Inscriptions of the Medieval Islamic World 9781474489447, 9781474489461, 9781474489478

Table of contents :
Contents
Figures
Tables
The Contributors
Series Editor’s Foreword
Acknowledgements
CHAPTER ONE Introduction
PART I INSCRIPTIONS AND ROYAL POWER
CHAPTER TWO The Fatimid Public Text Revisited
CHAPTER THREE Micro and Macro Power Projection in the Medieval Islamic World: The Architectural and Numismatic Epigraphic Evidence
CHAPTER FOUR The Monumental Inscriptions of the Great Seljuqs Malikshāh and Tutush: Observations on Texts, Protocols and Writing Styles
CHAPTER FIVE New Epigraphic Data from a Ghurid Monument at Chisht-i Sharif: Expressing Power and Piety in Sixth/Twelfth-Century Afghanistan
PART II INSCRIPTIONS AND PIETY
CHAPTER SIX Stars and Symmetry: The Name of the Prophet Muh∙ ammad in Architectural Inscriptions
CHAPTER SEVEN Barakat Muḥammad: Notes on Square Kufic Epigraphy in the History of Morocco
CHAPTER EIGHT Islamic Supplications in the Funerary Architecture of Medieval Castile
CHAPTER NINE The Shaykh and the Amir: Reflections on the non-Qur'anic Epigraphic Programme in the Buildings of Shaykhū al-'Umarī al-Nāṣirī
PART III INSCRIPTIONS, HISTORY AND SOCIETY
CHAPTER TEN Tombstones from Aswan in the British Museum
CHAPTER ELEVEN Marwanid Inscriptions
CHAPTER TWELVE The Rise of New Epigraphic Languages in the Medieval Islamic East: The Interplay of Persian, Turkish and Arabic on Inscriptions
CHAPTER THIRTEEN Inscriptions from the Golden Horde Period and the Crimean Khanate in Crimea: A Body of Hitherto Neglected Material within the Study of the Inscriptions of Islamic Lands
PART IV INSCRIBED OBJECTS
CHAPTER FOURTEEN The Epigraphic Samarra Horizon: Blue-on-White Ceramics
CHAPTER FIFTEEN Art with Poetry: Inscriptions on Mamluk Metalwork
CHAPTER SIXTEEN ‘The Calligrapher is An Ape!’ Arabic Epigrams on Pen Boxes (Sixth/ Twelfth–Ninth/Fifteenth Centuries)
CHAPTER SEVENTEEN Between the Artist and the Patron: Painted Inscriptions of the Khamsa of Shah Ṭahmāsb
PART V EPIGRAPHIC STYLE AND FUNCTION
CHAPTER EIGHTEEN The Influence of Aesthetics on Orthographic Decisions in the Early Islamic Graffiti of Wadi al-Khirqa, Northern Hijaz
CHAPTER NINETEEN The Here and the Hereafter: Rounded and Angular Inscriptions in Medieval Syria, Anatolia and the Jazira
CHAPTER TWENTY Luted Letters: The Relief Inscriptions on Kashan Lustre Mihrabs
CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE Carved Letters, Designs and Ornaments: Ilkhanid Stuccos and the ‘Signatures’ of their Craftsmen
CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO The Qutb Minar: Epigraphic Notes
Index

Citation preview

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC WORLD

Edinburgh Studies in Islamic Art Series Editor: Professor Robert Hillenbrand Advisory Editors: Bernard O’Kane and Scott Redford Series titles include: Isfahan and its Palaces: Statecraft, Shiism and the Architecture of Conviviality in Early Modern Iran Sussan Babaie The Making of the Artist in Late Timurid Painting Lamia Balafrej Text and Image in Medieval Persian Art Sheila S. Blair The Minaret Jonathan M. Bloom The Manuscript Tradition of the Islamic West: MaghribÈ Round Scripts and the AndalusÈ Identity Umberto Bongianino Reframing the Alhambra: Architecture, Poetry, Textiles and Court Ceremonial Olga Bush The Seljuqs and their Successors: Art, Culture and History Edited by Sheila R. Canby, Deniz Beyazit and Martina Rugiadi The Wonders of Creation and the Singularities of Painting: A Study of the Ilkhanid London QazvÈnÈ Stefano Carboni The Making of Islamic Art: Studies in Honour of Sheila Blair and Jonathan Bloom Edited by Robert Hillenbrand Islamic Manuscripts of Late Medieval Rum, 1270–1370: Production, Patronage and the Arts of the Book Cailah Jackson Islamic Chinoiserie: The Art of Mongol Iran Yuka Kadoi Rum Seljuq Architecture, 1170–1220: The Patronage of Sultans Richard P. McClary Medieval Monuments of Central Asia: Qarakhanid Architecture of the 11th and 12th Centuries Richard P. McClary The Dome of the Rock and its Mosaic Inscriptions Marcus Milwright Meaning in Islamic Art: Studies in Honour of Bernard O’Kane Heba Mostafa The Shrines of the Alids in Medieval Syria: Sunnis, Shiis and the Architecture of Coexistence Stephennie Mulder Inscriptions of the Medieval Islamic World Edited by Bernard O’Kane, A. C. S. Peacock and Mark Muehlhaeusler Rumi ­A Life in Pictures John Renard China’s Early Mosques Nancy Shatzman Steinhardt edinburghuniversitypress.com/series/esii

