southern Afghanistan but failed to conquer Gilan, on the southern Caspian littoral. At Oljeitu’s death, the throne passed to his eleven year old son, Abu Sa‘id (r.1317-1335). Much of the power within the realm now fell to Mongol commanders. Although the Ilkhans were still able to protect their borders, internal order was lost. With the death of Abu Sa‘id in 1335, the line of Hulegu became extinct. For a few years, khan from other lines held the throne with the help of regional powers, but by the 1350s Ilkhanid rule had ended.
In administering their territories, the Ilkhans depended heavily on Southwest Asian bureaucrats, most of whom spoke Persian. These viziers held great power and wealth and became deeply involved in court politics. There was constant ministerial in-fighting that often resulted in personal disgrace. Almost all Ilkhanid viziers died by execution.
Although the Mongols came into Southwest Asia as foreigners and destroyed several of its major cultural centers, the khans and their viziers actively promoted Islamic culture and spent unprecedented sums of money on building projects and patronage of the arts and sciences. Of particular interest are Il-Khanid architecture, ceramics, metalwork and textiles.
The Il-Khanids opened the Islamic world to outside influence, importing scholars, artists, and scribes from India, China, and Europe. Chinese influence was particularly prevalent and proved highly fruitful in the realm of art. It was at this time that Persian miniature painting first developed, based partly on Chinese models. Their art reflects Far Eastern influence in miniature painting and in the use of new iconographic themes of Chinese derivation, such as the lotus, the phoenix and square Kufic script, which was probably inspired by Chinese seal characters.
Historical writing also flourished, and two Ilkhanid viziers, Ata Malik Juwaini and Rashid al-Din, are among the greatest Persian historians.
The severe economic depression of the Ilkhanid period has often been ascribed to the ravages of the Mongol conquests and the exploitative administration of the early Ilkhans. Scholars have now shown that this decline had begun before the Mongol invasion. While the Mongols accelerated the decline of agriculture and of urban population, they cannot be seen as the only cause of these trends.
Mongol rule brought a major change in political and religious life. Before 1258, local Islamic dynasties had sought legitimation through their relationship to the caliphate. By destroying this institution, the Ilkhans strengthened the concept of individual dynastic legitimacy, thus preparing the ground for the later regional empires of Southwest Asia. With the end of the caliphate and of Isma‘ili power, moderate Twelver Shi‘ism gained greater popularity and acceptance.
During the Mongol period, Iran was perhaps the greatest cultural and scientific center of the Islamic world, and Persian began its long ascendancy as the language of high culture. Many scholars seek the origins of modern Iran in the Ilkhanid period, when for the first time Iran was controlled nominally by one ruler, separately from most Arab regions of the Islamic world.
The rulers of the Ilkhans were:
House of Hulagu (1256-1335)
* Hulagu Khan (1256–1265)
* Abaqa Khan (1265–1282)
* Ahmad Tegüder (1282–1284)
* Arghun (1284–1291)
* Gaykhatu (1291–1295)
* Baydu (1295)
* Mahmud Ghazan (1295–1304)
* Muhammad Khodabandeh (Oljeitu) (1304–1316)
* Abu Sa'id Bahadur (1316–1335)
After the Ilkhanate, the regional states established during the disintegration of the Ilkhanate raised their own candidates as claimants.
House of Ariq Böke
* Arpa Ke'ün (1335–1336)
House of Hulagu (1336-1357)
* Musa (1336–1337) (puppet of 'Ali Padshah of Baghdad)
* Muhammad (1336–1338) (Jalayirid puppet)
* Sati Beg (1338–1339) (Chobanid puppet)
* Sulayman (1339–1343) (Chobanid puppet, recognized by the Sarbadars 1341–1343)
* Jahan Temur (1339–1340) (Jalayirid puppet)
* Anushirwan (1343–1356) (Chobanid puppet)
* Ghazan II (1356–1357) (known only from coinage)
House of Qasar
Claimants from eastern Persia (Khurasan):
* Togha Temür (c. 1338–1353) (recognized by the Kartids 1338–1349; by the Jalayirids 1338–1339, 1340–1344; by the Sarbadars 1338–1341, 1344, 1353)
* Luqman (1353–1388) (son of Togha Temür and the protege of Timur)
Il-Khanids see Ilkhanids
"Subordinate Khans" see Ilkhanids
"Peaceful Khans" see Ilkhanids
Ilkhanids (Il-Khanids). Mongolian dynasty in Persia, Iraq, parts of Syria, eastern Anatolia, and the Caucausus during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries (c.1256-1355). Their main capitals were Tabriz, and from 1307 Sultaniya. Hulagu (r. 1252-1265), a grandson of Jenghiz Khan, conquered Iran in 1256 on behalf of his brother, the Great Khan Mongke, and launched the Mongol attack on Baghdad in 1258. He assumed the title Ilkhan (“subordinate or peaceful khan”) in recognition of the leadership aspirations of the Great Khan of the Mongols. In 1260, he was defeated by the Mamelukes, under Sultan Baybars at Ain Jalut (in Palestine), hindering the expansion westward. Hulagu’s son, Abaqa (r. 1265-1282), consolidated his authority via the battle against the Mamelukes and subdued the Caucasus, after a political alliance with Christian Europe failed. During the short-lasting governments that followed, the economic and financial systems went into decline. Under Khan Ghazan (r. 1295-1304), who made Islam the state religion, and his brother, Uljaitu (Oljeytu Khudabanda) (r. 1304-1316), who converted to Shi‘ism in 1310, the empire experienced its political and cultural zenith. The last Ilkhanid, Abu Said (Abu Sa‘id) (r. 1316-1335), a Sunnite, declared peace with the Mamelukes (1323), restored Mongol sovereignty over Anatolia, and successfully advanced into the Caucasus. After this, the empire broke up into different dominions, which developed separately.
The Il-Khanids showed a tendency toward Buddhism and Christianity, Nestorianism in particular, and were tolerant of the Shi‘a until Arghun (r.1284-1291) embraced Sunni Islam, which set the seal on the fusion of Mongols and Turks in Persia. Oljeytu Khudabanda, however, embraced Shi‘ism in 1310 but his son and successor Abu Sa‘id (r.1316-1335) reverted to Sunni Islam. The period of Il-Khanid rule was economically and politically difficult but rich in cultural achievements.
The Mongols conquered the northeastern Islamic world in the 1220s. In 1251, Genghis Khan’s grandson, Great Khan Mongke, gave the vice-regency of Southwest Asia to his brother Hulegu and sent him to complete its subjugation. In 1256 and 1257, Hulegu destroyed the strongholds of the Isma‘ili sect that had plagued the leaders of Sunni Islam. In 1258, his troops took Baghdad and killed the Abbasid caliph.
Hulegu reigned from 1256 to 1265. During his rule he established the boundaries and many of the policies of the Ilkhanid realm. Hulegu’s forces tried to attack Syria, but in 1260 the Mamelukes defeated them at the battle of Ain Jalut. Despite numerous campaigns, the Ilkhans were never able to gain control over Syria. Their territories thus reached their full extent, bounded by the Euphrates in the west, the Caucasus Mountains to the north, and the Oxus and the Punjab Rivers in the east. Having destroyed the powers within the center of the realm, Hulegu left local dynasties intact within the Ilkhanid borderlands, demanding tribute and interfering occasionally in their affairs.
The Ilkhans maintained unfriendly relations with their neighbors, including the Mongol states to the north. The Mamelukes, who threatened the Ilkhans in the west, soon found a useful ally in the khans of the Golden Horde, who declared war on the Ilkhans in 1262. Their attack failed, but the Caucasian frontier remained contested throughout the Ilkhanid period. In 1270, the Chagatai khans of Central Asia invaded Khurasan. This was the first of many such invasions. Since the Mamelukes also threatened the crusader states of the Levant, Hulegu sent envoys to the Western powers suggesting a joint campaign. The European rulers were eager to cooperate, and over the next forty years the Europeans and Ilkhans repeatedly discussed campaigns but never actually coordinated one.
Hulegu’s son Abaqa (r.1265-1282) continued his father’s policies, strengthening the European alliance and again attempting the conquest of Syria. Abaqa’s death 1282 from excessive drinking, a common problem among the Ilkhans, began the first of several succession struggles. He was succeeded by his brother Teguder (Ahmad), the first Muslim Ilkhan, but in 1284 Abaqa’s son Arghun seized power. Arghun (r.1284-1291) suffered from the rebellion of one of his greatest Mongol commanders, and from this time internal discord remained an almost constant problem for the Ilkhans. The next ruler, Abaqa’s son Geikhatu (r.1291-1295), is best remembered for his debauchery and his disastrous experiment with paper currency -- known from China -- which he introduced briefly in 1294 to alleviate his financial straits. In 1295, Geikhatu’s cousin Beidu deposed him, to be overthrown the same year by Arghun’s son Ghazan.
Most early Ilkhans were Buddhist or Christian and often favored their Christian and Jewish subjects at the expense of the Muslims. Ghazan (r.1295-1304), however, converted to Islam and reinstated it as the official religion, a move accompanied by unusual manifestations of religious hostility. At Ghazan’s accession, the fiscal administration and the economy were in chaos. He reorganized the currency, the tax structure, and the system of military support. These reforms did much to restore prosperity, and by Ghazan’s death in 1304 Ilkhanid rule approximated the traditional patterns of Islamic government.
Ghazan’s brother and successor, Oljeitu (r.1304-1316), attempted to expand Ilkhanid power within Southwest Asia. He annexed what is now southern Afghanistan but failed to conquer Gilan, on the southern Caspian littoral. At Oljeitu’s death, the throne passed to his eleven year old son, Abu Sa‘id (r.1317-1335). Much of the power within the realm now fell to Mongol commanders. Although the Ilkhans were still able to protect their borders, internal order was lost. With the death of Abu Sa‘id in 1335, the line of Hulegu became extinct. For a few years, khan from other lines held the throne with the help of regional powers, but by the 1350s Ilkhanid rule had ended.
In administering their territories, the Ilkhans depended heavily on Southwest Asian bureaucrats, most of whom spoke Persian. These viziers held great power and wealth and became deeply involved in court politics. There was constant ministerial in-fighting that often resulted in personal disgrace. Almost all Ilkhanid viziers died by execution.
Although the Mongols came into Southwest Asia as foreigners and destroyed several of its major cultural centers, the khans and their viziers actively promoted Islamic culture and spent unprecedented sums of money on building projects and patronage of the arts and sciences. Of particular interest are Il-Khanid architecture, ceramics, metalwork and textiles.
The Il-Khanids opened the Islamic world to outside influence, importing scholars, artists, and scribes from India, China, and Europe. Chinese influence was particularly prevalent and proved highly fruitful in the realm of art. It was at this time that Persian miniature painting first developed, based partly on Chinese models. Their art reflects Far Eastern influence in miniature painting and in the use of new iconographic themes of Chinese derivation, such as the lotus, the phoenix and square Kufic script, which was probably inspired by Chinese seal characters.
Historical writing also flourished, and two Ilkhanid viziers, Ata Malik Juwaini and Rashid al-Din, are among the greatest Persian historians.
The severe economic depression of the Ilkhanid period has often been ascribed to the ravages of the Mongol conquests and the exploitative administration of the early Ilkhans. Scholars have now shown that this decline had begun before the Mongol invasion. While the Mongols accelerated the decline of agriculture and of urban population, they cannot be seen as the only cause of these trends.
Mongol rule brought a major change in political and religious life. Before 1258, local Islamic dynasties had sought legitimation through their relationship to the caliphate. By destroying this institution, the Ilkhans strengthened the concept of individual dynastic legitimacy, thus preparing the ground for the later regional empires of Southwest Asia. With the end of the caliphate and of Isma‘ili power, moderate Twelver Shi‘ism gained greater popularity and acceptance.
