history and society during the mamluk period (1250–1517)

Preface

The Annemarie Schimmel Kolleg “History and Society of the Mamluk Era” (www.mamluk.uni-bonn.de), funded by the DFG and located at the University of Bonn, aims to make long-lasting contributions to Mamluk Studies through its sup-port of individual and cooperative projects. In this volume, Fellows of the first two years present their research produced at the Kolleg. Their interests have addresses a wide range of fascinating topics: medicine and non-Muslim physicians in Mamluk Cairo, the social order of 15th-century Damascus, official reports on natural disas-ter (maḥāḍir) as sources of Mamluk geography, folk literature, narrative analysis of ego-documents, the judiciary of Late Mamluk and Early Ottoman Damascus, and the problems of imperial village planning. All contributions lead to a better and more sophisticated understanding of the Mamluk society.

Stephan Conermann Bonn, October 19, 2013

Yehoshua Frenkel (Haifa)

Al-Biqāʿī’s Naval War-Report

Burhān ad-Dīn Ibrāhīm al-Biqāʿī’s ego-document is at the heart of the present pa-per. The author provides a rich account of Mamluk military operations in Cyprus and al-Qaštīl ar-Rūǧ (Château Roux/Kastelorizo/Castellorizo) Island. It is not an impartial or “objective” story, but rather an observer-participant report of a naval expedition by a well-known administrator and writer. The detailed text reflects the author’s self-presentation and interpretation of events and deeds. It casts light on historiography under the Mamluks, as well as on the history of the Eastern Mediterranean in the 15th century. The sultan Ǧaqmaq dispatched several naval forces to fight the Franks.1 The first fleet sailed in 1440. A second Mamluk armada sailed from Dimyāṭ (Damietta) to Alanya and Rhodes (in 844/1442).2 A third flo-tilla sailed to Rhodes three years later (in 847/1443).3 A fourth expedition sailed in 848/1444.4 Mamluk sources provide several accounts of these naval operations in the eastern Mediterranean.5 Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, a contemporary historian, reports concisely:

“On Monday (17 Rabīʿ I 847/15 July 1443) the army that was dispatched to fight the Franks in Rhodes departed [al-Būlāq]. It was headed by the amīr Tamur-Bāy,6 the commander of the royal guards’ battalion (raʾs nawbat al-kabīr) [who served as the commanding officer of the fleet (amīr al-baḥr)]7 and Īnāl al-ʿĀlāʾī [an-Nāṣirī], the chief of the chancel-lery. The army numbered 1500 fighters and a great number of volunteers. They headed towards Dimyāṭ to embark the ships that assembled there from various districts of Syria and other places. [The Egyptian forces sailed from Dimyāṭ in the Nile Delta. The Syrian forces sailed from Beirut and Tripoli].”8

1 Rabie, Mamluk Campaigns; Fuess, Rotting Ships, 55. 2 Ibn Taġrī Birdī, an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira, 15: 341, 343. 3 Ibn Taġrī Birdī, an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira, 15: 351–52 (dates it to AH 346). 4 Ibn Taġrī Birdī, an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira, 15: 360; Ouerfelli, Les relations, 340. 5 For an earlier episode see Moukarzel, Les expéditions militaires. 6 Sayf ad-Dīn at-Tamur-Buġawī (d. 853/April 1449). See Ibn Taġrī Birdī, al-Manhal aṣ-ṣāfī, 4:91–93

(no. 870); idem, an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira, 15:543. 7 On this office see Ayalon, Studies, 60–61. 8 Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ġumr, ed. al-Buḫārī, 9: 199; ed. Ḥabašī, 4: 208.

Yehoshua Frenkel10

The next item in the chronicle provides information on the rising of the water level in the Nile River (July 1443). Following these lines, the author resumes discussing the naval expedition against the Franks. The printed text is defective. It says:

“On Thursday [lacuna in the text] in the month of Rabīʿ II the army’s ships sailed to Dumyat in preparation to an expedition (ġazw). They set sail [lacuna; Sunday 4 August 1443?] in the water of the Mediterranean Sea (al-baḥr al-milḥ = the salt sea) and navi-gated [northward]. The wind drove them violently. They regrouped in Tripoli. They sailed from there. On 7 Ǧumādā II/1 October 1443 they occupied a town in al-Qaštīl (Château Roux)9, an island in the heart of the sea.”10

On the margins of this laconic chronology a note says:11

“The majority reached Beirut and not Tripoli. Among the ships that reached Beirut was the vessel of the amīr Īnāl al-ʿĀlāʾī. 15 vessels, including the boat carrying amīr al-baḥr Tamur-Bāy reached Tripoli. They anchored there in the night we [al-Biqāʿī ?] anchored at Beirut (Monday 22 Rabīʿ II/18 August). On Wednesday morning (24 Rabīʿ II) we sailed from Beirut. At the same date also the forces that were in Tripoli sailed. After a short period of sailing the wind stopped. Mount Lebanon remained visible. The governors of this region had sailed before we reached Beirut. Since no wind drove our sail, it was agreed to dispatch Ǧānibek an-Nīrūzī, one of the commanders (bāšāt), with a warship (ġurāb) that advanced by means of oars. He was ordered to cruise towards Cyprus and to meet these Syrian vessels and to inform them that we were on our way to join them. On Saturday (27 Rabīʿ II) a strong wind began to blow and we arrived in Cyprus on Sunday forenoon (28 Rabīʿ II). In the evening of the same day those vessels that were in Tripoli also joined us.”12

Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī appended to this short account a personal war-report that his student Burhān ad-Dīn Ibrāhīm al-Biqāʿī,13 one of the participants in this am-phibious operation, had provided him.14 An annotated translation of this report forms the major part of the present article. Burhān ad-Dīn Ibrāhīm al-Biqāʿī is a well-known 15th century administrator and writer. His writings are rich with ego-documents,15 a genre that is well-represented in Mamluk chronicles. Ego-doc-uments are eyewitness accounts by an observer-participant. It is not an impartial or “objective” story of an event, but rather a report that reflects the author’s self-pre-sentation and interpretation. The authors of these ego-documents often refer to their teachers and peers, as well. The translated document, a personal account by a

9 For a general account see Nicolle, Crusader Castles.10 Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ġumr, ed. Habaši, 9: 199–200; 4: 200.11 Cf. Tadayoshi, Analysis, 36. 12 Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ġumr, 9: 200 (Hayderabad), 4: 209 (Ḥabašī).13 Guo, Al-Biqāʿi’s chronicle; idem, Tales.14 Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ġumr, 9: 200–213 (Hayderabad), 4: 209–217 (Ḥabašī).15 Dekker, Jacques Presser’s Heritage.

Al-Biqāʿī’s Naval War-Report 11

Cairene scholar who participated in a Mamluk raid on the island of Cyprus, casts light on these two dimensions of intellectuals’ activity under the Mamluks.

“Our companion, the scholar (ʿallāma) Ibrāhīm b. ʿ Umar b. al-Ḥasan al-Biqāʿī, explained to us the fighting (waqʿa) and in an exposé (taʿlīq) clarified the combat. He wrote (bi-ḫaṭṭihi)16 for us [telling] about their experiences from the day they embarked at Dimyāṭ and till they returned to Egypt’s coasts. To provide a comprehensive and cont-inuous story [we incorporate here it entirely] from the moment the victorious army sailed from the Nile delta to the Mediterranean on Sunday (14 Rabīʿ II 847/11 August 1443), heading towards Limassol in the island of Cyprus, may Allah incorporate it in the Abode of Islam (dār al-islām) forever (literally: till the Day of Judgment), amen. One of the boats in the flotilla sailed very slowly. Due to the winds the other ships pressed forward but the slow boat forced them to come back. They were bewildered till they saw the mountains overlooking Sidon. Shortage in water forced them to anchor off the coast of Beirut on Monday (22 Rabīʿ II/19 August 1443). Tamur-Bāy and a flotilla of 15 vessels that he led got lost in the sea, but eventually anchored that very night off the coast of Tripoli. We learned that the fleet of 15 vessels that carried the Syrian forces had already sailed from Beirut on Thursday (18 Rabīʿ II/15 August). Two days after our arrival at Beirut we sailed to Cyprus (Wednesday 24 Rabīʿ II/21 August). The wind hardly blew. We reached the Great Salt Lake of Larnaca. The vessels that anchored at Tripoli also reached this Salina on the same day. It was a remarkable incident. From the Salt Lake we sailed on Tuesday (1 Ǧumādā I/27 August). The Syrian fleet advanced faster and had anchored off Limassol, so they retreated and waited for us between the Salt Lake and Limassol. The joint flotilla numbered 80 ships. It was composed of various types:17 large war galleys (aġriba),18 carriers (ḥamalāt), square-sailed vessel (murabbaʿāt) [or cogs],19 skiffs (zawārīq),20 auxiliary ships (salālīr)21 and other cargo ships (qawārib).22 On Tu-esday night we continued our voyage and on Wednesday (2 Ǧumādā I/28 August) an-chored off Limassol, discovering that the governor (amīr) had already fled, taking with him the entire population with their goods. The materialistic people, who composed a considerable section [of the Mamluk army], argued that the Cypriotes had broken the truce (ʿahd). A pretender who claimed to be a student of Islamic law provided them with a religious-legal opinion that supported their aspirations. He dared to do so although he actually never plunged deeply into Islamic studies, nor had any practical experience in elucidating the tradition of the Prophet (sunna). His knowledge in matters regarding the changing conditions in the battlefield and in implementing religious etiquette was

16 On the use of this term to indicate a relation or a comment see Abū Šāma, ar-Rawḍatayn, 1:117, 124; Ibn Furāt, Tārīḫ, 9a (789–799/1387–1397):53 (wa-raʾaytu bi-ḫaṭṭi man qaddamtu ḏikrahū min ʿulamāʾi t-tārīḫi), 81, 82, 92, 94, 103, 148, 153 (wa-ra ʾ aytu bi-ḫaṭṭi baʿḍi l-iḫwāni), 137 (wa-ašharu mā raytuhū maktuban bi-ḫaṭṭi baʿḍi l-iḫwāni qāla ṣāḥibunā l-amīru Ṣārim ad-Dīn Ibrāhīm [Ibn Duqmāq]), 167, 182.

