CORDOBA
Cordoba, named Qurtubain Arabic and Cordobain
Spanish, was the political capital of al-Andalus during the Umayyad emirate and
caliphate periods (AH seventh century first quarter of the eleventh century CE).
Today it is the capital of the province of the same name. Cordoba is located in
the southwest of the Spanish state, overlooking the medial course of the
Guadalquivir River (Wadi al-kabirin
Arabic) on
both
banks.
The rural area of the south of the city was
called qanbaniya, approximately the
same rural area known these days as ‘‘the Cordoba countryside.’’ The plain known
as Fahs al-Ballut (field of oaks) was
located to the north of the province, where the little town of Pedroche is
found (known by the Arabs as Bitrawj or
Bitrush.). Until the thirteenth century, the Cordoban region was known for
the wheat produced in its
countryside
and for the gardens and meadows that flanked the river. Nevertheless, the main
areas of farming production of al- Andalus were found far from the capital, in
the Seville highlands and the Toledo surroundings. Mining exploitation did not
completely disappear with Cordoba’s decadence, and there is evidence that still
in the thirteenth century, Ovejo (located forty kilometers from the capital)
was an important center of extraction of cinnabar, from which mercury
is
obtained.
The city was occupied by the Muslim armies in
AH Shawwal of 92/July–August 711 CE. Leading these armies was the manumitted
slave Mughith al-Rumi, deputy of Tariq
ibn Ziyad. Governor al-Hurr ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Thaqafi (r. 97–100/716–719) transferred
the capital of al-Andalus from Seville to Cordoba. His successor, al-Samh ibn
Malik al-Jawlani (r. 100–102/719–721), repaired the old Roman bridge and some
demolished parts of the protective enceinte. Al-Samh also founded the first
Islamic cemetery of the city, the
Maqbarat al-rabad (cemetery of
the
suburb), in the north bank of the river. In 133/750, governor Yusuf ‘Abd
al-Rahman (r. 129–138/ 747–756) bought the church of Saint Vincent to make it
the first cathedral mosque(al-jami‘)of Cordoba. In 138/756, the governor was
overthrown by the Umayyad prince ‘Abd al-Rahman, who had managed to escape from
the massacre of his family in
Syria.
‘Abd al-Rahman made Cordoba the administrative, political, military, religious,
and cultural capital of his new emirate.
In this way, Cordoba came to monopolize most
of the artistic activities. Its monumental center was composed of the fortress
or alcazar (erected on the remains of the old Visigoth palace), the main mosque,
and the bridge. The fortress and the mosque were located on the north bank of
the Guadalquivir River, separated from the river by a terrace.
Work began on the mosque in 785, under the
rule of ‘Abd al-Rahman I, and it was enlarged on several occasions, as a
parallel process to the city’s growth and development, during the governments
of ‘Abd alRahman’s successors, Hisham I (r. 172–180/788–796), ‘Abd al-Rahman II
(r. 206–238/822–852), and Muhammad I (r. 238–273/852–886). During the rule of
‘Abd al-Rahman III (300–350/912–961) the first to adopt the title of caliph the
city enjoyed its apogee. It was this same caliph who ordered the palatine city
of Madinat al-Zahra’ three to be built, approximately three miles northeast of
Cordoba, at the foot of the mountains. The remains of this city were declared a
national monument in 1923. Since then, some of its old rooms have been
restored, among which the socalled Rich Room is especially significant. In
regard
to
the old fortress of Cordoba, it has to be said that it was assigned to
administrative uses when the court was transferred to Madinat al-Zahra’. Later
on, when the palatine city was destroyed, the fortress was used again as the
residence of the different governors of the city.
The most important enlargement of the main mosque
of Cordoba was carried out by al-Hakam II (r. 350–366/961–976), son and
successor of ‘Abd alRahman III. The last big enlargement was commissioned by
al-Mansur ibn Abi ‘Amir, the mighty visir
of Hisham II (r. 366–399/976–1009). Al-Mansur built his own palatine city,
Madinat al-Zahira, east of Cordoba. This city underwent the same fate of
Madinat al-Zahra’ and was destroyed during the widespread revolts that took
place at the beginning of the fifth/ eleventh century.
After the fall of the caliphate, Cordoba was
ruled by the Jahwarids, between 1031 and 1070. It then became a part of the
territories governed by the Seville monarch Banu ‘Abbad. In 1091, Cordoba was
taken by the Almoravids, who built the defensive wall of the eastern part of
the city. In 1236, the city passed into Christian hands for good, after its
conquest by Ferdinand III of Castile.
After the disappearance of the caliphate and
the subsequent loss of Cordoba’s political and economic hegemony, the city
still kept its intellectual prestige, especially in the area of religious
sciences. However,
Cordoba
was no longer the main representative of Andalusis’ cultural life. Rather, it
had to share this role with the capitals of the different petty kingdoms into
which al-Andalus was fragmented from the eleventh century onward. The city
recovered its capital status under the Almoravid rule, but the construction of
monuments could never equal the emirate and caliphate periods. Almohads, for
their part, clearly showed a preference for the city of Seville.
After the Christian conquests, the process of
conversion of churches into mosques, which had taken place during the Islamic
invasion of the Iberian Peninsula, was reversed. Cordoba was taken by the
Christians in 1236, and its main mosque was converted into a cathedral. The
modifications undergone by the mosque did partially alter its original shape.
However, contrary to what happened to other mosques that underwent a similar
transformation process, the Cordoba temple still keeps a markedly Arabic and Islamic
character. This is probably related to the artistic and architectonic
singularity of the building, the preferred object of all the descriptions of
Islamic Cordoba.
Cordoba was the home of ‘‘ulama’’ such as of Ibn Hazm (d.
456/1064), Ibn Rushd (Averroes) (d. 595/ 1198), and Maimonides (d. 601/1204).
Further
Reading
Arberry, A.J. ‘‘Muslim Cordoba.’’
InCities of Destiny,
edited by A. Toynbee, 166–177.
London, 1967.
EI, s.v.Al-Andalus. [Le
´vi-Provenc¸al, E.; Torres Balba ´s, L.;
and Colins, G. S.].
EI2 , s.v. Kurtuba. [Seybold,
C.F.; [Ocan ˜a Jime´nez, M.]
Grabar, O. ‘‘Great Mosque of
Cordoba.’’ InThe Genius of
Arab Civilization. Source of
Renaissance. Cambridge,
MA, 1978, 106.
Hillenbrand, R. ‘‘The Ornament of
the World. Medieval
Co´rdoba As a Cultural Centre.’’
InThe Legacy of Muslim Spain, ed. S.Kh. Jayyusi, 112–135. Leiden, New
York, and Cologne: Brill, 1992.
Le´vi-Provenc¸al, E. Espan˜a
musulmana 711–1031 (tran.
Garcı´aGo´mez, E.),Historia de
Espan˜a, dirigida por R.
Mene´ndez Pidal. Madrid, 1965,
vols. V–VI.
Urvoy, D.Pensers d’al-Andalus. La
vie Intellectuelle a CorDoue et Seville au Temps des Empires Berbe`res (fin Xie
Sie`cle-De´but XIIIe Sie`cle).
Toulouse: Presses Universitaires du Mirail, 1990, 52–77.
CYPRUS
Cyprus (Kıbrısin modern Turkish, Kubrusin old
Ottoman or Arabic text, andKyprosin Greek) is the largest island in the Eastern
Mediterranean. The first encounter of Cyprus with Islam began in 632 CE when
the Arab invaders under Abu Bakr, according to the Arab and Greek chronicles,
showed themselves in Cyprus capturing the Byzantine city of Salamis
(Constantia)
and converting the large basilica of St. Epiphanios into a mosque. During
another expedition by Mu‘awiya, governor of Syria in 649, Umm Haram bint
Milhan, wife of Ubada ibn as-Shamit, a close relation of the Prophet, died by a
fall from her mule in Larnaca. Hala Sultan Tekke, akulliye including her mausoleum erected at the spot of her tomb, marked
by a megalithic monument, is the most venerated Islamic monument in the island.
The Arab expeditions continued during the
Latin Crusading Kingdom between the eleventh and sixteenth centuries. In one of
these, the Memelouk Sultan Emir Tanriverdi al-Mahmoudi from Cairo landed
at
Limassol with his army in 1426 and proceeded as far as Nicosia, where he
enjoyed the luxury of the Lusignan king’s palace and demanded a quarter to be
allocated to them in the capital city, as well as making an agreement of an
annual tribute.
