ENCYCLOPEDIA MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC PART 31

SUNNI ALI, SONGHAY RULER

  In the thirteenth century, Mali extended its sovereignty to include the Songhay area and, according to the chronicles (most of them by African writers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries), took two noble hostages. One of them, Ali Kolon, escaped and returned to found the Sunni (Sonni) dynasty. Ali Kolon’s far descendant, Sunni Ali (Ber), is known as a powerful and combative Songhay ruler who laid the foundations of an extensive empire, among others by conquering Timbuktu during his reign from 1463 to 1492. Islam’s influence in the area, with a flourishing base in Timbuktu, appeared as an obstacle to Sunni Ali Ber’s plan to exert more complete control over the entire region. According to the chronicles, he was a lukewarm Moslem at best. However, there is good reason to consider such descriptions as either biased by political points of view from regions with growing links to Islamic Northern Africa or as the product of a literary model, since both these chronicles and present-day oral traditions picture Sunni Ali in contrast to his illustrious successor Askia Muhammad.

Further Reading

Hale, Thomas A.Scribe, Griot, & Novelist—Narrative Interpreters of the Songhay Empire. Gainesville: University of Florida Press/Center for African Studies, 1990.

Hunwick, John O.Timbuktu & the Songhay Empire—AlSa‘dis Ta’rikh al-sudan down to 1613 and Other Contemporary Documents. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2003

SUNNI REVIVAL

  The Sunni revival occurred during the eleventh century when the ‘Abbasid caliphate in Baghdad and the Turkish Seljuk Sultans actively supported Sunnism. During this period Sunni Islam became the dominant branch in the Muslim east. Sunni Islam is based on the approved standard or practice introduced by the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w, as well as the pious Muslim forefathers. Sunnism first gained prominence during the eighth century when reports on the sayings and deeds of the Prophet were collected. During its earlyz days, Sunnism stood in opposition to the ‘Abbasid caliphate, which favored more rationalist schools of thought, like the Qadarites, Murji’ites, or Mu‘tazilites. The most prominent figure of early Sunnism, Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 855), withstood the persecution of prominent Sunni leaders during themihna, the ‘‘inquisition’’ instituted by the Caliph al-Ma’mun (r. 813– 833). After the end of the mihna in 848, ‘Abbasid caliphs are said to have paid homage to Ahmad ibn Hanbal and his followers, but they still did not support their traditionalist Sunni views. As the ‘Abbasid caliphs became more and more marginalized during the ninth and tenth centuries, the real power came into the hands of the emirs and grand-emirs of the Buyid family, who openly supported Shi‘ism in Iraq and Iran.

  During the beginning of the eleventh century, the twenty-fifth ‘Abbasid caliph, al-Qadir, who reigned the long period between 991 and 1031, managed to pursue a religious policy in Baghdad that became increasingly independent of the Buyid grand-emir in Shiraz. Al-Qadir found support among the wellorganized group of traditionalist Sunni scholars of the Hanbali school and their local militias (‘ayyarun). In 1018, al-Qadir published the so-called Qadiri Creed, in which he attempts to set a standard for Muslim orthodoxy. The Qadiri Creed, inspired by Hanbali Sunnism, is the very first document of its kind and it was repeatedly read in public throughout the eleventh century. In it, al-Qadir condemns Shi‘is and Mu‘tazilites and declares that rationalist theological positions such as the belief in the createdness of the Qur’an are unbelief (kufr) and liable to punishment by the state authorities. The open alliance of the Caliph al-Qadir and his grandson and successor, al-Qa’im (r. 1031–1075), with the conservative Hanbali branch of Sunni scholars led to violent tensions between the equally powerful Sunni and Shi‘i militias in Baghdad that often exploded in outbursts of civil war.

  The arrival of the Seljuks in Baghdad in 1055 completely changed the balance of power in favor of the caliph and his Sunni allies. The Seljuks were Turkish nomads from the plains of Central Asia (in today’s Kazakhstan) who had adopted Islam and crossed the border to the Muslim empire in about 1025. With their superior horsepower they destroyed the Buyid principalities one by one and aimed to establish amicable relations with the ‘Abbasid caliph in Baghdad. In 1055, they rescued the Caliph al-Qa’im from what was almost a successful Shi‘i-supported coup d’e´tat by an Iraqi military leader. Under the leadership of their Sultan Toghilbeg (d. 1063) and his Grand Vizier al-Kunduri (d. 1065), a Hanafi jurist from Nishapur in northeast Iran, the Seljuks pursued a religious policy that favored the conservative branches of Sunnism, who were loyal to the caliph. In Baghdad and Iraq they followed a middle way that acknowledged the rights and customs of the moderate Shi‘i population and made a halt to the excesses of the radical Shi‘i and Sunni militias.

  The politics of a middle path in order to establish moderate Sunnism as the dominant way of Islam was most forcefully pursued by al-Kunduri’s successor, Nizam al-Mulk (r. 1019–1092). He served as grandvizier over a period of almost thirty years, between 1063 and his violent death in 1092. Second in power only to the Seljuk Sultans Alp Arslan (r. 1063–1072) and Malikshah (r. 1072–1092), both of whom he served, Nizam al-Mulk formulated the religious policy for an area that stretched from Asia Minor to Afghanistan. In the big cities he founded religious madrasas (so-called Nizamiyyas) that institutionalized the teaching of Sunni jurisprudence and theology. In theology, he favored the Ash’arite school tradition of Nishapur and mentored such outstanding scholars as al-Juwayni (1028–1085) and al-Ghazali (1058–1111). His religious policy was successful because it combined tolerance toward the moderate groups of Shi‘ism with intolerance toward the radicals in all camps. Under the leadership of Nizam al-Mulk, the Seljuks continued to persecute Ismaili Shi‘is, who often acted as agents of the Shi‘i Fatimid caliphate in Cairo. Some Sunni groups, such as the populist Karramites, who were powerful in the province of Khorasan in Northeast Iran until the end of the eleventh century, lost much influence during Nizam al-Mulk’s reign, while particularly the Ash’arites came to dominate the scholarly activities in the Muslim east.

Further Reading

Bulliet, Richard W.Islam: The View from the Edge. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993, 145–168.

Glassen Erika.Der mittlere Weg: Studien zur Religionspolitik und Religiosita¨t der spa ¨teren Abbasiden-Zeit. Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1981.

Juynboll, G.H.A. ‘‘Sunna.’’ InEncyclopeadia of Islam.2d ed. Vol. 9, 878–881. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

Makdisi, George. ‘‘The Sunni Revival.’’ InIslamic Civilisation 950–1150, edited by D.S. Richards, 155–168. Oxford: Cassirer, 1973.

———.Ibn ‘Aqil: Religion and Culture in Classical Islam. Edinburgh: University Press, 1997.

SURGERY AND SURGICAL TECHNIQUES

  The art of healing wounds, djiraha, was derived from the Arabic rootdjurh,meaning injury or wound. The term ‘ilm al-djiraha was used from the ninth century on, meaning knowledge of wounds, operation of ill organs, and surgical treatment and instruments. Surgical operation,‘amaliyya djirahiyya,was expressed as ‘amal bi’l-yad or ‘amal al-yad,that is, work performed by hand. The one who treated wounds was named djarrah, while the bonesetter and bonehealer (Ar. mudjabbir) and sınıkcı (in Turkish) and the oculist kahhal were both regarded as practitioners of special fields of surgery.

