ered (Parsee Prakash,
p. 11). The information thus obtained by intelligent emissaries for
a long time guided the Parsis in their decisions regarding social and
religious questions, and formed the collection of the Rivayats. At the
same time the members of the community in India were not in a position
to alleviate the miseries of their Persian brethren, and each century
brought to the latter a new increase of sufferings and troubles.

Four revolutions contributed to the destruction of the Zoroastrian
population of Kirman. The Ghilzi-Afghans, who had long groaned under
the yoke of the Persians, rose at last under the command of a brave
and intelligent chief, called Mir Vais, who quickly made himself
master of Khandahar. [49] The Persian monarch Hussein, powerless to
reduce them by arms, tried to bring them back to a sense of duty by
sending emissaries, who were however treated with contempt. The Afghan
chief who succeeded Mir Vais resolved in his turn to be revenged by
invading Persia as soon as an opportunity presented itself. It came
soon. Whilst the north-east frontier of the kingdom was threatened by
the Abdali-Afghans of Herat, and whilst the Arabian Prince of Muscat
was taking possession of the coast of the Persian Gulf, Mahmoud, who
had succeeded his father, Mir Vais, in the government of Khandahar,
made an irruption into Persia. This invasion of the Ghilzi-Afghans
was the greatest catastrophe to the Zoroastrian community, Mahmood
having preferred to pass through Kirman rather than risk the deserts
of Seistan. Massacres and forced conversions drove the faithful band
to despair.

At the time of the second invasion of Mahmood he persuaded the
Zoroastrians of Yezd and Kirman to join his troops, and avenge the
wrongs they had suffered for centuries. [50] It is needless to say
that these unfortunates, too confiding, allowed themselves to be
convinced and enlisted. What do we know of their ultimate fate? What
became of them under the standard of Mahmood after the victory of
Ispahan? (October 21, 1722, H. 1135 [51]). Were they better treated,
and did they receive any recompense? There is reason to believe that
their condition, far from being ameliorated, became worse.

It is said that under the reign of Nadir-Shah and his successors, they
had again to elect between the frightful alternative of conversion
or death. At the time of the siege of Kirman, of which we have spoken
(p. 55), many Zoroastrians were put to the swo