During the Mongol period, Iran was perhaps the greatest cultural and scientific center of the Islamic world, and Persian began its long ascendancy as the language of high culture. Many scholars seek the origins of modern Iran in the Ilkhanid period, when for the first time Iran was controlled nominally by one ruler, separately from most Arab regions of the Islamic world.
The rulers of the Ilkhans were:
House of Hulagu (1256-1335)
* Hulagu Khan (1256–1265)
* Abaqa Khan (1265–1282)
* Ahmad Tegüder (1282–1284)
* Arghun (1284–1291)
* Gaykhatu (1291–1295)
* Baydu (1295)
* Mahmud Ghazan (1295–1304)
* Muhammad Khodabandeh (Oljeitu) (1304–1316)
* Abu Sa'id Bahadur (1316–1335)
After the Ilkhanate, the regional states established during the disintegration of the Ilkhanate raised their own candidates as claimants.
House of Ariq Böke
* Arpa Ke'ün (1335–1336)
House of Hulagu (1336-1357)
* Musa (1336–1337) (puppet of 'Ali Padshah of Baghdad)
* Muhammad (1336–1338) (Jalayirid puppet)
* Sati Beg (1338–1339) (Chobanid puppet)
* Sulayman (1339–1343) (Chobanid puppet, recognized by the Sarbadars 1341–1343)
* Jahan Temur (1339–1340) (Jalayirid puppet)
* Anushirwan (1343–1356) (Chobanid puppet)
* Ghazan II (1356–1357) (known only from coinage)
House of Qasar
Claimants from eastern Persia (Khurasan):
* Togha Temür (c. 1338–1353) (recognized by the Kartids 1338–1349; by the Jalayirids 1338–1339, 1340–1344; by the Sarbadars 1338–1341, 1344, 1353)
* Luqman (1353–1388) (son of Togha Temür and the protege of Timur)
Il-Khanids see Ilkhanids
"Subordinate Khans" see Ilkhanids
"Peaceful Khans" see Ilkhanids
‘Ilmi Bownderi
‘Ilmi Bownderi (Elmi Bonderi) (b. c. 1908 - d. probably c. 1938). Somali oral poet. His many love poems gained him a wide reputation in northwestern Somaliland. According to popular tradition, he died of love for a woman he could not marry. Rejected by the woman’s relatives as too poor, he had gone away to earn money and upon his return found her married. During the illness which preceded his death, he recited many poems which those around him learned by heart and passed on to others. His poems are characterized by a majestic power of diction and by images drawn from the history of Somali clans and Islamic tradition. Some have been written down by private collectors.
Bownderi, 'Ilmi see ‘Ilmi Bownderi
Elmi Bonderi see ‘Ilmi Bownderi
Bonderi, Elmi see ‘Ilmi Bownderi
‘Ilmi Bownderi (Elmi Bonderi) (b. c. 1908 - d. probably c. 1938). Somali oral poet. His many love poems gained him a wide reputation in northwestern Somaliland. According to popular tradition, he died of love for a woman he could not marry. Rejected by the woman’s relatives as too poor, he had gone away to earn money and upon his return found her married. During the illness which preceded his death, he recited many poems which those around him learned by heart and passed on to others. His poems are characterized by a majestic power of diction and by images drawn from the history of Somali clans and Islamic tradition. Some have been written down by private collectors.
Bownderi, 'Ilmi see ‘Ilmi Bownderi
Elmi Bonderi see ‘Ilmi Bownderi
Bonderi, Elmi see ‘Ilmi Bownderi
Iltutmish
Iltutmish (Shams ud-Din Iltutmish) (Shams al-Din Iltutmish ibn Elam Khan) (Shams-ud-din Iltutmish) (Shams al-Din Iltutmish) (Altamash) (d. April 29, 1236). Greatest of the Mu‘izzi or Slave Kings in Northern India (r. 1211- 1236). He laid the foundations of Muslim rule in India.
Iltutmish was a Mameluke sultan who consolidated Turkish rule in North India. He organized the governing class, the army, the iqta land-revenue assignment system, and the currency of the sultanate. A great builder and patron of arts, he enhanced the glory of Delhi and made it his capital. Iltutmish was an intensely religious Muslim and obtained an investiture from the caliph in the year 1229.
Of Ilbari Turkish lineage, Iltutmish was, in boyhood, sold into slavery at Bukhara. In 1192, Aibak bought Iltutmish at Delhi. Iltutmish married Aibak’s daughter and had a meteoric career. He became the head of Aibak’s bodyguard detail; amir-i shikar, amir of Gwalior; and upon Aibak’s death in 1210, sultan of Delhi. During the Khokar campaign, Muizuddin manumitted Iltutmish. Iltutmish led expeditions into Rajasthan and eastern India but avoided conflict with the Mongols in the northwest. His tomb is near the Qutb Minar.
Iltutmish was the third and greatest Delhi sultan of the so-called Slave dynasty. Iltutmish was sold into slavery but married the daughter of his master, Quṭb al-Dīn Aibak, whom he succeeded in 1211. He strengthened and expanded the Muslim empire in northern India and moved the capital to Delhi, where he built the great victory tower, the Quṭb Mīnār.
A wise and patient statesman who was trained as a trusted administrator under his predecessors Muʿizz al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Sām and Quṭb al-Dīn, Iltutmish was faced upon his accession not only with the deterioration of Muslim rule but also with the claim of Tāj al-Dīn Yildoiz, the Ghazna ruler, to succession to all of Muʿizz al-Dīn’s conquests and with the attempts by the Hindus to recover portions of their lost territory. In 1215, he captured Yildoiz, who died in prison. In 1225, he forced the unruly Bengali governor to acknowledge the authority of Delhi, and shortly thereafter he consolidated again the Muslim holdings. Iltutmish was able to preserve his kingdom against the ravages of the Mongol invasions that coincided with his reign, and he succeeded in building an administrative machinery for the empire. He sought out 11th-century Islamic classics on the art of government; and the Ādāb al-Muluk (“Conduct of the Kings”), the first Indo-Muslim classic on the art of government and warfare, was written for him. He was tolerant of the Hindus despite the urgings of his advisers, and he built up the waterworks, mosques, and amenities at Delhi to make it for the first time a fitting seat of government. His reign and his advisers, especially the vizier Junaydī, were praised by contemporaries.
Iltutmish’s eldest son died before he did, and his other sons were incompetent. He gave an excellent education to his daughter Raziyya (Raziyyat al-Dīn) and desired that she should succeed him. His wishes were offensive to the administrative Council of Forty, Iltutmish’s personal slaves who served as his advisers. Raziyya did succeed briefly to the throne, but her appointment of an African to an important position was considered insulting to the council, which shortly thereafter brought about her downfall. This marked the beginning of the decline of the line of Iltutmish.
Shams al-Din Iltutmish ibn Elam Khan see Iltutmish
Shams ud-Din Iltutmish see Iltutmish
Shams al-Din Iltutmish see Iltutmish
Altamash see Iltutmish
Iltutmish (Shams ud-Din Iltutmish) (Shams al-Din Iltutmish ibn Elam Khan) (Shams-ud-din Iltutmish) (Shams al-Din Iltutmish) (Altamash) (d. April 29, 1236). Greatest of the Mu‘izzi or Slave Kings in Northern India (r. 1211- 1236). He laid the foundations of Muslim rule in India.
Iltutmish was a Mameluke sultan who consolidated Turkish rule in North India. He organized the governing class, the army, the iqta land-revenue assignment system, and the currency of the sultanate. A great builder and patron of arts, he enhanced the glory of Delhi and made it his capital. Iltutmish was an intensely religious Muslim and obtained an investiture from the caliph in the year 1229.
Of Ilbari Turkish lineage, Iltutmish was, in boyhood, sold into slavery at Bukhara. In 1192, Aibak bought Iltutmish at Delhi. Iltutmish married Aibak’s daughter and had a meteoric career. He became the head of Aibak’s bodyguard detail; amir-i shikar, amir of Gwalior; and upon Aibak’s death in 1210, sultan of Delhi. During the Khokar campaign, Muizuddin manumitted Iltutmish. Iltutmish led expeditions into Rajasthan and eastern India but avoided conflict with the Mongols in the northwest. His tomb is near the Qutb Minar.
Iltutmish was the third and greatest Delhi sultan of the so-called Slave dynasty. Iltutmish was sold into slavery but married the daughter of his master, Quṭb al-Dīn Aibak, whom he succeeded in 1211. He strengthened and expanded the Muslim empire in northern India and moved the capital to Delhi, where he built the great victory tower, the Quṭb Mīnār.
A wise and patient statesman who was trained as a trusted administrator under his predecessors Muʿizz al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Sām and Quṭb al-Dīn, Iltutmish was faced upon his accession not only with the deterioration of Muslim rule but also with the claim of Tāj al-Dīn Yildoiz, the Ghazna ruler, to succession to all of Muʿizz al-Dīn’s conquests and with the attempts by the Hindus to recover portions of their lost territory. In 1215, he captured Yildoiz, who died in prison. In 1225, he forced the unruly Bengali governor to acknowledge the authority of Delhi, and shortly thereafter he consolidated again the Muslim holdings. Iltutmish was able to preserve his kingdom against the ravages of the Mongol invasions that coincided with his reign, and he succeeded in building an administrative machinery for the empire. He sought out 11th-century Islamic classics on the art of government; and the Ādāb al-Muluk (“Conduct of the Kings”), the first Indo-Muslim classic on the art of government and warfare, was written for him. He was tolerant of the Hindus despite the urgings of his advisers, and he built up the waterworks, mosques, and amenities at Delhi to make it for the first time a fitting seat of government. His reign and his advisers, especially the vizier Junaydī, were praised by contemporaries.
Iltutmish’s eldest son died before he did, and his other sons were incompetent. He gave an excellent education to his daughter Raziyya (Raziyyat al-Dīn) and desired that she should succeed him. His wishes were offensive to the administrative Council of Forty, Iltutmish’s personal slaves who served as his advisers. Raziyya did succeed briefly to the throne, but her appointment of an African to an important position was considered insulting to the council, which shortly thereafter brought about her downfall. This marked the beginning of the decline of the line of Iltutmish.
Shams al-Din Iltutmish ibn Elam Khan see Iltutmish
Shams ud-Din Iltutmish see Iltutmish
Shams al-Din Iltutmish see Iltutmish
Altamash see Iltutmish
Ilyas Shahi
Ilyas Shahi. Refers to a dynasty of India. Shaking Tughluq authority in Bengal, Sultan Shams al-Din Ilyas Shah founded the Ilyas Shahi dynasty in 1342. His son, Sikander Shah (r.1357-1389), consolidated the dynasty’s authority. The less effectual rule of his successors, however, allowed a Hindu minister, Raja Ganesh, to seize power in 1417. Ilyas Shahi rule was restored in 1437 and lasted until 1487. The longest lived independent Bengal sultanate, the Ilyas Shahis were able administrators particularly noted for their architectural patronage, especially of the enormous Adina Mosque in Pandua, their first capital.
The Ilyas dynasty or Iliyas dynasty or Iliyas Shahi dynasty was the first independent ruling dynasty in late medieval Bengal, which ruled from the 14th century to the 15th century. The dynasty was founded by Ilyas Shah (1342–1358), who achieved the political unity of Bengal. Shams-ud-Din Ilyas made Pandua his capital but in 1453 Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud shifted it to Lakhnauti.
In 1415, The Ilyas Shahi dynasty was overthrown by Raja Ganesha. He was succeeded by his son Jadu or Jalal-ud-Din Muhammad Shah (after conversion to Islam). He was succeeded by his son, Shams-ud-Din Ahmad Shah. He was killed by his nobles in 1436. After his death, the rule of Ilyas Shahi dynasty was restored by Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah, a descendant of Shamsuddin Ilyas Shah, who ascended the throne in 1437. In 1487, the last ruler of this dynasty Jalal-ud-Din Fath Shah was killed by his Habshi commander of the palace guards, Sultan Shahzada, who ascended the throne under the title, Barbak Shah. Thus the Ilyas Shahi dynasty rule over Bengal ended.