  Surgical development started in the ninth century following the translation of the ancient Indian, Greek, and Roman surgical works into Arabic. Hunain ibn Ishaq (d. 874) highly contributed to Arabian surgery by translating works of Hippocrates, Galen, and above all Paulus Aegineta (d. 690). We find chapters on surgery in the books of known physicians, for example, al-Mansuri, al-Jami,andal-Hawi of Zakariya’ ar-Razi (d. 925); Kamil as-sina‘a of ‘Abbas al-Madjusi (d. 994); Qanun fi’t-tibb of Ibn Sina (980–1037);Tadhkirat al-kahhalin (about 1000) of ‘Ali ibn ’I˙sa; Dhakhira of I˙smail al-Jurjani (d. 1136); and al MujizandSharh Tashrih al-Qanun of Ibn an-Nafis (d. 1288). The first known monograph on surgery, titledal-‘Umda fi sina’at al-djiraha,was compiled by Ibn al-Quff (1233–1286) in the thirteenth century.

  The greatest surgeon of the medieval ages was Abu’ l-Qasim az Zahrawi (d. 1010), a most important representative of the Andalusian school. Called Albucasis in Europe, Zahrawi is mainly known for the thirtieth chapter on surgery, fi‘amal al-yadin his encyclopedic book at-Tasrif liman ajiza.The sources of Zahrawi were classical Greek and Latin authors, Paulus Aegineta being the immediate source. However, Zahrawi inserted his own experiences, not following any author in the description of some new pathological conditions and methods of treatment, for example, ptosis and its method of cure; removal of ranula beneath the tongue; removal of a leech sticking in the throat; treatment of fracture of male and female private parts; hunchback; wounds of the neck; various pathological conditions affecting the adult uterus; and lithotomy incision in the female case; and the designs and ways of using various instruments, such as the tonsil guillotine and its use, the concealed knife for opening abscesses, the trocar for paracentesis, vaginal speculum, and obstetric forceps. The illustrations of surgical instruments and the sketches of several incision and excision techniques are the earliest addition of these operative elements to a book. In the second half of the twelfth century, Gerard of Cremona translated the chapter on surgery into Latin as Liber Alsaharavi de cirurgia. Zahrawi’s surgery was utilized as a main source in the Islamic and European worlds through eight centuries.

  From the fourteenth century on, Arabic and Persian medical books started to be translated into Turkish; consequently, Turkish medical literature began to develop. In the fifteenth century a comprehensive chapter in Dhakhira-i Muradiye (1437) of Mu’min b. Mukbil, and the exhaustive book Murshid (1483) by Mehmed ibn Mahmud of Shirvan were assigned to ophthalmology. The Turkish book on surgery, Jarrahiyatu’l Khaniye (1465), of Sharafaddin Sabunjuoghlu, the head physician of the Amasya Hospital in central Anatolia, is mainly a translation of Zahrawi’s work Kitabu’t- Tasrif, specifically the thirtieth chapter on surgery. However, he introduced his own experiences as well, and added two new chapters. Sabunjuoghlu was the earliest in illustrating surgeons treating patients. Certain spots of cauterization marked on the patients illustrated are similar to those used in acupuncture and moxa. Fifteenth-century Turkish surgical monographs Kitab-ı djarrahnama by an unknown writer (Su¨leymaniye Library, No. 814); Tarcama-i hulasa fi fenni’lciraha by Djarrah Mesud; and Alaim-i djarrahin by Ibrahim b. Abdallah are also notable.

  The main surgical instruments and techniques of medieval Islamic surgery were, for example, kayy (cauterization by fire) used with the objective of surgical excision or as a stimulating remedy; the mismariya (cautery) of several forms, such as claviform, crescentic, ring, quill, and so on; the mibda‘(scalpel) with numerous shapes and sizes for incision, scraping, extraction, separation, and opening; fasd (bleeding) applied by a phlebotome, theal-fa’s, an edged and sharp pointed scalpel; hadjm (cupping) without or after scarification, practiced with mahajim (cupping vessels); miqass (scissors) invented for surgical purpose; miqdah (needles) for eye operations; several probes (barid, misbar, mirwad) and the fine trocar (midass) as exploring instruments; sinnara (hook) for picking up and holding tissues; instruments for circumcising, the musa (razor) and falka (spindle whorl); anbuba (tube) for drainage; zarraqa (syringe) both for aspiration and for irrigation; mihqan (clyster) for irrigating sinuses; kasatir (syringe); al-qam (funnel) for fumigation and irrigation; and mus’ut (dropper) for irrigating the nose. A great variety of minshar (saw),mijrad (raspatory), miqta‘ (osteotome), mithqab (trephine), kalalib (forceps), jabira (splint) devices to reduce dislocations or displace fracture ends and plaster cases were used to treat fractures and dislocations. Several instruments such as minqash, mibrad, mishdakh (lithotrites), and mish‘ab (lithotriptor) were developed for extracting stones. Various kinds of suture materials for surgical purposes were utilized, such as ants’ nippers; gut sutures; wool, linen, ox, or horse hair and silk in connection with the ligature (rabt); gold or silver wire for wiring in the teeth. Drugs called muhaddir or murkid,such as opium, henbane, mandrake, hemlock, Indian hemp, and yellow alison, were used as anesthetics by snuffing or inhaling, especially as a soporific sponge or as local anesthetics in surgical operations.

  Surgery was regarded as an art necessitating skill and experience. Though authors like Zahrawi noted anatomy as a necessary knowledge for surgeons, dissection of dead bodies as a means of training was not practiced, though there is no religious prohibition of it. Surgeons were trained by the master-apprenticeship method, usually as a family profession; they were employed as primary or secondary surgeons at hospitals, palaces, military service, or offices, and some were itinerant. The head of surgeons was called ser-djarrahin. Information and hints about the requirements and expectations of morality regarding surgery is found in surgical manuscripts and the deed of trusts of hospitals. The reflection of Muslim morality to surgical practice is found in judges’ registries, for example, a patient’s or guardian’s written consent taken before surgical operation and a contract signed to certify this in order to withhold a suit for compensation against the surgeon in case of death or injury.

Further Reading

Hau, Friedrun R. ‘‘Die Chirurgie Und Ihre Instrumente in Orient und Okzident Vom. 10. Bis 16. Jahrhundent.’’ Paper presented at the Internationaler Kongress Krems An Der Donau 6. Bis 9. Oktober 1992.

O¨ sterreichische Akademie Der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Sitzungsberichte, 619. Band. Wien, 1994: 307–352.

Jhonstone, Penelope (Ed).Max Meyerhof Studies in Medieval Arabic Medicine Theory and Practice. London,1984.

O¨ncel, O¨ztan. ‘‘Anesthesia in Turkish-Islamic Medicine.’’

Ph.D dissertation. Istanbul University, Istanbul Medical School, Medical Ethics and History Department. Istanbul, 1982.

Sarı, Nil. ‘‘Ethical Aspects of Ottoman Surgical Practice.’’Tu¨rkiye Klinikleri. 8, no. 1 (April 2000): 9–14.