17 On these types and names see Agius, Wake of the Dhow; Idem, Classic Ships.18 Agius, Classic Ships, 348–350. 19 Ibid., 210–211. 20 Ibid., 307–308. 21 Ibid., 322. 22 Ibid., 271–72.

Yehoshua Frenkel12

very narrow. They cleaved to something that cannot hold up. The waves became stron-ger and the voices higher. They caused considerable damage in that region and in certain places looted whatever they grabbed, burning and killing. I did my outmost to prevent them and prolonged my efforts at reprimand. I discussed the issue with the person who led them astray and was able to refute their arguments. I mentioned that we had renewed the truce (ʿahd) with the Cypriotes and that we should discard it only if it were to be established that they had violated it, that the Cypriotes had fled out of fear from wrongdoers, and hence we should not blame them. I added that God’s words: “O belie-vers, if an ungodly man comes to you with a tiding, make clear”23 encouraged balanced behavior. Deep in my mind I knew that they will not repent in their hearts. I added and narrated the story of the Jews from the Banū Naḍīr tribe.24 The prophet Muḥammad approached them, asking for help in paying the compensation to the families of two men from the ʿĀmir clan who were wrongly killed by ʿAmr b. Umayya aḍ-Ḍamrī. He sat under a palm tree in one of the palm groves when the Jews plotted to kill him with a rock. Yet Allah informed him about the conspiracy. However, the Prophet did not rush to confront them, despite the fact that he had established the Jews’ treason firmly. He ordered them to choose between two options: either to accept him or to depart from the territory under his control. The story is well-known. The emissary that the lord of Cyp-rus had dispatched arrived on Thursday evening while we still were engaged in these talks. He informed us that he would receive the Mamluk army in Paphos.25 The Cypriot embassy also stated that they abide by the truce-treaty, that they are submissive and obedient, and that our decision to sail and fight against Rhodes makes them pleased because they have suffered from the Rhodians. They also apologized for the flight of the neighboring villagers, using words akin to my explanation of the villagers’ behavior. During that day some Muslims noticed that two vessels (markab) were observing our expedition fleet from a distance. So they made preparation to assault these vessels. Yet the attack was fruitless because sailors (nūtiyya) and soldiers were not on board our galleys, and so they could not post forces in these places. On Saturday evening (5 Ǧumādā I/31 August 1443) we sailed from Limassol and on Sunday afternoon anchored at Epis-kopi Bay (al-Iskabiyya). Rowing with oars, we continued our voyage on Monday, yet the flotilla scattered. This was caused by the lack of wind. Moreover, some vessels were not equipped with oars. We anchored at Raʾs al-Abyaḍ (the White Cape). At night (Tuesday 15 Ǧumādā I/10 September 1443) the wind’s direction changed, and we sailed. The vessels with the oars, which did not benefit from the wind, trailed behind. We an-chored close to this station. On Wednesday morning (16 Ǧumādā I/11 September) we continued sailing and anchored at a village near Paphos. The messengers of the lord of Cyprus arrived and reported according to the reception’s etiquette. They complained about the misdeeds that had been committed in their territory [by us] and grieved them. Indeed, by acting in this manner they aimed at deceiving us, this resulted either because of the damages that their country suffered or due to other motivations. Our commander in chief demonstrated his unhappiness with the gift that they had presented. He consi-dered it undersized. Moreover, he was angered by the failure of the king of Cyprus to

23 Quran, 49: 6 (trans. Arberry). 24 Kister, Notes on the Papyrus Text, 233–235; Faizer, Muhammad, 469, 473.25 On the port at this time see Broquiere, Voyage d’outremer, 9.


report personally. Their [failure] to bring the tribute monies remaining due also anno-yed him. The messengers heard our commander’s expressions of sorrow regarding the events that had taken place in their land. He apologized, claiming that these were the deeds of some of the auxiliaries, and that he was not aware of them. He added that he accepted their excuses for not coming forward immediately to meet him, their failure to provide provisions of food and to report that they are obedient.26 On Thursday night (17 Ǧumādā I/12 September 1443) our commander departed. He avoided Paphos, eva-ding from collecting their gifts. We followed him. Refraining from stopping at Paphos, we anchored at Raʾs aṣ-Ṣandafānī (Cape Arnauti). Although no wind had blown, we sailed on Friday morning (18 Ǧumādā I/13 September). We meandered in the sea till we observed the mountains of Anatolia. Then we sailed towards the mainland and on Saturday night anchored at that station. There we obtained water. Next morning (Sunday 20 Ǧumādā I/14 September) we sailed, arriving at the town of Alanya on the Turkish coast on Thursday (24 Ǧumādā I/19 September). Earlier on Friday the 15th [Rabīʿ I/12 July 1443?],27 at ten o’clock in the late afternoon, the town had been hit by a severe earthquake (zalzala). The major event was followed by two secondary waves. On Monday (28 Ǧumādā I/23 September) we set sail. We arrived at the town of Antalya on Tuesday night, as the new moon of Ǧumādā II was first seen (24 September). On Wednesday forenoon we sailed from Antalya and anchored at Aġu {?} in the evening (2 Ǧumādā II/25 September), waiting to reassemble the forces. The fleet was stricken by heavy winds. The flotilla was badly beaten, vessels were damaged and their nuts and bolts loosened. Yet despite these conditions the fleet reassembled, except for two [boats]. One boat was missing and no information on its fate reached the expedition. Regarding the second warship (ġurāb),28 the forces were informed that it was in [the port of] Antioch repairing a hole. Yashbak the jurist (al-faqīh)29 was ordered to return and to help the ġurāb. He did so on Sunday night (5 Jumādā II/29 September). Meanwhile, the commander in chief sailed with the army towards Rhodes, while we returned at that day to Antioch. Immediately after the warship’s damages were mended we sailed and joined a division of the army at Cape aš-Šāldūn (Scandalore), On Tuesday all the force anchored at Finike at night (7 Ǧumādā II/1 October). During the night we continued sailing and at morning, at the Isthmus of al-Qayqabūn, we met with the rest of the forces. Batḫāṣ was also with them. During the night he had passed by the fleet but did not see the vessels and assumed that they advanced further. Yet upon approaching al-Qayqabūn, they encountered four Frankish ships that threatened them. Batḫāṣ retreated and observed that the Frankish ships were carrying Turkmens, who landed ashore. The parties clashed and moved back. Learning that the entire army was at his rear, Batḫāṣ continued his retreat till he reached Finike, where he spent the night. This became known to the commander in chief and he dispatched reinforcements to Finike. All that day we anchored at al-Qayqabūn. Some soldiers encountered a woman sitting on the hill. They brought her to the commander in chief and she told him that in the past she used to cast a spell on the armies of Islam,

26 Fuess, Cyprus.27 Mamluk sources do not mention an earthquake in this year. See the data in Tahir, Grandes zones,

96–97; Arslantaş, Islām Dünyasında Depremler, 133.28 Literally, a black crow; see Agius, Classic Ships, 203, 279. 29 As-Saḫāwī, aḍ-Ḍawʾ al-lāmiʿ, 10: 271–272.