The Ilyas Shahi rulers were:
1. Shams-ud-Din Ilyas Shah (r.1342-1358)
2. Sikandar Shah (r.1358–1390).
3. Ghiyas-ud-din Azam Shah (r.1390–1410 or 1396?)
4. Saif-ud-din Hamza Shah (r.1410–1412 or 1396–1405?)
5. Shihab-ud-din Bayazid Shah (r.1412–1414 or 1405–1415?)
6. Ala-ud-din Firuz Shah (r.1414-1415)
7. Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah (r.1437-1459) (restored)
8. Rukn-ud-Din Barbak Shah (r.1459-1474)
9. Shams-ud-Din Yusuf Shah (r.1474-1481)
10. Sikandar Shah II (r.1481)
11. Jalal-ud-Din Fath Shah (r.1481-1487)
Iliyas see Ilyas Shahi.
Iliyas Shahi see Ilyas Shahi.
Ilyas Shahi. Refers to a dynasty of India. Shaking Tughluq authority in Bengal, Sultan Shams al-Din Ilyas Shah founded the Ilyas Shahi dynasty in 1342. His son, Sikander Shah (r.1357-1389), consolidated the dynasty’s authority. The less effectual rule of his successors, however, allowed a Hindu minister, Raja Ganesh, to seize power in 1417. Ilyas Shahi rule was restored in 1437 and lasted until 1487. The longest lived independent Bengal sultanate, the Ilyas Shahis were able administrators particularly noted for their architectural patronage, especially of the enormous Adina Mosque in Pandua, their first capital.
The Ilyas dynasty or Iliyas dynasty or Iliyas Shahi dynasty was the first independent ruling dynasty in late medieval Bengal, which ruled from the 14th century to the 15th century. The dynasty was founded by Ilyas Shah (1342–1358), who achieved the political unity of Bengal. Shams-ud-Din Ilyas made Pandua his capital but in 1453 Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud shifted it to Lakhnauti.
In 1415, The Ilyas Shahi dynasty was overthrown by Raja Ganesha. He was succeeded by his son Jadu or Jalal-ud-Din Muhammad Shah (after conversion to Islam). He was succeeded by his son, Shams-ud-Din Ahmad Shah. He was killed by his nobles in 1436. After his death, the rule of Ilyas Shahi dynasty was restored by Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah, a descendant of Shamsuddin Ilyas Shah, who ascended the throne in 1437. In 1487, the last ruler of this dynasty Jalal-ud-Din Fath Shah was killed by his Habshi commander of the palace guards, Sultan Shahzada, who ascended the throne under the title, Barbak Shah. Thus the Ilyas Shahi dynasty rule over Bengal ended.
The Ilyas Shahi rulers were:
1. Shams-ud-Din Ilyas Shah (r.1342-1358)
2. Sikandar Shah (r.1358–1390).
3. Ghiyas-ud-din Azam Shah (r.1390–1410 or 1396?)
4. Saif-ud-din Hamza Shah (r.1410–1412 or 1396–1405?)
5. Shihab-ud-din Bayazid Shah (r.1412–1414 or 1405–1415?)
6. Ala-ud-din Firuz Shah (r.1414-1415)
7. Nasir-ud-Din Mahmud Shah (r.1437-1459) (restored)
8. Rukn-ud-Din Barbak Shah (r.1459-1474)
9. Shams-ud-Din Yusuf Shah (r.1474-1481)
10. Sikandar Shah II (r.1481)
11. Jalal-ud-Din Fath Shah (r.1481-1487)
Iliyas see Ilyas Shahi.
Iliyas Shahi see Ilyas Shahi.
‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh (‘Ali ibn Buwayh ‘Imad al-Dawla) (Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula) (c. 891/2–December 949). Eldest of the three Daylami brothers who became the founders of the dynasty of the Buyids (Buwayhids). He ruled from 934 to 949. He seized Baghdad in 945 and brought the ‘Abbasid caliph under his control.
'Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula was the founder of the Buyid dynasty in Iran (in Shiraz, 934–949). 'Ali first entered the services of the Samanids under Nasr II, where he became a member of the ruler's entourage. From there he eventually joined Makan, who ruled Gorgan and Ray as a governor of the Samanids, in around 928. He may have done so at Nasr's suggestion. In any case, he managed to occupy a high position under Makan and gained army commissions for his two younger brothers, Hasan and Ahmad. In 930, however, Makan rebelled against the Samanids by seizing Khurasan. He was subsequently attacked by the Ziyarid prince Mardavij and forced to give up Tabaristan.
'Ali and his brothers managed to defect to Mardavij's side just as the Ziyarid was preparing to undertake the conquest to the south of the Alborz mountains as far as Qazvin. Not long afterwards Mardavij granted 'Ali administrative rule over Karaj, a strategically important town probably situated near modern Bahramabad. While making a stop in Ray on his way to Karaj, however, 'Ali was warned by Mardavij's vizier al-'Amid that the Ziyarid was planning to eliminate him. Quickly leaving Ray, he arrived at and took over Karaj.
With a small number of Dailamite troops to support him, 'Ali sought to expand his position. Moving against the heretical Khurramites, who controlled the surrounding mountains, he gained control of the region and was heavily enriched by the expeditions. At the same time, he managed to maintain his troops' loyalty, despite Mardavij's attempts to incite them against their master.
In order to further secure his position, 'Ali decided to seize the nearby city of Isfahan, then under control of the Abbasid governor Yaqut. The enemy army outnumbered 'Ali's, but a large portion of it defected to him upon his appearance before the city. Yaqut, however, refused to negotiate with him, and Mardavij's approach forced him to abandon Isfahan in favor of the Ziyarids. Having fled Karaj as well, 'Ali now took Arrajan, a city between Fars and Khuzestan.
Having stayed for the winter in Arrajan, 'Ali decided to campaign in Fars in the spring of 933. There he encountered the resistance of Yaqut, who was also the governor of Fars and from whom 'Ali had stripped Arrajan. He also found an ally, Zaid ibn 'Ali al-Naubandagani, a wealthy landowner who disliked the Abbasids. After a series of battles, 'Ali managed to prove the victor. By May or June of 934, he entered Shiraz, the capital of Fars.
In order to prevent Mardavij from pressing claims on his territory, 'Ali sought the recognition of the Abbasid Caliph, who confirmed him as his viceroy in September or October of 934. Although the caliph's emissary arrived with the insignia for his office, 'Ali delayed giving the requisite tribute. By the time the emissary died in Shiraz two years later, the tribute was still unpaid.
Mardavij continued to pose a threat; he decided to invade Khuzestan, which was still under caliphal control, in order to sever the Buyids from the Caliphate. This invasion prompted the caliph to reach an agreement with the Ziyarid, which forced 'Ali to recognize Mardavij's authority. This recognition proved short-lived, as Mardavij was assassinated in January of 935. 'Ali then decided to press claims on Khuzestan, and occupied 'Askar Mukram. The Buyid and the caliph then came to terms with one another. The latter confirmed 'Ali in his possession of Fars and gave Khuzestan to Yaqut.
Bolstered by many of Mardavij's Turkish mercenaries that had joined him, as well as the collapse of Ziyarid control over central Iran, 'Ali decided that Isfahan should be taken. He sent his brother Hasan to accomplish this. Hasan initially managed to take Isfahan but later encountered difficulties. After Hasan took Isfahan, 'Ali sent his other brother Ahmad to take Kerman. Although the bulk of that province was compelled to recognize Buyid authority, direct control was not established, and 'Ali eventually recalled him.
'Ali next sent Ahmad to Khuzestan, where the Basrian clan of the Baridis had become the de facto rulers of the province but were trying to throw off caliphal rule. They asked 'Ali for their struggle against the Abbasids, providing the pretext for Ahmad to enter Khuzestan. Although the Baridis temporarily recovered the province and even managed to take Baghdad a few times, Ahmad eventually took control of Khuzestan himself. From Khuzestan Ahmad waged a series of campaigns in Iraq, until in 945 he entered Baghdad. The caliph then gave him the title of "Mu'izz al-Daula," while 'Ali and Hasan were given the titles of "'Imad al-Daula" and "Rukn al-Daula," respectively. By 948 Rukn al-Daula had also secured his position in central Iran, causing a clear definition of the borders of the Buyid state.
'Imad al-Daula was not the master of the entire Buyid empire. Rukn al-Daula, partly as a result of 'Imad al-Daula's failure to send him military support during his struggles in central Iran, was relatively independent of his brother. Mu'izz al-Daula, on the other hand, had been given support by his brother in his efforts to take Khuzestan, and was a subordinate of 'Imad al-Daula. He was not listed as an independent ruler on contemporary sources, and the name of his brother appeared before his own on coins struck by him. Despite the fact that Mu'izz al-Daula's capture of Baghdad resulted in him gaining the title of senior amir (amir al-umara'), which in theory made him the highest ranking individual out of all three Buyids, he remained little more than a provincial ruler under 'Imad al-Daula's authority. 'Imad al-Daula himself claimed the title of senior amir during his lifetime, and although he never officially held it, nor was entitled to do so, he was recognized as the de facto holder of that position.
'Imad al-Daula's lack of an heir posed a problem until shortly before his death. A few months beforehand, he settled on Rukn al-Daula's eldest son Fana-Khusrau as his successor. He died in December of 949, and his brothers helped to install Fana-Khusrau (who took the title of "'Adud al-Daula") in Shiraz. Rukn al-Daula, who was the most powerful of the Buyids, claimed the title of senior amir for himself and received both Mu'izz al-Daula's and 'Adud al-Daula's recognition as such.
'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al-Dawla see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Dawla, 'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al- see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh (‘Ali ibn Buwayh ‘Imad al-Dawla) (Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula) (c. 891/2–December 949). Eldest of the three Daylami brothers who became the founders of the dynasty of the Buyids (Buwayhids). He ruled from 934 to 949. He seized Baghdad in 945 and brought the ‘Abbasid caliph under his control.
'Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula was the founder of the Buyid dynasty in Iran (in Shiraz, 934–949). 'Ali first entered the services of the Samanids under Nasr II, where he became a member of the ruler's entourage. From there he eventually joined Makan, who ruled Gorgan and Ray as a governor of the Samanids, in around 928. He may have done so at Nasr's suggestion. In any case, he managed to occupy a high position under Makan and gained army commissions for his two younger brothers, Hasan and Ahmad. In 930, however, Makan rebelled against the Samanids by seizing Khurasan. He was subsequently attacked by the Ziyarid prince Mardavij and forced to give up Tabaristan.
'Ali and his brothers managed to defect to Mardavij's side just as the Ziyarid was preparing to undertake the conquest to the south of the Alborz mountains as far as Qazvin. Not long afterwards Mardavij granted 'Ali administrative rule over Karaj, a strategically important town probably situated near modern Bahramabad. While making a stop in Ray on his way to Karaj, however, 'Ali was warned by Mardavij's vizier al-'Amid that the Ziyarid was planning to eliminate him. Quickly leaving Ray, he arrived at and took over Karaj.
With a small number of Dailamite troops to support him, 'Ali sought to expand his position. Moving against the heretical Khurramites, who controlled the surrounding mountains, he gained control of the region and was heavily enriched by the expeditions. At the same time, he managed to maintain his troops' loyalty, despite Mardavij's attempts to incite them against their master.
In order to further secure his position, 'Ali decided to seize the nearby city of Isfahan, then under control of the Abbasid governor Yaqut. The enemy army outnumbered 'Ali's, but a large portion of it defected to him upon his appearance before the city. Yaqut, however, refused to negotiate with him, and Mardavij's approach forced him to abandon Isfahan in favor of the Ziyarids. Having fled Karaj as well, 'Ali now took Arrajan, a city between Fars and Khuzestan.