INSCRIPTIONS OF THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC WORLD Edited by Bernard O’Kane, A. C. S. Peacock and Mark Muehlhaeusler

Edinburgh University Press is one of the leading university presses in the UK. We publish academic books and journals in our selected subject areas across the humanities and social sciences, combining cutting-edge scholarship with high editorial and production values to produce academic works of lasting importance. For more information visit our website: edinburghuniversitypress.com © editorial matter and organisation Bernard O’Kane, A. C. S. Peacock and Mark Muehlhaeusler, 2023 © the chapters their several authors, 2023 Jacket images: (front) Yazd, Friday Mosque, mihrab and qibla wall, (back) Yazd, Friday Mosque, detail of mihrab with a medallion incorporating ‘Muhammad’ and ‘Ali’. Images courtesy of Bernard O’Kane Jacket design: Stuart Dalziel. Series design concept: Cathy Sprent Edinburgh University Press Ltd The Tun – Holyrood Road 12 (2f) Jackson’s Entry Edinburgh EH8 8PJ Typeset in Trump Medieval by Cheshire Typesetting Ltd, Cuddington, Cheshire, and printed and bound in Great Britain A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978 1 4744 8944 7 (hardback) ISBN 978 1 4744 8946 1 (webready PDF) ISBN 978 1 4744 8947 8 (epub) The right of Bernard O’Kane, A. C. S. Peacock and Mark Muehlhaeusler to be identified as editors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 (SI No. 2498).

Contents

List of Figures List of Tables The Contributors Series Editor’s Foreword Acknowledgements CHAPTER 1 Introduction Bernard O’Kane and A. C. S. Peacock

viii xx xxi xxvi xxvii 1

PART I  INSCRIPTIONS AND ROYAL POWER CHAPTER 2  The Fatimid Public Text Revisited Jonathan M. Bloom CHAPTER 3  Micro and Macro Power Projection in the Medieval Islamic World: The Architectural and Numismatic Epigraphic Evidence Richard P. McClary CHAPTER 4  The Monumental Inscriptions of the Great Seljuqs Malikshåh and Tutush: Observations on Texts, Protocols and Writing Styles Roberta Giunta CHAPTER 5  New Epigraphic Data from a Ghurid Monument at Chisht-i Sharif: Expressing Power and Piety in Sixth/Twelfth-Century Afghanistan Viola Allegranzi

17

38

57

81

vi

contents

PART II  INSCRIPTIONS AND PIETY CHAPTER 6  Stars and Symmetry: The Name of the Prophet Mu˙ammad in Architectural Inscriptions Bernard O’Kane

115

CHAPTER 7  Barakat Mu˙ammad: Notes on Square Kufic Epigraphy in the History of Morocco Péter T. Nagy and Umberto Bongianino

146

CHAPTER 8  Islamic Supplications in the Funerary Architecture of Medieval Castile Razan Francis

173

CHAPTER 9  The Shaykh and the Amir: Reflections on the non-Quranic Epigraphic Programme in the Buildings of ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ211 Noha Abou-Khatwa PART III  INSCRIPTIONS, HISTORY AND SOCIETY CHAPTER 10  Tombstones from Aswan in the British Museum241 Venetia Porter CHAPTER 11  Marwanid Inscriptions Carole Hillenbrand CHAPTER 12  The Rise of New Epigraphic Languages in the Medieval Islamic East: The Interplay of Persian, Turkish and Arabic on Inscriptions A. C. S. Peacock CHAPTER 13  Inscriptions from the Golden Horde Period and the Crimean Khanate in Crimea: A Body of Hitherto Neglected Material within the Study of the Inscriptions of Islamic Lands Nicole Kançal-Ferrari and Fatma M. S¸en

264

283

324

PART IV  INSCRIBED OBJECTS CHAPTER 14  The Epigraphic Samarra Horizon: Blue-on-White Ceramics Rebecca Wrightson

363

vii

contents

CHAPTER 15  Art with Poetry: Inscriptions on Mamluk Metalwork389 Doris Behrens-Abouseif CHAPTER 16  ‘The Calligrapher is an Ape!’ Arabic Epigrams on Pen Boxes (Sixth/Twelfth–Ninth/Fifteenth Centuries) Frédéric Bauden

436

CHAPTER 17  Between the Artist and the Patron: Painted Inscriptions of the Khamsa of Shah Êahmåsb535 Selin Ünlüönen PART V  EPIGRAPHIC STYLE AND FUNCTION CHAPTER 18  The Influence of Aesthetics on Orthographic Decisions in the Early Islamic Graffiti of Wadi al-Khirqa, Northern Hijaz Risa Tokunaga CHAPTER 19  The Here and the Hereafter: Rounded and Angular Inscriptions in Medieval Syria, Anatolia and the Jazira Scott Redford