Islamic societies took part sometimes as
allied forces beside the Lusignans against the Byzantines or the Genoese.
However, there is not much known about the extent of the spreading of the
Islamic culture in Cyprus dating back to pre-Ottoman rule, although medieval
chronicles referred to mosque building and the presence of the Turcopoles on
the
island. There are several Ottoman buildings (St. O¨mer Tekke, Kirklar Tekke, and O¨ merge Mosque) dedicated to
the early Islamic martyrs.
The Ottoman conquest during the reign of
Selim II in 1570/71, with the consent of the Sheyh u¨l Islam, introduced the
permanent Islamic culture on the island. An organized settlement policy by
forced migrations from Anatolia, mainly Konya, Karaman, Larende, Nig˘de, Ichel,
Menteshe, Denizli, and Zu¨lkadiriye, created a Turkish Islamic population
beside
the Orthodox Greek natives. Institutions of the Ottoman administration and the
Islamic religion were established, the most significant being the Evkaf (waqf) institution, which still functions
as
the
administrator of the religious and philanthropic affairs as the greatest
property holder in the island. Trade activities from the Islamic countries also
increased during this period.
Cyprus became a chief principality governed
by a Beylerbeyiin Nicosia and Sancak Beysin the kazas, including some provinces
in Anatolia such as Ichel, Sis, Alaiye (Alanya), and Tarsus until the early
decades of the seventeenth century. British rule terminated the Ottoman
administration in 1878, although the Turkish Islamic culture continued.
The language of the Turkish Cypriots is in
the southeastern dialect deriving from Oghuz Turks. Islamic architectural
heritage is of Ottoman character. Bu
¨yu¨k Han, Bu¨yu¨k Hamam, O ¨ meriye complex, Arap Ahmet and Agha Cafer
Mosques, Hala Sultan and Mevlevi Tekkes, aqueducts, fountains, and the castles
in Paphos, Larnaca, and Limassol are the most notable ones from the sixteenth
century. Also, Latin
monuments,
mainly Selimiye (Ayia Sophia) Mosque in Nicosia, Lala Mustafa Pasha (Ayia
Sophia or St. Nicholas) Mosque in Famagusta, the city walls, and citadels and
domestic buildings, restored and
renovated
according to Turkish culture during the last quarter of the sixteenth century,
is a sign of the respect of the Ottoman administrators toward the cultural
heritage. Several others were constructed during the seventeenth to nineteenth
centuries, including Bekir Pasha Aqueduct and Sultan Mahmut Library. Museums
located in Mevlevi Tekke, Dervish
Pasha
Konak, and Canpolat Bastion display art and ethnographical collections of
Islamic origin. Islamic manuscripts and Ottoman documents in the possession of
the Turkish Cypriot Archive and Documentary Centre and the Waqf Administration
in North Cyprus and the Prime Ministry Ottoman Archive in Istanbul show the
legacy of the Islamic culture in Cyprus.
Further
Reading
Boustronios, George.The
Chronicles of George Boustronios
1456–1489, ed. and trans. R. M.
Dawkins. Melbourne:
University of Melbourne, Cyprus
Expedition Publication, No. 2, 1964.
Cobham, Claude Deleval, ed. and
trans.Excerpta Cypria,
Materials for a History of
Cyprus. Cambridge, MA,
1908.
C¸ uhadirog ˘lu, Fikret, and Og
˘uz, Filiz. ‘‘Kibrıs‘ta Tu¨rk Eserleri [Turkish Historical Monuments in
Cyprus].’’ Vakiflar, Ro¨lo ¨ve ve Restorasyon Dergisi, Vakiflar Genel
Mu¨du¨rlu ¨g˘u¨ Yayinlari No. 2
(1975): 1–76.
De Groot, A. H. ‘‘Kubros.’’ InThe
Encyclopaedia of Islam,
ed. Bosworth, E. van Donzel,
Lewis, B., and Pellat, Ch.
Vol V. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1986.
Esin, Emel. Aspects of Turkish
Civilization in Cyprus.
Ankara: Tu¨rk Ku ¨ltu ¨ru ¨nu¨
Aras¸tıma Enstitu ¨su ¨, 1965.
Gaziog˘lu, Ahmet Cemal. The Turks
in Cyprus. London:
Kemal Rustem and Brother, 1990.
Hill, George.A History of Cyprus.
4 vols. Cambridge, MA:
University Press, 1948–1952.
I
˙
nalcik, Halil (Ed). The First
International Congress of
Cypriot Studies (14–19 April
1969), Ankara. Institute
for the Study of Turkish Culture,
1971.
Le Januen, C.D.Histoire
Ge´ne´rale Des Roiaumes de Chypre
de Jerusalem. 3 vols. A Leide,
1785.
Jennings, Ronald C. Christians
and Muslims in Ottoman
Cyprus and the Mediterranean
World, 1571–1640. New
York, 1993.
Latrie, L. de Mas.Histoire de
L’Ile de Chypre Sous le Re`gne
des Princes de la Maison de
Lusignan. Paris, 1862 (Famagouste, Chypre: Les Edition l’Oiseau), 1970.
Makhairas, Leontis.Recital
Concerning the Sweet Land of
Cyprus, Entitled ‘Chronicle,ed.
and trans., R. M. Dawkins. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1932 (Famagouste,
Chypre: Les Edition l’Oiseau), 2
vols.
Ostrogorsky, George.History of
the Byzantine State. New
Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University
Press, 1969.
Roper, Geoffrey, ed.World Survey
of Islamic Manuscripts.
2 vols. London: Al-Furqan Islamic
Heritage Foundation, 1992.
Runciman, Steven.History of the
Crusades. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA. 1951–1954.
Setton, Kenneth M., and M. W.
Baldwin, eds.A History of
the Crusades. VI vols. Madison,
Milwaukee, and London: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969–1989.
S¸es¸en, Ramazan, Altan, Mustafa
Has ¸im, and I zgi, Cevat.
Kıbrıs I˙slam Yazmaları Katalog
˘u.Istanbul: Islam Tarihve Ku¨ltu ¨ru ¨nu¨ Aras¸tırma Vakfı, 1415/1995
Uluc¸am, Abdu ¨lsellam. ‘‘The
Architectural Characteristics
of Turkish Monuments in
Cyprus.’’Cyprus International
Symposium on Her Past and
Present, Gazimag˘usa, 28
October Ekim–2 November 1991.
Ankara: Eastern Mediterranean University of TRNC and Van Yu ¨zu¨ncu¨ Yıl
University of Turkish Republic,
No: 9, 1994, 149–181.
Yıldız, Netice. ‘‘The Koran of
Lala Mustafa Pas¸a.’’ New
Cyprus(July 1991): 22–25.
———. ‘‘Ottoman Period in Cyprus,
A Glance at Turkish
Architecture.’’New
Cyprus(February–March 1992):
22–27.
———. ‘‘Aqueducts in
Cyprus.’’Journal for Cypriot Studies
2/2 (1996): 89–112.
———. ‘‘Ottoman Houses in
Cyprus.’’Proceedings on the
International Symposium on The
Ottoman Houses,
Papers from the Amasya Symposium,
24–27 September
1996, The British Institute of
Archaeology at Ankara
and the University of Warwick, BIAA
Monographs 26,
1998, 79–88, pl. 10.1–8
———. ‘‘Ottoman Culture and Art in
Cyprus.’’Learning
and Education in the Ottoman.
World Proceedings, I
˙
stanbul 12–15 April 1999,
Research Centre for Islamic
History, Art and Culture
(IRCICA), I˙
stanbul, 2001,
259–276.
———. ‘‘Kıbrıs’ta Osmanlı Ku¨ltu
¨r Mirasına Genel Bir
Bakıs¸.’’ In Tu¨rkler, edited by
H. C. Gu ¨zel, K. C ¸ic¸ek,
and S. Koca, vol. 19, 966–993.
Ankara: Yeni Tu¨rkiye
Yayınları, 2002.
———. ‘‘Vakfsin Ottoman Cyprus.’’
CIEPO–15
th
Symposium, (International
pre-Ottoman and Ottoman Studies,
The London School of Economics
and Political Science,
7–12 July 2002 (in print by
TAURIS Publications).