Sarton, George.Introduction to the History of Science.3vols. Baltimore, 1927–1947.

Spink, M.S., and Lewis, G.L.Albucasis on Surgery and Instruments. London: The Welcome Institute of the History of Medicine, 1973.

Uzel, I˙lter.Sharafaddin Sabunjuoghlu Jarrahiyatu’l Khaniye.2 vols. Ankara: Turkish History Society, III/15, 1992.

Yıldırım, Nuran. ‘‘A Fifteenth Century Turkish Book ofSurgery.’’ Ph.D dissertation. Istanbul University,Istanbul Medical School, Medical Ethics and HistoryDepartment. Istanbul, 1981

SUYUTI, AL-, ‘ABD AL-RAHMAN

  Al-Suyuti, the celebrated erudite Egyptian savant, is recognized today as one of the most prolific authors of all Islamic literature.

  The family of al-Suyuti, of Persian origin, settled during the Mamluk period in Asyut, in Upper Egypt (from where they derive their name). His father, however, was established in Cairo, and it is there that al-Suyuti was born on October 3, 1445. The child followed a very thorough course in various Islamic sciences. It is shown very early on, as of eighteen years of age, that he teaches Shafi‘i jurisprudence and the science of Hadith; in addition, he deliversfatwas (legal consultations) in various sciences. In parallel, he writes prolific works: Before al-Suyuti reached the age of thirty, his works came to be required reading throughout the whole of the Middle East and then soon circulated in India until they reached Tekrur in sub-Saharan Africa.

  In Egypt, on the other hand, he evokes much jealousy and polemic because he claims to have reached the status of mujtahid (that is, a legal scholar possessing independent authority in interpreting the sources of the law) in the Shafi‘i school of jurisprudence. Moreover, al-Suyuti affirms that hisijtihad, far from being limited to Islamic law, also applies to the sciences of Hadith and the Arabic language. Finally, al-Suyuti is announced as the mujaddid (renewer of Islam) (seeRenewal, or Tajdid) for the ninth century of thehijra, two or three years before the year 900/ 1494. At the age of forty, al-Suyuti withdraws from public life to his house on the island of Rawda, in Cairo. He dies on October 18, 1505. The reasons that he calls upon in connection with his withdrawal are the corruption of the institution of the ulema and the ignorance that prevails among them; in fact, the decline of the cultural level at the end of the Mamluk era is manifest.

  The assurance, even the claim, to which al-Suyuti testifies, comes initially from the awareness that he has of his own gifts: He has an extraordinary memory, a remarkable spirit of synthesis that enables him to write or to dictate several works at the same time. He is convinced to be invested with a mission, which prevails over any other consideration and, in particular, over the opinion that others have of him. This mission consists of gathering and transmitting to the future generations the Islamic cultural inheritance, before it disappears following the neglect of his contemporaries. In fact, he quotes in his works many old texts now lost, particularly in the field of the Arabic language. Al-Suyuti precedes the modern time by certain aspects: for example, he is partly an autodidact, and herewith to a public that he wishes to reach out to with handbooks centered on precise topics. In the same spirit of popularization, he summarizes the works of others and makes them clean. One cannot regard al-Suyuti as only a compiler. Indeed, he approaches topics usually neglected in the Islamic literature; he is the first to have introduced Sufism into the field of the fatwa.

  Al-Suyuti wrote approximately one thousand works (981 according to a 1995 study). Hardly three hundred were published, but his manuscripts are nowadays a great success in published editions. The scientific versatility of al-Suyuti illustrates the Islamic ideal, according to which there is no really profane science; he explores geography, as well as lexicography, pharmacopoeia, dietetics, erotology. More profoundly, his approach to a subject is often multidisciplinary, and he often employs several sciences to cover a subject.

  This versatility allowed al-Suyuti to free himself from a determined axis through his attachment to the Prophet (see Muhammad the Prophet s.a.w ) and his Sunna. He includes in his field of vision the most scattered sciences as long as they do not contradict the Revelation descended on Muhammad; this is why he condemnsal-mantiq(Hellenistic logic). Among the disciplines that he says to control, that of Hadith prevails because it permeates the greatest part of his work. Sciences having been imbued with the Arabic language represent, according to him, his subject of predilection, but one very clearly notes the influence of the science of Hadith in his major work on language, Al-Muzhir fi ‘Ulum al-Lugha wa Anwa‘iha. In his other ‘‘linguistic’’ works, al-Suyuti follows the method of religious sciences like usul al-fiqh (foundations of jurisprudence) or the fiqh (jurisprudence). Qur’anic sciences constitute another axis of al-Suyuti’s work (approximately twenty works). ‘‘AlItqan fıˆ‘Ulum Al-Qur’an’’ makes the beautiful share with the language and rhetoric, but the principal commentary of al-Suyuti, Al-Durr al-Manthur fi al-Tafsir bi-al-Ma’thur, is exclusively based on Hadith and the words of the first Muslims. In this field, it is also necessary to mention the very practical Tafsir al-Jalalayn, a Qur’anic commentary started with al-Suyuti’s professor, Jalal al-Din al-Mahalli, and completed by him.

  If the discipline of Hadith represents in al-Suyuti’s eyes the noblest ‘‘of sciences,’’ it is imbued with the prophetic model, which for him is the only way that leads to God. In this field, al-Suyuti’s working model is undoubtedly Tadrib al-Rawi fi Sharh Taqrib al-Nawawi, which pertains to the terminology of Hadith. The aforementioned prophetic model could not be transmitted by book science alone; it must be experienced interiorly. Al-Suyuti, who affirms to have seen the Prophet more than seventy times while in a waking state, ensures that he can maintain during a vision the validity of Hadith directly from the Prophet. As a Sufi (see Sufis and Sufism), al-Suyuti found in the tariqa Shadhiliyya (Shadhili order) the right balance between the Law and the Way. Moreover, he benefited besides from his notoriety as a scholar and jurisconsult to carry out a perspicacious apology for Sufism and its Masters: He sees in the dhikr (invocation of God) the highest form of worship, showing that it is necessary to interpret the words of the Sufi, and to defend the orthodoxy of Ibn ‘Arabıˆ.

  Finally, al-Suyuti wrote much in the fields of history and biography, including a number of works on the theory of history (for example, al-Shamarikh fi ‘Ilm al-Ta’rikh), in its various fields of application: the history of the caliphs, to which he was very attached (Ta’rikh al-Khulafa’), about the history of  Egypt(Husn al-Muhadara), and a great number of biographical collections by specialty (specialists in Hadith, grammarians, poets, and so on).

Primary Sources

Al-Haˆwıˆ lil-fata ˆwıˆ: recueil de toutes les fatwas d’alSuyuti (droit, langue, histoire islamique, soufisme, etc.), Beyrouth, s. d.

Al-Itqaˆnfıˆ‘ulu ˆm al-Qur’aˆn, maintes e ´ditions : reste un ouvrage de re´fe ´rence pour aborder les sciences coraniques.

Al-Tahadduth bi-ni‘mat Allaˆh: autobiographie, e ´d. en arabe par E. M. Sartain. Cambridge, 1975.

