The full and detailed accounts of the reigning Qájár dynasty already available to the English reader render any Áqá Muḥammad Khán (assassin­ated June 17, 1797). attempt to summarize their history in this place quite unnecessary. * Áqá Muḥammad Khán was not actually crowned until A.D. 1796, and was as­sassinated in the following year, so that he wore the crown of Persia for not more than fifteen months, * but his reign practically began on the death of Karím Khán in A.D. 1779, though “he used to observe that he had no title even to the name of king till he was obeyed through the whole of the ancient limits of the Empire of Persia,” * so that it was only after he had finally subdued Georgia that he consented to assume the title of Sháh. His appear­ance and character are admirably summarized by Sir John Malcolm in the following words: * <graphic>

ÁQÁ MUḤAMMAD KHÁN QÁJÁR seated, with his minister
ḤÁJJI IBRÁHÍM standing before him
Add. 24903 (Brit. Mus.)
To face p. 144

“Áqá Muḥammad Khán was murdered in the sixty-third year of his age. He had been ruler of a great part of Persia for upwards of twenty years, but had only for a short period enjoyed the undisputed sovereignty of that country. The person of that monarch was so slender that at a distance he appeared like a youth of fourteen or fifteen. His beardless and shrivelled face resembled that of an aged and wrinkled woman; and the expression of his countenance, at no times pleasant, was horrible when clouded, as it very often was, with indignation. He was sensible of this, and could not bear that anyone should look at him. This prince had suffered, in the early part of his life, the most cruel adversity; and his future conduct seems to have taken its strongest bias from the keen recollection of his misery and his wrongs. The first passion of his mind was the love of power; the second, avarice; and the third, revenge. In all these he indulged to excess, and they administered to each other: but the two latter, strong as they were, gave way to the first whenever they came in collision. His knowledge of the character and feelings of others was wonderful; and it is to this knowledge, and his talent of concealing from all the secret purposes of his soul, that we must refer his extraordinary success in subduing his enemies. Against these he never employed force till art had failed; and, even in war, his policy effected more than his sword. His ablest and most confidential minister, * when asked if Áqá Muḥammad Khán was personally brave, replied, ‘No doubt; but still I can hardly recollect an occasion when he had an opportunity of dis­playing courage. The monarch's head,’ he emphatically added, ‘never left work for his hand.’”

Áqá Muḥammad Khán was succeeded by his nephew the uxorious and philoprogenitive * Fatḥ-'Alí Sháh. He was avaricious and vain, being inordinately proud of his hand- Reign of Fatḥ­'Alí Sháh (A.D. 1797-1834). some face and long beard, but not by nature cruel (at any rate compared to his late uncle), and it is related that, though obliged by custom to witness the execution of malefactors, he would always avert his face so as not to behold the unhappy wretch's death-agony. He was something of a poet, and composed numerous odes under the pen-name of Kháqán. Politically the chief features of his reign were the Anglo-French rivalry typified by the missions of Malcolm and Harford Jones Brydges on the one hand, and Jaubert and General Gardanne on the other (A.D. 1800-1808); the growing menace of Russia, resulting in the successive disastrous treaties of Guli­stán (A.D. 1813) and Turkmán-cháy (A.D. 1826); and the war with Turkey in A.D. 1821, concluded in 1823 by the Treaty of Erzeroum. Other notable events of this reign were the disgrace and death of the traitor Ḥájji Ibráhím and the almost complete extirpation of his family about A.D. 1800; * the massacre of Grebaiodoff and the Russian Mission at Ṭihrán on February 11, 1829; * and the premature death, at the age of forty-six, of the Sháh's favourite son 'Abbás Mírzá, the Crown Prince, “the noblest of the Kajar race,” as Watson calls him, * in A.D. 1833. His heart-broken father only survived him about a year, and died at the age of sixty-eight on October 23, 1834, leaving fifty-seven sons and forty-six daughters to mourn his loss.