DAMASCUS
Damascus (Dimashq) is the current capital of
the Arab Republic of Syria. In popular usage, it is widely referred to
asal-Sham,a term that is also used to refer to greater Syria (i.e.,Bilad al-Sham).
Damascus owes its existence to the river
Barada, which springs from the eastern slopes of the AntiLebanon mountain
range, and, after crossing Damascus, empties into the eastern and southern
desert, forming around the city a fertile agricultural land known asal-Ghuta.
The abundance of water and agriculture, along with the city’s strategic
location on the
internal
highway that connects the south (Egypt and Arabia) and the north (Mesopotamia
and Asia Minor), allowed Damascus to play a significant role in Near Eastern
trade and communication, and, at times, in politics, too, from antiquity to
modern times. The city plan took its shape inside the surrounding wall and its
seven gates during the Roman period. The main east west street (decumanus) is
still partly in existence, and approximately in its middle was the Temple of
Jupiter (which was converted during the Byzantine period into the Church of St.
John the
Baptist)
and the market place (agora), the ruins of which still exist just outside the
southern gate of the Umayyad Mosque. The town’s houses were arranged in
quarters on both sides of the main street, with small
alleys
and paths leading to them.
Damascus fell to the Muslim army in AH 15/636
CE and ever since has been under Islamic rule. It rose to significance under
the Umayyads (r. 41–132/661–750), who chose it as their main capital and
reorganized it
as
an imperial city. During that period, the first mosque built on a grand scale
in Islam (the Umayyad Mosque) was constructed by orders from Caliph alWalid b.
‘Abd al-Malik (r. 86–96/705–715), who also ordered the construction of the Aqsa
Mosque in Jerusalem. The site of the Umayyad Mosque and its courtyard was
originally occupied by the Church of St. John, which included a small chapel
built to house a casket that was believed to contain St. John’s head. After the
Islamic conquest, an earlier mosque was built in the southern corner of the
Church’s courtyard, although some Muslim historians suggest that the Church
itself was divided into two sections: one for the Muslims and another for the
Christians. AlWalid ordered the confiscation of the property, and
all
preexisting buildings, including the Church and the earlier mosque, were razed
to the ground to allow for the new mosque. The casket containing St. John’s head
was incorporated into the main mosque, where
it
still exists today. In 61/680, the head of al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, the grandson of
the Prophet Muhammad and the third Shi‘i Imam, was buried in the eastern side
of the mosque complex; however, it was moved shortly
after
359/970 and buried in Cairo, in a mosque built for that purpose by the Fatimids
of Egypt (the alHusayn Mosque). These two figures of tremendous religious and
spiritual authority made the Umayyad Mosque a center especially for local
pilgrimage and subsequently augmented the religious symbolism (fada’il) of
Damascus.
In
addition to the two key figures mentioned above, local legends identify
Damascus and its surrounding area as the birthplace of Abraham and the burial
place
of Moses and Mary, the mother of Jesus. Similarly, Jesus is believed to have
escaped to Damascus with Mary and Joseph at the time of the Massacre of the
Innocents hence its association with the Qur’anic reference ‘‘wa-awaynahuma ila
rabwatin dhati qararin wa-ma‘ini’’ (23:50); it is also believed that He will descend
into the city to usher in the End Times. The town’s main medieval cemetery, Maqbarat al-Bab al Saghir (this is outside of the southern Small Gate, which
is also known as Bab al-Hadid),
contains the graves of a large host of significant Muslim public figures and
religious scholars, including companions
of
the Prophet Muhammad. All of this bestowed on Damascus—and, by extension, on
Syria additional holiness.
The city grew outside its walls, but it
gradually lost most of its prestige and centrality, especially as compared with
towns in Syria like Aleppo (Halab) and Hims after the ousting of the Umayyads.
It reclaimed
its
political, intellectual, economic, and religious supremacy back when Sultan Nur
al-Din (d. 569/1174) captured it in 549/1154 and made it his capital city, although
its political prominence was lost again with
his
death. Nur al-Din ordered a major facelift for the city, including major
renovations of some of its existing monuments and the addition of new ones,
such as a hospice (al-Bimaristan al-Nuri), several schools for
religious
sciences (e.g., Dar al-Hadith al-Nuriyya), and several mosques. Since the time
of Nur al-Din, Damascus has become one of the most prestigious centers for
Sunni Islam, and its scholars (both natives
and
residents) played a significant role in the promotion and diffusion of Sunni
Islam in Syria and the Middle East. During the Ottoman period, Damascus rose
back to political supremacy, especially with the alAzm family during the
eighteenth century. Many members of the family were governors of the wilayet (province)
of Damascus, which extended east to the Bekaa valley in modern-day Lebanon and
south to Jordan and northern Palestine. The al-Azm family left their mark on
the city, with their splendid palaces and public undertakings, including
construction and renovation of the city’s markets and caravanserais.
Damascus gave its name to several types of
merchandise that were initially produced there and traded widely during the
Middle Ages. The two most notable items are damask, which is a firm, lustrous
fabric that blends linen and silk, and thedamask rose(ward juri), which is a
very fragrant red rose. A special syrup is made from the damask rose and used
in desserts and a few other recipes; if diluted in water, the syrup becomes a
refreshing drink that is usually served at weddings and on special occasions.
Further
Reading
Elissee´ff, Nikita. La
Description de Damas d’Ibn ‘Asakir,3
vols. Damascus: Institut
Franc¸ais de Damas, 1959.
Hillenbrand, Carole.The Crusades:
Islamic Perspectives.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University
Press, 1999.
Lindsay, James E.Daily Life in
the Medieval Islamic World.
Westport, Conn: Greenwood, 2005.
DARA SHIKOH (1615–1659)
The eldest son and the heir apparent of the
Mughal Emperor Shahjahan (d. 1657) and his favorite wife Mumtaz Mahal and
himself an Emperor manque´, Dara never showed much interest in political
affairs.
He
took part in one military campaign to Kandahar in 1659, which resulted in
failure, and he only accepted the governorship of Allahabad in 1645 so that he could
be near the Chishti mystic and philosopher Muhibb Allah Ilahabadi (d. 1648); he
never took up his post in Allahabad and merely corresponded with the
philosopher. Along with his favorite sister,
Jahanara,
he spent more time with literati and Sufis, affiliating himself with the Qadiri
order. Their political disinterest led to his younger brother Awrangzeb to
launch a successful bid to become emperor and outflanking Dara Shikoh. European
travelers such as Bernier and Manucci regarded him as an aloof and arrogant man
who had no real convictions and
was
hence interested in syncretism.
Dara was already associated with the Qadiri
order at the time of Miyan Mir (d. 1635), but, along with his sister, he only
formally joined in 1640, paying allegiance to Mulla Shah Badakhshi (d. 1661),
Miyan
Mir’s
successor. This in itself was a significant act: the heir apparent pledging
allegiance to a Sufi master was an almost unique step during the Mughal period.
Dara wrote two hagiographies of famous Sufis of the
past
and of the Qadiri order: Safinat
al-Awliya’in 1640 and Sakinat
al-Awliya’in 1642. However, his major literary contribution came later. In
1646, he completed his best work,Risala-yi Haqq-numa, which was a defense of
monism that was steeped in the learning of the school of Ibn ‘Arabi. His
growing interest in following in the footsteps of his great grandfather Akbar
led to his encounters with Indian thought. In 1653, he met the kabirpanthi
ascetic Baba La‘l Das and asked him questions about truth, religion, and
community, a conversation that was recorded for posterity in an intriguing mix
of Persian, Sanskrit, and Hindavi by Dara’s secretary, Candrabhan Brahman.
Dara’s most obvious expression of syncretism came
in 1655 with the completion ofMajma‘ al-Bahrayn (The Mingling of the Two
Oceans). Drawing on Qur’an 18:60, he argued that the essences of Indian religions
(he meant the Vedanta and Natha paths) and Sufism were the same. A rather
mediocre work, its significance lies not in the quality of its composition but
rather the identity of its author. It does seem that Dara had a good grasp of
Sanskrit and of the technical terminology of the Vedic schools, because he
himself translated this work as Samudrasangama.