Having stayed for the winter in Arrajan, 'Ali decided to campaign in Fars in the spring of 933. There he encountered the resistance of Yaqut, who was also the governor of Fars and from whom 'Ali had stripped Arrajan. He also found an ally, Zaid ibn 'Ali al-Naubandagani, a wealthy landowner who disliked the Abbasids. After a series of battles, 'Ali managed to prove the victor. By May or June of 934, he entered Shiraz, the capital of Fars.
In order to prevent Mardavij from pressing claims on his territory, 'Ali sought the recognition of the Abbasid Caliph, who confirmed him as his viceroy in September or October of 934. Although the caliph's emissary arrived with the insignia for his office, 'Ali delayed giving the requisite tribute. By the time the emissary died in Shiraz two years later, the tribute was still unpaid.
Mardavij continued to pose a threat; he decided to invade Khuzestan, which was still under caliphal control, in order to sever the Buyids from the Caliphate. This invasion prompted the caliph to reach an agreement with the Ziyarid, which forced 'Ali to recognize Mardavij's authority. This recognition proved short-lived, as Mardavij was assassinated in January of 935. 'Ali then decided to press claims on Khuzestan, and occupied 'Askar Mukram. The Buyid and the caliph then came to terms with one another. The latter confirmed 'Ali in his possession of Fars and gave Khuzestan to Yaqut.
Bolstered by many of Mardavij's Turkish mercenaries that had joined him, as well as the collapse of Ziyarid control over central Iran, 'Ali decided that Isfahan should be taken. He sent his brother Hasan to accomplish this. Hasan initially managed to take Isfahan but later encountered difficulties. After Hasan took Isfahan, 'Ali sent his other brother Ahmad to take Kerman. Although the bulk of that province was compelled to recognize Buyid authority, direct control was not established, and 'Ali eventually recalled him.
'Ali next sent Ahmad to Khuzestan, where the Basrian clan of the Baridis had become the de facto rulers of the province but were trying to throw off caliphal rule. They asked 'Ali for their struggle against the Abbasids, providing the pretext for Ahmad to enter Khuzestan. Although the Baridis temporarily recovered the province and even managed to take Baghdad a few times, Ahmad eventually took control of Khuzestan himself. From Khuzestan Ahmad waged a series of campaigns in Iraq, until in 945 he entered Baghdad. The caliph then gave him the title of "Mu'izz al-Daula," while 'Ali and Hasan were given the titles of "'Imad al-Daula" and "Rukn al-Daula," respectively. By 948 Rukn al-Daula had also secured his position in central Iran, causing a clear definition of the borders of the Buyid state.
'Imad al-Daula was not the master of the entire Buyid empire. Rukn al-Daula, partly as a result of 'Imad al-Daula's failure to send him military support during his struggles in central Iran, was relatively independent of his brother. Mu'izz al-Daula, on the other hand, had been given support by his brother in his efforts to take Khuzestan, and was a subordinate of 'Imad al-Daula. He was not listed as an independent ruler on contemporary sources, and the name of his brother appeared before his own on coins struck by him. Despite the fact that Mu'izz al-Daula's capture of Baghdad resulted in him gaining the title of senior amir (amir al-umara'), which in theory made him the highest ranking individual out of all three Buyids, he remained little more than a provincial ruler under 'Imad al-Daula's authority. 'Imad al-Daula himself claimed the title of senior amir during his lifetime, and although he never officially held it, nor was entitled to do so, he was recognized as the de facto holder of that position.
'Imad al-Daula's lack of an heir posed a problem until shortly before his death. A few months beforehand, he settled on Rukn al-Daula's eldest son Fana-Khusrau as his successor. He died in December of 949, and his brothers helped to install Fana-Khusrau (who took the title of "'Adud al-Daula") in Shiraz. Rukn al-Daula, who was the most powerful of the Buyids, claimed the title of senior amir for himself and received both Mu'izz al-Daula's and 'Adud al-Daula's recognition as such.
'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al-Dawla see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Dawla, 'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al- see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani
‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani (1125-1201). Historian. His most remarkable work is Qussian eloquence on the conquest of Jerusalem (of 1187). The term Qussian is related to the name of Quss ibn Sa‘ida al-Iyadi.
Isfahani, 'Imad al-Din al-Katib al- see ‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani
‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani (1125-1201). Historian. His most remarkable work is Qussian eloquence on the conquest of Jerusalem (of 1187). The term Qussian is related to the name of Quss ibn Sa‘ida al-Iyadi.
Isfahani, 'Imad al-Din al-Katib al- see ‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani
‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi)(also Zangi, Zengui, Zenki, or Zanki) (İmadeddin Zengi) (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur) (c. 1084/1085–September 14, 1146). Member of the line of the Turkish Zangid dynasty in Mosul and Aleppo (r. 1127-1146). In 1127, he was appointed governor of Mosul, and received the title of atabeg. He took possession of Jazirat ibn ‘Umar, Nisibis, Sinjar, Harran, Aleppo and Hamat. His attack on Baghdad, however, was unsuccessful, as was that of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Mustarshid bi-‘llah on Mosul. ‘Imad al-Din approved of the deposition of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Rashid (r. 1135-1136) and paid homage to the latter’s successor al-Muqtafi (r. 1136-1160). In 1137, he routed King Fulk of Jerusalem, took the fortress of Ba‘rin (Monsferrandus), and pursued the Emperor John II of Constantinople on his return to Antioch after an unsuccessful attack on Shayzar. He received Homs and in 1139 conquered Baalbek. He then laid siege to Damascus, whose commander Mu‘in al-Din invoked the support of the Crusaders. ‘Imad al-Din then raised the siege and returned to Mosul. In 1144, he took Edessa from the Crusaders, which set off the Second Crusade.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi (al-Malik al-Mansur) was the son of Aq Sunqur al-Hajib, governor of Aleppo under Malik Shah I. His father was beheaded for treason in 1094, and Zengi was brought up by Kerbogha, the governor of Mosul.
Zengi became atabeg of Mosul in 1127, and of Aleppo in 1128, uniting the two cities under his personal rule, and was formally invested as their ruler by the Sultan Mahmud II of Great Seljuk. Zengi had supported the young sultan against his rival, the caliph Al-Mustarshid.
In 1130, Zengi allied with Taj al-Mulk Buri of Damascus against the crusaders, but this was only a ruse to extend his power. He had Buri's son taken prisoner and seized Hama from him. He also besieged Hims, the governor of which was accompanying him at the time, but could not capture it, so he returned to Mosul, where Buri's son and the other prisoners from Damascus were ransomed for 50,000 dinars. In 1131, Zengi agreed to return the 50,000 dinars if Buri would deliver to him Dubais, emir of al-Hilla in Iraq, who had fled to Damascus to escape al-Mustarshid. When an ambassador from the caliph arrived to bring Dubais back, Zengi attacked him and killed some of his retinue. The ambassador returned to Baghdad without Dubais.
In 1134, Zengi became involved in Artuqid affairs, allying with the emir Timurtash (son of Ilghazi) against Timurtash's cousin Da'ud. Zengi's real desires, however, lay to the south, in Damascus. In 1135, Zengi received an appeal for help from Ismail, who had succeeded his father Buri as emir of Damascus, and who was in fear for his life from his own citizenry who considered him a cruel tyrant. Ismail was willing to surrender the city to Zengi in order to restore peace. None of Ismail's family or advisors wanted this, however, and Ismail was murdered by his own mother, Zumurrud, to prevent him from turning over the city to Zengi's control. Ismail was succeeded by his brother Shihab ad-Din Mahmud.
Zengi was not discouraged by this turn of events and arrived at Damascus anyway, still intending to seize it. The siege lasted for some time with no success on Zengi's part, so a truce was made and Shahib ad-Din's brother Bahram-Shah was given as a hostage. At the same time, news of the siege had reached the caliph and Baghdad, and a messenger was sent with orders for Zengi to leave Damascus and take control of the governance of Iraq. The messenger was ignored but Zengi gave up the siege, as per the terms of the truce with Shahib ad-Din. On the way back to Aleppo, Zengi besieged Hims, whose governor had angered him, and Shahib ad-Din responded to the city's call for help by sending Mu'in ad-Din Unur to govern it.
In 1137 Zengi besieged Hims again but Mu'in ad-Din successfully defended it. In response to Zengi's renewed attack, Damascus allied with the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem against him. Zengi laid siege to the Crusader fortress of Ba'rin and quickly crushed the army of Jerusalem. King Fulk of Jerusalem agreed to surrender and was allowed to flee with his surviving troops. Zengi, realizing that this new expedition against Damascus was bound to fail, made peace with Shahib ad-Din, just in time to be confronted at Aleppo by an army sent by the Byzantine Emperor John II Comnenus. The Emperor had recently brought the Crusader Principality of Antioch under Byzantine control, and allied himself with Joscelin II of Edessa and Raymond of Antioch. Facing a combined Byzantine/crusader threat, Zengi mobilized his forces and recruited assistance from other Muslim leaders. In April 1138, the armies of the Byzantine emperor and the crusader princes laid siege to Shaizar, but were turned back by Zengi's forces a month later.
In May 1138 Zengi came to an agreement with Damascus. He married Zumurrud, the same woman who had murdered her son Ismail, and received Hims as her dowry. In July 1139 Zumurrud's surviving son, Shihab ad-Din, was assassinated and Zengi marched on Damascus to take possession of the city. The Damascenes, united under Mu'in ad-Din Unur, acting as regent for Shihab ad-Din's successor Jamal ad-Din, once again allied with Jerusalem to repel Zengi. Zengi also besieged Jamal ad-Din's former possession of Baalbek, and Mu'in ad-Din was in charge of its defenses as well. After Zengi abandoned his siege of Damascus, Jamal ad-Din died of a disease, and was succeeded by his son Mujir ad-Din, with Mu'in ad-Din remaining as regent.
Mu'in ad-Din signed a new peace treaty with Jerusalem for their mutual protection against Zengi. While Mu'in ad-Din and the crusaders joined together to besiege Banias, Zengi once more laid siege to Damascus, but quickly abandoned it again. There were no major engagements between the crusaders, Damascus, and Zengi for the next few years, but Zengi in the meantime campaigned in the north and captured Ashib and the Armenian fortress of Hizan.
In 1144, Zengi besieged the crusader County of Edessa. Edessa was the weakest and least Latinized crusader state, and Zengi captured it on December 24, 1144. This event led to the Second Crusade, and later Muslim chroniclers noted it as the start of the jihad against the Crusader states.
Though he continued his attempts to take Damascus in 1145, Zengi was assassinated by a Frankish slave named Yarankash in 1146. The Christian chronicler William of Tyre said that he was killed by a number of his retinue while he lay drunk in his bed. Zengi's sudden death threw his forces into a panic. His army disintegrated, the treasury was looted, and the crusader princes, made bold by Zengi's demise, plotted to attack Aleppo and Edessa. Mu'in ad-Din immediately recaptured Baalbek, Hims, and other territories lost to Zengi over the years.
Zengi was the founder of the eponymous Zengid dynasty. In Mosul he was succeeded by his eldest son Saif ad-Din Ghazi I and in Aleppo he was succeeded by his second son Nur ad-Din.