Yehoshua Frenkel14

but the Almighty guided her towards Islam and she converted. God had abolished the magic she had performed against the Muslims and turned it towards the infidels. Allah caused them to be trapped in the net of their own unfaithfulness, in the trap of their own deception and evasion. Late on Thursday night we set sail and on Friday forenoon (10 Ǧumādā II/4 October) we anchored at Īnwaʾ {?}. At evening we continued our voyage and at night anchored at Qaštīl ar-Rūǧ (Château Roux). This is a formidable castle on a high mount on the edges of Kastelorizo (Castellorizo) Island. The size of this island is nearly the distance from the suburb of al-Ḥusayniyya to the cemetery of Cairo (Qarāfa), and from the tomb (turba) of Barqūq to the suburb of al-Būlāq on the Nile. Several young Muslim soldiers climbed up the hill to inspect the fort, yet an older soldier followed them and convinced them to return. The Franks believed that they were scared, and shot at them with a cannon (makḥala)30 and mocked them. This caused a dispute in the Mamluk camp. Several tried to convince the commander to fight the Franks. Yet he refrained from doing so and ordered to prepare for sail. Nevertheless a growing number of Muslim demanded that he fight. God has made him accomplish his fortune and fulfill his eternal destiny, to be satisfied with the fulfillment of his providence. Like vi-gorous lions, the [Mamluk] army furiously attacked the Franks. The soldiers granted their souls generously. The heroes pressed on. The advancing combatants fell while the beaten stood. The brave men excelled. The battering ram breached the walls. The soldiers clearly demonstrated their endurance there. The two sides poured arrows on their op-ponents and threw all sorts of stones. High in the sky flew arrows carrying messages of bitter death. The cup of death was circling among the living on earth. They collided with leather shields, bucklers, bulwarks, and mail. God praise the light catapults, that let fly as if they were heavy ballistae. God honor their operators. The robust warriors covered parts of their bodies with iron shields. The combatants operating the catapults imagined that their bodies were made of iron. They dispatched ammunition vehemently, yet were blocked from advancing by the closeness of the walls to the fortifications of the bastion. A dry eastern wind blew from the starting of the engagement till Monday midday (12 Ǧumādā II/7 October 1443). This was akin to the Prophet’s saying (ḥadīṯ): “I won with the eastern wind.”31 The fighting erupted, although on that very day the fighters had been dispirited and despair intensified amongst them. The pupils [of the eye] felt wounded from looking at the lions. The bodies felt sorrow and pain. Yet they succeeded in surrounding the bastion from almost all directions. A great number of our shots struck the target. The fighting intensified and the devil suffered a setback. Most of their shots missed and their cannons failed. Their shields were beaten and their fighters were bat-tered. At that time the wind turned, changed direction and became western. This was one of the signs that they were on the brink of destruction. “ʿĀd was destroyed by the northern wind”32 says the prophetic ḥadīṯ. At that moment our cannon struck the bas-tion’s fortification and demolished part of it. Accidently an arrow caused a fire under the bastion. This was a marvelous hint and a wonderful indication of the intervention

30 Abdel-Hamid, Citadel, 35 (note 59).31 Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Fatḥ al-Bārī, 3:390 (kitāb al-istisqāʾ, bāb 26, ḥadīṯ 1035).32 This mythical ancient Arab tribe is mentioned in ancient Arabic poetry and in the Quran as the

people to whom the prophet Hūd was sent. Horovitz, Koranische Untersuchungen, 125–127; Hoyland, Arabia, 223–24; Rippin, ʿĀd.


of Divine Providence. The tongues of fire slowly licked the bastion, demolishing it piece by piece till a complete side of it was totally destroyed. It was a hard day for the infidels. The emir Sūdūn Qarāqāš al-Muʾayyadī33 told me (on Saturday 26 Ǧumādā II/19 Octo-ber 1443) about a dream he had.34 He envisioned that the siege would be in a place protected by a double wall, adding: “[In my night vision] I pushed aside the man next to it, and he said: ‘You should shoot at the one that is behind you, since he is more im-portant’.” The interpretation (taʾwīl) of this is that during the siege of this bastion, his position was near the other tower (burǧ), which was adjacent to the gate. On the forenoon of Thursday (16 Ǧumādā II/10 October) one of the Franks appeared and said: “Rhodes has been your target and we prefer that your bodies and capital will be not be worn out [here]. First you should go to Rhodes. Were you to seize it we would be in your hands, or provide us with a craft (sallūra)35 and we will sail to Rhodes. Were the Rhodians to agree, we will hand you the bastion and give it up”. But the Mamluk commander did not answer verbally, but rather bombarded them with cannon and ballistae. At that time he also prohibited us from communicating with the Franks. His herald proclaimed, and they were listening to his proclamation, that contact with the Frank was strictly forbid-den, unless the emir permitted it. We discovered that they had contaminated some of the water cisterns, pouring dirt and throwing oleander braches and leaves into them.36 The water stank and the quantity of drinking water decreased. To obtain drinking water several of the Muslims traveled to the Turkish coast. There they encountered three men and brought them back to the camp at evening. The three were questioned by the com-mander in chief and they said that they had fled from the territory of the Turkmens to the Qaštīl [al-Rūǧ] (Kastelorizo Island). They were tortured and admitted to being slaves (mamālīk) of Muslim Turks (Rūm). Each of the three named his master (mālik). Some of the people that had advanced close to the bastion were hit by stones and arrows. Because the stoning we also lost a considerable portion of our [weapons]. Due to this, the commander in chief banned the advance. He used primarily cannon and ballistae. On Sunday the weather changed and heavy showers rained upon us till Monday. The rain fell constantly, intensifying from time to time and accompanied by flashes of shining lightning and followed by breaking thunders. The weather continued to be dark most of the time. The stormy conditions prevailed and the rain and earth became joined. The people did not anticipate such weather and the conditions weighted heavily upon them. On the other hand they benefited from it, because the rain made it unnecessary to cross over and to carry water from the Turkish land. On Saturday (25 Ǧumādā II/19 October 1443) the sky cleared and the sun heated. During this day the cannon and the ballistae pounded heavily. They targeted a point on the walls continuously and managed to weaken it severely. We discharged toward this point swiftly and prevented the infidels, who were stricken by fear, from reaching the breach. Two Muslims advanced and inci-dentally figured it out. They clung to the place and others joined them at that position. They shielded the engineers who moved to the gap. The Franks rushed to the scene and

33 Sūdūn Qarāqāš died during a raid on Cyprus in 865/1460–61. As-Saḫāwī, aḍ-Ḍawʾ al-lāmiʿ, 3: 276–277 (no. 1052).

34 Cf. Frenkel, Dream Accounts.35 Agius, Classic Ships, 322.36 Meyerhof, Book of Treasure, 71; Levey, Toxicology, 50.

Yehoshua Frenkel16

intensified the stoning. Yet Allah made it easy for the engineers and they hollowed out a mine. They were joined by reinforcements carrying armor, and worked hard to widen the breach. The number of casualties was low despite the harsh conditions. The night’s darkness covered the field and coated it with a black wrap. The Franks’ stones fall heed-lessly and hardly hit the Muslims. The tunnel was narrow and the diggers faced harsh difficulties. Timbers covered the gate, yet even under these circumstances they succeeded in opening a wide gap. As morning was breaking they were lucky. At the calling for the first prayer the crumbling intensified. The efforts built up and victory came. Our kett-ledrums played and pierced the strong wall. God implanted fear in the hearts of those who do not believe, because these infidels worship other deities beside Him, although this does not belittle His authority. The fire of hell is their final destiny. How terrible is the last abode of the wrongdoers. So, as the sun was rising in the East the Franks asked for a truce. The shooting of arrows stopped and with a cable they let down their leader. An armistice was agreed with them. It was conditional upon a ceasefire, the departure of the Franks and the handing over of the fort with all the armaments. This was one of God’s secret benefits and one of the prophetic miracles. The Franks numbered about 150 men and 60 riding animals. Only God knows the number of their dead. I was present when two of them were questioned. They did not agree on the numbers and angrily disputed it. We lost more than 30 warriors and suffered a great number of wounded men. The Muslims climbed and most of them entered the bastion. The Franks’ banners were torn down and the flags of Islam flew high. The crosses were smashed and the creed of Islam rose. The catchword of the sultan was loudly called. Praise God who extingu-ished the devil’s word. For the Muslims it was a significant day, a date of greatness and supremacy. For the infidels it was a stern and inauspicious day. On Monday morning (27 Ǧumādā II/21 October) we started to demolish the place, we did not stop destroying it till the wall lay completely flat on the ground. Swiftly it became desolated ruins, a shelter of foxes and wolfs. Neither a single dwelling nor a stove remained on this island. I ascended to the fortress and witnessed the challenge. There are no words to describe the difficulties. I prayed for a long time, expressing my gratitude to God who planted fear in the Franks’ hearts. Were they to persist in their resistance, the difficulties would increase and we would not be able to pierce the walls or to knock them down with our cannon. There is a hope that the One, who made real a part of the emir Sūdūn’s dream, will cause the rest of it to materialize. The commanders of the expedition decided that the force would spend the winter in Anatolia (bilād ar-Rūm), in a town named Makarī {?}, till God will make possible what is most desired, that is a safe return. Yet the western wind continued to blow and it did not turn to an eastern wind. The commanders became troubled by the fear that the sailors and other personnel of the fleet would flee. So they chose to sail to Cyprus and disembark there. On Sunday (3 Raǧab/27 October) in the forenoon the flotilla sailed. At morning it reached Finike. Because the night was dark and the wind light, the fleet dispersed. It anchored there for two days and sailed after-wards. The wind intensified and the flotilla anchored on the western side of Ra ʾs aš-Ša-lidūn, in a bay named Qarā-Bālık (the Black Fish). The fleet scattered all over. No one knew the place of the others. Then the wind intensified and the flotilla reassembled. All the vessels regrouped, only the ship of the emir Īnāl ad-Duwaydir was missing. He was the senior among the commanders and they sent a light boat to enquire about his fate,