Husn al-muhaˆdara fıˆ akhbaˆr Misr wa l-Qa ˆhira, Le Caire, 1968: sur l’histoire de l’Egypte et du Caire.

Taˆrıˆkh al-khulafaˆ’, Le Caire, 1964: sur l’histoire des califes de l’islam, depuis Abu Bakr.

Further Reading

E. Geoffroy, E. art.al-Suyuˆtıˆdans l’Encyclope´die de l’Islam II, tome IX, 951–954.

Garcin, J. Cl. ‘‘Histoire, opposition politique et pie´tisme traditionaliste dans le Husn al-muha ˆdarat de Suyuˆtıˆ.’’ Annales IslamologiquesVII, IFAO, Le Caire, 1967, 33–88.

Kaptein, N.J.Muhammad’s Birthday Festival. Leiden, 1993:

pre´sente et traduit lafatwa d’al-Suyuti validant la pratique dumawlid nabawıˆ(ce ´le ´bration de l’anniversaire du Prophe`te). Sartain, E.M.Jalaˆl al-dı ˆn al-Suyuˆtıˆ, Biography and Background. Cambridge, 1975: reste l’e ´tude la plus comple `te en langue occidentale

SYNAGOGUES

  There were Jewish communities scattered throughout Arabia in Muhammad’s time. Mecca, his hometown, does not seem to have had an organized Jewish community, but the oasis of Yathrib, to which he emigrated in 622, housed a large and well-organized community. Now known as al-Madina (from madinat al-nabi,or ‘‘the city of the Prophet’’), it had two tribes of Kohanim,that is, of Priestly ancestry, a third Jewish tribe, and possibly other clans. The synagogue there was called Midras; the word is from the Hebrew Bet Midrash,or ‘‘House of Study.’’ Islamic tradition has preserved some details about theMidrasof the Jews in Yathrib, enough to suggest various conclusions about the building, religious services, administration, and theology, but unfortunately not to secure them.

  The Qur’an itself has several terms that refer to Jewish houses of worship. It most likely refers to the Temple in Jerusalem, with the termMasjid.While the reference of 17:1 (al-masjid al-aqsa,‘‘the farther place of prostration’’) is open to some controversy, the reference to the twofold destruction of the Israelites, alluding to destroyers entering themasjidas they hadbbefore (17:7), can hardly refer to anything else. Places of monotheistic prayer before Islam are called sawami‘, bi’a, salawat, and masajid,roughly translated as ‘‘cloisters,’’ ‘‘places of petition and prayer,’’ and ‘‘places of prostration’’ (Q 22:40).Bi’a(sing.bi’a) and kanisa (pl. kana’is) a term not used in the Qur’an came to be the most usual appellations for synagogue and church, although some authors say the one or the other ought to be used only for houses of prayer of Christians or Jews; others use both as synonyms. Jewish sources generally referred to the synagogue askanisorkanisain Arabic, and bet knessetin Hebrew. Some geniza sources use the termmajlis(assembly) to refer to certain synagogues, especially those clearly postdating Islam.

  Islamic expansion quickly brought the largest centers of Jewish life into its orbit; indeed, for several centuries, most of the world’s Jews resided in areas ruled by Muslims. Islamic provisions about the status of non-Muslims in Islamic lands, including the status of their synagogues and churches, reached full expression in the form of the document usually known as the Pact of Umar. The framework of the Pact reflects reports of agreements made with non-Muslims by Umar b. al-Khattab or his generals during the Islamic conquests. The early pacts indicate that non-Muslims were allowed to retain their religion and places of worship, although the part of their houses of worship facing the qibla could be used by the Muslims as a place of prayer. Many more limitations are found in later legal works, such as Kitab al-Umm by al-Shafi‘i, and the regulations do not appear in the form of the Pact of Umar earlier than the tenth century. According to this document, Jews and Christians stated:

‘‘We shall not found in (the town) or in the land surrounding it, a new monastery, church, cloister or monastic cell. Nor shall we renew whatever has been destroyed of them, nor revive any of them which are in Muslim quarters. We shall not prevent any Muslims from staying in our churches at night or during the day, and we shall open their gates wide to passers-by and wayfarers.’’

  The legal prohibition of the construction of new churches and synagogues applied particularly to Muslim areas, and some of the legal traditions had no objections to synagogues in neighborhoods where there were no Muslims, or which had been Jewish prior to becoming Muslim. So, too, in the early days, establishment of synagogues to serve the Jewish community seems to have been less of a problem: Kairawan, Cairo, Baghdad, Fez, and other places established by Muslims all had synagogues, although often in neighborhoods considered to antedate Islam. A report that Umar ra himself established seventy Jews in Jerusalem was cited to support the synagogue there.

  By the twelfth century, opinions about this became more settled, and the Pact of Umar ra came to be applied more stringently. Synagogues were closed in North Africa and Cairo, and there was discussion and occasional violence concerning whether synagogues in Cairo and Jerusalem were allowed to be retained or repaired; in early-fourteenth century Cairo, continuing riots led to the closure of numerous synagogues and churches and the intervention of the king of Aragon and the Byzantine emperor to reopen them. These restrictions continued into the nineteenth century, until reform attempts by Muhammad Ali and his successors in Egypt and in Palestine, by the Ottomans, and by European protectorates.

  We have little information about the layout and procedures in synagogues of the Islamic world. Nathan the Babylonian gives a particularly vivid description of one synagogue service in Baghdad from the tenth century. Geniza records confirm that in addition to meeting for prayer it was the center for many other community functions. Lawsuits were brought there and persons, including women, could delay services to seek redress. Sometimes, funerals would stop outside or in the courtyard. In some, a women’s entrance indicated that women attended services. Many cities had multiple synagogues, reflecting differences in custom between the traditions of the Jews of Babylonia (Iraq) and Palestine, or Rabbanite, Qaraite, and Samaritan Jews. Some synagogues were built primarily in locations of pilgrimage, such as the Dammuh synagogue in Egypt; travelers’ descriptions of sacred tombs also suggest these were sometimes the locations of synagogues, although in many cases graves associated with figures from biblical history were also sacred to the Muslims and Christians, and the buildings associated with these sites could not be considered synagogues.

  In some cases the few structural details of which we are aware suggest that the buildings continued the pre-Islamic basilica style, and may even have been converted from churches; in other cases, as, for example, in Benjamin of Tudela’s description of the synagogue in Baghdad, the colonnaded hall and open courtyard suggest similarities to early Islamic mosques, although synagogues in Muslim areas would necessarily have had modest facades.

Further Reading

Goitein, S.D.A Mediterranean Society. Vol II. University of California Press, 1971, 143–170

Ward, Seth. ‘‘Taqi al-Din al-Subki on Construction, Continuance and Repair of Churches and Synagogues in Islamic Law.’’ InStudies in Islamic and Judaic Traditions II, edited by W. Brinner and S. Ricks, 169–188. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.

SYRIA, GREATER SYRIA

  Syria, specifically Greater Syria (Ar. Bilad al-Sham), is a historical term denoting a region that comprises modern Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, the West Bank of Palestine, and the southwestern borderlands of Turkey. Geographically, Greater Syria can be divided into two sections: the mountainous coastal region in the west, which in the medieval period included Antioch (modern Antakya in southern Turkey), and the Mediterranean ports of Tripoli, Beirut, Tyre, and Acre; and the steppe and desert region in the east, of which the leading centers were Aleppo, Hama, Hims, Damascus, and Jerusalem.