Zengi was courageous, strong in leadership and a very skilled warrior according to all of the Islam chroniclers of his day. The conquest of Edessa being his greatest achievement. These same chroniclers however, also relate Zengi as being a very violent, cruel, and brutal man. Muslims, Byzantines, and Franks all suffered at his hands.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
İmadeddin Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Mansur, Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al- see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi Imadeddin see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi, Imad ad-Din Atabeg see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi)(also Zangi, Zengui, Zenki, or Zanki) (İmadeddin Zengi) (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur) (c. 1084/1085–September 14, 1146). Member of the line of the Turkish Zangid dynasty in Mosul and Aleppo (r. 1127-1146). In 1127, he was appointed governor of Mosul, and received the title of atabeg. He took possession of Jazirat ibn ‘Umar, Nisibis, Sinjar, Harran, Aleppo and Hamat. His attack on Baghdad, however, was unsuccessful, as was that of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Mustarshid bi-‘llah on Mosul. ‘Imad al-Din approved of the deposition of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Rashid (r. 1135-1136) and paid homage to the latter’s successor al-Muqtafi (r. 1136-1160). In 1137, he routed King Fulk of Jerusalem, took the fortress of Ba‘rin (Monsferrandus), and pursued the Emperor John II of Constantinople on his return to Antioch after an unsuccessful attack on Shayzar. He received Homs and in 1139 conquered Baalbek. He then laid siege to Damascus, whose commander Mu‘in al-Din invoked the support of the Crusaders. ‘Imad al-Din then raised the siege and returned to Mosul. In 1144, he took Edessa from the Crusaders, which set off the Second Crusade.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi (al-Malik al-Mansur) was the son of Aq Sunqur al-Hajib, governor of Aleppo under Malik Shah I. His father was beheaded for treason in 1094, and Zengi was brought up by Kerbogha, the governor of Mosul.
Zengi became atabeg of Mosul in 1127, and of Aleppo in 1128, uniting the two cities under his personal rule, and was formally invested as their ruler by the Sultan Mahmud II of Great Seljuk. Zengi had supported the young sultan against his rival, the caliph Al-Mustarshid.
In 1130, Zengi allied with Taj al-Mulk Buri of Damascus against the crusaders, but this was only a ruse to extend his power. He had Buri's son taken prisoner and seized Hama from him. He also besieged Hims, the governor of which was accompanying him at the time, but could not capture it, so he returned to Mosul, where Buri's son and the other prisoners from Damascus were ransomed for 50,000 dinars. In 1131, Zengi agreed to return the 50,000 dinars if Buri would deliver to him Dubais, emir of al-Hilla in Iraq, who had fled to Damascus to escape al-Mustarshid. When an ambassador from the caliph arrived to bring Dubais back, Zengi attacked him and killed some of his retinue. The ambassador returned to Baghdad without Dubais.
In 1134, Zengi became involved in Artuqid affairs, allying with the emir Timurtash (son of Ilghazi) against Timurtash's cousin Da'ud. Zengi's real desires, however, lay to the south, in Damascus. In 1135, Zengi received an appeal for help from Ismail, who had succeeded his father Buri as emir of Damascus, and who was in fear for his life from his own citizenry who considered him a cruel tyrant. Ismail was willing to surrender the city to Zengi in order to restore peace. None of Ismail's family or advisors wanted this, however, and Ismail was murdered by his own mother, Zumurrud, to prevent him from turning over the city to Zengi's control. Ismail was succeeded by his brother Shihab ad-Din Mahmud.
Zengi was not discouraged by this turn of events and arrived at Damascus anyway, still intending to seize it. The siege lasted for some time with no success on Zengi's part, so a truce was made and Shahib ad-Din's brother Bahram-Shah was given as a hostage. At the same time, news of the siege had reached the caliph and Baghdad, and a messenger was sent with orders for Zengi to leave Damascus and take control of the governance of Iraq. The messenger was ignored but Zengi gave up the siege, as per the terms of the truce with Shahib ad-Din. On the way back to Aleppo, Zengi besieged Hims, whose governor had angered him, and Shahib ad-Din responded to the city's call for help by sending Mu'in ad-Din Unur to govern it.
In 1137 Zengi besieged Hims again but Mu'in ad-Din successfully defended it. In response to Zengi's renewed attack, Damascus allied with the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem against him. Zengi laid siege to the Crusader fortress of Ba'rin and quickly crushed the army of Jerusalem. King Fulk of Jerusalem agreed to surrender and was allowed to flee with his surviving troops. Zengi, realizing that this new expedition against Damascus was bound to fail, made peace with Shahib ad-Din, just in time to be confronted at Aleppo by an army sent by the Byzantine Emperor John II Comnenus. The Emperor had recently brought the Crusader Principality of Antioch under Byzantine control, and allied himself with Joscelin II of Edessa and Raymond of Antioch. Facing a combined Byzantine/crusader threat, Zengi mobilized his forces and recruited assistance from other Muslim leaders. In April 1138, the armies of the Byzantine emperor and the crusader princes laid siege to Shaizar, but were turned back by Zengi's forces a month later.
In May 1138 Zengi came to an agreement with Damascus. He married Zumurrud, the same woman who had murdered her son Ismail, and received Hims as her dowry. In July 1139 Zumurrud's surviving son, Shihab ad-Din, was assassinated and Zengi marched on Damascus to take possession of the city. The Damascenes, united under Mu'in ad-Din Unur, acting as regent for Shihab ad-Din's successor Jamal ad-Din, once again allied with Jerusalem to repel Zengi. Zengi also besieged Jamal ad-Din's former possession of Baalbek, and Mu'in ad-Din was in charge of its defenses as well. After Zengi abandoned his siege of Damascus, Jamal ad-Din died of a disease, and was succeeded by his son Mujir ad-Din, with Mu'in ad-Din remaining as regent.
Mu'in ad-Din signed a new peace treaty with Jerusalem for their mutual protection against Zengi. While Mu'in ad-Din and the crusaders joined together to besiege Banias, Zengi once more laid siege to Damascus, but quickly abandoned it again. There were no major engagements between the crusaders, Damascus, and Zengi for the next few years, but Zengi in the meantime campaigned in the north and captured Ashib and the Armenian fortress of Hizan.
In 1144, Zengi besieged the crusader County of Edessa. Edessa was the weakest and least Latinized crusader state, and Zengi captured it on December 24, 1144. This event led to the Second Crusade, and later Muslim chroniclers noted it as the start of the jihad against the Crusader states.
Though he continued his attempts to take Damascus in 1145, Zengi was assassinated by a Frankish slave named Yarankash in 1146. The Christian chronicler William of Tyre said that he was killed by a number of his retinue while he lay drunk in his bed. Zengi's sudden death threw his forces into a panic. His army disintegrated, the treasury was looted, and the crusader princes, made bold by Zengi's demise, plotted to attack Aleppo and Edessa. Mu'in ad-Din immediately recaptured Baalbek, Hims, and other territories lost to Zengi over the years.
Zengi was the founder of the eponymous Zengid dynasty. In Mosul he was succeeded by his eldest son Saif ad-Din Ghazi I and in Aleppo he was succeeded by his second son Nur ad-Din.
Zengi was courageous, strong in leadership and a very skilled warrior according to all of the Islam chroniclers of his day. The conquest of Edessa being his greatest achievement. These same chroniclers however, also relate Zengi as being a very violent, cruel, and brutal man. Muslims, Byzantines, and Franks all suffered at his hands.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
İmadeddin Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Mansur, Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al- see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi Imadeddin see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi, Imad ad-Din Atabeg see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
‘Imad Shahi
‘Imad Shahi. Ttitle of the ruling family, founded by a Hindu convert to Islam, which ruled over Berar, the eastern districts of what is now Maharashtra State, western India, from 1490 until 1574.
‘Imad Shahi. Ttitle of the ruling family, founded by a Hindu convert to Islam, which ruled over Berar, the eastern districts of what is now Maharashtra State, western India, from 1490 until 1574.
imam
imam (Arabic for “leader” or “exemplar”). In general usage in Islam, the imam is the political head of the Muslim community or the person who leads prayer services. The Prophet Muhammad and his early successors -- including those of the Umayyad caliphate (661-750) -- performed both functions. The head of state himself led Friday prayers in the central capital mosque, and his governors did the same in provincial capitals. Later, however, administrative and political functions were separated from religious ones. In Shi‘ite Islam, the term imam is applied to the person who is both the political and religious leader. He must be descended from Ali and Fatima (the son-in-law and daughter of the Prophet Muhammad). No imam, however, except Ali, ever ruled, and beginning with the sixth imam, Jafar al-Sadiq (c.700-765), all eschewed political power. The imam is regarded by the main body of Shi‘ites as immune from error and sin and by the Isma‘ilis as a veritable incarnation of God. Both sects believe the last imam to be in concealment, and they await his return.
The term imam is used seven times in the singular form and five times in plural form (a‘imma) in the Qur‘an. However, large parts of its content are a result of theological developments.
The term imam is used in many different contexts, and with different meanings. There are five different ways of using the term, but there has never been any attempt to create a consolidated system for the different usages. It differs from group to group, from sect to sect and sometimes even from mosque to mosque.
In Shi‘a Islam, the ideas around the imam go to the very core foundations upon which the rest of the Shi'a theology rests. In Sunni Islam, the term imam is used principally as a title, and has minimal importance in theology.
The Sunni congregational prayer performed in the mosque is supposed to have a leader, and this person is called imam. In the standard interpretation, being imam is not having a profession, nor is it a qualification. The imam is imam only as long as he is leading the prayer. Any respected Muslim who is normally well-trained in the prayer, as-Salat, can be an imam. In general, it is the most learned and most respected person in the assembly who is offered the honor of being imam. However, in modern times, many mosques have made their imam into something more – an employed leader of the congregation, a spokesperson for the members of the congregation and an adviser in all questions that relate to Islam.
There are several different points of view with regard to the term imam among the Shi‘is. There are differences over what makes an imam an imam, and therefore who should be imam. At the time of the first imam, Ali, there was one view, even if the imamship was not yet defined. The original concept of the imam included the following requirements:
Be a man of direct descent of either Husayn or his brother Hassan
Not be a minor
Be sound in mind and body
Have good knowledge of theology
Have the capacity of being a ruler
The imam is supposed to have a special closeness to God – to have something that comes close to divine powers. The imam is supposed to be the guidance of the human race, in both religious as well as secular issues. Due to this quality, for the Shi'a, there can only be one imam at a time. For the Shi'a, the imam is the only one who can give interpretations of the Qur‘an and the hadiths. Hence, he is the only one who can rule the Muslim society on a day to day basis.
For many Shi‘as there are two types of imams: The true and the false. The false imams are the Ummawiyy and Abbasid caliphs, while the true imams are Ali, Hassan, Husayn, Ali, Muhammad, Jafar, Musa, Ali,
Muhammad, Ali, Hassan, and Muhammadu al-Mahdi. According to the Ithna ‘Ashari (Twelver) Shi‘is – which is the largest group of Shi‘a – there were twelve imams, of which the last went into occultation around 941 of the Christian calendar. This last imam is expected back as the Mahdi – a savior character with many similarities with the Messiah of Judaism and Christianity.
Along the line of the twelve imams, there were many disputes over who was the right imam. Records show that there were more than forty Shi‘a sects growing out of these indifferences, where the first group was the Saba‘iyya, who thought that Ali achieved the quality of being God, and went into occultation instead of dying.
With all imams, save Husayn, groups differed over who was the right imam. Most of these groups have long since disappeared, but a few of them still exist.
After the fourth imam died in 712 or 713, one group advocated that Zayd was the rightful new imam, and from this assertion came the Zaydis. The Zaydis believe that there can be more than one imam at one time, and that there can be periods when there are no imams at all.
Some years later (around 765), another group claimed that Isma‘il was the rightful seventh imam, and from this claim came the Isma‘ilis, and even later, the Druze.
With Ayatollah Khomeini a new orientation found its place in Twelver Shi‘ism. Many of the qualities which earlier rested with the imam alone were defined to be within the reach of the very most learned men of their branch of Islam. Thus, Khomeini and his closest aides, could effectively rule the religious life of Iran, something that would not have been possible if the older concept of the imam had continued to prevail (since only the imam can be the rightful leader of the Muslim community).