559

583

CHAPTER 20  Luted Letters: The Relief Inscriptions on Kashan Lustre Mihrabs Sheila Blair

606

CHAPTER 21  Carved Letters, Designs and Ornaments: Ilkhanid Stuccos and ‘Signatures’ of their Craftsmen Ana Marija Grbanovic

642

CHAPTER 22  The Qutb Minar: Epigraphic Notes Robert Hillenbrand

671

Index711

Figures

Map 13.1

Map of historical places in the Crimea with the epigraphic material discussed

325

Figures 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 3.1

Carved stone inscription from the Bir al-Watawit, Cairo20 Carved plaster inscription from the mosque of Nayin 21 Carved stone inscription on the façade of the mosque of Bu Fatata, Sousse, 838–41 24 Carved stone inscription on the façade of the mosque of Mu˙ammad b. KhayrËn (Mosque of the Three Doors), Kairouan, 866–7 25 Carved stone inscription around the courtyard of the Congretational Mosque of Sousse 27 Carved stone inscription around the lunette over the Båb al-Wuzarå (Vizier’s Gate) at the Great Mosque, Córdoba28 Cut brick inscription on the façade of the mosque of Bab Mardum, Toledo 29 Portal of the Congretational Mosque of Mahdia, showing possible location of inscriptions 31 Mutilated Fatimid or Zirid inscription on the façade of the Great Mosque of Sfax 32 Inscription in the name of Robert Guiscard on the façade of the Duomo (San Matteo) of Salerno 35 Exterior and interior of the Shah Fazl tomb (447–51/1055–60), Safid Buland, Kyrgyzstan 40

ix

figures

3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10

3.11 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 6.1

Southwest corner of the interior of the Shah Fazl tomb42 Stucco roundel on the right side of the south wall in the Shah Fazl tomb and a Qarakhanid dirham naming Naßr b. AlÈ, minted in Uzgend in 398/1007–8 43 Samanid dirham naming Naßr II b. A˙mad, minted in Shash (Tashkent), Uzbekistan in 318/930–1 with Quran 9:33 around the edge 45 Qarakhanid copper fals, minted in Ilaq, near Shash (Tashkent) in 395/1004–5 46 Central roundel over the entrance to the al-Aqmar mosque, Cairo, Egypt 48 Al-Aqmar roundel and Fatimid dinar dated 518/1124, naming al-ManßËr48 Fragmentary pair of lions on the upper section of the portal of the Izz al-DÈn KaykåËs hospital, Sivas, Turkey51 Epigraphic sun and moon roundels on the spandrels of the east Èwån of the Izz al-DÈn KaykåËs hospital 52 Rum Seljuq tile with anthropomorphised sun, from Kubadabad palace (Karatay Madrasa Museum, Konya) and a silver dirham minted in Sivas in 640/1242–3 naming Ghiyåth al-DÈn Kaykhusraw II 52 Rum Seljuq gold dinar naming Ghiyåth al-DÈn Kaykhusraw II 53 The two domed structures in Chisht-i Sharif, view from the south 82 The two domed structures in Chisht-i Sharif, view from the northeast 82 The northeastern domed structure (structure B), view from the southwest 84 The inscription on the right-hand jamb of the portal of structure B (No. 1a) 89 The inscription on the left-hand jamb of the portal of structure B (No. 1b) 89 Sections of the south archway (with inscription No. 2b) and of the west wall of structure B 90 The plasterwork on the middle section of the west wall of structure B 91 Section of the secular inscription inside structure A, containing the laqab ‘Shams al-dunya wa’l-dÈn’91 View on the west wall of structure B, with inscriptions Nos. 3–9, 12–13 92 View of the west wall of structure B, with inscriptions Nos. 3b, 5, 6b, 7, 9–14 93 a) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü (early eighth/ fourteenth century): detail of exterior tile; b) gallery