He extended this by commissioning a translation of
the
Upanishads. which was completed in 1657 with the title Sirr-i Akbar (The Great
Secret). He claimed that the Upanishads were the ‘‘hidden scripture’’ alluded
to in Qur’an 56:78.
A patron of the arts, Dara commissioned
paintings and albums that included depictions of himself that still survive.
Awrangzeb, who was seen as a heretical aesthete, took advantage of Shahjahan’s
illness in 1658
and
had Dara declared a heretic. During the ensuing trial, Dara was condemned, and
he was executed on August 12, 1659. His political failure meant that he could
not call on powerful defenders for his cause.
Since then, historians and Indians have
debated what might have been. Awrangzeb has been cast as Dara’s opposite,
associating with Naqshbandis and treating non-Muslims harshly; this was in
contrast with Dara’s syncretic idea of ‘‘universal peace.’’ Dara’s real problem
was that, by focusing on lofty ideals and transcendental unity, he had little
understanding of political realities.
Primary
Sources
Shikoh, Dara.Majma‘ al-Bahrayn
(The Mingling of the
Two Oceans), ed. and trans. M.
Mahfuz ul-Haq. Calcutta: Biblioteca Indica, 1929.
———. ‘‘Mukalama Baba La‘l
(Entretiens de Lahore).’’
ed. and trans. C. Huart and L.
Massignon, Journal
Asiatique 209 (1926): 285–334.
(English translation
in Waseem, M., ed. and trans. On
Becoming an
Indian Muslim: French Essays on
Aspects of Syncreticism, 106–30. New Delhi: Oxford University Press,
2003.)
Hasrat, B.J.Dara Shikuh: Life and
Works. New Delhi:
Munshiram Manoharlal, 1979.
Filliozat, J. ‘‘Dara
Shikoh’sSamudrasangama’.’’ In On Becoming an Indian Muslim: French Essays on
Aspects of
Syncreticism, Waseem, M., ed. and
trans., 131–44. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press,
2003.
Go¨bel-Gross, E.Sirr-i Akbar. Die
Upanishad-U¨bersetzung
Dara Shikohs. PhD dissertation.
Marburg: 1961.
Renard, P. ‘‘Historical
Bibliography of Upanisads in Translation.’’ Journal of Indian Philosophy23
(1995): 223–46.
Shayegan, D.Les Relations de
‘Hindouisme et du Soufisme.
Paris: Editions de la Difference,
1979.
DOME OF THE ROCK
The Dome of the Rock (Qubbat al-Sakhra) in Jerusalem is the oldest standing monument of
Islamic architecture. It was built on the site of the Jewish Temple by orders
from the Umayyad caliph ‘Abd al-Malik b.
Marwan
(d. AH 65–86/685–705 CE), and its construction was completed in 72/691–692. The
Dome of the Rock, along with the Aqsa mosque (al-Masjid alAqsa) constitute the
Haram al-Sharif, which corresponds to Herod’s enlarged Temple Mount area.
The Dome of the Rock is a unique monument as compared
to other Islamic monuments. It is not a mosque, and it was not intended to
function as such. Whatever the reason for its construction might have
been,
it was and remains the most impressive example of Islamic religious architecture. The shape of
the building is octagonal, with a diameter of forty eight meters, and the
structure consists of two ambulatories that surround the Rock, which are
believed to be the site of the biblical story of the binding of Isaac (Genesis
22). The building stands on two arcades: an inner circular arcade that supports
the dome and comprises twelve columns and four piers, and an outer octagonal
arcade that consists of sixteen columns and eight piers. The dome is
approximately twenty meters in diameter, and it rises approximately thirty meters
above the building floor. In the panel on top of the octagonal arcade, there is
the 240-meter-long foundation inscription that is coated in gold. At the beginning
of the inscription, one encounters the name
of
the ‘Abbasid caliph al-Ma’mun (r. 196–218/812– 833), but this is because, when
he authorized the renovation of the building, he ordered the name of ‘Abd
al-Malik to be effaced and replaced by his own. Part of the text of the
inscription quotes Qur’anic passages (the most obvious cases are the references
to
[3:18-19, 4:171–172, and 19:33–36]), making it the earliest dated reference to
the Qur’anic text.
The architects and artisans who constructed
the building were local Christians, and they were well versed in that
particular style of architecture, which is also found in similar monuments especially
martyriums in Jerusalem and Syria. In
its decoration, which blends Byzantine and Persian styles, the creators used
marble, painted wood, mosaics, and colored tiles. The outside of the dome was
originally
covered
with gold sheets, which were later removed by the ‘Abbasids. The building has
undergone several major renovations; the most recent one, made between 1956 and
1964, restored the entire building, including the current gilded dome.
There are many explanations for why ‘Abd
alMalik built the Dome of the Rock. The first explanation is that he was eager
during the challenging first years as caliph to create a pilgrimage shrine in
his
domain
to which Syrians would journey, for the Ka‘ba in Mecca was under the control of
his enemy, Caliph Ibn al-Zubayr (d. 73/692). ‘Abd al-Malik, according to this
explanation, wanted to prevent any possible influence that Ibn al-Zubayr might
exercise on the Syrians during the pilgrimage season. The town of the Jewish
temple, Jerusalem, was the most appropriate choice for ‘Abd al-Malik, and it
was probably the only option. It has been also suggested that the Dome of the
Rock was meant as a proclamation of the triumph of the new faith over the other
two
monotheistic
traditions, Judaism and Christianity. With this second explanation, too,
Jerusalem was the obvious choice because of its centrality to Jewish and
Christian thought. A third explanation, which
lacks
support in Islamic literature, is that ‘Abd alMalik was rebuilding the Temple.
A few contemporary Christian and Jewish accounts attest to this,
including
a Jewish midrashthat names ‘Abd alMalik as the one who rebuilds the Temple.
Sometime after the completion of the Dome of
the Rock, the site was identified as the place from which the Prophet Muhammad
ascended to Heaven (mi‘raj). This association, which represents the fourth and
most
popular explanation for why it was built, bestowed on the Dome of the Rock and
by extension, on Jerusalem an additional, exclusively Islamic layer of
holiness. Muslim legend has it that the Rock lifted itself when the Prophet
stood on it to start his ascension; hence the widespread popular Muslim belief
that the Rock is hanging up in the air. The inscription from the time of ‘Abd
al-Malik does not reflect any connection between the building and Muhammad’s
mi‘raj.
Throughout Islamic history, the Dome of the
Rock has attracted a cult of minor pilgrimage among the local population of
greater Syria, and, to a lesser extant, Egypt, especially as a stop on the way
to perform the major pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina. This practice generated
protest from theologians like Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), who wrote against the
practice
of the minor pilgrimage to Jerusalem. In recent years, the Dome of the Rock has
become widely used as the representative symbol for Jerusalem in Palestinian,
Arab, Islamic, and even Israeli media.
Further
Reading
Elad, Amikam.Medieval Jerusalem
and Islamic Worship:
Holy Places, Ceremonies,
Pilgrimage. Leiden: Brill, 1995.
Grabar, Oleg.The Shape of the
Holy: Early Islamic Jerusalem. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996
Raby, Julian, and Jeremy Johns,
eds.Bayt al-Maqdis: ‘Abd
al-Malik’s Jerusalem (Oxford
Studies in Islamic Art
IX.1). Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1992.
Johns, Jeremy, ed. Bayt
al-Maqdis: Jerusalem and Early
Islam (Oxford Studies in Islamic
Art IX.2). Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1999.
Robinson, Chase.‘Abd al-Malik
(Makers of the Muslim
World series). Oxford: Oneworld,
2005.
DRUZE
Druze historical origins are often traced to
eleventhcentury Fatimi Egypt, particularly to the year 1017 CE, when the
propagation of Druzism began. The term Druzismis nearly one hundred years old
and refers to the Druze religious doctrine, which advocates a strict form of
Unitarianism (tawhid). Like other esoteric traditions, Druzism began covertly,
and the Druze manuscripts speak of a twenty-one-year period of secret
missionary activities between 996 and 1017. Both the historical accounts and
the Druze manuscripts agree that the propagation of Druzism continued until the
year 1043. Three leading figures al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, Hamza ibn ‘Ali
al-Zawzani, and Baha’ al-Din al-Samuqi—were important during the initial years
of the movement (996–1043).