  Greater Syria played a major role in the development of Islam from the earliest period. The decisive battles of the futuh (Islamic conquests) against the Byzantines were fought there; Damascus was the capital of the first Islamic dynasty, the Umayyads; and Jerusalem quickly became the Muslims’ third most important religious center after Mecca and Medina. A degree of religious and linguistic pluralism persisted in spite of Islamization: Christianity survived, although at times under duress; and neither Greek nor Aramaic was completely abandoned for Arabic.

  By the start of the medieval period, the political predominance that Greater Syria had enjoyed under the Umayyads had long since gone. ‘Abbasid rule over the region from Baghdad had given way successively to Tulunid and Ikshidid control, successor dynasties of the weakening ‘Abbasids. In the middle of the tenth century, the decline of Ikshidid power resulted in northern Syria being given to the Bedouin Arab Hamdanids, under whom Aleppo enjoyed a period of literary and artistic inflorescence.

  Even before Hamdanid rule in Aleppo had come to an end in AH 394/1004 CE, the Egyptian Fatimids had conquered Palestine and Syria. Fatimid rule over Greater Syria was weak, however, especially in the north, where a revived Byzantium regained some of its old territory, and another Bedouin dynasty, the Mirdasids, established themselves in Aleppo.

  The situation in Greater Syria was altered by the advance of the Seljuk Turks during the second half of the eleventh century. By the eve of the Crusades, often mutually hostile Seljuk amirs (princes) ruled in Jerusalem, Damascus, Aleppo, and Hims. In AH 477/1084 CE, the Byzantines lost Antioch, their last possession in Syria. An independent Arab family ofqadis (Islamic judges) ruled in Tripoli, while the Fatimids remained in control of some of the coast.

  There was a tension between the strongly Sunni Seljuks and the existing Shi‘is and Shi‘i-influenced sects. The latter included people in sympathy with

the (Ismaili Shi‘i) Fatimids, and more heterodox elements, such as the Nusayris and the Druze of the coastal montagne. To these would later be added the Syrian Assassins.

  The map of Greater Syria changed again in the wake of the arrival of the Crusaders before Antioch in AH 491/1098 CE. By 1130, much of the region was under Frankish control: the principality of Antioch and the county of Edessa (modern Urfa in southern Tur key) in the north; the county of Tripoli in the central maritime region; and the kingdom of Jerusalem to the south. Many of the military fortifications that the Crusaders built to protect their possessions have survived, such as the impressive Krak des Chevaliers in the west of modern-day Syria. Much of the Muslim interior, meanwhile, maintained a precarious independence, with the Turkish amirs of Aleppo and Damascus among others paying tribute to the Crusaders in return for peace.

  The Frankish possessions shrank almost as rapidlyas they had grown. The Crusaders were isolated, and weakened by their unwillingness to make common cause with their coreligionists in the East, the Byzantines and the Armenians. ‘Imad al-Din Zanki, a Turk who had risen to prominence in the service of the Seljuks and made himself independent of his former masters, pushed the Crusaders back west of the River Euphrates. In the middle of the twelfth century, his equally able son, Nur al-Din Mahmud, became ruler of both Aleppo and Damascus. Nur al-Din continued and emphasized the Seljuk Sunni Muslim  tradition by founding madrasas (Islamic schools) in which an orthodox curriculum was taught.

  Outdoing the Zankids in their opposition to the Crusaders was a Kurdish lieutenant of Nur al-Din’s, Saladin, the founder of the Ayyubid dynasty. Having declared himself ruler of Egypt on the death of the last Fatimid caliph, Saladin proceeded to seize Damascus from Nur al-Din’s heirs. He then turned on the Crusaders. By the time of Saladin’s death in AH 589/1193 CE, only Antioch, Tripoli, Tyre, and Acre remained in Frankish hands.

  The following century saw the increasing dominance of Egypt as the center of the Ayyubid empire, at the expense of Greater Syria, particularly of Damascus. In AH 642/1244 CE, the Egyptian Ayyubids defeated a prudential alliance of central Syrian Ayyubids and Crusaders in southern Palestine. Aleppo, meanwhile, bought its continued independence from Egypt by helping the Egyptians to capture Damascus. Jerusalem was also brought under Egyptian control, after a brief period in the hands of the Crusaders, to whom the Syrians had given the city in return for cooperation against the Egyptians. In AH 648/1250 CE, the Ayyubids of Egypt were ousted by the Mamluks, originally Turkish slave soldiers who would found their own dynasty. Aleppo seized the advantage and occupied Damascus. It was a short-lived triumph: Within ten years the Mongols had overrun Greater Syria and put an end to Ayyubid rule.

  The Mamluks would eventually absorb Greater Syria into their empire. In AH 658/1260 CE, they defeated the Mongol armies at ‘Ayn Jalut in Palestine. Damascus and Aleppo were occupied by the Mamluks, although the Mongols remained a threat to Greater Syria until the beginning of the fourteenth century. Before the end of the thirteenth century, the Mamluks had taken all the Frankish colonies still remaining in Greater Syria. It was the end of an era marked by ambivalent relations between Muslims and Crusaders: hostility punctuated by accommodation, and mutual destruction contrasting with thriving commercial links between East and West.

  Mamluk rule lasted until AH 922/1516 CE, when they were defeated by the Ottomans at Marj Dabiq near Aleppo in a decisive battle that marks the end of the medieval period in Greater Syria. Damascus and Aleppo were leading cities of the Mamluk empire. Both took years to recover from the effects of the plague pandemic of the mid-fourteenth century, and of Tamerlane’s ravages in AH 803/1400 CE, when they were pillaged and emptied of their populations. This not with standing, and in spite of the depredations of some of the governors of the Syrian niyab as (Mamluk provinces), industry and trade at times resulted in a degree of prosperity that allowed intellectual and artistic life to flourish.

Further Reading

Gabrieli, Francesco.Arab Historians of the Crusades. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1969.

Hitti, Philip K.History of Syria: Including Lebanon and Palestine. 2d ed. London: Macmillan, 1957.

Holt, P.M.The Age of the Crusades: The Near East from the Eleventh Century to 1517. London: Longman, 1986.

Le Strange, Guy.Palestine under the Moslems. London, 1890.

SYRIAC

  Syriac is the name that came to be given to the Late Aramaic dialect of Edessa (modern-day Sanliurfa, southeast Turkey). The earliest texts (in Old Syriac) are pagan inscriptions of the first to third century CE, and three legal documents on skin from the early 240s. Syriac, with its own distinctive script, soon became the literary language of Aramaic-speaking Christians, both in the Eastern provinces of the Roman Empire and in the Parthian and Sasanian empires to the east. Syriac literature, which covers many secular and religious topics, constitutes by far the largest body of Aramaic literatures, spanning from the second century to the present day. Many of the earliest writings are preserved in manuscripts of the fifth and sixth centuries.

  Syriac script takes on three main forms: the oldest, estrangelo, is the norm in manuscripts till at least the end of the eighth century, when it was largely replaced byserto in the west (based on an earlier cursive) and a distinctive ‘‘eastern’’ script. It is disputed whether Arabic script has its roots in Syriac or Nabataean script.