Amongst Sunni Muslims, the caliphs have been called “imams”. However, since there are no longer any caliphs, the use of the term imam has been relegated to being one of lesser importance. Indeed, as a way of expressing eminence for certain learned men inside Islam, the term imam has been added to their names. Examples of learned men being called imam are the founders of the schools of the shari'a, and the great theologian al-Ghazzali.
Among Ithna Ashari (Imani, Twelver) Shi‘ites, the living imam is the twelfth in the line of Ali through Husain. This imam disappeared from ordinary contact with his followers in 874. Since 940 (or 941), he has been in total occultation (ghaiba), but, according to the Twelvers, he will return in the future to establish justice and rid the world of evil.
Other Shi‘a (Isma‘ilis, Zaydis) accept modifications in the concept of the imamate and hold a different line of imams to have been correct. For example, one branch of the Isma‘ilis maintains that the current Agha Khan is the forty-ninth imam in a direct, unbroken line from Ali.
"leader" see imam
"exemplar" see imam
Along the line of the twelve imams, there were many disputes over who was the right imam. Records show that there were more than forty Shi‘a sects growing out of these indifferences, where the first group was the Saba‘iyya, who thought that Ali achieved the quality of being God, and went into occultation instead of dying.
With all imams, save Husayn, groups differed over who was the right imam. Most of these groups have long since disappeared, but a few of them still exist.
After the fourth imam died in 712 or 713, one group advocated that Zayd was the rightful new imam, and from this assertion came the Zaydis. The Zaydis believe that there can be more than one imam at one time, and that there can be periods when there are no imams at all.
Some years later (around 765), another group claimed that Isma‘il was the rightful seventh imam, and from this claim came the Isma‘ilis, and even later, the Druze.
With Ayatollah Khomeini a new orientation found its place in Twelver Shi‘ism. Many of the qualities which earlier rested with the imam alone were defined to be within the reach of the very most learned men of their branch of Islam. Thus, Khomeini and his closest aides, could effectively rule the religious life of Iran, something that would not have been possible if the older concept of the imam had continued to prevail (since only the imam can be the rightful leader of the Muslim community).
Amongst Sunni Muslims, the caliphs have been called “imams”. However, since there are no longer any caliphs, the use of the term imam has been relegated to being one of lesser importance. Indeed, as a way of expressing eminence for certain learned men inside Islam, the term imam has been added to their names. Examples of learned men being called imam are the founders of the schools of the shari'a, and the great theologian al-Ghazzali.
Among Ithna Ashari (Imani, Twelver) Shi‘ites, the living imam is the twelfth in the line of Ali through Husain. This imam disappeared from ordinary contact with his followers in 874. Since 940 (or 941), he has been in total occultation (ghaiba), but, according to the Twelvers, he will return in the future to establish justice and rid the world of evil.
Other Shi‘a (Isma‘ilis, Zaydis) accept modifications in the concept of the imamate and hold a different line of imams to have been correct. For example, one branch of the Isma‘ilis maintains that the current Agha Khan is the forty-ninth imam in a direct, unbroken line from Ali.
"leader" see imam
"exemplar" see imam
Imam
Imam. In Brazil, a spiritual leader among Muslim blacks.
Imam. In Brazil, a spiritual leader among Muslim blacks.
Imam Bondjol
Imam Bondjol (b. 1772, Kampung Tandjung Bunga, Sumatra — d. November 6, 1864, Manado, Celebes). Indonesian religious leader. Tuanku Imam Bondjol was originally named Mohammad Sjahab and in his youth was called Peto Sjarif, Malin Basa (Mualim Besar), and Tuanku Mudo. The name -- or, more precisely, the title, Tuanku Imam Bondjol derives from the fortified village of Bondjol, founded in 1806-1807 in the valley of Alahan Panjang. Imam Bondjol was a student of Tuanku Nan Rintjeh. After his teacher's death Imam Bondjol became the most important leader of the fundamentalist Islamic Padri movement in the Minangkabau in western Sumatra. He also fought the Dutch, who tried to intervene after 1821. He was captured by the Dutch in 1837 after the fall of Bondjol and banished to Cianjur, Ambon (1839), and then to Manado, Sulawesi (1841).
Imam Bondjol was the leader in a religious war that divided the Minangkabau people of Sumatra. A convert to reformist Wahhabi Islam, known in Sumatra as the Padri sect, he established the fortified community of Bondjol, from which he took his name, as a center from which to wage holy war. The secular government called on the Dutch to help, but the Dutch were preoccupied with the Java War (1825 – 30), and Imam Bondjol's forces expanded the area under their control. The Dutch eventually turned their attention to the Padris and defeated them. Imam Bondjol surrendered in 1837, and the Minangkabau territory was added to the Dutch colonial holdings.
Bondjol, Imam see Imam Bondjol
Tuanku Imam Bondjol see Imam Bondjol
Mohammad Sjahab see Imam Bondjol
Sjahab, Mohammad see Imam Bondjol
Peto Sjarif see Imam Bondjol
Malin Basa see Imam Bondjol
Imam Bondjol (b. 1772, Kampung Tandjung Bunga, Sumatra — d. November 6, 1864, Manado, Celebes). Indonesian religious leader. Tuanku Imam Bondjol was originally named Mohammad Sjahab and in his youth was called Peto Sjarif, Malin Basa (Mualim Besar), and Tuanku Mudo. The name -- or, more precisely, the title, Tuanku Imam Bondjol derives from the fortified village of Bondjol, founded in 1806-1807 in the valley of Alahan Panjang. Imam Bondjol was a student of Tuanku Nan Rintjeh. After his teacher's death Imam Bondjol became the most important leader of the fundamentalist Islamic Padri movement in the Minangkabau in western Sumatra. He also fought the Dutch, who tried to intervene after 1821. He was captured by the Dutch in 1837 after the fall of Bondjol and banished to Cianjur, Ambon (1839), and then to Manado, Sulawesi (1841).
Imam Bondjol was the leader in a religious war that divided the Minangkabau people of Sumatra. A convert to reformist Wahhabi Islam, known in Sumatra as the Padri sect, he established the fortified community of Bondjol, from which he took his name, as a center from which to wage holy war. The secular government called on the Dutch to help, but the Dutch were preoccupied with the Java War (1825 – 30), and Imam Bondjol's forces expanded the area under their control. The Dutch eventually turned their attention to the Padris and defeated them. Imam Bondjol surrendered in 1837, and the Minangkabau territory was added to the Dutch colonial holdings.
Bondjol, Imam see Imam Bondjol
Tuanku Imam Bondjol see Imam Bondjol
Mohammad Sjahab see Imam Bondjol
Sjahab, Mohammad see Imam Bondjol
Peto Sjarif see Imam Bondjol
Malin Basa see Imam Bondjol
Imamiyya
Imamiyya. Arabic term which means “followers of the imam.” Imami is an adjective derived from Imamiyya. The Imamiyya is a general designation of those Shi‘ites who believe in the necessity of the office of imam, the infallibility of the imam, and his being designated to the office by his predecessor -- his nass. The term Imamiyya refers in particular to the “Twelvers.”
Imamite authors, in their exposition of the Shi‘ite creed, divide the principles of religion into five tenets: (1) the affirmation of the unity of God; (2) a belief in the justice of God; (3) a belief in prophecy; (4) a belief in the imamate; and (5) a belief in the Day of Judgment. In four of these principles (1, 2, 3, and 5), the Imamites share common ground with the Sunnites albeit with some minor divergences. Sunnites, however, do not consider the fourth principle -- the belief in the imamate -- to be a fundamental principle of Islam, while the Shi‘ites make it their cardinal principle.
The Shi‘ites regard their imams as designated by God through Muhammad his Prophet, in accordance with the testament revealed to the Prophet, which announces the names of those who would succeed him. The testament also carried instruction for each imam to follow. Thus the first three imams, Ali, Hasan and Husayn chose to resist the Umayyad caliphate while the succeeding eight imams (Ali ibn al-Husayn, Muhammad al-Baqir, Ja‘far al-Sadiq, Musa al-Kazim, Ali al-Rida, Muhammad al-Jawad, Ali al-Hadi, and al-Hasan al-‘Askari) chose political acquiescence until the rising of the twelfth imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, who went into “complete occultation” in 940 C.C., in compliance with the instruction in the testament.
The special mark of the imam, as it was known to the later Imamites, was infallibility. Whereas Sunnite theologians considered infallibility to be a peculiar quality of the Prophet, Shi‘ite theologians contended that since the imamate was intended as the continuation of the Prophet’s mission, the community needed an infallible leader. The difference between the two creeds became marked when the Shi‘ite imam was asserted to have possessed the light of God, which was passed on to him by the Prophet.
The prophetic heritage of the imam guarantees the survival of religion in his person. The imam alone is endowed with the power of interpreting religion at different times. As a result, a person who dies without acknowledging his imam dies a death of ignorance. This means there is an imam in every age, whether manifest or concealed, who calls people to the way of God. But there are times when the world can be without a manifest imam; this is so when God is enraged at the people who have threatened the safety of the imam and who are unable to see the imam who is in occultation although he sees them.
Occultation is a state chosen by God for the imam who is in danger of being slain by his enemies. Thus, the twelfth imam, al-Mahdi, went into occultation and will continue to live in this state for as long as God deems it necessary. Then God will command him to reappear and take control of the world, in order to restore justice and equity. During this period of concealment, the imam is not completely cut off from his followers but has spokesmen, in the person of learned jurists -- mujtahids -- who can act on his behalf and guide the Shi‘ites in religious, social, and political matters.
Imamite piety, although differing little from Sunnite piety in its adherence to the sharia, developed its own sharia. Imamites depended on the Qur‘an as well as hadith for validating religious injunctions, but they looked to the sunna of the imams in addition to that of the Prophet. Yet except for the special place given to the reports of the imams, their hadith were often almost identical with those of the Sunnites. However, their piety included the devotion of the imams as expressed in the annual commemoration of the ta‘ziya -- the wrongs committed against the household of the Prophet, especially the murder of al-Husayn -- and the visit (the ziyara) to the tombs (mashhads) of all the imams, believed to have suffered at the hands of oppressive Sunnite caliphs. The other marks of Shi‘ite piety include dissimulation of one’s true opinion as part of the religious duty, in order not to arouse animosity of other Muslims, and the payment of the “fifth,” a tax intended for pious purposes and particularly for the descendants of the Prophet.
Followers of the imam see Imamiyya.
Imamiyya. Arabic term which means “followers of the imam.” Imami is an adjective derived from Imamiyya. The Imamiyya is a general designation of those Shi‘ites who believe in the necessity of the office of imam, the infallibility of the imam, and his being designated to the office by his predecessor -- his nass. The term Imamiyya refers in particular to the “Twelvers.”
Imamite authors, in their exposition of the Shi‘ite creed, divide the principles of religion into five tenets: (1) the affirmation of the unity of God; (2) a belief in the justice of God; (3) a belief in prophecy; (4) a belief in the imamate; and (5) a belief in the Day of Judgment. In four of these principles (1, 2, 3, and 5), the Imamites share common ground with the Sunnites albeit with some minor divergences. Sunnites, however, do not consider the fourth principle -- the belief in the imamate -- to be a fundamental principle of Islam, while the Shi‘ites make it their cardinal principle.
The Shi‘ites regard their imams as designated by God through Muhammad his Prophet, in accordance with the testament revealed to the Prophet, which announces the names of those who would succeed him. The testament also carried instruction for each imam to follow. Thus the first three imams, Ali, Hasan and Husayn chose to resist the Umayyad caliphate while the succeeding eight imams (Ali ibn al-Husayn, Muhammad al-Baqir, Ja‘far al-Sadiq, Musa al-Kazim, Ali al-Rida, Muhammad al-Jawad, Ali al-Hadi, and al-Hasan al-‘Askari) chose political acquiescence until the rising of the twelfth imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, who went into “complete occultation” in 940 C.C., in compliance with the instruction in the testament.