From what little is known about the
connection between al-Hakim and Druzes, it can be concluded that, between 996
and 1021, al-Hakim did not ban the Druze missionaries but rather permitted
their activities , protected their followers, and approved their epistles. In
1021, al-Hakim left on one of his routine trips to the hills of al-Muqattam
east of Cairo and mysteriously never returned. Unlike al-Hakim, his successor,
al-Zahir, did not protect members of the Druze movement and instead ordered
their persecution, because they recognized him as caliph and not as imam. This
instigated a period of hardship that lasted several years.
Hamza Ibn ‘Ali, the second leading figure,
came to Cairo from eastern Iran in December 1016. A few months later, in May 1017, al-Hakim granted
him the title of imam and the freedom to preach his reform doctrine openly.
However, public resistance to Hamza’s teachings increased as he spoke against corruption,
the practice of polygamy, the remarriage of one’s divorcee, and other social
customs. During this external resistance, an internal rivalry arose between
Hamza and one of his subordinates, al-Darazi. Darazi deviated from the essence
of the movement’s message and falsified the writings and teachings of
Hamza
to present al-Hakim as divine. He had hoped that al-Hakim would favor him over
Hamza, but instead public opposition to Darazi’s teachings increased. Darazi
then redirected the public’s resistance by declaring that he had acted on
Hamza’s instructions. Consequently, instead of attacking Darazi, the crowd
turned against Hamza and his associates, who were in the Ridan Mosque at the
time. Although Darazi was eventually killed and his teachings repudiated, many
early and later observers, ironically, attribute the Druze doctrine to Darazi
and do
not
mention Hamza at all. To date, Druzes and the Druze manuscripts consider Darazi
the most heretical apostate. More importantly, Hamza is considered to be the
actual founder of Druzism and the primary author of the Druze manuscripts.
During the same year that al-Hakim
disappeared, 1021, Hamza went into retreat and delegated the affairs of the
community to the third leading figure, Baha’ al-Din al-Samuqi. Baha’ al-Din
continued public preaching with the approval of Hamza, who was in an
undisclosed location known only to Baha’ al-Din and a few other missionaries.
He wrote epistles to
both
prospective members in new destinations and to those followers who had seceded
from the teachings of the movement. He also send missionaries to strengthen the
believers and to provide further spiritual direction. Baha’ al-Din continued
his activity until the closing of Druzism in 1043; from that year to the
present, no one has been permitted to join the Druze movement. During the same
year, Hamza Ibn ‘Ali, Baha’ al-Din, and the other leading figures left Egypt.
Druzes believe that these individuals will return on the Day of Judgment.
After this establishment period of the Druze
movement, the Druze princes of the Buhturi (1040s–1507) and then the Ma‘ni
(1507–1697) families provided leadership to the Druze masses and protected the
continuity
of the religious reforms issued by Hamza Ibn ‘Ali. Prince Fakhr al-Din al-Ma‘ni
II (r. 1590– 1635) is often mentioned by some Lebanese historians as the early
founder of Lebanon and as the source of
Lebanese
nationalism. Druze history itself was not, of course, devoid of both internal
and external tribal rivalries. For example, to guarantee their survival, Druzes
and their allies often fought against or cooperated with different Muslim
regimes, including Mamluks, Ayyubids, and Ottomans.
Today there are approximately one million
Druzes in the world, the majority of them living in four Middle Eastern
countries: Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan. In addition to these larger
concentrations of Druzes, smaller diaspora communities can be found in
Australia, Canada, Europe, the Persian Gulf nations, the Philippines, South
America, West Africa, and the United States.
Further
Reading
Abu Izzeddin, Nejla M.The Druzes:
A New Study of
their History, Faith, and
Society. Leiden: Brill, 1984
and 1993.
Betts, Robert Benton.The Druze.
New Haven, Conn: Yale
University Press, 1988.
Firro, Kais.A History of the
Druzes. Leiden: Brill, 1992.
Hitti, Philip K.The Origins of
the Druze People and
Religion. New York: Columbia
University Press,
1928.
Makarem, Sami Nasib.The Druze
Faith. Delmar, NY:
Caravan Books, 1974.
Swayd, Samy. The Druzes: An
Annotated Bibliography.
Kirkland, Wash: Ises
Publications, 1998.
EGYPT
From the Arab Conquest until the end of the
Umayyad Period, the Arab army commanded by ‘Amr ibn al-‘As entered Egypt in
late 639 or early 640 CE, initially laying siege to the Byzantine fortress at
Babylon at the meeting place between Lower and Upper Egypt. The Arabs proceeded
to conquer Upper Egypt before marching on Alexandria. Faced with numerous
internal problems, the Byzantines eventually surrendered the city by treaty. As
was the case elsewhere in the conquered lands, the Arabs did not take up residence
among the conquered people—the Egyptian Christians
(Copts)—but rather settled in a garrison city (misr) known as al-Fustat. There
they established their administration and institutions, including a mosque that
was named for ‘Amr and a diwan to
record
the financial and military affairs of the new territory. The Arab tribesmen
proved to be difficult to govern, and this task, along with the collection of taxes
and the provision of revenues to the Caliph, were the responsibility of the
governor (wali).
‘Amr took control of the province on behalf
of Mu’awiya during the First Civil War (656–661) and was thus on the side of
the victor. During the Second Civil War, Marwan ibn al-Hakam seized control of
the province to keep it loyal to the Umayyads Perhaps the best known governor
of Egypt during the Umayyad period is Qurra ibn Sharik (709–715); this is
because the survival of numerous documents on papyrus provides more knowledge
about his administration than is available for any other governor of early
Islamic Egypt. The classical tax system of
land
tax (kharaj) and poll tax ( jizya) was not solidified until the middle of the
eighth century, and the Umayyads frequently experimented with their revenue
collection system. One attempt to raise taxes in 725 or 726 resulted in a major
uprising by Coptic peasants. As the Umayyad Caliphate weakened, the Arab rulers
of Egypt fought among themselves for control of this wealthy province.
An ‘Abbasid Province
After the ‘Abbasid occupation in the summer
of 750, Egypt was governed by a series of men who originated in the Khurasani
units that had overthrown the Umayyads. From 775 to 785, the governor was the
Caliph
al-Mansur’s son, al-Mahdi (the Umayyad governors had also frequently been
members of the ruling family). In 784, attempts to raise taxes led to a major revolt
by Arab tribesmen that had to be suppressed.
The
period from 809 to 826 was characterized by instability, and it must have
become clear to the ‘Abbasids that the status quo was unworkable. Eventually,
the rise of Turkish slave soldiers provided a solution, albeit a disastrous one
from the point of view of the Caliphs. In 831, the Turkish general Afshin put
down a joint Arab–Coptic rebellion, and the Arab families of Egypt lost power
for good.
In 868, Ahmad ibn Tulun, the son of a Turkish
slave soldier, was appointed governor of Egypt. His arrival began a process whereby
governors of Egypt, although never renouncing their allegiance to the
‘Abbasids,
nonetheless ruled Egypt in an autonomous manner. In fact, Ibn Tulun ruled on
behalf of his stepfather and then of his father-in-law; this aided in the
establishment of a mini dynasty. Furthermore,
because Ibn Tulun could dispose of the significant resources of Egypt,
he was in a position to solidify his control over the province. He raised an
army of
Turkish,
Greek, and Black soldiers, which immediately caused disquiet in Baghdad.
Because the ‘Abbasids were unable to defend Syria and Cilicia from the Byzantines,
they were obliged to delegate this authority to Ibn Tulun, demonstrating the
degree to which Baghdad had become dependent on Egypt. A rebellion by his son
al-‘Abbas forced Ibn Tulun to return to Egypt. In 880, Ibn Tulun founded a new
town, al-Qata’i‘, not far from al-Fustat. Al-Qata’i‘ later fell into ruin, but
Ibn Tulun’s mosque was renovated during the thirteenth century by Mamluk Sultan
Lajin.
Ibn Tulun died in 884. His descendants lost
power in 905, and the Fatimids, who ruled Ifriqya from 909, made several
attempts to seize control of Egypt. In 935, Muhammad ibn Tughj, who later
received the
title
‘‘Ikhshid,’’ became governor. He
restored some of Egypt’s autonomy; this policy was continued by the eunuch
Kafur, who seized power after the Ikhshid’s death in 946. After Kafur’s death
in 968, there was little to stop the Fatimid conquest, which occurred the following
year.