  Syriac literature can most conveniently be divided into three main periods, second to mid-seventh centuries, mid-seventh to thirteenth centuries, and the thirteenth century onwards. Although some names are known from the second and third centuries, only a few texts survive, and it is not until the fourth century that major authors emerge: Aphrahat, writing in the Sasanian empire around 345, and the poet Ephrem (d. 373) in the Roman empire. Subsequent important prose writers of this first period include then historian John of Ephesus (d. ca. 589). Poetry is particularly well represented, with Narsai (d. ca. 500) and Jacob of Serugh (d. 521), as well as many fine anonymous authors. Among the genres developed is one that continues the ancient Mesopotamian precedence dispute; thus Syriac provides the bridge between ancient Mesopotamia and the Arabic munazara (debate or contest in verse or prose).A remarkable number of translations from Greek were made during this period, especially in the latter part, and include medical and philosophical texts. A few translations were also made from Middle Persian, among them the oldest version of Kalila wa-Dimna.

  A distinctive feature of the second period is the more learned and encyclopedic character of its writings. Despite the political upheavals of the time, the seventh century witnessed a great flowering of Syriac literature, both in the Syrian Orthodox Church (notably with the scholar Jacob of Edessa, d. 708) and in the Church of the East, where several monastic authors flourished, among whom Isaac of Nineveh was to prove particularly influential (he, in fact, originated from Qatar). In the late eight and ninth centuries, Syriac scholars (the most notable being Hunayn ibn Ishaq) played an important role in the ‘Abbasid translation movement, especially early on when it proved more practical to translate Greek texts first into Syriac (a task that had the benefit of several centuries of experience) and only then into Arabic. The second period comes to an end with the encyclopedic writings of the polymath Gregory Abu ’l-Faraj, better known as Bar Bar Hebraeus (Bar ‘Ebroyo, d. 1286). Whereas authors of the sixth and seventh centuries had come to be greatly influenced by Greek literary culture, Bar Hebraeus draws freely on both Arabic and Persian sources.

  The third period is the least known, and most texts remain unpublished. Syriac literature, however, has continuously been produced right up to the present time. Poetry in Modern Syriac is known from the seventeenth century onward, and prose from the midnineteenth century.

Further Reading

Baumstark, Anton. Geschichte der syrischen Literatur. Bonn: Marcus und Weber, 1922.

Brock, Sebastian.A Brief Outline of Syriac Literature. Kottayam: St Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute (SEERI), 1997.

Reinink, G.J., and H.L.J. Vanstiphout (Eds).Dispute Poems and Dialogues in the Ancient and Medieval Near East. Leuven, 1991.

TABARI, AL

  Ab-Ja’far Muhammad b. Jarar al-Tabari (d. AH 310/ 923 CE) was the most important scholar of his generation. His works exerted a profound influence on future Muslim scholarship, because of both their voluminous content and their meticulous methods of inquiry. Although many of his works have not survived, his two most famous works, his History (Ta’rikh al-Rusul Wa’l-mul-k) and his Qur’an commentary (Tafsir),remain standard references today.

  Al-Tabari was born in 224–225/839 in or near Amul, in Tabaristan near the Caspian Sea. He then spent most of his life in Baghdad, where he composed most of his works. He left his birthplace at a young age to pursue studies in Rayy and then in Baghdad, where he arrived in 241/855, shortly after the death of Ibn Hanbal, with whom he had hoped to study. His scholarly travels subsequently took him to most of the major intellectual centers in the Muslim world, including Bara, Kufa, Damascus, Beirut, and Egypt. Unlike many scholars, al-Tabari does not appear to have studied in the Hijiz, with the exception of  brief pilgrimage visits. Ultimately, he returned to Baghdad around 256/870 to write and teach.

  Although income from his family’s estate in Tabaristan spared him the poverty many scholars suffered, he did occasionally find himself in dire financial circumstances. For a time he served as a tutor to the son of al-Mutawakkil’s vizier, ‘Ubaydallah b. Yahya, probably because of his own economic difficulties. Despite many later offers, this was his only stint of government employment. Payments from his many students (supplemented by income from his family’s estates) sufficed to meet his modest needs.

  Reports about al-Tabari’s lifestyle typically emphasize his piety and moderation. Although he was not an ascetic, he did not live extravagantly or indulge in food, drink, or other diversions. He never married, and he apparently committed himself to a life of celibacy. He spent his days teaching, worshipping at the mosque, and writing. His scholarly works attracted both admirers and enemies. He condemned the usual heretical groups, including Mu‘tazilites, Shi‘is, Zahiris, and others. He attracted unusual enmity from the followers of Ibn Hanbal, who reportedly rioted in front of his house on at least one occasion. His dispute with the Hanbalis reportedly centered on two issues. The first was al-Tabari’s decision to exclude Ibn Hanbal from his Ikhtilaf al-Fuqaha’; this was done because of his opinion that Ibn Hanbal was a great muhaddith but not a jurist. Ibn Hanbal’s followers naturally took offense and reacted violently. The second focus of al-Tabari’s feud with the Hanbalis was his interpretation of the praiseworthy position (maqaman mahm-d’an) that God had promised the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. Al-Tabari rejected the Hanbali interpretation that this meant Muhammad s.a.w  would sit on God’s throne. Some reports suggest that Hanbali hostility toward al-Tabari was so extreme that, when al-Tabari died in 310/923, he had to be buried secretly at night to prevent Hanbali mobs from disrupting his funeral. Most reports, however, describe a peaceful daylight funeral instead.

  Al-Tabari’s works covered a broad range of topics, including law, history, Qur’anic exegesis, and hadith (tradition). His most famous and influential works are his History and hisTafsir.The History presents a complete history of the world from creation until just before al-Tabari’s time. In the History,al-Tabari applied the methods of the hadith scholars to historical reports, emphasizing proper isnads and including divergent versions of events to allow the reader to decide which interpretation was most valid. His meticulous methods profoundly influenced the way in which later Muslim historians approached their craft. Modern scholars have emphasized al-Tabari’s objectivity and his reluctance to impose his own interpretations on material or to insert his own narrative voice in any way. The work is also praised for alTabari’s skillful incorporation of pre-Islamic narratives into a master narrative that places Islam at the center of world history. Although al-Tabari skillfully concealed his own agenda in his History, careful analysis of his treatment of pivotal events suggests that he did adhere to a theory of historical causation according to which calamity befell the Muslim community when tribal rivalries and personal greed were not sufficiently suppressed. His Historyis essentially a salvation story in which the advent of Islam is situated in God’s larger plan and proper adherence to Islam raises human society to its pinnacle.

  In hisTafsir,al-Tabari was more willing to express his own opinions about particular disputes about Qur’an interpretation. He relied extensively on grammatical analysis of the text and included divergent interpretations of particular verses. However, he ultimately offered his own judgment about which interpretation was most viable, relying on ijtihad to an extent that his Hanbali rivals could not accept. As a legal scholar, al-Tabari initially adhered to the Shafi’i madhhab, which he probably embraced during his travel to Egypt as a young man. Later, however, his followers began to consider themselves to be a separate madhhab, usually called the Jariris. His madhhab did not survive long, and its principles were apparently not far removed from the Shafi’i school from which it sprang.