but failed to obtain any information whatsoever. After a while it became known that due to the light wind, Īnāl was anchoring at al-Qayqabūn together with his retinue. The commander of the navy ordered the war-vessels (aġriba) to sail and join Īnāl. Our war-ves-sel was included in this fleet. We sailed after the burial of Fāris, the governor of Dama-scus, took place. Fāris had headed the Syrian force.37 He had been wounded in his fore-head during the siege of Chateau Roux. It was a severe wound that ended his life. In the afternoon, while we were in the middle of sailing, the heavens opened and poured heavy rain upon us. The darkness of the night united with the gloomy shadow of the clouds. Afraid from crashing or encountering devastation during the voyage, we anchored on the spot. Early on Sunday morning (10 Raǧab/3 November 1443), we saw that the peaks of the Anatolian mountains were covered with white and that turbans of snow wrapped the summits. The face of the people became noxious from the intense cold, it was lasting and spreading. Then the clouds’ colour brightened and painted the sea’s foam with white. Then it turned to black and green and these colours were superior to the white of the beginning of the day. From all directions, from the mountains and from the sea, the winds beat us strongly us with cold and fog. We were immersed in the clouds’ water and we were discomfited. We suffered from the sting of the flies and the dancing of the ġurāb.38 It was the most severe torture. I realized that only good deeds would stop it. This soaking would not vanish and these continuing clouds of rain would not be pushed away only by words. It never occurred to me in the past that this would make me plea-sed in these circumstances. I asked for shelter in God and put my hope in His deliverance. From these torments I understood the ḥadīṯ on hasty praying, a tradition which Kaʿb b. ʿŪǧra [al-Balawī al-Anṣārī] and others have transmitted. This saying says that praying for the Prophet is the prayer to which [the Almighty’s] response is immediate. In mo-ments of deep crisis this is the finest prayer to acquire deliverance. I said it day and night, at sunrise and at sunset. On Monday night we anchored at Finike. The heavy winds prevented us from sailing further. It was dangerous and difficult. We spent the night there, experiencing high waves, extreme situations and gales. Our vessel almost capsized. Only God rescued us. No shelter or dress could protect us from the clouds that poured heavy rain upon us. The flashing of the lightning almost blinded us. Nothing could block the huge waves and the upheavals of the raging sea. We fainted. Our hearts were stressed and the soul took flight. The colour of a black raven is brighter than the deep darkness of that night. The vessel swirled higher and faster than a diving fowl. Then the weather improved. We collected the fruit of our prayers that led to our rescue and salvation. On the night between Tuesday and Wednesday, at the last vigil of the night (13 Raǧab/5 No-vember), we sailed towards al-Qayqabūn Istmus and joined the rest of the army at the first gathering point. Worried by prospects of storms, high waves and chancing winds it was agreed unanimously to return to Egypt. God is the best helper and we asked His help”.39 “The first boats arrived at the coast of Dimyāṭ on Wednesday (19 Raǧab; should be 20 Raǧab/12 November). [At the same date several boats arrived at Rašīd (Rosetta)]. The news reached Cairo on Friday after noon prayer. Afterwards Sūdūn al-Muḥammadī entered Cairo and announced the return of the expedition force. On Sunday (21 Raǧab;

37 As-Saḫāwī, aḍ-Ḍaw al-lāmiʿ, 6:164 (no. 548).38 The author plays on the double meaning of the name = a black crow and a model of a warship.39 Here ends al-Biqaʿī’s account.

Yehoshua Frenkel18

should be Saturday 23 Raǧab/16 November) he met with the sultan. The remainder of the forces followed suit. Some were pushed by the winds towards Dimyāṭ, others to Alexandria. The major bulk disembarked at Rašīd. They attempted to sail up the Nile but were kept back by southern winds (marisīya) and succeeded in entering Cairo only on Wednesday (11 Šaʿbān/4 December 1443). The force, with the booty and prisoners, ascended to the Citadel. On Thursday they met with the sultan and were decorated.”

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Abū Šāma, ar-Rawḍatayn, Kitāb al-Rawḍatayn fī aḫbār ad-dawlatayn an-nūrīya wa-ṣ- ṣalāḥīyah, ed. Ibrāhīm Šams ad-Dīn, 5 vols., Beirut 2002.

Ibn Furāt, Taʾriḫ Ibn al-Furāt, ed. Q. Zurayq, 2 parts in 3 vols. Beirut 1936.Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Fatḥ al-bārī bi-šarḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Buḫārī, ed. ʿ Abd al-Azīz b. Bāz and ʿ Abd

al-Raḥmān b. Nāṣir al-Burāk, 19 vols. Riyad 2005.Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ġumr bi-abnāʾ al-ʿumr, ed. ʿA. al-Buḫārī, 10 parts in 5 vols.

Hayderabad 1987.Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-ġumr bi-abnāʾ al-ʿumr, ed. Ḥ. Ḥabašī, 4 vols. Cairo 1998.Ibn Taġrī Birdī, al-Manhal aṣ-sāfī wa-l-mustawfī baʿd al-wāfī, 12 vols. Cairo 2003–2006.Ibn Taġrī Birdī, an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira fī mulūk Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira, Cairo 1929–1949.Ibn Taġrī Birdī, an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira fī mulūk Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira, 16 vols. Cairo 2006.As-Saḫāwī, aḍ-Ḍawʾ al-lāmiʿ li-ahl al-qarn at-tāsiʿ, 12 vols. Beirut 1992.

Bertrandon de la Broquiere, Le voyage d'outremer De Bertrandon de la Broquiere, ed. Ch. Schefer, Paris 1892.

Secondary Literature

Abdel-Hamid, Tarek Galal, “The Citadel of Cairo in the Ayyubid Period and the Development of the Thirteenth-century Fortifications,” in: Creswell Photographs Re-Examined: New Perspectives on Islamic Architecture, ed. Bernard O’Kane, Cairo 2009, pp. 1–42.

Agius, Dionisius A., Classic Ships of Islam: From Mesopotamia to the Indian Ocean, Leiden 2008.Agius, Dionisius A., In the Wake of the Dhow: The Arabian Gulf and Oman, Reading 2002.Arslantaş, Nuh, Islām Dünyasında Depremler, Istanbul 2003.Ayalon, David, “Studies on the Structure of the Mamluk Army,” part III: Bulletin of the School

of Oriental and African Studies 16 (1954), pp. 57–90. Dekker, Rudolf. “Jacques Presser’s Heritage: Egodocuments in the study of History”, Memoria

y Civilización 5 (2002), pp. 13–37.Faizer, Rizwi S., “Muhammad and the Medinan Jews: A Comparison of the Texts of Ibn

Ishaq’s Kitab Sirat Rasul Allah with al-Waqidi's Kitab al-Maghazi,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 28/4 (1996), pp. 463–489.

Frenkel, Yehoshua, “Dream Accounts in the Chronicles of the Mamluk Period,” in: Dreaming Across Boundaries: The Interpretation of Dreams in Islamic Lands, ed. Louise Marlow, Cambridge 2008, pp. 202–220.


Fuess, Albrecht, “Was Cyprus a Mamluk Protectorate? Mamluk Policies toward Cyprus between 1426 and 1517,” Journal of Cyprus Studies 11/28–29 (2005), pp. 11–28.

Fuess, Albrecht. “Rotting Ships and Razed Harbours: The Naval Policy of the Mamluks,” Mamluk Studies Revies 5 (2001), pp. 46–71.

Guo, Li, “Al-Biqāʿi’s Chronicle”, in: Historiography of Islamic Egypt, ed. H. Kennedy, Leiden 2000, pp. 121–148.

Guo, Li, “Tales of a Medieval Cairene Harem: Domestic Life in al-Biqāˁi's Autobiographical Chronicle,” Mamluk Studies Review 9 (2005), pp. 101–121.

Horovitz, Josef, Koranische Untersuchungen, Leipzig 1926.Hoyland, Robert, Arabia and the Arabs from the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam,

London 2001.Kister, M. J., “Notes on the Papyrus Text about Muhammad’s Campaign against the Banu

al-Nadir,” Archiv Orientalni 32 (1964), pp. 233–236.Levey, Martin. “Medieval Arabic Toxicology: The Book on Poisons of ibn Wahshīya and Its

Relation to Early Indian and Greek Texts,” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 56/7 (1966), pp. 1–130.

Meyerhof, Max. “The ‘Book of Treasure’, an Early Arabic Treatise on Medicine,” Isis 14/1 (1930), pp. 55–76.

Moukarzel, Pierre, “Les expéditions militaires contre Chypre (1424–1426) d’après Ṣāliḥ b. Yāḥya: Quelques remarques sur la marine mamelouke,” al-Masaq (2007), pp. 182–191.

Nicolle, David, Crusader Castles in Cyprus, Greece and the Aegean 1191–1571, Oxford 2007.Ouerfelli, Mohamed. “Les relations entre le royaume de Chypre et le sultanat mamelouk au

XVe siècle,” Le Moyen Age 110 (2004), pp. 327–344.Rabie, Hassaein, “Mamluk Campaigns Against Rhodes,” in: The Islamic World from Classical

to Modern Times, ed. C. E. Bosworth, Princeton 1989, pp. 281–286.Rippin, Andrew, “ʿĀd,” Encyclopaedia of Islam3, Leiden 2007. Tadayoshi, Kikuchi. “An Analysis of ‘Abd al-Basit al-Hanaf| al-Malati’s Description of the

Year 848: On the Process of Writing History in the Late Fifteenth Century,” Mamluk Studies Review 10/1 (2006), pp. 29–81.