The Fatimid Caliphate
The Fatimid conquest and the establishment of
the city of Cairo as its capital turned Egypt into a regional power, a status
it would not surrender until the Ottoman conquest of 1517. Egypt was at its
height as an economic power under the Fatimids, producing more food than it
could usually consume and boasting a robust textile industry. Thanks to the
survival of the Geniza documents, it is known that Fustat’s Jewish community
had trade relations with co-religionists throughout the Mediterranean and
Indian Ocean worlds as well as with rural Egypt. The Fatimid Caliphate employed
men of talent of a variety of ethnicities and religious persuasions. In
addition to the Fatimids themselves, Ismaili Shi’is who claimed descent from
the Prophet Muhammad through his
daughter
Fatima, Arabs, Berbers, Turks, Armenians, Copts, Jews, and others served in the
Fatimid army and administration.
Unlike his predecessors in Egypt, the Fatimid
Caliph al-Mu‘izz was a determined opponent of the ‘Abbasid Caliphate in
Baghdad. Egypt now became the base for a campaign to unseat the ‘Abbasids and establish
Fatimid rule over the Muslim world. Although this campaign was ultimately
unsuccessful, the Fatimid state was not merely concerned with
consolidating
its rule but also with spreading its Ismaili doctrine. To this end, Caliph
al-Mu‘izz established al-Azhar as the center of the Ismaili mission (da‘wa).
Fatimid missionaries traveled throughout the Muslim world, enjoying some
success in Yemen, Syria, and Iran. They were unable, however, to prevent the
fall of Baghdad to the Seljuks, an event
that
greatly reduced Shi’i influence in the ‘Abbasid capital.
In
1094, the Fatimids underwent a fundamental schism, which resulted in the
victory of the Caliph al-Musta‘li and the death of his rival Nizar. Nizar’s
supporters
fled to the Ismaili communities outside of
Fatimid
territory and established the ‘‘new mission,’’
which
survived the dissolution of the Fatimid Caliphate in 1171. As time went, on,
however, the influence of the Fatimid caliphs waned. Their army was torn by ethnic
divisions, and this led to a major conflict between black and Turkish soldiers
in 1060, which was only resolved by the arrival of an Armenian force. Increasingly,
it was the wazir who held real power in the Fatimid state, exercising control
over an impressive centralized bureaucracy. Many wazirs were also military men.
By 1169, when Nur al-Din Mahmud sent his Kurdish retainersAsad al-Din Shirkuh and
his nephew Salah al-Din Yusuf (Saladin) to Egypt, the Fatimids had been reduced
to paying tribute to the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem.
The Ayyubid Sultanate
After the death of his uncle, Shirkuh, Salah
al-Din initially served as the wazir to the Fatimid Caliph. After the latter’s
death in 1171, Salah al-Din ordered the ‘Abbasid Caliph’s name to be mentioned
in the Friday sermon, thus abolishing the Fatimid Caliphate. For some time, it
looked as if relations might break down between Salah al-Din and Nur al-Din,
but
Nur al-Din’s death in 1174 presented a golden opportunity for Salah al-Din to
add Syria to his holdings, as well as parts of Iraq, the Hijaz, and
Yemen.
By 1183, he was in a position to turn against the Kingdom of Jerusalem, and his
famous victory at Hittin in 1187 allowed him to recover Jerusalem for Islam.
Salah al-Din and his successors, known as the
Ayyubids (after Salah al-Din’s father), built on the Fatimid state, but they
also made significant
changes.
The Fatimid chancery and tax administration were quite sophisticated, and the
Ayyubids and mamluks regarded the Fatimid precedent as the basis for their own
bureaucracies. At the same time,
the
Ayyubids introduced some elements of Seljuk bureaucratic practice, including
military iqta‘, whereby amirs were rewarded for their service by being assigned
the tax revenues of a certain area or areas. This new system, which was
preceded by a cadastral survey of Egypt, gave increased administrative responsibilities
to the military, a trend that continued through the Mamluk period. As a result
of their concern for gaining support from the religious scholars and promoting
Sunnism, the Ayyubids built a series of law schools (madrasas) and Sufi
convents (khanqahs).
The Mamluk Sultanate
The Mamluk Sultanate, a government of Turkish
(and later Circassian) soldiers of slave origin, was born of crisis. In the
wake of the Ayyubid victory over Louis IX at al-Mansura in 1250, a group of Mamluks belonging to the deceased Sultan
al-Malik al-Salih Ayyub overthrew and murdered his successor, Turanshah; they
apparently feared being marginalized or eliminated in favor of the new Sultan’s
entourage. A period of instability followed, only coming to an end after the
Mamluk defeat of the Mongols at ‘Ayn al-Jalut in 1260. After the battle, the
amir
Baybars
assassinated Sultan Qutuz and took control of the state.
Baybars (r. 1260–1277) can be seen as the
founder of the Mamluk Sultanate. He waged a series of campaigns against the
Crusaders and Mongols that left Cairo the capital of a large empire that
included Syria
and
the Hijaz. To bolster his authority, he installed ‘Abbasid survivors of the
Mongol sack of Baghdad as ‘‘shadow caliphs’’ in Cairo; he also gave official recognition
to all four of the Sunni schools of law, which gave the increasingly
centralized Mamluk state greater flexibility.
Although every Mamluk sultan attempted to establish
a dynasty, they had very limited success. Baybars’s descendants were overthrown
by another powerful amir, Qalawun (r. 1279–1290). Qalawun’s descendants ruled—although
often in name only until 1382. His son al-Ashraf Khalil (r. 1290–1293) captured
Acre, the last Crusader possession in the
Levant,
in 1291.
Another son, al-Nasir Muhammad (r. 1294–1295,
1299–1309, 1309–1340) presided over what was perhaps the greatest period of
prosperity in medieval Egypt. The Mongol threat had receded, commerce between
Egypt and Syria and between the Mamluks and the Europeans was booming, and the
political system was stable for three decades. Al-Nasir used this opportunity
to increase the authority of the sultan by redistributing iqta‘s in his favor
and by becoming increasingly involved with commerce, which provoked accusations
of monopolization. He also seized much of the property of the Coptic Church,
and the Copts were subjected to a period of persecution that led to large
numbers of conversions to Islam.
Unfortunately, if al-Nasir Muhammad’s
intention was to shore up the position of the sultan, he failed. In 1347, the
Black Death arrived in Egypt and brought about a demographic crisis of
unprecedented proportions. By the 1370s, famine became increasingly common, leading
to the crisis of 1403 through 1405, when famine and disease struck together.
The result of these events and of subsequent outbreaks of plague is that Egypt’s
population remained low until at least the mid-sixteenth century, thus reducing
the possibilities for economic recovery. Agricultural production was reduced,
and the sultans attempted to compensate for the loss in tax revenues by
intervention in commerce and the establishment of monopolies of certain
commodities. European merchants who wished to buy goods imported from the
Indian Ocean were obliged to purchase them from the sultan in Alexandria.
The collapse of the Qalawunid ‘‘dynasty’’ in
1382 led to the rise of a series of sultans who ruled as strongmen.
Increasingly these new rulers were Circassians rather than Turks, and they had
little success passing on their powers to their sons. Although alNasir Faraj
(r. 1399–1405, 1405–1412) succeeded his father al-Zahir Barquq, he failed to
respond to the
crisis
of 1403 through 1405 or to prevent Timur Lenk from seizing Aleppo and Damascus
in 1399. Although these cities were recovered in 1402, Faraj was remembered as
a Mamluk Nero. The reign of Sultan al-Ashraf Barsbay (1422–1438) was more
successful. Barsbay established a monopoly on the trade in spices, reducing the
Karimi merchants who had
controlled
this commerce to his agents. He used his improved financial situation to launch
successful raids on Cyprus in 1425 and 1426, avenging the sack of Alexandria by
Peter I of Cyprus in 1365.
The longest-reigning sultan of the fifteenth
century
was
al-Ashraf Qaytbay (r. 1468–1496), who has been
described
as a conservative who was concerned with
maintaining
the traditions of the sultanate. By the beginning of the sixteenth century,
however, change was clearly in order. The Ottoman sultans were a growing
threat, and the rise of the Shi’i Safavids in
Iran
changed the political map of the region. In 1498, Vasco de Gama reached the
Indian Ocean, and Portuguese attacks on ships and ports brought about a sudden
reduction in the revenues of the Mamluk
state.