Fatḥ-'Alí Sháh was succeeded by his grandson Muḥam-mad, the son of 'Abbás Mírzá, who, ere he was crowned on Muḥammad Sháh (A.D. 1835-1848). January 31, 1835, was confronted with two rival claimants to the throne, his uncle the Ẓillu's-Sulṭán and his brother the Farmán-farmá. These, however, were overcome without much difficulty by Persian troops commanded by Sir Henry Lindsay Bethune, and though the new Sháh had every reason to be grateful to England and Russia for assuring his succession, the fact that these two powerful neighbours had for the first time intervened in this fashion was an ominous portent and a dangerous precedent in the history of Persia. The same year witnessed the fall and execution (on June 26, 1835) of the celebrated Qá'im-maqám Mírzá Abu'l-Qásim, * hitherto the all-powerful minister of the King, still regarded by his countrymen as one of the finest prose stylists of modern times. He was succeeded as Prime Minister by the notorious Ḥájji Mírzá Ághásí, concerning whom many ridiculous anecdotes are still current in Persia. * Of the protracted but fruitless siege of Herát by the Persians in 1838 and the manifestations of Anglo-Russian rivalry for which it afforded occasion it is unnecessary to speak; nor of the withdrawal of Sir J. McNeill, the British Minister (A.D. 1838-1841), from the Persian Court; nor of the Turco-Persian boundary disputes of 1842 and the Turkish massacre of Persians at Karbalá in the early part of 1843. From our point of view none of these events, fully discussed by R. G. Watson and other historians of Persia, are equal in interest to the Isma'ílí revolt of 1840 or thereabouts, and the rise of the Bábí religion in 1844.

Of the origin and doctrines of the Isma'ílí heresy or “Sect of the Seven” (Sab'iyya), some account will be found in the first volume * of this work, while their destruction by Húlágú

The Isma'ílís in modern times. Khán the Mongol in the middle of the thir­teenth century of our era is briefly described in the second. * But, though their power in Persia was shattered, they still continued to exist, and, from time to time, to reappear on the pages of Persian history. In the volume of the Násikhu't-Tawáríkh dealing with the reigning Qájár dynasty several references to them occur. The first,

Sháh Khalílu­'llah killed at Yazd in 1232/ 1817. under the year 1232/1817, refers to the death of the then head of the sect Sháh Khalílu'lláh, the son of Sayyid Abu'l-Ḥasan Khán, at Yazd. Under the Zand dynasty Abu'l-Ḥasan had been governor of Kirmán, whence on his dismissal he retired to the Maḥallát of Qum. There he received tribute from his numerous followers in India and Central Asia, who, it is recorded, if unable to bring their offerings in person, used to throw them into the sea, believing that they would thus be conveyed into the hands of their Imám; but, when possible, used to visit him in his abode and deem it an honour to render him personal service, even of the most menial kind. His son, Sháh Khalílu'lláh, transferred his abode to Yazd, but after residing there two years he was killed in the course of a quarrel which had arisen between some of his followers and the Muslim citizens of Yazd, instigated by a certain Mullá Ḥusayn. The Sháh punished the perpetrators of this outrage, gave one of his daughters in marriage to Áqá Khán, the son and successor of the late Imám of the Isma'ílís, and made him governor of Qum and the surrounding districts (Maḥallát).

We next hear of this Áqá Khán in 1255/1839 or 1256/ 1840, * when, apparently in consequence of the arrogant behaviour of Ḥájji 'Abdu'l-Muḥammad-i-Maḥallátí, insti- Revolt of the Áqá Khán in A.D. 1839 or 1840. gated by the minister Ḥájji Mírzá Áqásí, he rebelled against Muḥammad Sháh and occupied the citadel of Bam, but was obliged to surren­der to Fírúz Mírzá, then governor of Kirmán, who pardoned him and sent him to Ṭihrán. Here he was well received by Ḥájji Mírzá Áqásí and was presently allowed to return to his former government in the district of Qum. Having sent his family and possessions to Karbalá by way of Baghdád, so as to leave himself free and unencumbered, he began to buy swift and strong horses and to recruit brave and devoted soldiers, and when his preparations were completed he set out across the deserts and open country towards Kirmán, pretending that he was proceeding to Mecca by way of Bandar-i-'Abbás, and that the government of Kirmán had He is defeated by Bahman Mírzá, and flees by way of Lár to India. been conferred upon him. Prince Bahman Mírzá Baha'u'd-Dawla, being apprised of his inten­tions, pursued and overtook him as he was making for Shahr-i-Bábak and Sírján, and a skirmish took place between the two parties in which eight of the Prince's soldiers and sixteen of the Áqá Khán's men were killed. After a second and fiercer battle the Áqá Khán was defeated and fled to Lár, whence he ultimately escaped to India, where his descendant, the present Áqá Khán, * lives a wealthy and spacious life at Bombay when not engaged in his frequent and extensive travels.