x

figures

6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5

6.6

6.7 6.8 6.9

6.10

6.11

6.12

7.1

stucco; c): interior painted plaster; d) Natanz, Friday mosque, painted plaster of dome chamber 116 Linjan, Shrine of Pir-i Bakran (712/1312–13), engaged column; drawing, reciprocal Mu˙ammad (after Sakkal)118 Taybad, funerary mosque of Zayn al-DÈn (848/1444–5)119 a) Sava, Friday Mosque, early tenth/sixteenth century; b) Amasya, Beyazid Pa∞a mosque (817/1414) 121 Drawings of chahår Mu˙ammad and AlÈ in square Kufic as on the lower photographs; as in Bidar, mausoleum of A˙mad Shåh (839/1436); Bitlis, S¸erifiye mosque (935/1529); Diyarbakır, Safa Mosque (second half of ninth/fifteenth century) 121 Drawing of chahår Mu˙ammad and AlÈ in square Kufic; Cairo, mausoleum of QalåwËn (683/1284); Cairo, khånqåh of Sad al-DÈn b. Ghuråb (c. 803–8/1400–6) 122 Drawing of shish AlÈ (after Sakkal); Kayseri Sultan Han (634/1237); Cairo, mausoleum of Shaykh Zayn al-DÈn YËsuf (697/1298) 123 Samarqand, Ustad Nafasi mausoleum (c. 782/1380); Istanbul Çinili Kiosk (877/1473); scroll, Topkapı Saray Library (ninth/fifteenth century) 125 a) Yazd, Friday mosque (777/1375–6); b) Istanbul, Sakıp Sabancı Museum, Hilye, Istanbul (?) c. 1750–1800, inv. no. 400; c) London, Khalili Collection, Hilye, Istanbul (?) (1322/1904–5); d–e) Cairo, Bab al-Akhdar (549/1154–5); f) Damascus, Great Mosque (668/1269)125 a) Zuzan, madrasa (616/1219); b) Ashtarjan Friday Mosque (715/1315); c) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü (early eighth/fourteenth century), gallery; d) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü, interior 126 a) Tercan, mausoleum of Mama Khatun (mid-seventh/thirteenth century); b) Konya, Sahib Ata mausoleum (656/1258); c) Bey∞ehir, E∞refoÌlu mosque (696/1297) 127 a) Cairo, mashhad of al-Juyushi (1085); b) Cairo, shrine of Sayyida Ruqayya (572/1135); c) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü; d) Malatya, Great Mosque (621/1224); e) Kirman Friday Mosque (750/1350); f) Yazd, mausoleum of Rukn al-Din (725/1325); g) Turbat-i Jam, main Èwån (first quarter of eighth/ fourteenth century); h) Muradiye mosque (1435) 128 Entrance to the prayer hall, Great Mosque of Paris, 1926147

xi

figures

7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 8.1 8.2

8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9 8.10 8.11 8.12 8.13 8.14 8.15 8.16

Northwest side of the minaret, AbË Madyan mosque, al-Ubbad (Tlemcen), 739/1339 150 Southwest side of the minaret, Sharabliyyin mosque, Fez, mid-eighth/fourteenth century (?) 151 Southwest side of the courtyard, Buinaniyya madrasa, Meknes, 736/1335–6 153 Northwest side of the northeast ramp, Qantarat al-Fallus bridge, Beht River, Khemisset Province, mid-eighth/fourteenth century (?), vandalised in 2017 155 Lower part of the southeast façade, Manara pavilion, Marrakesh, 1286/1869–70 161 Central part of the anaza (‘secondary mi˙råb’), Bab al-Gisa mosque, Fez, c. 1109/1698 (?) 163 Gilt-stamped leather binding, al-JazËlÈ, Dalåil al-Khayråt, thirteenth/nineteenth century (?) 165 Calligraphic panel with iconic images, made by A˙mad al-TådilÈ al-Ribå†È, 1350/1932 166 Embroidered silk cover for the cenotaph of Mawlåy IdrÈs II, dated 1273/1856–7 167 Vault with peacocks (detail), cloister of San Fernando 177 Fragment of silk compound twill with confronted peacocks, from the Chasuble of Saint Exupéry from the Church of St Sernin, Toulouse, possibly made in Almería, Spain, 1100–50 178 Maqbariyya of Maryam bint AbÈ Jafar, 618/1221179 Sacristy wooden door, Las Huelgas 180 Pasaje vault stucco decoration 181 Hafsid gold dinar, Bijaia, Algeria, 1257–74 182 Torreón de los Baños de la Cava, Toledo 184 Islamic column tombstone (amËd qabr), Torreón de los Baños de la Cava, Toledo 185 Tomb of Alfonso Pérez, Church of San Andrés, Toledo189 Islamic column tombstone (amËd qabr) uncovered in 1912 in the Church of San Andrés, Toledo 190 Tomb of Fernán Gudiel (d. 1278), Chapel of San Pedro, Toledo Cathedral 193 Tomb of Lupus Fernandi (d. 1312), Convento de la Concepción Francisca, Toledo 195 Tomb of Lupus Fernandi (d. 1312), Convento de la Concepción Francisca, Toledo 196 Detail, tomb of Lupus Fernandi (d. 1312), Convento de la Concepción Francisca, Toledo 197 Tombstone fragments with the phrase ‘al-yumn wa’l-iqbål’, Alcazaba Málaga, mid-thirteenth or fourteenth centuries 201 ‘Ears tombstone’ from Granada or Málaga 202