Sultan al-Ashraf Qansuh al-Ghuri (r. 1501– 1516) made an alliance with the
Ottomans and tried to reorganize his army to face the new threat, but this was
in vain. When Ottoman Sultan Selim I turned against the Mamluks, he must have
sensed an opportunity. Syria fell to the Ottomans in the summer of 1516, and
Egypt fell in January through April of
1517.
With the end of the Mamluk Sultanate, an era came
to an end. For much of the Middle Ages, Egypt had been the greatest power of
the Middle
East;
now it became a province in a great empire, with a center of gravity that was
elsewhere. In many ways, Mamluk Egypt was the most successful medieval state
(excluding the Ottomans, who represented a break with many aspects of medieval
Islamic statecraft). The Mamluks reigned for more than 250 years. Despite the
competitive character of the sultanate, Mamluk rule was generally peaceful.
Egypt was the center of a flowering culture in areas such as historical
writing, Islamic legal scholarship, Sufism, and even Arabic literature. A new
international style
came
into being in Mamluk architecture, and Mamluk textiles, glasswork, and
metalwork were of a high quality until the late-medieval depression. During the
fifteenth century, Egypt became more dependent on
European
imports, but this dependence was not as total as has sometimes been claimed.
Mamluk rule came to an end as the result of the rise of a new power the
Ottomans and not as the result of any inevitable
decline. Indeed, one legacy of the Mamluk Sultanate was the incorporation of
some aspects of its administration into the Ottoman state.
Further
Reading
Ashtor, Eliyahu.The Levant Trade
in the Later Middle
Ages. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1983.
Atiya, Aziz S.The Coptic
Encyclopedia, 8 vols. New York:
MacMillan, 1991.
Berkey, Jonathan P.The
Transmission of Knowledge in
Medieval Cairo: A Social History
of Islamic Education.
Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1992.
Brett, Michael.The Rise of the
Fatimids: The World of the
Mediterranean & the Middle
East in the Tenth Century
CE. Leiden: Brill, 2001.
———. ‘‘The Way of the
Peasant.’’Bulletin of the School of
Oriental and African Studies47
(1984): 44–56.
Cresswell, K.A.C.The Muslim
Architecture of Egypt, 2 vols.
Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1952–1959.
Dols, Michael.The Black Death in
the Middle East. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977.
Fernandez, Leonor.The Evolution
of a Sufi Institution in
Mamluk Egypt: The Khanqah.
Berlin: K. Schwarz, 1988.
Garcin, Jean-Claude.Un Centre
Musulman de la HauteE´
gypte Me´die´vale: Qus. Cairo:
Institut Franc ¸ais
d’Arche´ologie Orientale, 1976.
Goitein, S.D.A Mediterranean
Society: The Jewish Communities of the Arab World as Portrayed in the Documents
of the Cairo Geniza, 6 vols.
Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1967–1994.
Irwin, Robert. The Middle East in
the Middle Ages: The
Early Mamluk Sultanate 1250–1382.
London: Croon
Helm, 1986.
Lev, Yaacov.State and Society in
Fatimid Egypt. Leiden: E.J.
Brill, 1991.
Lyons, Malcolm Cameron, and
D.E.P. Jackson.Saladin:
The Politics of the Holy War.
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1982.
Petry, Carl F., ed.The Cambridge
History of Egypt: Volume
1, Islamic Egypt, 640–1517.
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1998.
Petry, Carl F.The Civilian Elite
of Cairo in the Later Middle
Ages. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1981.
———.Protectors or Praetorians?
The Last Mamluk Sultans and Egypt’s Waning as a Great Power. Albany: State
University of New York Press,
1994.
Rabie, Hassanein.The Financial
System of Egypt AH 564–
741/AD 1169–1341. London: Oxford
University Press,
1972.
Raymond, Andre´.Cairo. Cambridge
and London: Harvard
University Press, 2000
ELEGY
The elegy (marthiyehin Persian) exists in two forms in Persian poetry: as a
section of a longer narrative work and as a discrete poem. Because narratives
are always in the mathnawi (couplet) form in Persian, elegies of the former
kind are invariably in couplets; notable examples are to be found in Ferdowsi’s
Shahnameh and in various medieval
romances. The elegies in the Shahnameh are very often spoken by women (examples
are Gordyeh’s elegy for her brother Bahram Chubineh, Roshanak’s for her husband
Sekandar, and Rudabeh’s for her son Rostam), and this corresponds with the
relatively public role undertaken by women during mourning ceremonies in many
Middle Eastern cultures, including Persian. Ferdowsi’s elegiac passages use the
ubi sunt topos extensively, and typically many successive lines begin with the
evocation ‘‘Where now is...?’’ as the dead subject’s virtues and glories are
listed. Ferdowsi also inserts into the Shahnamehan elegy spokenin propria persona; this is a lament on the
death of his own son, in which he reproaches his child for leaving him alone in
the world; this trope became standard.
As a discrete poem, the elegy usually took
the form of a qasideh (a praise poem in monorhyme). One of the earliest and
most famous examples of the genre is that by Farrokhi (early eleventh century)
for the Ghaznavid
King Mahmoud (d. 1030). The poem evokes the monarch’s past pleasures and
glories and describes the desolate state of the land and its populace now that
Mahmoud has departed; its diction and imagery were widely imitated by later
writers of elegies for the politically powerful. Court poets were expected to
produce elegies after the death of a prominent member of the ruling family, and
they were remunerated for doing so. However, not all elegies were written for
such practical motives. For example, for Sa’di to write his fine elegy about
the last ‘Abbasid Caliph, who was murdered by the Mongols in 1258, was a
politically risky move that could well have provoked retribution. Although the
form was primarily associated with the court and traditionally invoked an
atmosphere of formal, public mourning, elegies
were
also written for dead friends, presumably with little hope of remuneration; an
example of a more personal elegy of this kind is that by Atai Razi (early
twelfth century) about the death of his fellow poet at the Ghaznavid court,
Mas’ud Sa’d. After the triumph of Shi’ism in Iran, with the accession to power
of the Safavid dynasty in 1501, elegies for the significant
martyrs of Shi’i Islam were widely written. In these poems, the emphasis is
generally on the innocence and sufferings of the elegy’s subject rather than on
past pleasures or glories. Some of these religious elegies
have achieved the status of widely-diffused folk poetry, and a number of them
have retained great popularity among the more pious sections of Iranian
society.
Further
Reading
Pagliaro, A., and A.
Bausani.Storia della Letteratura Persiana. Milan, 1960.
Safa, Zabihollah.Tarikh-e
Adabiyat dar Iran (The History
of Literature in Iran), 5 vols.
Tehran, 1366/1987
EPIC POETRY
Very few long poems remain of the Jahiliyya
and the Umayyad poetry that narrate the deeds of a hero. Selected verses of
heroic poems were collected in anthologies during the ‘Abbasid period by famous
poets such as Abu Tammam (d. 849), al-Buhturi (d. 897), and others (until the
thirteenth century). These collections were entitledHamasa(bravery, fervor in
war); their first and main chapters contain a short poem about pre-Islamic
battles of the Arabs that praises their heroism. The subsequent chapters are
selections from other funun al-shi’r
(genres of
poetry):
elegy (ritha‘), eulogy (madiIˆ ), chaste erotic opening line (nasib), morality
(adab), description (wasf ), and others. In Rasa’il
Ikhwan al-Safa (tentheleventh centuries), some verses that are quoted by
Abu
Tammam are called al-mushajji’ (the
favoring or the encouraging verses); they are used during battles and wars and
sung with heroic melodies (Rasa‘il Ikhwan al-Nafa, Cairo, 1928:132–36).
In his translation of Aristotle’s Poeticafrom
Syriac into Arabic, Matta b. Yunis used the Greek term Epi (in Arabic, Afi),
whereas the editor ‘Abd al-Rahman Badwi himself used, in his modern
translation, the
term
malhama (see Fann al-Shi’r, ed.