Tahir, Mustafa Anwar, “Les Grandes zones sismiques du monde musulman à travers l’histoire”, Annales islamologiques 30 (1996), pp. 79–104.

Yehoshua Frenkel (Haifa)

Volksroman under the Mamluks: The Case of the Tamīm ad-Dārī Popular Sīra

Prologue

The present paper evolved from a historical-legal research project. While search-ing for information about properties in Hebron (al-Ḫalīl), which the offspring of the ṣaḥābī Tamīm ad-Dārī claimed, I stumbled upon a popular story. In this story Tamīm is portrayed as a hero who has been kidnapped by ǧinns and endured or-deals and adventures on remote islands. The aim of this paper is to shed light on the text and its reception by the Mamluk society. Inter alia, I will describe the au-diences, and will try to elucidate the supposed connections between Tamīm the historical character and Tamīm the literary hero. Since there is slight positive ev-idence to indicate that this text is “Mamluk,” one may ask why my talk is about a “sīra šaʿbiyya”1 in the Mamluk environment? What makes it “Mamluk”? What is Mamluk in the story? My answer is based primarily upon circumstantial evidence, and I will return to it at the closing section of this paper.

1 Introduction

Popular story telling was not unusual in Mamluk society.2 Chronicles and biogra-phies from their realm report on popular performances: musicians, theatre and sto-rytellers.3 The latter narrated tales about invisible forces, miraculous salvations and mirabilia (ʿaǧāʾib). Amongst the heroes of these stories are well-known sultans and caliphs. A paramount example is the Sīrat Baybars that used to be performed in public.4 Another one is Sīrat Iskandar, which was copied during the Mamluk

1 Heath, A Critical Review, 19. 2 This genre has attracted the attention of modern folklorists, historians and narratologists. See

Heath, sīra shaʿbiyya; Doufikar-Aerts, Alexander Magnus Arabicus, 233–235, 267. 3 Ibn Furāt, Tārīḫ Ibn al-Furāt, 9a:26, 41. 4 ʿAzzām, Maǧālis as-sulṭān, 118–119; It is probable that Ibn Iyās’ remarks: “wa-aḫbāru l-maliki

ẓ-ẓāhiri Baybars kaṯīratun fī ʿ iddati muǧalladātin wa-l-ġālibu fīhā mawḍūʿun laysa lahū ḥaqīqatun”

Yehoshua Frenkel22

period.5 In his account of the Umayyad history the Damascene historian Ibn Kaṯīr summarizes the story of al-Baṭṭāl and warns his readers: “regarding the popular stories that the common people tell about al-Baṭṭāl, using the pseudo-biography of Dalhama, Baṭṭāl, the emir ʿAbd al-Wahhāb and the judge ʿUqba; it is all lies and imaginative innovations (…) these stories circulate only among the uneducated who accept as true also the forged folk romance of ʿAnṭara al-ʿAbsī, the biogra-phy [of the Prophet] composed by [Abū l-Ḥasan] al-Bakrī, the story of [Aḥmad] ad-Danaf and other stories.”6 The story of “the kidnapped Tamīm” fits this social milieu well. Tamīm ad-Dārī, as a literary persona, is a cultural hero. He is first mentioned in the tafsīr of Muqātil b. Sulaymān (d. 150/767). In his exegeses of the Qurʾānic verse: “O ye who believe! Let there be a testimony between you when death approaches any of you” (Q: 5.106), Muqātil says that this verse (āya) “was revealed (nazalat)” following a historical event. Buzayl b. Abī Māriya, a client of al-ʿĀṣī b. Wāʾil as-Sahmī, travelled across the sea to the land of the Ethiopian king (Negus of Abyssinia / Neǧašī / al-Naǧašī). He was accompanied by two Christians: Tamīm b. al-Aws ad-Dārī from the Banū Laḫm tribe and ʿAdī b. Baddāʾ. While sailing from Arabia to the African shores of the Red Sea, Buzayl died on board. On his deathbed, Buzayl wrote a will and put it among the merchandise, which he handed to Tamīm and his companion, requesting them to give the goods to his household. Tamīm and ʿAdī handed over the cargo but refrained from giving a sil-ver vessel ornamented with gold engraving to Buzayl’s family. When the fraud was uncovered, the Prophet instructed the Muslims to act in line with the āya. The next dated piece of evidence is an account by the Baġdādī historian Aḥmad b. Abī Ṭāhir Ṭayfūr (204–280/819–893). He reports on a visit to Damascus paid by al-Maʾmūn (fl. 197–218/813–833). During his stay in Syria’s capital (in 218/833), the caliph met some local delegations. One of them came from the town of al-Ḫalīl (Hebron). Its members, headed by Saʿīd b. Zayyād, were offspring of Tamīm ad-Dārī. They asked al-Maʾmūn to confirm their legal status and to authenticate the properties, which they claimed the prophet Muḥammad had allocated to Tamīm. Saʿīd b. Zayyād is named as the source of the following story:

“[When] I went into al-Maʾmūn’s presence at Damascus, the caliph said to me: Show me the document which the Messenger of Allah wrote out for your family. Saʿīd rela-ted: So I showed it to him and al-Maʾmūn said: I should very much like to know what this covering over this seal is. Saʿīd added: Abū Isḥāq al-Muʿtaṣim [Maʾmūn’s brother and the future caliph] said to him: Untie this knot so that you may know what it is. But al-Maʾmūn then said: I do not doubt that the Prophet tied this knot himself, and I am

refer to a popular Sirat Baybars. Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ az-zuhūr, 1/1: 341 (ll. 6–7); Paret, Sirat Baybars; Herzog, Geschichte und Imaginaire, 385.

5 Doufilkar-Aerts, Alexander Magnus Arabicus, 196, 200; Wust, A Catalogue of the Arabic manuscripts, 332 (ms. 444 Ibrāhīm b. Mufarriǧ aṣ-Ṣūrī’s narration).

6 Ibn Kaṯīr, al-Bidāya wa-n-nihāya, 13: 115–116 (AH 122/740); Shoshan, Popular Culture, 23 ff.

Volksroman under the Mamluks: The Case of the Tamīm ad-Dārī Popular Sīra 23

not the person who is going to unloose a knot tied by the Messenger of Allah. Then [al-Maʾmūn] said to [his nephew] al-Waṯīq: Take it and lay it on your eye; perhaps Allah will heal you. Saʿīd related: al-Maʾmūn began to lay it on his eye and to weep”.7

In the ḥadiṯ collections Tamīm plays the role of the originator of a unique story. He has informed the Prophet about his adventures and ordeals in a remote island. Then Muḥammad told the story to his community:

“The Prophet said: By Allah, I have not made you assemble for exhortation or for a caution, but I have assembled you here for Tamīm ad-Dārī, a Christian, who has come, sworn alliance and accepted Islam, told me something, which agrees with what I was telling you about the false Messiah (ad-daǧǧāl).8 Tamīm told me that once he had sailed in a ship with thirty men of the Banū Laḫm and Banū Ǧuḏām tribes. For nearly a month the waves tossed them in the ocean. In the end the waves brought them to the shores of an island where the sun was setting. They sat in a landing boat and disembarked. On that island they encountered a very hairy beast; her fur was so bulky and thick that they could not distinguish her face from her rear. They said: Woe to you, who are you? The beast said: I am the she-spy (al-ǧassāsa). They asked her: What is al-Ǧassāsa? And she said: Oh, people, go to this person who is in the monastery as he is very eager to know about you. Tamīm added: When the bulky she-beast called our attention to a person we were afraid that she was a she-Satan (šayṭāna). Hence we hurriedly went on till we entered that monastery. There we found a well-built person, “previously we had never seen anyone like him.” He was strongly bound, his hands were tied to his neck and iron shackles fettered his legs from the ankles up to the knees. We said: Woe upon thee, who are you? And he said: You will soon be able to know who I am, but first tell me who are you. We said: We are Arabs. We sailed in a boat. The sea became stormy and the waves carried us from one place to another. After a month the sea-waves brought us to the shores of this island, where you dwell. We sat in the ship’s side-boat and landed on this island where we encountered a hairy she-beast. She has such thick hair that it is impossible to distinguish between her face and rear. We said: Woe be unto thee, who are you? She said: I am al-Ǧassāsa. So we asked her: What is al-Ǧassāsa? And she ans-wered: Go to this person who is in the monastery for he is eagerly waiting to know your story. So fleeing her, we hastened towards you. We did not trust her words that you are the Devil. The chained creature asked them: Tell me about the date-palms in Baisan (Bīsān). We responded: About what features of these trees are you seeking information? He said: I ask you whether these trees bear fruit or not? We said: Yes. Thereupon he said: It is most probable that soon the trees will not bear fruit. The chained man then

7 Ṭayfūr, Kitāb Baġdād, 147–148; Keller, Sechster Band des Kitab Baĝdad, 271, 123 (trans.); aṭ-Ṭabarī, Tāriḫ ar-rusul wa-l-mulūk, 8:652; 3:1142 (AH 218); Bosworth, The History of al-Tabari, 32:234; Ibn al-Aṯīr, al-Kāmil fī t-tāriḫ, 6:9 (AH 218). The transmission of this anecdote by such a late historian can indicate that Mamluk-period audiences might be familiar with it.