xii

figures

8.17

Visigothic plaque-niches, fifth–seventh century ad, Toledo204 8.18 Tombstone of Princess Badr, Córdoba, 496/1103 205 9.1 The sabÈl of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 144, 755/1354, foundation inscription216 9.2 The khanqah and mosque-madrasa of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ218 9.3 The mosque of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 147, 750/1349, panel above mihrab219 9.4 The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, foundation inscription above door 224 9.5 The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of first riwåq from courtyard, right side 226 9.6 The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of first riwåq from courtyard, left side 227 9.7 The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of second riwåq from courtyard, right side229 9.8 The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ alNåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, ceiling of second riwåq from courtyard, left side 231 9.9 The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of third riwåq from courtyard, qibla wall, right side 232 9.10 The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qåa probably used for ˙a∂ras, south of the qibla area, band beneath ceiling of qibla/east Èwån234 10.1 John Frederick Clifford Hunt (1897–1978). View of Aswan across the river photographed in 1917 242 10.2 John Frederick Clifford Hunt (1897–1978). Old town of Aswan showing the cemetery 246 10.3 Félix Teynard (1817–92). Assouan, Cimetière Arabe – Inscription Funéraires, 1851–2, printed 1853–4248 10.4 Marble tombstone engraved in the name of Sitt al-Fajr (or Fakhr) AshbånÈ, 554/ 1159 251

xiii

figures

10.5 10.6 10.7 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6 11.7 11.8 11.9 11.10 11.11 11.12 11.13 11.14 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 13.1

13.2

13.3

13.4

Sandstone tombstone engraved in the name of Få†ima bt. Jafar b. Mu˙ammad the dyer in 412/1021 258 Sandstone tombstone engraved in the name of Baraka bt. Óusayn b. Rizqallåh b. AlÈ b. Óusayn b. DaËd the goldsmith in 455/1063 259 Sandstone tombstone engraved in the name of Jafar b. A˙mad b. Abdallåh b. Mu˙ammad b. al-Qåsim al-TilåfÈ (?) in 421?/1030? 260 Amid, inscription of 426/1035–6 265 Map of Marwanid territories, from 990–1 to 1085–6 266 Mayyafariqin, walls 269 Amid, walls 270 Mayyafariqin, inscription of 391/1001 272 Amid, inscription of 426/1035–6 274 Amid, inscription of 42* a.h.275 Amid, inscription of 437/1045–6 275 Amid, inscription of 437/1045–6 275 Amid, inscription of 444/1052–3 276 Amid, inscription of 444/1052–3 276 Jerusalem, Marwanid inscription near Bab Hitta 277 Amid, inscription of 460/1067–8, drawing 279 Amid, inscription of 476/1083–4 279 The interior of the Shah Fazl mausoleum, with the Persian verse Kufic inscription at the top 292 Uzgend northern mausoleum: the Persian verse inscription in cursive 293 Uzgend northern mausoleum: Turkish titles on the Arabic Kufic inscription 293 The Umur Bey Turkish inscription, Bursa, Turkey 314 The Karsakpay inscription, currently held in the Hermitage, St Petersburg, Russia 316 Detail showing the name of the Golden Horde ruler Mu˙ammed Özbeg Khan in the foundation inscription on the entrance façade of the so-called Özbeg Khan Mosque 714/1314–15, Qirim 334 Slab from a well constructed by IdrÈs b. HåjjÈ Ya˙yå, dated Sha‘bån 760/June–July 1359, containing the names of Qutluq-TÈmËr Beg, son of the former amÈr Tuluk-TÈmËr, and the Golden Horde khan Ghiyåth al-DÈn Berdibeg Khan (r. 758/1357–760/1359), in the village of Otuz 336 Fragment of the inscription of the mausoleum of Khanike Khanım, daughter of the last Golden Horde khan, Toqtamish Khan (r. 780/1380–796/1396), dated 841/1438, Qirq-yer 338 In situ inscription on the mausoleum of BuyËde Sultan, the daughter of Acagan Beg, constructed

xiv

figures

13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9

13.10

13.11 13.12 13.13

14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 15.1 15.2 15.3

by her son, Mu˙ammedshah Beg, himself the son of Mu˙ammed Beg, late eighth/fourteenth or early ninth/fifteenth century, Eskiyurt 339 Inscription from a funerary monument today found inserted in the exterior façade of the Zincirli Medrese, Salaçik340 Tombstones in Qirim. Details of the stele of Shaykh Óusåm al-DÈn343 A cenotaph with a hadith in the Feodosia Antiquities Museum (eighth/fourteenth century). 343 Cenotaph from Qirim with an epitaph in Turkish (eighth/fourteenth–ninth/fifteenth century), Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg 344 Inscription on the entrance of the audience hall of the Khan’s Palace bearing the name of the khan ­responsible for its repair, Selåmet Geråy Hån, and also his father’s name, el-Hac SelÈm Geråy Hån, and the date 1156/1743–4, Bahçesaray 348 Detail of the eulogy in the so-called Golden (Fruit) Room of the Khan’s Palace in Ottoman Turkish in praise of the khan Kırım Geray (1129/1717–1182/1769), Bahçesaray 349 Tombstone of Mu߆afå Efendi, mufti of Kefe, beginning of the eleventh/seventeenth century, Feodosia Antiquities Museum 351 Fragment of an inscription originally from the nearby (old) Khan’s Palace, today incorporated into an arch of the Zincirli Madrasa, Salaçik 352 Chronogram poem (tårÈh manzËme) dated 1061 (1650–1) by the Ottoman poet CevrÈ Çelebi (d. 1065/1654) from a fountain; today in a mihrab niche in the portico of the Khan’s Mosque, Kezlev (Yevpatoria)353 Fragments of a bowl with green splashes and blue inscription, third/ninth century, Iraq, Ctesiphon 370 Bowl with epigraphic decoration, third/ninth century, Iraq371 Bowl emulating Chinese stoneware, third/ninth century, Iraq 374 Bowl with cobalt decoration on tin-glazed earthenware, third/ninth century, Basra, Iraq 375 Bowl with inscription, third/ninth century, Iraq 376 Bowl, third/ninth century, Iraq 380 Silvered basin, eighth/fourteenth century 399 Copper bowl with wine poetry, ninth/fifteenth century400 Rim of copper bowl 400

xv

figures

15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 15.8 15.9 15.10 15.11 15.12 15.13 16.1 16.2

16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.8 16.9 16.10 16.11 16.12 16.13 16.14 16.15 16.16 16.17 16.18 16.19 16.20 16.21 16.22

Tinned copper bowl with a date, early tenth/sixteenth century401 Lidded and gilded copper bowl, eighth/ fourteenth–ninth/fifteenth century 403 Tinned copper bowl, ninth/fifteenth century 408 Detail of tinned copper bowl with poem by Ibn Ójja409 Detail of inscription, tinned copper bowl, ninth/ fifteenth century 410 Bowl, ninth/fifteenth century 412 Copper bowl, eighth/fourteenth–ninth/fifteenth century415 Detail of inscription, eighth/fourteenth–ninth/ fifteenth century 416 Drawing of cartouche with poem by JËbån ibn MasËd on bowl at the Hermitage Museum, eighth/fourteenth century419 Unusual inscription on ninth/fifteenth–tenth/ sixteenth-century silver-inlaid bowl 424 A cross-legged ruler surrounded by the executive secretary holding the pen box and the sword holder  438 Eagle replaced by a five-petalled rosette on a Rasulid pen box; eagle on a Mamluk pen box made for one of QalåwËn’s sons; eagle on the frontispiece of a Mamluk manuscript dedicated to one of QalåwËn’s grandsons445 The cross-legged ruler and the astrological configuration472 Pen box 496 Pen box, Algiers 497 Pen box, Baghdad 499 Pen box, Bologna 500 Pen box, Copenhagen 502 Pen box, Doha 503 Pen box, L. A. Mayer Museum of Islamic Art 505 Pen box, Jerusalem 506 Pen box, Kuwait 507 Pen box, Kuwait 508 Pen box, London, British Museum 510 Pen box, London, Victoria and Albert Museum 512 Pen box, London, Victoria and Albert Museum 514 Pen box, London, Victoria and Albert Museum 515 Pen box, New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art 516 Pen box, Paris, Musée du Louvre 520 Pen box, Paris, Musée du Louvre 522 Ebony and ivory pen box 523 Silver and golden inlaid pen box 524

xvi

figures

16.23 16.24 16.25 17.1

Silver inlaid pen box and 525 Silver inlaid pen box 525 Silver inlaid pen box 526 ‘Khusraw Enthroned’, from the Khamsa of NiΩåmÈ, made for Shah Êahmåsb, Tabriz 946/ 1539–949/1543536 17.2 ‘Khusraw and ShÈrÈn listening to stories told by ShÈrÈn’s maidens’, from the Khamsa of NiΩåmÈ, made for Shah Êahmåsb, Tabriz 946/1539–949/ 1543539 17.3 Detail of Figure 17.2 541 17.4 Detail of Figure 17.2 542 17.5 Detail of Figure 17.2 544 17.6 ‘Isfandiyår Slays Arjåsp and Takes the Brazen Hold’, folio from the Shåhnåma of Shah Êahmåsb545 17.7 ‘Khusraw Listens to Bårbad Playing the Lute’, from the Khamsa of NiΩåmÈ, made for Shah Êahmåsb, Tabriz 946/1539–949/1543 546 17.8 Detail of Figure 17.7 547 17.9 Detail of Figure 17.7 548 17.10 Detail of Figure 17.7 550 17.11 Detail of Figure 17.7 551 18.1 Location of Wadi al-Khirqa 560 18.2 The graffito site of Wadi al-Khirqa 561 18.3 Concentration of early Islamic graffiti in Group I, Wadi al-Khirqa 561 18.4 Wadi al-Khirqa KhRQ-I-Ar 1, 24 and 26  568 18.5 Wadi al-Khirqa KhRQ-I-Ar 39, 47 and 52  569 18.6 Wadi al-Khirqa KhRQ-I-Ar 60 and 64  570 18.7 Wadi al-Khirqa KhRQ-I-Ar 85 and 87  571 18.8 Wadi al-Khirqa KhRQ-I-Ar 6, 25 and 49  577 18.9 Wadi al-Khirqa KhRQ-I-Ar 23 and GhBYY-Ar 8  579 19.1 Aleppo, Syria. Inscription of NËr al-DÈn ZangÈ from the mashhad of al-Mu˙assin, 541/1146 586 19.2 Ashkelon, Israel. Inscription from the talus in front of the Jaffa Gate. Fatimid, late fifth/eleventh or mid-sixth/twelfth century. Inscription reads ‘al-mulk li-llåh’587 19.3 Yazd, Iran. Tombstone of YËsuf b. AlÈ Salår al-DavånÈ. Steatite, dated 9 Safar 585/29 March 1189590 19.4 Aleppo, Syria. Mihrab of the Shadbakhtiyya madrasa. Ayyubid, 1193 595 19.5 Konya, Turkey. Alaeddin Camii. North façade 597 19.6 Sivas, Turkey. Gök Medrese, 1271–2. Detail showing uppermost stone module on right-hand minaret599

xvii

figures

19.7 20.1

20.2

20.3

20.4

20.5

20.6

20.7 20.8

20.9 20.10

20.11 20.12

Alanya, Turkey. Tersane (Arsenal). Inscription of Rum Seljuq sultan Alå al-DÈn Kayqubåd I above north entrance603 View of the tomb of Imam Ri‰å in the shrine at Mashhad from the early 1970s, showing the three main types of lustre tiles and the Mi˙råb-i pÈsh rË still in situ607 Mi˙råb-i pÈsh rË (‘mihrab before the face [of the Blessed One]’), made by AbË Zayd Mu˙ammad b. AbÈ Êåhir in RabÈ II 612/August 1215 for the tomb room in the Shrine of Imam Ri‰å at Mashhad and now moved to the shrine museum 608 Mi˙råb-i påÈn på (‘mihrab at the foot [of the Blessed One]’), made c. 1215 for the tomb room in the Shrine of Imam Ri‰å at Mashhad and now moved to the shrine museum 608 Mihrab made by AlÈ b. AbË Zayd Mu˙ammad b. AbÈ Êåhir in 640/1242–3 and moved from the Riwaq/ Masjid-i Bala Sar in the shrine of Imam Ri‰å to the shrine museum 610 Mihrab made by Óasan b. Arabshåh in Íafar 623/ February 1226 once installed in the Maydan Mosque at Kashan and now in the Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin 611 Mihrab made by AlÈ b. AbË Zayd Mu˙ammad b. AbÈ Êåhir in Shabån 663/May 1265 for the Imamzada Yahya at Varamin and now in the Doris Duke Foundation for Islamic Art, Honolulu 612 Mihrab made by YËsuf b. AlÈ on 1 Rama∂ån 734/5 May 1334 for the Dar-i Bihisht at Qum and moved to the National Museum of Iran, Tehran 613 Lustre tile in which the text in Kufic with interlaced stems containing Quran 2:255–7 reads in two directions below the frieze in thuluth with Quran 76:3–4618 Detail of the central niche in the mihrab made by Óasan b. Arabshåh in 623/1226 and now in the Museum für Islamische Kunst, Berlin 620 Black volcanic stone signed by Ma˙mËd b. Mu˙ammad al-JawharÈ and dated Mu˙arram 628/ November–December 1230 with the Quranic phrase fasayakfÈkahum Allåh in the centre 623 Detail of the central niche in the mihrab by AlÈ b. AbË Zayd Mu˙ammad in 663/1265 and now in the Doris Duke Foundation for Islamic Art, Honolulu 626 Set of three lustre tiles ordered by Shams al-DÈn Óusayn in 710/1310–11 629

xviii

figures

20.13 21.1 21.2 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 22.5 22.6 22.7 22.8 22.9 22.10