‘A.-R. Badawi, 143). Ibn Sina (Avicenna) (980–1037), in his attempt to survey
Greek science and philosophy for the benefit of the Muslim culture, also used
the termAfi
(Ibid.,
194–5). Although Ibn Sina was aware that Homer, in his epics, used blank
(unrhymed) verse, he confirmed that ‘‘We [in Arabic culture] almost do not call
that which is unrhymed, poetry’’ (Ibn Sina, Jawami’ ’ilm al-Musiqa, ed. Z.
Yusuf, Cairo, 1956, 122–3). Hazim al-Qartajanni (1211–1285), in his Minhaj al-Bulagha‘ wa-Siraj al-Udaba‘
(The Program of Rhetoric and the Lamp of
Men of Letters) (Tunis 1966), explained
why the Arabs did not translate Greek literature: ‘‘The Greek poets would
invent things upon which they would set their poetic imagination and they made
this an aspect of their speech. They presumed things which did not happen at
all and used them as a model for what happens, and they built upon them legends
such as those old women
relate
to their grandchildren at night, fables of things which cannot possibly
happen.’’ Al-Qartajanni concluded his argument by saying, ‘‘Avicenna condemned
this kind of poetry and said: ‘There is no
need
for poetic imagination of the simple fables which are but invented narratives.’
’’ He also said, ‘‘...this (type of poetry) does not suit all temperaments.’’
Moreover, even during the thirteenth century,
Aˆiya‘ al-Din
Ibn al-Athir (d. 1239), in his al-Mathal al-Sa‘ir,noticed
that the Arabs unlike the Persians like long poetic genres, as the Shahnama.
The use of end-stop monorhyme in Arabic
poetry limits the length of the heroic ode (qasida). Arab poets used in their
narrative poetry a simple form of urjuza
muzdawija (a couplet in rajaz meter); this form helped them, during the
‘Abbasid period, to get rid of the burden of monorhyme, which dictates the
content of the verse. In such couplets, many didactic fables, narrative poems,
and chronicles were versified. The most famous work isKalila wa-Dimna,which was
versified by Aban al-Lahiqi (d. ca. 815); the work was imitated inal-NadiIˆ wa-’l-Baghim (The Singing
Birds
and the Gazelles) by Ibn al-Habbariyya (d. ca. 1111). The history of some
Islamic dynasties was also versified, mainly in Andalus. However, the talented poet
Ibn al-Farid (d. 1235) was able to write his epic about Sufism, Nazm al-Suluk (Poem of the [Sufi] Way),
known as al-Ta‘iyya al-Kubra,in about 730 verses rhyming with the letterta‘.
Such long poems
were
called mutwwalat (long poems).
Arab scholars wrote in classical Arabic, the
sacred language of the Qur’an, in religious and serious literature. They
expressed their contempt toward popular narrative literature and used
colloquial or semiliterary style in their popular oral literature, such as shadow
plays (khayal al-zill), popular
entertainment, and narrative genres of Siyar.This
was evident as in the romances Sirat
‘Antar (thirty-two parts),Sirat ‘Ali al-Zibaq, Qissat Bni Hilal, Qissat al-Zir
Salim, Sirat alAmira Dhat al-Himma(seventy parts), Sirat(or Qissat), and Sayf
ibn Dhi Yazan(nineteen parts). These
heroic,
romantic, and chivalrous romances were recited in cafe´s, at assemblies, and
during feasts and festivals, and they were accompanied by rababa or rabab esh-sha’er (poet’s one string viol) and chanted by
the
storytellers
(hakawati) of the romance ofAboo-Zeyd. The chanting narrator of such poetry is
called sha’ir Lane 1954, 370–71, 397,
406.) This term must be an old one,
because Pedro de Alcala, in his dictionary
Vocabulista
Arabigo en Leta Castellana, defined the Arabic termsha’ir as ‘‘representador de
comedias/ tragedias.’’ Arab scholars considered these romances, which are
composed in rhymed prose (saj’) in a semi-literary style that shifts into verse
when tense emotional situations are depicted, to be popular epics.
In their attempt to keep pace with European
literature from the second half of the nineteenth century onward, Arab critics
adopted the Western classification of poetry, based on Plato’s theory that
poetry is divided into the lyrical, the epic, and the dramatic (see Sulayman
al-Bustani 1904, 163–64, 171–72). To their amazement, they found that the bulk
of Arabic poetry written throughout its long history was mainly lyrical (ghina’i)
and that it did not deal with the narrative
(qasasi), dramatic (masrahi), or epic (malhami) genres. They argued that
the reason for this phenomenon
in
Arabic poetry is the rigid tradition of using monorhyme whereas, among other
nations, rhyme is not essential, and it can be used to change simple patterns of
rhyme schemes.
Among the first Arab scholars who tried to
give the Arabs a model of Greek epic poetry and its history in European
literature was Sulayman al-Bustani (1856– 1925). Unlike Ibn Sina and
al-Qartajanni, who based their arguments against Greek literature on taste,
alBustani argued that it was a religious factor (i.e., the Iliad contains pagan elements, whereas Greek philosophy, logic, and
medicine were useful to the Arabs [Bustani 1904, 65–7]). He added that the
Arabs wrote epics by combining poetry and rhymed prose (Bustani 1904, 171–72).
He took the formidable task
of
versifying theIliad into more than ten thousand Arabic verses using various
patterns of rhyme schemes and conventional Arabic meters, such as monorhyme and
couplets; Arabic and European stanza forms of quatrain and quintet; and forms
of Andalusian muwashshah. Hi pioneering translation encouraged other poets to
write epics (malahim or
mutawwalat)
in modern Arabic literature.
By introducing dramatic, narrative, and epic
poetry, the modernist poets considered the monorhyme in Arabic poetry the main
obstacle in their attempts to enrich Arabic literature with the new genres.
They were astonished to note that lyric, dramatic, and epic poetry are the main genres in Western
poetry. The problems that attracted the attention of Arab poets and critics at
the end of the nineteenth century were the questions of why the Arabs
translated Greek writing about philosophy, logic, and medicine while ignoring
Greek literature and why the Arabs did not write epic poetry. (Other Eastern
peoples, such as the Indians, Persians, ancient Egyptians, and Turks, wrote
epics, and the Indians, Persians, and Syrians translated the Iliad into their
own languages [see
al-Bustani
1904, 61–3, 165–7, 265]).
Encouraged by al-Bustani’s translation of and
introduction to the Iliad, Arab poets such as alZahawi (1864–1946), A.Z. Abu
Shadi (1892–1955),
Muhammad
‘Abd al-Muttalib (1871–1931), and M.F. Abu Hadid (d. 1967) wrote articles about
and experimented with epic poetry. Other poets, such as Ahmad Muharram, Bulus
Salama, and Fawzi Ma’luf, tried to
compose historical and philosophical epics in conventional Arabic meters.
However, not all of them were successful. To be able to compose or translate epic
poetry, Arab critics and poets defended the use of
blank
verse (shi’r mursal). Most of their attempts were doomed to failure, because
they used connotative diction with end-stop rhyme and were unaware of the
technique of enjambment used in European blank verse. However, using vers
irregulier (which they called shi’r hurr
[free verse]) with an irregular number of feet and an irregular rhyme scheme
with enjambment, they were successful in writing mutawwalat. The Iraqi poet Badr Shakir al-Sayyab (1926–1964) is the
leading Arab poet in this modern genre of Arabic poetry; his works include Haffar al-Qubur(1952),alMuwmis
al-‘Amya’(1954), and al-Asliha wa-’l-Atfal,
(1954),
which was later included in his anthology Unshudat
al-Matar.
Further
Reading
Bausani, A. ‘‘Elementi Epici
Nelle Letterature Islamiche.’’
InLa Poesia Epica e la sua
Formazione,759–69. Rome,
1970.
Al-Bustani, Sulayman.Le Illiade
d’Homere. Traduite en
Vers Arabes, Avec une
Introduction Historique et Litteraire. Cairo, 1904.
Canova, G. ‘‘Epic Poetry.’’
InEncyclopedia of Arabic Literature.London & New York: Routledge, 1998.
Gabrieli, G. ‘‘Elementi Epici Nell’Antica
Poesia Araba.’’ In
La Poesia Epica e la sua
Formazione,759–69. Rome,
1970.
Lane.Manners and Customs. London,
1954.
Moreh, S.Modern Arabic Poetry
1800–1970. Leiden: Brill,
1976.
Pellat, Ch. ‘‘Hamasa.’’ InEI,2nd
ed
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar