Muhammed Tapar’ın Veziri Sa’dü’l-Mülk ve Bâtınîlerle Mücadelesi
Yükleniyor...
Tarih
2023 Aralık
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Selçuk Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Selçuklu Sultanı Muhammed Tapar dönemi Selçukluların Bâtınîlikle mücadelesinde bir dönüm noktası olarak görülmektedir. Dindar kişiliğiyle öne çıkan Muhammed Tapar'ın amansız Bâtınî mücadelesi yoğun olarak İsfahan civarında olup, başkenti tehdit eden Şahdiz Kalesi’nin zaptı bunun ilk somut örneğidir. Bunun yanında Bâtınî kalelerinin birer birer düşürülüp esas emir komuta merkezi olarak bilenen Alamut Kalesi’nin kuşatılması Bâtınîliğin sona ereceği anlamına gelmekteydi. Ancak Muhammed Tapar'ın ansızın ölümü, buna bağlı olarak Alamut Kalesi’nin zapt edilememesi, şüphe uyandıran ve tarihçiler tarafından tartışılan konular arasındadır. Ayrıca Bâtınîlerin İran coğrafyasında uzun bir süre ömür sürmelerini kimi tarihçiler bölgenin sıkıntılı coğrafi konumuna bağlarken kimileri de bu durumu Selçuklu vezir ve emirlerinin Bâtınilerle iş birliğine bağlamışlardır. Mesela Tapar’ın güvendiği bir adamı olarak bilinen Vezir Sa'dül-Mülk'ün, Bâtınî liderlerinden Ahmed b. Abdülmelik b. Attaş ile irtibat halinde olduğu iddiası, bu durumun sultana iletilmesine rağmen vezirine güvenmeye devam etmesi, nihayetinde hacamatla uğraşan bir Bâtınî eliyle sultanı zehirletme teşebbüsü ve iddiaları akabinde dört arkadaşıyla birlikte idam edilmesi, üzerinde durulması gereken hadiselerdir. Bu gelişmeleri Muhammed Tapar'ın Bâtınîlikle mücadelesinin başarısızlığa uğraması yönünde ipuçları veren bilgiler olarak görmek mümkündür. Öte yandan Vezir Sa’dü’lMülk'ün hayatı boyunca Bâtınilikle mücadele eden ve bu mücadelede bedel ödeyen Nizamü’l-Mülk ailesinden olmaması, seleflerinin aksi istikamette bir siyaset izlemesi de manidardır.
The reign of the Seljuk Sultan Mohammad Tapar is seen as a turning point in the Seljuks' struggle against B?tinism. Mohammad Tapar, who was prominent with his pious personality, was relentlessly battling the B?tinids around Isfahan, and the capture of Shahdiz Castle, which threatened the capital, is recorded as the first concrete example of this. Apart from this, the fall of the B?tinid strongholds one by one and the siege of Alamut Castle, which was known as the main command center, meant the end of B?tinism. However, the sudden death of Mohammad Tapar and the consequent failure to capture Alamut Castle are among the issues that raise doubts and are debated by historians. Nevertheless, while some historians attribute the prolonged survival of the B?tınids in Iran to the troubled geographical location of the region, some scholars rarely attribute this to the cooperation of Seljuk viziers and emirs with the B?tınids. For example, the fact that the vizier Sa'd al-Mulk, who was known as the sultan's best man, was in contact with Ahmad b. 'Abd al-Malik b. Attash, one of the B?tinid leaders, and that he continued to trust his vizier despite this situation being communicated to the sultan, and that he eventually attempted to have the sultan poisoned by a B?tinid practicing cupping, and that he was executed along with four of his friends following his claims, are events that should be emphasized. It is possible to see these developments as clues to the failure of Mohammad Tapar's struggle against B?tinidism. On the other hand, it is also significant that the vizier Sa?d al-Mulk was not from the Niz?m al-Mulk family, who fought and paid the price for the struggle against B?tinism throughout his life, and that he followed a policy contrary to his predecessors.
The reign of the Seljuk Sultan Mohammad Tapar is seen as a turning point in the Seljuks' struggle against B?tinism. Mohammad Tapar, who was prominent with his pious personality, was relentlessly battling the B?tinids around Isfahan, and the capture of Shahdiz Castle, which threatened the capital, is recorded as the first concrete example of this. Apart from this, the fall of the B?tinid strongholds one by one and the siege of Alamut Castle, which was known as the main command center, meant the end of B?tinism. However, the sudden death of Mohammad Tapar and the consequent failure to capture Alamut Castle are among the issues that raise doubts and are debated by historians. Nevertheless, while some historians attribute the prolonged survival of the B?tınids in Iran to the troubled geographical location of the region, some scholars rarely attribute this to the cooperation of Seljuk viziers and emirs with the B?tınids. For example, the fact that the vizier Sa'd al-Mulk, who was known as the sultan's best man, was in contact with Ahmad b. 'Abd al-Malik b. Attash, one of the B?tinid leaders, and that he continued to trust his vizier despite this situation being communicated to the sultan, and that he eventually attempted to have the sultan poisoned by a B?tinid practicing cupping, and that he was executed along with four of his friends following his claims, are events that should be emphasized. It is possible to see these developments as clues to the failure of Mohammad Tapar's struggle against B?tinidism. On the other hand, it is also significant that the vizier Sa?d al-Mulk was not from the Niz?m al-Mulk family, who fought and paid the price for the struggle against B?tinism throughout his life, and that he followed a policy contrary to his predecessors.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Selçuklular, Muhammed Tapar, Sa'dü’l-Mülk, Bâtınîler, vezir, Seljuks, Mohammad Tapar, Sa'd al-Mulk, Bātinis, vizier
Kaynak
Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
Sayı
50
Künye
Akkuş, M., Zeki, İ., (2023). Muhammed Tapar’ın Veziri Sa’dü’l-Mülk ve Bâtınîlerle Mücadelesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, (50), 231-242.
DOI: 10.21497/sefad.1407746