  Al-Tabari’s influence on later scholarship cannot be understated. HisHistorybecame the model for many later works, some of which were merely poorly disguised abridgments. The hadith methodology he so carefully applied to historical reports became the standard procedure for scrutinizing and reporting historical akhbar. HisTafsir remains a crucial work for understanding the development of Qur’anic exegesis and for insight into the debates about variant readings of the Qur’anic text. In addition, his Ikhtilaf offers thorough comparisons of the legal theories of  the orthodox madhhabs (with the exception of the Hanbalis). His reputation as a pious and exemplaryn scholar survived the extreme hostility of his Hanbali foes and the accusations that he was in fact a Shi‘i, which stemmed from his unwillingness to condemn ‘Ali with sufficient vigor. His meticulous work ultimately withstood his critics’ venom and remains a vital part of Muslim scholarship to this day.

Primary Sources

Ibn ‘Asakir.Ta’rukh Madinat Dimashq. Beirut, 1995–1999.

al-Tabari, Muhammad b. Jarar. Ta’rikh al-Rusul Wa-lmul-k, ed. M.J. de Goeje. Leiden, 1879–1901.

al-Tabari, Muhammad b. Jarir.Tafsir (Jami’ al-Bayan ‘an ta’Wil ay al-Qur’an). Cairo, 1905.

Yaq-t.Irshad al-Arib ila ma’Rifat al-Adib. Cairo, 1936.

Further Reading

Gillot, Claude. ‘‘La Formation Intellectuelle de Tabar.’’ Journal Asiatique276 (1988).

Khalidi, Tarif.Arabic Historical Thought in the Classical Period. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Rosenthal, Franz.The History of Tabari. Vol. 1. General Introduction and From the Creation to the Flood. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1989.

TAJ MAHAL

  During the first decade of his rule, the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan (r. 1627–1658 CE) embellished the imperial capital of Agra with stunning white marble buildings that were metaphors of the hierarchy and order supporting the state. That huge architectural programs of this sort could be undertaken not only in Agra but also in Delhi, Lahore, Ajmer, and Allahabad reflects the wealth, artistic talent, and administrative acumen available to the Mughal rulers. They projected a developed classic style, reproducible in its elements and clear in its symbolic content. When the emperor’s favorite wife Arjumand Banu Begam (or Mumtaz Mahal) died in 1631 giving birth to their fourteenth child, the grieving ruler added another massive project to those already underway, the construction of her tomb, now known as the Taj Mahal.

  Built over an eleven-year period from 1632 to 1643, the tomb’s form came from a rich tradition of Mughal sepulchral architecture, beginning with the tomb of the second Mughal emperor, Humayun, whose tomb was built in Delhi under the patronage of his son Akbar from 1562 to 1571. In the center of a cruciform (four-quadrant) garden (chahar bagh), Humayun’s tomb was a huge octagon faced in red sandstone with marble outlining the main structural elements. It supported a high double dome that glistened in white marble and reflected the influence of architecture from the Mughals’ Timurid heartland in Central Asia. For the builders of the Taj Mahal, the tomb of Humayun, along with the 1636 tomb of the Khan Khanan in Delhi, was a direct prototype.

  The Taj Mahal and its extensive gardens were surrounded on the east, south, and west sides by red sandstone walls measuring 305 by 549 meters in length. The main gate was on the south side and was preceded by an extensive bazaar (Mumtazabad or city of Mumtaz), the income of which, along with that from thirty neighboring villages, was assigned to the maintenance of the tomb. The gate not only controlled access to the complex; it also had a specific meaning. Its great arch is framed by white marble inlaid with a black marble inscription from the Qur’an that describes the Last Judgment and the joys awaiting the blessed who can enter Paradise; this is seen as visitors enter the tomb’s garden.

  Once inside the gate, visitors left behind the everyday life of Mumtazabad and entered a place of ordered quiet. A formal four-part garden stretched from the gate north to the actual tomb and provided a structured space intended to replicate paradise. Movement was controlled by paved walkways that outlined beds of flowers, flowering shrubs, and trees fed by streams of water from bubbling fountains.

  The name Taj Mahal first appears in the writings of visiting Europeans during the seventeenth century. To the Mughals, it was known simply as ‘‘the illumined tomb.’’ Begun in 1632, it was almost entirely complete by 1643, and much of its construction took place at the same time as the rebuilding of the Agra Fort. It was the single largest building project underway in the Mughal state, and some twenty thousand workers from India, Iran, and Central Asia were employed at the enormous cost of forty million rupees. The overall project was supervised by two distinguished architects, Makramat Khan and ‘Abd al-Karim; a third architect, Ustad Ahmad, appears to have been responsible for the design of the actual tomb. Passionately interested in architecture, Shah Jahan must have carefully watched over the design and its implementation. Imprisoned by his son Awrangzeb in the Agra Fort from 1658 until 1666, he could look east to view the Taj.

  The mausoleum itself is a square with chamfered corners that rests on a marble plinth that is seven meters high. Each side is dominated by a thirty-threemeter-high pishtaq (niche arch) that is flanked to the east and west by two smaller pishtaqs and topped by a domed and arcaded pavilion at each corner. At each corner of the plinth stands a three-storied minar. This elaborate structure of repeating identical elements is dominated by a twenty-meter-high drum and double dome. The outer dome provides the dramatic profile that defines the sky around it; the inner dome is low and comforting. Directly under its peak was the cenotaph of the deceased empress, beside her the cenotaph of Shah Jahan. Both grave markers are enclosed by an intricate marble screen inlaid with precious stones, as are the cenotaphs themselves.

  The great calligrapher Amanat Khan designed inscriptions that frame the great pishtaqs, the smaller arched entrances into the tomb, the eight interior pishtaqs, the inner frieze of the drum, and the two cenotaphs themselves. Written in a majestic cursive style of script known as thuluth, they are inlaid in black marble into the white marble. A number of inscriptions give us completion dates, the name of the scribe, and other historical information. Most, however, are Qur’anic: admonitions to follow Islam; warnings of hell to those who do evil; evocations of the Last Judgment; references to the Resurrection; and descriptions of the joys of paradise for the righteous. The inscriptions were selected to fit the purpose of the tomb and to reinforce an image: the Taj Mahal was designed to replicate one of the houses of paradise.

  Family and adherents were expected to make formal visits on birth and death anniversaries. To the tomb’s west was a red sandstone and marble mosque with three glistening white domes. Its exact counterpart (jawab; answer) was on the east side. Mughal designers laid out gardens and buildings according to precise grids that preserved predictable proportions. A formal garden replaced natural chaos with order; although buildings might inspire awe, they should avoid surprises. The great south–north garden is divided into identical quadrants; the mausoleum creates balance through repetition, and a visitor’s expectations are rewarded by dazzling elements that have already been seen before. One must remember, however, that harmony has variations, and, in its interaction with its natural setting, the tomb provides a multitude of them. The white marble facing is minutely inlaid with precious stones that only reveal their variety when a visitor is close. The marble is translucent, and the great dome absorbs and responds to every change in the sky over Agra.

Further Reading

Asher, Catherine B. ‘‘Architecture of Mughal India.’’ In The New Cambridge History of India, vol. I, 4.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Begley, W.E., and Z.A. Desai.Taj Mahal: The Illumined Tomb. Cambridge, Mass: The Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture; and Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1989.

Brandenburg, Dietrich.Der Taj Mahal in Agra. Berlin: Verlag Bruno Hessling, 1969.

Crowe, Sylvia and S. Haywood.The Gardens of Mughal India. London: Thames & Hudson, 1973.

Gascoigne, Bamber.The Great Moghuls. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.

Koch, Ebba M.Mughal Architecture. Munich: PrestelVerlag, 1992.

———.Mughal Art and Imperial Ideology: Collected Essays. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Nath, R.The Taj Mahal and Its Incarnation. Jaipur, 1985.

Pal, P., S. Merkel, J. Leoshko, and J.M. Dye.Romance of the Taj Mahal. W.W. Norton, 1989.

Wescoat, James L., and Joachim Wolschke-Bulmahn. Mughal Gardens: Sources, Places, Representations, and Prospects. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, 1996.

TAMERLANE, OR TIMUR

  Tamerlane, or Timur, (ca. 1336–1405 CE), was the last of the great nomadic conquerors and the founder of the Timurid dynasty, which ruled in Transoxiana and eastern Iran (1405–1507). A member of the Turco Mongol Barlas tribe, Timur was born in Transoxania and rose to power among the Ulus Chaghatay, a nomadic tribal confederation that formed the western region of the Mongolian Chaghadaid khanate. Stories about Timur’s early life are rife with legend and share too-striking similarities with those of Genghis Khan; therefore, it is hard to estimate the credibility of the descriptions of his lowly beginnings. He advanced in the tribal arena through personal valor and brigandage, gathering a nucleus of supporters and offering his services to the local rulers. During one of his early battles in Iran, he got the limp that became part of his name (Persian: Timur-i leng, ‘‘Timur the lame’’). His military genius and charismatic personality in combination with his clever manipulation of tribal politics led to his rise first to the leadership of his tribe (1361/1362) and then to the head of the whole ulus (1370). Not being a descendant of Genghis Khan, Timur could not bear the title khan and thus was known only as amir(commander). To legitimate himself, he married Genghisid princesses, took the title ku¨regen (Mongolian; ‘‘son-in-law’’), and appointed a puppet Genghisid as khan. He also collected a host of princes of the different Genghisid branches, portraying himself as their patron.

  Another important component of  Timur’s legitimation was Islam. Timur respected and patronized Sufi sheikhs and ulama, with whom he often debated, and he built religious monuments. The third facet of his legitimation was his own charisma and success: Timur stressed his intimate connection with the supernatural, consciously imitated Genghis Khan, and used monumental building and court historiography to magnify his name.

  From 1370 onward, Timur fought almost imminently at the head of his troops, unwilling to entrust their command to anybody but himself. He started with a series of raids into Moghulistan, the eastern part of the Chaghadaids, and into Iran, and this occupied him between 1370 and 1385. During the next decade, he was active mainly against the Golden Horde Khan and his former prote´ge´ Toktamish, in south Russia and Ukraine, achieving his major victory at 1395 when he ruined Sarai, the Golden Horde capital, thereby encouraging the rise of Muscovy. In 1398 and 1399, Timur raided India, inflicting a decisive blow on the Delhi Sultanate. In 1400, he turned westward, defeating the Mamluks in 1401 in Damascus (where he met Ibn Khaldun) and the Ottomans in 1402 at Ankara, capturing their sultan and enabling Byzantium to survive for another fifty years. In 1405, Timur was on his way to attack China, but he died near Utrar before completing his campaign.

  Although Timur raided the territory between Moscow and Delhi, he established permanent administration only in Iran, Iraq and Central Asia. These sedentary territories, governed by his sons and commanders, provided him with a rich tax base and a reserve of manpower. Unlike Genghis Khan, Timur did not try to subjugate the nomads whose domains he invaded. While Timur’s capital, Samarqand, became a cosmopolitan imperial city that flourished as never before, Iran and Iraq suffered devastation at a greater degree than that caused by the Mongols.

  Because Timur’s campaigns were a mass of uncoordinated raids, he often conquered one place more than once. However, the constant fighting enabled Timur to engage and reward his troops, thereby preventing them from turning against him. Timur’s conquests also consciously aimed to restore the Mongol Empire, and the deliberate devastation that accompanied them was a conscious imitation of the Mongol onslaught. The third aim of the conquests was the revival of the Silk Roads, shifting their main routes into his realm, mainly at the expense of the more northern route that passed through the Golden Horde’s lands.

  Timur’s conquests were a high time for Transoxiana, but they weakened—although did not eliminate nearly all of the Muslim forces of his time (Ottomans, Mamluks, Golden Horde, Chaghadaid Moghuls, Delhi Sultanate). They also led to the spread of the gunpowder weapon back eastward, from the Ottomans to China and India, thereby contributing to the subsequent decline of the nomads.

  Timur’s empire, which was mainly based on his personal charisma and lacked a strong institutional basis, did not survive intact after his death. However, his descendants, the Timurids, ruled over a smaller realm that was composed of eastern Iran and Transoxania for another century (1405–1501), presiding over a period of cultural brilliance. With the Uzbek conquest of Transoxiana, one Timurid prince, Babur, escaped into India, where he founded the Mughal dynasty (1526–1858), the rulers of which called themselves Timurids. Under the Timurids, Timur had become a source of legitimacy in his own right and was used as such by different rulers in Central Asia and Iran up to the nineteenth century. He was also well known in Renaissance Europe. During the late twentieth century, Timur also became the father of independent Uzbekistan, even though the Uzbeks had expelled his descendants from the territory that later became Uzbekistan.

Further Reading

Primary Sources

de Clavijo, Ruy Gonzales.Narrative of the Spanish Embassy to the Court of Timur at Samarkand in the Years 1403– 1406, transl. G. Le Strange. London, 1928.

Ibn ‘Arabshah.Tamerlane or Timur the Great Amir, transl. J.H. Sanders. 1936; Reprint 1976.

Ibn Khaldun. Ibn Khaldu ¨n and Tamerlane, ed. and transl. W.J. Fischell. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Berkeley University Press, 1952.

Khwandamir. Habib al-Siyar, ed. and transl. W.M. Thackston., 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass: Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University, 1994.

Shami, NiU ˆam al-Din.Zafar Namah, ed. F. Tauer. Monographie Archivu Orientalniho 5. Beirut, 1937.

Yazdi, Sharaf al-Din.Zafar Namah, ed. Urunbaev. Tashkent: Academy of Sciences of the Uzbek SSR, 1972.

Studies

Manz, B.F. ‘‘Tamerlane and the Symbolism of Sovereignty.’’Iranian Studies21 (1988): 105–22.

———.The Rise and Rule of Tamerlane. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

———. ‘‘Tamerlane Career and Its Uses.’’Journal of World History13 (2002): 1–25.

Woods, John E. ‘‘Timur’s Genealogy.’’ InIntellectual Studies on Islam, Essays Written in Honor of Martin B. Dickson, eds. M.M. Mazzaouni and V.B. Moreen, 85–126. Salt Lake City: Utah University Press, 1990.