The special mark of the imam, as it was known to the later Imamites, was infallibility. Whereas Sunnite theologians considered infallibility to be a peculiar quality of the Prophet, Shi‘ite theologians contended that since the imamate was intended as the continuation of the Prophet’s mission, the community needed an infallible leader. The difference between the two creeds became marked when the Shi‘ite imam was asserted to have possessed the light of God, which was passed on to him by the Prophet.
The prophetic heritage of the imam guarantees the survival of religion in his person. The imam alone is endowed with the power of interpreting religion at different times. As a result, a person who dies without acknowledging his imam dies a death of ignorance. This means there is an imam in every age, whether manifest or concealed, who calls people to the way of God. But there are times when the world can be without a manifest imam; this is so when God is enraged at the people who have threatened the safety of the imam and who are unable to see the imam who is in occultation although he sees them.
Occultation is a state chosen by God for the imam who is in danger of being slain by his enemies. Thus, the twelfth imam, al-Mahdi, went into occultation and will continue to live in this state for as long as God deems it necessary. Then God will command him to reappear and take control of the world, in order to restore justice and equity. During this period of concealment, the imam is not completely cut off from his followers but has spokesmen, in the person of learned jurists -- mujtahids -- who can act on his behalf and guide the Shi‘ites in religious, social, and political matters.
Imamite piety, although differing little from Sunnite piety in its adherence to the sharia, developed its own sharia. Imamites depended on the Qur‘an as well as hadith for validating religious injunctions, but they looked to the sunna of the imams in addition to that of the Prophet. Yet except for the special place given to the reports of the imams, their hadith were often almost identical with those of the Sunnites. However, their piety included the devotion of the imams as expressed in the annual commemoration of the ta‘ziya -- the wrongs committed against the household of the Prophet, especially the murder of al-Husayn -- and the visit (the ziyara) to the tombs (mashhads) of all the imams, believed to have suffered at the hands of oppressive Sunnite caliphs. The other marks of Shi‘ite piety include dissimulation of one’s true opinion as part of the religious duty, in order not to arouse animosity of other Muslims, and the payment of the “fifth,” a tax intended for pious purposes and particularly for the descendants of the Prophet.
Followers of the imam see Imamiyya.
Imamzadah
Imamzadah (Imamzadeh) ("Imam-born"). Literally means “offspring or descendant of an imam.” In Iran, the term imamzadah is most commonly applied to a shrine tomb of a descendant of the Shi‘a imams.
An Imāmzādeh is a word found in both the Persian and Urdu languages, that refers to an immediate descendant of a Shi'a Imam.
The word is also used to refer to a shrine that is specific to Shī‘ah Islām, in which an Imamzadeh is buried. The descendants of the Shia Imams are venerated for their own contributions to the religion, and for their direct lineage to Muhammad.
The shrines attract many visitors and pilgrims for Ziyarat, and are scattered in many numbers throughout Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan. They usually exhibit exquisite architecture and craftsmanship in their interiors.
Imamzadehs include:
* Imamzadeh Hamzah, Tabriz
* Imamzadeh Ja'far, Borujerd
* Imamzadeh Saleh, Shemiran
* Imamzadeh Sultan Mutahhar
* Shāh Abdol Azīm
* Shāh Chérāgh
Offspring of an Imam see Imamzadah
Descendant of an Imam see Imamzadah
"Imam-born" see Imamzadah
Imamzadah (Imamzadeh) ("Imam-born"). Literally means “offspring or descendant of an imam.” In Iran, the term imamzadah is most commonly applied to a shrine tomb of a descendant of the Shi‘a imams.
An Imāmzādeh is a word found in both the Persian and Urdu languages, that refers to an immediate descendant of a Shi'a Imam.
The word is also used to refer to a shrine that is specific to Shī‘ah Islām, in which an Imamzadeh is buried. The descendants of the Shia Imams are venerated for their own contributions to the religion, and for their direct lineage to Muhammad.
The shrines attract many visitors and pilgrims for Ziyarat, and are scattered in many numbers throughout Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan. They usually exhibit exquisite architecture and craftsmanship in their interiors.
Imamzadehs include:
* Imamzadeh Hamzah, Tabriz
* Imamzadeh Ja'far, Borujerd
* Imamzadeh Saleh, Shemiran
* Imamzadeh Sultan Mutahhar
* Shāh Abdol Azīm
* Shāh Chérāgh
Offspring of an Imam see Imamzadah
Descendant of an Imam see Imamzadah
"Imam-born" see Imamzadah
‘Imran
‘Imran (in Hebrew, ‘Amram). Muslim authors mention two persons of this name, the first of whom appears in the Bible but not in the Qur‘an, the second vice versa. The first is the father of Moses, Aaron and Maryam (Exodus 6:20), the other the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus (Qur‘an 3:31). The last mentioned is also, according to the historians, the father of Elizabeth (in Arabic, Ashba‘), the mother of John the Baptist.
Imran is a male Arabic given name that means construction, prosperity, and happiness. It is a very popular first name throughout the Arab and Muslim World.
The name may refer to:
* Imran, the father of Mariam/Maryam in the Qur'an
o The Al-i-Imran, is the 3rd chapter of the Qur'an with two hundred verses
* Abu Talib ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib (549-619), uncle of Muhammad. His first name is believed to be Imran.
* Imran ibn Husain, was one of the Companions of Muhammad and a Narrator of hadith
'Amram see ‘Imran
‘Imran (in Hebrew, ‘Amram). Muslim authors mention two persons of this name, the first of whom appears in the Bible but not in the Qur‘an, the second vice versa. The first is the father of Moses, Aaron and Maryam (Exodus 6:20), the other the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus (Qur‘an 3:31). The last mentioned is also, according to the historians, the father of Elizabeth (in Arabic, Ashba‘), the mother of John the Baptist.
Imran is a male Arabic given name that means construction, prosperity, and happiness. It is a very popular first name throughout the Arab and Muslim World.
The name may refer to:
* Imran, the father of Mariam/Maryam in the Qur'an
o The Al-i-Imran, is the 3rd chapter of the Qur'an with two hundred verses
* Abu Talib ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib (549-619), uncle of Muhammad. His first name is believed to be Imran.
* Imran ibn Husain, was one of the Companions of Muhammad and a Narrator of hadith
'Amram see ‘Imran
‘Imran ibn Shabin
‘Imran ibn Shabin (d. 979). Bandit lord of the swampy area on the lower course of the Euphrates and Tigris between
Kufa and Basra (in Arabic, al-bata‘ih).
Imru‘ al-Qays
Imru‘ al-Qays. By-name meaning “slave of (the god) Qays.” This by-name was used by several Arab poets. The most famous of them is Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr (Imru‘u‘l-Qais ibn Hujr), generally considered to have died around 550. Although remaining an obscure and semi-legendary personality, he has acquired a vaunted reputation. Some of his admirers in Basra credited him with the creation of the qasida. Among his poems the so-called Mu‘allaqa has aroused the most interest.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is said to have been a Bedouin chief’s son, and to have led a wandering (probably criminal) life attempting to recover his patrimony, lost at the dissolution of the confederation which his father headed. The Emperor Justinian summoned him to Constantinople to employ him in mobilizing the Arabs for war against Persia, but he died at Ankara, on his way back to Arabia. He is said to have been poisoned by the Emperor because of a liaison with a Byzantine princess.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is regarded as the greatest of the poets of the Jahiliyya (Age of Ignorance), as the Muslims call the pre-Islamic period. He is credited with a large body of poetry, among which is his celebrated Mu‘allaqa. This is a qasida (ode), and forms part of the collection of 7 odes (actually 10, as different odes are included in different texts) known as the Mu‘allaqat. The significance of this name, literally “suspended,” is unknown.
In any one poem a pre-Islamic poet has one basic object. It may be to praise himself, to praise his tribe or his patron, to beg for a reward, to taunt his enemies, or something else of this sort. Before doing so, however, he will give a lengthy description of the desert, a journey, his camel or his horse, and of other places, objects and situations familiar to his audience which will awaken response in them. Since his arm is to describe in new ways objects and situations similar to those described by his contemporaries, it is very difficult to translate the pre-Islamic poems satisfactorily.
The poetry of this period was later considered by the Arabs to be the only suitable model for their own. Poets would learn by heart an enormous amount of it, and would produce something almost indistinguishable from it. Poems of this sort continued to be composed long after the appearance of the “Modern” school, in spite of the criticism and ridicule of the “Moderns” and their partisans. Books like the Kitab al-Aghani (Book of Songs) must have served as valuable reference works for would be poets of the period.
Imru' al-Qais bin Hujr bin al-Harith Al-Kindi (Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr) (c.501-c.544) was an Arabian poet of the 6th century, the author of one of the Muallaqat, an anthology of pre-Islamic Arabic literature.
Imru' was the son of Hujr, the last king of Kindah. He was born around 501 and died around 544. His mother was Fatimah bint Rabi’ah, the sister of Kulayb and Al-Muhalhal, two well known Arab tribe leaders. Even though he was raised in luxury as a result of being the son of the king, he suffered because he was denied kingship after his father’s assassination. That is why Arabs called him al-Maliku 'ḍ-ḍillīl (the lost king or the king who has lost his throne).
He loved wine to such an extent that when he was informed of his father’s death during drinking, he shocked every one around him by his response when he said “Today is for wine and tomorrow is another matter” (al-yawma Khamr, wa ghadan ʼamr). It is believed that he avenged his father, although they had a bad relationship.
He wrote passionate love poetry, and is believed to have invented the Qasida, or classical Arabic ode. His verse was intensely subjective, like much of the poetry of the pre-Islamic period. He was assassinated by Emperor Justinian I, who sent him a poisoned cloak, after al-Qays had an affair with a princess at his court.
Slave of the god Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Slave of Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Imru‘ al-Qays. By-name meaning “slave of (the god) Qays.” This by-name was used by several Arab poets. The most famous of them is Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr (Imru‘u‘l-Qais ibn Hujr), generally considered to have died around 550. Although remaining an obscure and semi-legendary personality, he has acquired a vaunted reputation. Some of his admirers in Basra credited him with the creation of the qasida. Among his poems the so-called Mu‘allaqa has aroused the most interest.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is said to have been a Bedouin chief’s son, and to have led a wandering (probably criminal) life attempting to recover his patrimony, lost at the dissolution of the confederation which his father headed. The Emperor Justinian summoned him to Constantinople to employ him in mobilizing the Arabs for war against Persia, but he died at Ankara, on his way back to Arabia. He is said to have been poisoned by the Emperor because of a liaison with a Byzantine princess.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is regarded as the greatest of the poets of the Jahiliyya (Age of Ignorance), as the Muslims call the pre-Islamic period. He is credited with a large body of poetry, among which is his celebrated Mu‘allaqa. This is a qasida (ode), and forms part of the collection of 7 odes (actually 10, as different odes are included in different texts) known as the Mu‘allaqat. The significance of this name, literally “suspended,” is unknown.
In any one poem a pre-Islamic poet has one basic object. It may be to praise himself, to praise his tribe or his patron, to beg for a reward, to taunt his enemies, or something else of this sort. Before doing so, however, he will give a lengthy description of the desert, a journey, his camel or his horse, and of other places, objects and situations familiar to his audience which will awaken response in them. Since his arm is to describe in new ways objects and situations similar to those described by his contemporaries, it is very difficult to translate the pre-Islamic poems satisfactorily.
The poetry of this period was later considered by the Arabs to be the only suitable model for their own. Poets would learn by heart an enormous amount of it, and would produce something almost indistinguishable from it. Poems of this sort continued to be composed long after the appearance of the “Modern” school, in spite of the criticism and ridicule of the “Moderns” and their partisans. Books like the Kitab al-Aghani (Book of Songs) must have served as valuable reference works for would be poets of the period.
Imru' al-Qais bin Hujr bin al-Harith Al-Kindi (Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr) (c.501-c.544) was an Arabian poet of the 6th century, the author of one of the Muallaqat, an anthology of pre-Islamic Arabic literature.
Imru' was the son of Hujr, the last king of Kindah. He was born around 501 and died around 544. His mother was Fatimah bint Rabi’ah, the sister of Kulayb and Al-Muhalhal, two well known Arab tribe leaders. Even though he was raised in luxury as a result of being the son of the king, he suffered because he was denied kingship after his father’s assassination. That is why Arabs called him al-Maliku 'ḍ-ḍillīl (the lost king or the king who has lost his throne).
He loved wine to such an extent that when he was informed of his father’s death during drinking, he shocked every one around him by his response when he said “Today is for wine and tomorrow is another matter” (al-yawma Khamr, wa ghadan ʼamr). It is believed that he avenged his father, although they had a bad relationship.
He wrote passionate love poetry, and is believed to have invented the Qasida, or classical Arabic ode. His verse was intensely subjective, like much of the poetry of the pre-Islamic period. He was assassinated by Emperor Justinian I, who sent him a poisoned cloak, after al-Qays had an affair with a princess at his court.
Slave of the god Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Slave of Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Inal
Inal (Aynal) al-Ajrud (b. 1381). Mameluke sultan of Egypt and Syria (r.1453-1461). During his reign, Mameluke troops intervened in dynastic troubles of the Lusignan in Cyprus, but suffered many losses.
Aynal see Inal
Ajrud, al- see Inal
Inal (Aynal) al-Ajrud (b. 1381). Mameluke sultan of Egypt and Syria (r.1453-1461). During his reign, Mameluke troops intervened in dynastic troubles of the Lusignan in Cyprus, but suffered many losses.
Aynal see Inal
Ajrud, al- see Inal
Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibn al-Emin (Ibn al-Emin Inal) (Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal) (1870-1957). Turkish biographer and writer. He was probably one of the last outstanding representatives of traditional Ottoman scholarship and erudition, ignoring the changes which were taking place around him. In 1940, he became an adviser to the Editorial Board of the Turkish edition of the Encyclopedia of Islam.
Ibn al-Emin Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibn al-Emin (Ibn al-Emin Inal) (Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal) (1870-1957). Turkish biographer and writer. He was probably one of the last outstanding representatives of traditional Ottoman scholarship and erudition, ignoring the changes which were taking place around him. In 1940, he became an adviser to the Editorial Board of the Turkish edition of the Encyclopedia of Islam.
Ibn al-Emin Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
‘Inan
‘Inan. Poetess of Baghdad. She is considered the first woman to have won literary fame under the ‘Abbasids. She played an important role as the center of a literary circle.
‘Inan. Poetess of Baghdad. She is considered the first woman to have won literary fame under the ‘Abbasids. She played an important role as the center of a literary circle.
‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
‘Inayat Allah Kanbu (Inaya Abdullah Kanbu) (August 31, 1608, Bahranpur - September 23, 1671, Delhi). Author of a history of the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan I.
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu was a Mughal historian, author of Tarikh-i Dil Kush, on the history of Djahan Shah and his predecessors (from the time of Adam) and Bahar-i Danish. He was the brother of Muhammad Sali Kanbu, author of Shahdjahannama (history Djahan Shah).
Kanbu, 'Inayat Allah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Kanbu, Inaya Abdullah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
‘Inayat Allah Kanbu (Inaya Abdullah Kanbu) (August 31, 1608, Bahranpur - September 23, 1671, Delhi). Author of a history of the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan I.
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu was a Mughal historian, author of Tarikh-i Dil Kush, on the history of Djahan Shah and his predecessors (from the time of Adam) and Bahar-i Danish. He was the brother of Muhammad Sali Kanbu, author of Shahdjahannama (history Djahan Shah).
Kanbu, 'Inayat Allah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Kanbu, Inaya Abdullah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Ince, Ozdemir
Ince, Ozdemir (Ozdemir Ince) (b. September 1 1936 Mersin), Turkish poet, writer, newspaper writer.
Ozdemir Ince see Ince, Ozdemir
Ince, Ozdemir (Ozdemir Ince) (b. September 1 1936 Mersin), Turkish poet, writer, newspaper writer.
Ozdemir Ince see Ince, Ozdemir
Independence of Malaya Party
Independence of Malaya Party (IMP). Founded as a multi-racial political party in September 1951 by Dato Onn bin Ja‘afar, who had resigned from the presidency of the United Malays National Organization because of its unwillingness to offer membership to non-Malays. Ja‘afar felt that a post-independence system made up of ethnic parties would aggravate ethno-nationalist tensions. Strong opposition from Malays, who feared that the IMP would diminish their political dominance, compelled previously supportive Chinese and Indian leaders to withhold their backing. Thus, the IMP was soundly beaten by the new Malay and Chinese Alliance Party, formed in response to the IMP’s concept of multi-racial parties, in the February 1952 Kuala Lumpur election. A noble experiment, the IMP never really enjoyed solid support, and it was dissolved in 1953.
The Independence of Malaya Party was a political party in British-ruled Malaya that stood for political independence. Founded by Onn Ja'afar after he left UMNO in 1951, it opposed the UMNO policy of Malay-supremacy.
The party was open to all races of Malaya, but received support mainly from Indians. After noticing that support for the party was unfavourable, Onn dissolved the party in 1953 and formed the Parti Negara.
IMP see Independence of Malaya Party
Independence of Malaya Party (IMP). Founded as a multi-racial political party in September 1951 by Dato Onn bin Ja‘afar, who had resigned from the presidency of the United Malays National Organization because of its unwillingness to offer membership to non-Malays. Ja‘afar felt that a post-independence system made up of ethnic parties would aggravate ethno-nationalist tensions. Strong opposition from Malays, who feared that the IMP would diminish their political dominance, compelled previously supportive Chinese and Indian leaders to withhold their backing. Thus, the IMP was soundly beaten by the new Malay and Chinese Alliance Party, formed in response to the IMP’s concept of multi-racial parties, in the February 1952 Kuala Lumpur election. A noble experiment, the IMP never really enjoyed solid support, and it was dissolved in 1953.
The Independence of Malaya Party was a political party in British-ruled Malaya that stood for political independence. Founded by Onn Ja'afar after he left UMNO in 1951, it opposed the UMNO policy of Malay-supremacy.
The party was open to all races of Malaya, but received support mainly from Indians. After noticing that support for the party was unfavourable, Onn dissolved the party in 1953 and formed the Parti Negara.
IMP see Independence of Malaya Party
Indo-Mauritians
Indo-Mauritians. The island of Mauritius lies in the western Indian Ocean, some 500 miles east of Madagascar and 20 degrees south of the equator. On its 720 square miles are nearly one million people, all descendants of immigrants who arrived, voluntarily or involuntarily, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. An independent country within the British Commonwealth since 1968, Mauritius is almost totally dependent on the production of sugar.
The Muslims of Mauritius came from the Indian subcontinent and make up about 17 percent of the total population, or 24 percent of the Indo-Mauritian population. By origin, they can be divided into two major groups: those whose ancestors came as indentured laborers between 1834 and 1907 from India’s United Provinces, Bihar, Orissa, Bengal and the Tamil and Telegu speaking areas of southern India, and a smaller group of traders from the Gujarati speaking areas of west India, notably Kutch and Surat, most of whom arrived after World War I.
Indo-Mauritians. The island of Mauritius lies in the western Indian Ocean, some 500 miles east of Madagascar and 20 degrees south of the equator. On its 720 square miles are nearly one million people, all descendants of immigrants who arrived, voluntarily or involuntarily, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. An independent country within the British Commonwealth since 1968, Mauritius is almost totally dependent on the production of sugar.
The Muslims of Mauritius came from the Indian subcontinent and make up about 17 percent of the total population, or 24 percent of the Indo-Mauritian population. By origin, they can be divided into two major groups: those whose ancestors came as indentured laborers between 1834 and 1907 from India’s United Provinces, Bihar, Orissa, Bengal and the Tamil and Telegu speaking areas of southern India, and a smaller group of traders from the Gujarati speaking areas of west India, notably Kutch and Surat, most of whom arrived after World War I.
Inju
Inju (Injuids). Iranian family that wielded power in western Iran (1304-1357). "Inju" is a Mongol term referring to royal domains, and the family began as administrators of such property for the Ilkhan rulers. During the turmoil following the death of the last Ilkhan, Abu Said, in 1335, the Injuids struggled against several rivals to hold onto power in Shiraz and Isfahan. They eventually lost to the Muzaffarids. Some of the great fourteenth century poet Hafiz’s earliest poems praise the enlightened rule of the Injuids in Shiraz, which became the center of Iranian literary culture at that time.
Injuids see Inju
Inju (Injuids). Iranian family that wielded power in western Iran (1304-1357). "Inju" is a Mongol term referring to royal domains, and the family began as administrators of such property for the Ilkhan rulers. During the turmoil following the death of the last Ilkhan, Abu Said, in 1335, the Injuids struggled against several rivals to hold onto power in Shiraz and Isfahan. They eventually lost to the Muzaffarids. Some of the great fourteenth century poet Hafiz’s earliest poems praise the enlightened rule of the Injuids in Shiraz, which became the center of Iranian literary culture at that time.
Injuids see Inju
Inonu, Ismet
Inonu, Ismet (Ismet Inonu) (Mustafa İsmet İnönü) (September 24, 1884 – December 25, 1973). President of Turkey (1938-1950). During his presidency, he maintained Turkish neutrality during most of World War II.
Ismet was born on September 24, 1884, in Izmir to a middle class Kurdish family with ties to Malatya. He received a military education, graduating from the general staff academy as staff captain in 1906. He served with distinction in World War I, and after the defeat of the Ottoman regime he joined nationalist forces under Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) to fight for the establishment of the Turkish Republic. In 1921, Ismet defeated a Greek invasion force in two battles at Inonu, near Eskisehir in Anatolia, and later took the name of that village as his family name. As the nationalists‘ foreign minister (1921-24), he led the delegations to the Lausanne Conference (1922-23), at which the European powers recognized Ataturk’s government.
When the Turkish Republic was established in 1923, Ismet became its first premier, he was re-appointed in 1925, and held that office until 1937. Elected president when Ataturk died in 1938, he kept Turkey out of World War II until 1945, when he came in on the side of the Allies, preparing for Turkey’s later alignment with the West. Competitive party politics, which he inaugurated in 1946, led to Inonu’s defeat at the polls four years later.
Inonu then led the opposition against the Democratic Party until the party’s overthrow by the army in May 1960. After the 1961 elections, he served as prime minister in three coalition governments (1961-65), after which he returned to the opposition. He tried to revitalize his Republican People’s Party (RPP) by adopting a left of center image that he thought would appeal to Turkish voters of the late 1960s. However, he failed to win re-election in 1969 and was discredited by his support of the military regime that seized power in 1971. He resigned as party chairman in 1972 but remained a senator until his death in Ankara on December 25, 1973.
Inonu has been called a pragmatist, an optimist, and a “statesman par excellence.” Inonu’s main achievement was to lead Turkey from the system of benevolent despotism under Ataturk to a multi-party democracy. Inonu has today fallen into relative obscurity, but is, after Ataturk, one of the main architects behind today’s modern Turkey. Inonu was the man behind the development of Turkish democracy, the development of pluralism in politics and the development of the Turkish economy. Inonu will also be remembered for keeping Turkey neutral during most of World War II.
Ismet Inonu see Inonu, Ismet
Mustafa İsmet İnönü see Inonu, Ismet
Inonu, Mustafa İsmet see Inonu, Ismet
No comments:
Post a Comment