8 Most probably the Arabic term was acquired from the Syriac “mešiḥa daggala.” See Mathew 24.24 “indeed false Messiahs and false prophets will arise”; Lazarus-Yafeh, Some Religious Aspects of Islam, 51. In al-Maqrīzī’s days, it was commonly believed among Muslims that Jesus would kill the Antichrist. Taylor, Some Aspects of Islamic Eschatology, 68.

Yehoshua Frenkel24

said: Inform me about the Sea of Galilee? We responded: About what features of it? So he asked: Is there water in this sea? They said: It is large and [contains a] great quantity of water. Thereupon he said: It is most probable that soon the sea will become dry. He again said: Inform me about the spring of Zoar of Lot, which is in a village in southern Syria.9 They said: About which aspect of it do you want to know? The chained person said: Is there water in the spring and does it irrigate the plantations? We answered him: Yes, it is flowing and the local inhabitants use the water to irrigate the plantations. The creature said: Inform me about the Prophet of the common folk, those who do not know the Book (ummiyyūn);10 what has he done? We said: He has departed from Mecca and settled in Yaṯrib (Medina). He said: Did the Arabs fight against him? We said: Yes. He said: How did he deal with them? We informed him that he had overcome those Arabs in his vicinity and they submitted to him. Thereupon he said to us: Has it actually hap-pened? We said: Yes. Thereupon he said: If it is so, it is better for them to obey him.11 [The false Messiah continued]: “I am going to tell you about myself. I am the Messiah, it is about [the time that] I will soon be permitted to get out, and I shall proceed and travel to the ends of Earth. I will not spare a single place and for forty nights torture its inhabitants, except Mecca and Medina as these two sacred locations have been blocked from me. Whenever I make an attempt to enter either of these two places, an angel with a drawn sword in his hand will confront me and bar me from entering. On every passage leading to Mecca and Medina there will be a guardian angel.”12

Tamīm is also named in several Abbasid mirabilia. Abū Muḥammad ʿ Abd al-Malik b. Hišām (213/828) quotes in his account of the ancient Arab tribe of ʿĀd, which is mentioned in the Qurʾān (Q: 89.6–8), a tradition supposedly transmitted from Wahb b. Munnabih.13 Wahb is the authoritative source of the following tradition: “During the reign of ʿUmar b. al-Ḫaṭṭāb, Tamīm ad-Dārī saw the town of Iram.” Abū ʿUṯmān ʿAmr b. Baḥr b. Maḥbūb al-Ǧāḥiẓ (160–255/776–868) tells the story of Ḫālid b. Yazīd, the client of the Muhallabīs. According to al-Ǧāḥiẓ’s narrative, Ḫālid stated: “I reached the end of the earth and the stage of sailing in the ocean. It is not for you to see Ḏū l-Qarnayn (The Double Horned One; Alexander the Great of Macedonia in many exegeses). Give up the methods of Ibn Šarya, because he knows only the plain aspects of historical stories. Were Tamīn ad-Dārī to encounter

9 Le Strange, Palestine under the Muslims, 290–291.10 A reference to Qurʾān 2.78; 3.20, 75. The Qurʾān describes the Messenger of Allah as the ummī

prophet 7.157–158. Traditionally Muslim commentators explain ummī as unlettered. Watt, Bell’s Introduction to the Qurʾān, 33–34; Gilliot, Le Coran, 171.

11 Some Mamluk authors associate this story with the verse “And when the word is fulfilled concern-ing them, We shall bring forth a beast of the earth to speak unto them because mankind had not faith in Our revelations” (Q: 27.82; trans. Pickthall), alleging that this is the beast mentioned by Tamīm. Ibn al-Wardī, Ḫarīdat al-ʿaǧāʾib, 302.

12 Muslim, Ṣaḥīḥ, 2942 (kitāb al-fitan traditions 119–122). This ḥadīṯ was translated by Saritoprak, The Legends of al-Dajjal, 295–96.

13 Ibn Hišām, k. at-Tīǧān fī mulūk Ḥimyar, 48.


me, he would acquire from me the description of the barrier”14 [which is mentioned in the Qurʾān, Q: 18.82–103]. Stories regarding ǧinns15 and abduction were not strange to Muslim societies.16 Ibn Saʿd transmits a report on a meeting between Tamīm ad-Dārī and ǧinns in a ravine in Syria. The ǧinns informed him that the Prophet had appeared in Arabia. Following this news Tamīm traveled and met with Muḥammad. The ḥadīṯ of Ḫurāfa (or Ḫurfa) that Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal incorporated in his Musnad also tells about ǧinns and abduction. In his dictionary, Lane explains the word ḫurāfa as “a story that is deemed pretty.” The plural form aḫārīf is equiva-lent to asāṭīr. Ḫurafāt, another plural form, are facetious night-stories. Al-Masʿūdī employs “alf ḫurāfa” to designate a collection of marvelous amusing legends. This seems to be the prototype of “The One Thousand and One Nights”.

2 Cultural Reception during the Mamluk Period

Tamīm ad-Dāri continued to play a role in historical and legal texts as well as in popular romances of the Mamluk period. In this paper I will concentrate on the last genre and will not dwell upon the two first genres. Describing an island of the Indian Ocean, the geographer Muḥammad Šams ad-Dīn ad-Dimašqī (654–727/1256–1327) says: “The island of the Anti-Christ: The transmitters of traditions claim that the ad-Daǧǧāl is chained there. It is narrated that the ǧinn kidnapped Tamīm ad-Dārī and brought him to this island. There they treated him and asked him about the indications of the last day and the emergence of the Anti-Christ. The story is well-known”.17 The ʿ ifrīts are a chthonic class of ǧinns and are believed to be particularly powerful and cunning. Describing the festive departure of the maḥmal caravan from Cairo, Mamluk authors tell of a group of people whom the crowd named “ʿafarīt.”18 “They were dressed in reversed leather, the coat outwards, or covered by straw. On their heads they carried feathers of ostriches. Masks with artificial hair and teeth covered their faces. It was an amusing vision.”19 Ibn Taġrī Birdī reports on a huge ship named ʿifrīt al-baḥr. The Mamluk period witnessed merchants and travelers who would receive stories about hazards in remote lands and long years of detachment favorably. The chronicles from that era and area transmit various stories that make it clear that urban and rural audiences alike used to listen to popular stories. Here are several examples:

14 Al-Ǧāḥiẓ, al-Buḫalāʾ, 49 (ll. 2–4).15 Ǧinns are mentioned in the Qurʾān and their existence was completely accepted by the Muslim

population of the Mamluk Sultanate. s.v. Macdonald, Djinn.16 ʿAzzām, Maǧālis as-sulṭān al-ġūrī, 79.17 Ad-Dimašqī, Nuḫbat ad-dahr, 149 (ll. 16–17).18 “An ʿifrīt of the jinns” is mentioned in King Solomon story in the Qurʾān. s.v. Chalhod, ʿifrīt.19 Meloy, Celebrating the Mahmal, 419; and see Bauer, ʿIfrīt.

Yehoshua Frenkel26

– Ibn Ẓāfir al-ʿAsqalānī is said to be familiar with a person that crossed every year from Damascus to Mecca within three days. This man said that al-Ḫiḍr helped him to do so.20

– Ibn Abī l-Ḥiǧǧa narrated that while he lived in Mecca, a Persian told him that he was married for forty years. Since no child was borne to him he took a concubine who after nine months gave birth to a maimed son. As the handless and feetless boy reached maturity, he provided him with a maid. The boy slept with her and in a single night he ejaculated 12 times. Nine months later the maid gave birth to 12 boys. He provided each one of them with a wet nurse. They grew up and he stationed each one in his castle.” The story ends with an ego-remark: “I came to here till death will come.”21

– A sweets seller told Ibn Abī l-Ḥiǧǧa that he used to sell his products to pilgrims (hāǧǧ). Once, one of them lost his way. He saw light on a hill. When approaching the fire, he encountered angels in the shape of blacksmiths, who were preparing fetters. Upon his inquiry, they told him that they hurl the chains of men upon women and those of women on men. So he asked them: Have you prepared a chain for me? Yes!” came the response, “your shackle has been thrown on the daughter of Ḥusayn the blind man from Baghdad.” He traveled to the city and enquired about the blind man and his daughter. Seeing their miserable condi-tions, he stabbed the girl. Believing that she had died, he left the place, traveled to Basra and sailed to India. After twelve years the man returned to Baghdad. According to the narrator it was a common tradition among the traveling mer-chants to meet with local girls prior to marrying them. So he went with a lawyer to a ḫān, selected a girl and married her. In the summer he saw her as she was changing her dress and discovered wounds on her body. She told him that a stranger had attacked her at a young age. Years passed, and only after she gave birth to several children, the man told her his biography.22

The spread of the stories was not limited to the lower classes, and their reception cannot be explained by times of unrest or instability. Several Mamluk chroniclers transmit a memorandum from Damascus that reported an amazing event, which happened in one of the province’s villages (in 695/1296):

“Many people from Damascus narrated a story that spread quickly through the city and everyone was engaged by it during the first ten days of Muḥarram. Its source was the judge of the district of Ǧubbat ʿ Asal (the honey ditches), a district in the province of Damascus, who related that in one of the hamlets, an ox has spoken. It all started when a boy led the ox to the water trough. When the animal finished drinking, he said: “Praise

20 Ibn al-Ǧazarī, Tārīḫ Ibn al-Ǧazarī, 165.21 Ibid., 223. 22 Ibn al-Ǧazarī, Tārīḫ Ibn al-Ǧazarī, 225.


the Almighty God.” This has astonished the boy, who told his master, the ox’s owner about it. This person refused to believe the story and the next morning joined the boy and the ox to the trough. As the ox finished swallowing, he indeed praised God. On the third day, a group of farmers came to the site and they too heard the ox blessing God. The ox said: The Lord inflicted on the nation of Islam seven years of drought, yet due to the intercession of the Prophet, He changed it to fertility. Then the ox mentioned that the Prophet instructed him to transmit this information. The animal asked the Prophet what the evidence that he is reporting the truth would be, and the Prophet answered: “Immediately after informing them you will die.” The reporter added, and then the ox advanced and ascended to a higher ground, fell and died. Hoping to gain blessing, the people cut the ox’s coat, wrapped him with shrouds and buried him”.23

Tamīm ad-Dārī is the hero of a Volksbuch. This popular story is preserved in c. 30 manuscripts, most of them undated. An early version in Aljamiado was written in the Kingdom of Aragon in the 16th century. Describing a manuscript that includes Die Geschichte des Tamim al-Dari,24 Ahlwardt notes: “So erklärt sich die dabei an-gegebene Zeit der Abschrift [ist] 917 Muḥarram (1511)”.25 It seems at the moment impossible to diagram a stemma of the manuscripts. Certainly it is impossible to identify an ur-text or to fix an exact date of its first appearance. However, the short remarks in Mamluk sources about kidnapped Tamīm, makes it possible to deduce that the story was not unfamiliar to the Mamluk audience. This method of dating is in line with the agreed means of periodization of popular stories, where no date of the story is possible to detect. The structure of Tamīm’s story is plain.26 The frame is that of a pseudo-ḥadīṯ. Following a short isnād,27 not mentioned in all the manu-scripts,28 the narrator describes the court of the Prophet and the regulations he pre-scribed regarding the duties of ablution. The closing section deals with legal ques-tions regarding the annulment of a contracted marriage. In these sections Tamīm’s unnamed woman is credited with the prime role. She is not happy with Tamīm’s

23 An-Nuwayrī, Nihāyat al-arab, 31:295–96 (quoting Ibn al-Ǧazarī, Ḥawādiṯ az-zamān). See Taʾrīḫ Ibn al-Ǧazarī 1: 279–80; Ibn al-Furāt, Tārīḫ, 8:203; al-Maqrīzī, as-Sulūk, 1:811 (quotes an official account that reached Cairo’s citadel); Ibn Taġrī Birdī, an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira, 8:59 (quotes a report extracted from the Syrian historian Quṭub ad-Dīn Yunīnī. Ibn Taġrī Birdī appends a remark to the piece of information transmitted by him: “This is a strange story, yet our chronicler is a trust-worthy source and he has mentioned that the story circulated widely in Damascus.”); Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ az-zuhūr, 1:380–81 (quoting as-Suyūṭī); Wiet, Le Traité des famines de Maqrīzī, 40.

24 Berlin Arab no. 8788; edited in the appendix to this paper. 25 Arabischen Handschriften vol. 19/7 673b. Bellino, Tamim Al-Dari, 197–225 studied several man-

uscripts at the Stadtbibliothek zu Berlin (p. 208) but she doesn’t mention this particular one.26 Chauvin, Bibliographie des ouvrages arabes, 50–54.27 Bellino, Tamim Al-Dari, 209–210.28 Ahlwardt, Verzeichnis der arabischen Handschriften, Band 08/Buch 19 (mss. 8952–9361), (Berlin,

1896) 53a ms. 9069 mq 431, 53b ms. 9070,2 pet f. 111, 54a ms. 9070,4 we 743 f. 65 “from Ibn ʿAbbās”, 53b ms. 9070,1 pm 67 f. 137 “from ʿUmar b. al-Ḫaṭṭāb.”

Yehoshua Frenkel28

virile performances and summons the ǧinn.29 On the other hand, this very woman plays the role of the ideal Muslim wife. She is portrayed as a loyal woman that pa-tiently waits for her husband to return. She devotedly follows the instructions of the caliph and marries only after receiving his consent.30 In between, the story narrates the incidents experienced by Tamīm amongst the ǧinns and in remote lands.31 The plot is rich in details. The ʿ ifrīt carries him fast and high, which enables him to have a bird’s-eye view of the universe. His gaze encompasses unlimited distances and totalizes space and time, paramount features of utopian stories. Throughout his voyages he encounters ǧinns of two kinds: infidels and believers.32 Back on Earth Tamīm wanders along the shores of remote islands and faces severe dangers while sailing, two topics that were very popular in medieval marvel and utopia stories. The island is the setting of discovery; seafaring is the track of dangers and hazards. His experiences in these two environments resemble the prospects of the believer in the hereafter. On one side he faces the tortures of Hell. On the other side is Paradise. During his adventure Tamīm also talks with a person dressed in green (ḫaḍarī; is he al-Ḫidr/St. George/Elias?), who provides him with sound advice.33 Yet, the text also contains a hidden stratum, in which the plot transmits a subversive message. In the case of a crisis, the woman is the one who finds the right solution. It is due to her that the story ends with a happy end. Since the narrator is occupied by performing an amusing and moralistic fiction, he is not troubled by questions of truth or reality; these are matters that engage historians. While reading the text I was troubled by the question why Tamīm was selected to perform the major role in this legendary story. I assume that a precise answer is beyond our reach. Yet, circumstantial evi-dence may provide some clues. Ibn an-Nadīm al-Warrāq mentions in his catalogue a work named: “k. at-Tamīmī wa-t-tamīmiyya allaḏī taʿāhadū.” This indicates that a certain Tamīm was the hero of an Abbasid adventures stories.34 Moreover in the ḥadīṯ transmitted above Tamīm’s vessel landed on a remote and mysterious island where he met with the hairy female creature that is said to spy for the Daǧǧāl. In this genre Tamīm is depicted as a pious ṣaḥābī, a man involved in travels, sailing and maritime stories. Tamīm’s adventures in the qiṣṣa described here are akin. He was

29 On the summoning of spirits see Abu-Lughod, Writing women’s worlds, 38: “Well, there was a ravine and I would go over and sit there all day. I sat next to it saying, ‘Possess me, spirits, possess me.’ I wanted the spirits to possess me, I wanted to go crazy.”

30 In most texts unnamed. In Berlin ms. Arab 8788 she is named Ġamra bt. Āmir al-Ānṣariyya.31 This episode resembles a story in the One Thousand and One Nights. A bride was kidnapped by

an ʿifrīt while her procession travelled to the house of her groom. The ʿifrīt used to cohabit with her every tenth night. Halflants, Le Conte du Portefaix, 208, 209.

32 On the motive of “voyages merveilleux” see Bellino, Tamim Al-Dari, 215.33 Al-Ḫiḍr or al-Ḫaḍir (the green man) is commonly associated with the Qurāʾnic story (Q: 18.60–82).

Ibn al-Anbārī, az-Zāhir, 2: 163–164; and cf. Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, az-Zahr al-naḍir, 100, 171, 177–78; s.v. Wensinck, Khaḍir.

34 Is it possible to connect it to the platonic love (al-ḥubb al-ʿuḏrī/al-ġazal al-ʿuḏrī)? EI2, X:774–7776 (by Renate Jacobi); and Al Harthi, I Never touched Her.


kidnapped by a hairy creature, transferred to a remote island, encountered mysteri-ous beings and remarried with his wife. Moreover, she was on the brink of marrying a man from the ʿUḏra clan, the same tribe that is mentioned in the ḥadīṯ ḫurāfa.

3 Summary

From these pieces of information I deduce that the character of Tamīm went through a process of actualization. The narrators transported him from the leaves of chronicle and ḥadīṯ collections to play the role of a popular hero in a romance that aimed not only to amuse the audiences, but also to provide them with social and religious guidelines. Tamīm was selected to serve as the ideal type and so was his wife. Qiṣṣat Tamīm ad-Dārī is a Volksbuch, which was framed in a pseudo-ḥadīṯ form and transmitted orally and in writing. It was received by the Mamluk audi-ences because the narrative responded to their social and emotional needs. The story amused them and provided them with ideals to be followed. It informed them about remote lands and transmitted values and norms. Yet, the popular story did not eliminate the presence of the loyal wife and even gave her the opportunity to express subversive positions. In this manner the listeners and readers learned about gender practices and values. Also at least one version of the romance was copied at the last years of the sultanate;35 it does not mention sultans, coins or institutions that are identified with the sultanate of Egypt and Syria. Indeed, nothing in the narrative makes it “a Mamluk story” and its definition as such rests upon hypothet-ical evaluation and several concrete facts. The partial obliteration of dividing lines between the ruling elite and the popular classes is clearly visible in the chronicles.36 Tamīm is nicknamed “the kidnapped” only in Mamluk sources, not previously; the plot resembles to a considerable degree episodes in the Thousand and One Nights, a popular epic that was copied in the realm of the Mamluks. The years of this re-gime witnessed growing literacy among city dwellers and the diffusion of colloquial communication that infiltrated the high language of scholars.

35 The colophon of Berlin Ms. Arab 8788 says that it was copied by ʿAlī b. Aḥmad al-Ṣāliḥī on 25 Muḥarram 917 (24 April 1511), that is to say during the last decade of the sultanate. It is an east-ern handwriting compared to most manuscripts that were written in western (maġribī) handwrit-ing.

36 Documented very recently by Behrens-Abouseif, Craftsmen, upstarts and Sufis, 375 –395.

Yehoshua Frenkel30

Bibliography

Al-Anbārī, Muḥammad b. al-Qāsim (271–327/884–940), aẓ-Ẓāhir fī maʿānī kalimāt an-nās, ed. Ḥ. aḍ-Ḍāmin, Baġdād 1987.

Ad-Dimašqī, Muḥammad Šams ad-Dīn (654–727/1256–1327), Nuḫbat ad-dahr fī ʿaǧāʾib al-barr wa-l-baḥar, ed. A. F. M. von Mehern, St. Petersburg 1865.

Al-Ǧāḥiẓ, Abū ʿUṯmān ʿAmr b. Baḥr b. Maḥbūb (160–255/776–868), al-Buḫalāʾ, ed. G. van Vloten, Tria opuscula auctore Abu Othman Amr ibn Bahr al-Djahiz Basrensi, Leiden 1903.

Ibn al-Aṯīr, ʿ Izz ad-Dīn ʿ Alī b. Abū l-Karam Muḥammad al-Ǧazīrī (555–630/1160–1233), al-Kāmil fī t-taʾrīḫ, ed. ad-Daqqāq, Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya 1424/2003.

Ibn al-Ǧazarī, Šams ad-Dīn Muḥammad b. Ibrāhīm (658–739/1259–1338), Taʾrīḫ Ibn al-Ǧazarī al-musammā ḥawādiṯ az-zamān wa-anbāʾihi wa-wafayāt al-akābir wa-l-aʿyān min abnāʾihi al-maʿrūf bi-taʾrīḫ Ibn al-Ǧazarī, ed. A. at-Tadmūrī, Beirut: al-Maktaba al-ʿAṣriyya 1419/1998.

Ibn al-Wardī, Sirāǧ ad-Dīn (861/ 1457), Ḫarīdat al-aǧāʾib wa-farīdat al-ġarāʾib, (The Pearl of Wonders and the Uniqueness of Strange Things), ed. M. Faḫūrī, Aleppo 1411/1991.

Ibn Furāt, Nāṣir ad-Dīn Muḥammad b. ʿAbd ar-Raḥīm (735–807/1334–1405), Taʾrīḫ Ibn al-Furāt, ed. Q. Zurayq, Beirut: AUB 1936.

Ibn Ḥaǧar al-ʿAsqalānī, Šihāb ad-Dīn Aḥmad b. ʿ Alī (773–852/1372–1449), az-Zahr an-naḍir fī ḥāl al-ḫaḍir, Kuwait 2004.

Ibn Hišām, Abū Muḥammad ʿ Abd al-Malik (213/828), Kitāb at-tīǧān fī mulūk Ḥimyar, Ṣanʿa: Markaz ad-Dirāsāt wa-l-Buḥūṯ al-Yamanī 1979/2008.

Ibn Iyās, Muḥammad b. Aḥmad al-Ḥanafī (852–930/1448–1524), Badāʾiʿ az-zuhūr fī waqāʾiʿ ad-duhūr, [Die Chronik des Ibn Ijas] (The Amazing Flowers about the Events of the Times), ed. M. Mustafa, reprinted, Cairo: Dār al-Kutub 2008.

Ibn Taġrībirdī, Abū l-Maḥāsin Ǧamāl ad-Dīn Yūsuf (813–874/1411–1470), an-Nuǧūm az-zāhira fī mulūk Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira, Cairo 1929–1949.

Ibn Ṭayfūr, Aḥmad b. Abū Ṭāhir (204–280/819–893), Kitāb Baġdād, Beirut: Dār al-Ǧinān, no date, ed. H. Keller, Sechster Band des Kitab Baġdad von Ahmed ibn Abi Ṭahir Ṭaifur Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz 1908.

Al-Maqrīzī, Taqī d-Dīn Aḥmad b. ʿAlī (766/1364–845/1441), as-Sulūk li-maʿrifat duwal al-mulūk, eds. M. M. Ziyāda and ʿĀšūr, Cairo: Maṭbaʿat Dār al-Kutub 1934–73.

An-Nuwayrī, Šihāb ad-Dīn Aḥmad (677–733/1278–1333), Nihāyat al-arab fī funūn al-adab, ed. I. al-Arinī, Cairo 1992.

Aṭ-Ṭabarī, Abū Ǧaʿfar Muḥammad b. Ǧarīr (224–310/838–923), Taʾrīḫ ar-rusul wa-l-mulūk, ed. M. J. De Goeje (Leiden, 1879); ed. M. A. Ibrahim (Cairo, 1386/1967); Clifford Edmund Bosworth (trans.), The History of al-Tabari, vol. 32: The Reunification of the ʿAbbasid Caliphate: The Caliphate of al-Maʾmun A.D. 813–833/A.H. 198–218, Albany SUNY 1987.

Abu-Lughod, Lila, Writing women’s worlds: Bedouin stories, The University of California Press 1993.

Ahlwardt, Wilhelm, Verzeichnis der arabischen Handschriften, Berlin 1887–1899.Bauer, Thomas, Art. “ʿIfrīt,” in: Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, 2:486–487, Brill 2003.Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, “Craftsmen, upstarts and Sufis in the late Mamluk period,” Bulletin

of the School of Oriental and African Studies 74/3 (2011), pp. 375 395.Bellino, Francesca, “Tamim Al-Dari – The Intrepid Traveller: Emergence, Growth and Making

of a Legend in Arabic Literature,” Oriente Moderno 89/2 (2009), pp. 197–225.Celhold, J., Art. “ʿifrīt,” in: EI², 3:1050–1051.Chauvin, V., Bibliographie des ouvrages arabes ou relatifs aux Arabes publiés dans l’Europe

chrétienne de 1810 à 1885, Liège-Leipzig 1903.


Doufikar-Aerts, Faustina, Alexander Magnus Arabicus, Peeteers 2010.Gilliot, Claude, “Le Coran: trois traductions récentes,” Studia Islamica 75 (1992), pp. 159–177.Halflants, Bruno, Le Conte du Portefaix et des Trois Jeunes Femmes dans le manuscript de

Galland (XIVe-XVe siècles), Louvain la Neuve 2007.Heath, Peter, “A Critical Review of Modern Scholarship on ‘Sīrat ʿAntar ibn Shaddād’ and

the Popular Sīra,” Journal of Arabic Literature 15 (1984), pp. 19–44.Heath, Peter, Art. “Sīra shaʿbiyya,” in: EI², 9:664–665.Herzog, Thomas, Geschichte und Imaginaire, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2006.Lazarus-Yafeh, Hava, Some Religious Aspects of Islam, Leiden 1981.Le Strange, Guy, Palestine under the Muslims, London 1890.Macdonald, D., Art. “Djinn,” in: EI², 2:546–548.Meloy, John, “Celebrating the Mahmal: The Rajab Festival in Fifteenth Century Cairo,”

in: History and historiography of post-Mongol Central Asia and the Middle East. Studies in Honor of John E. Woods, eds. Judith Pfeiffer and Sholeh A. Quinn, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz 2006, pp. 404–428.

Paret, Rudi, Art. “Sīrat Baybars,” in: EI2, 1:1126–1127.Saritoprak, Zeki. “The Legends of al-Dajjal (Antichrist) – The Personification of Evil in the

Islamic Tradition,” Muslim World 93 (2003), pp. 291–307.Taylor, John B., “Some Aspects of Islamic Eschatology,” Religious Studies 4 (1968), pp. 57–76.Watt, Montgomery W., Bell’s Introduction to the Qurʾān, Edinburgh University Press 1970.Wensinck, A. J., Art. “Khaḍir,” in: EI², 4:902–905.Wiet, Gaston, “Le Traité des famines de Maqrīzī,” Journal of the Economic and Social History

of the Orient 5/1 (1962), pp. 1–90.Wust, Efraim, A Catalogue of the Arabic manuscripts in the A.S. Yahuda collection at the Jewish

national and university library in Jerusalem, Jerusalem 1997.

history and society during the mamluk period (1250–1517)

Documents