22.11 22.12 22.13 22.14 22.15 22.16 22.17 22.18 22.19

Set of three lustre tiles, dated Shawwål [70]9/March 1310, that probably served as the mihrab in the congregational mosque at Natanz 630 Map of monuments with signatures of Ilkhanid craftsmen646 Stucco mihrab in the Abu al-Hasan al-Kharaqani funerary complex 657 Qutb Minar: general view 672 Qutb Minar: general view with Ashokan pillar in foreground675 Ashokan pillar near Qutb Minar: upper articulation 676 Qutb Minar showing changes in articulation 677 Qutb Minar: fourth, fifth and sixth bands of the basement storey; the fourth band is historical in content, the fifth and sixth are Quranic678 Qutb Minar from the very top of the fourth band of the basement storey upwards (after Hürlimann) 679 Qutb Minar: first and second bands of the basement storey, general view 680 Ashokan pillar near Qutb Minar: devanagari inscription680 Qutb Minar: fifth and sixth bands of the basement storey, both Quranic in content; note the virtual absence of vegetal ornament 682 Qutb Minar: sixth band of the basement storey and both bands of the second storey: the lower band is historical in content and gives the titles and name of Ïltutmish; the upper band is Quranic682 Qutb Minar: upper and lower bands of the second storey684 Qutb Minar: second band of the basement storey showing broad and narrow guard bands framing the historical inscription 684 Qutb Minar: guard band immediately above the lowest inscription 685 Qutb Minar: narrow guard bands immediately below the second band of the basement storey 685 Qutb Minar: first and second bands of the basement storey, close-up view 686 Qutb Minar: third band of the basement storey; its content is Quranic686 Minaret of Jam (after Herrmann) 688 Ajmer, Adhål-din-ka-Jhomprå mosque: detail of qibla screen691 Delhi: Quwwat al-Islåm mosque, detail of Kufic inscription692

xix

figures

22.20 22.21 22.22 22.23 22.24 22.25 22.26 22.27 22.28 22.29 22.30 22.31 22.32 22.33 22.34 22.35 22.36 22.37 22.38 22.39 22.40 22.41

Delhi: Quwwat al-Islåm mosque, detail of cursive inscription693 Delhi: Quwwat al-Islåm mosque, detail of cursive inscription694 Qutb Minar, lowest band: detail 695 Qutb Minar: second band of the basement storey, detail696 Qutb Minar, lowest band: detail showing combination of unrelated blocks 696 Qutb Minar, lowest band: detail showing redundant cedilla below wåw697 Qutb Minar, lowest band: detail showing letter ­preceding kåf698 Qutb Minar: third band of the basement storey, detail 698 Qutb Minar, lowest band: detail 699 Qutb Minar, lowest band: detail 700 Qutb Minar: third band of the basement storey, detail 700 Qutb Minar: second band of the basement storey, detail701 Qutb Minar: second band of the basement storey, detail701 Qutb Minar: second band of the basement storey, detail702 Qutb Minar: third band of the basement storey, detail 702 Ribat-i Mahi, inscription 703 Ribat-i Sharaf, inscription 703 Qutb Minar: second band of the basement storey, detail704 Qutb Minar: second band of the basement storey 705 Qutb Minar, lowest band: detail 705 Qutb Minar: third band of the basement storey, detail 706 Qutb Minar: general view 707

Tables

4.1 Titles and laqabs attested in the inscriptions of Malikshåh and Tutush 4.2 Selected letters from Group A 4.3 Selected letters from Group B 4.4 Portions of Group C inscriptions 5.1 Inscriptions recorded in the northeastern domed structure (‘structure B’) at Chisht-i Sharif 10.1 The sandstone tombstones at the British Museum from Aswan 14.1 Script orientation diagram 14.2 Signature drawings 14.3 Two-line inscription drawings 14.4 Three-line inscription drawings 14.5 Catalogue of objects 16.1 List of the pen boxes and of the epigrams/formulas inscribed on them

69 74 75 77 86 253 367 369 377 378 381 465

The Contributors

Noha Abou-Khatwa is Adjunct Assistant Professor of Islamic Art and Architecture at the American University in Cairo. Her main research interests are the manuscript culture and architecture of the Mamluks. She earned her PhD from the University of Toronto in Islamic Art and Material Culture in 2017. Prior to that, she worked at the Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation, where she started and directed The Dar al-Kutub Manuscript Conservation Project and the Islamic Art Network. Viola Allegranzi is post-doctoral research fellow at the Institute of Iranian Studies of the Austrian Academy of Sciences (Vienna). In 2017, she obtained a joint PhD at the University Sorbonne Nouvelle and University of Naples ‘L’Orientale’, with a dissertation focused on the Persian inscriptions from Ghazni, Afghanistan. Her main fields of research are monumental epigraphy, Persian literature and historiography, and the material culture of Medieval Iran and Central Asia (eighth–fourteenth centuries). Frédéric Bauden is Professor of Arabic Language and Islamic Studies at Liège University (Belgium). His research focuses on Mamluk historiography, diplomatics and codicology. He is the editor of the Bibliotheca Maqriziana (Leiden) and, since 2018, the co-director of the Thesaurus d’épigraphie islamique. Doris Behrens-Abouseif is Professor Emerita at SOAS – University of London. She studied Islamic Art at the American University in Cairo, obtained her PhD from the University of Hamburg, and her ‘Habilitation’ from the University of Freiburg in Germany. She taught at AUC and the universities of Freiburg and Munich in Germany. From 2000 to 2014 she served as Nasser D. Khalili Chair of Islamic Art and Archaeology at SOAS. She is a member of the Academia

xxii

the contributors

Europaea. Her list of publications covers a wide range of subjects from the early period to the nineteenth century with focus on Egypt and Syria: history of Islamic architecture, urbanism, cultural history, concepts of aesthetics, Orientalism, material culture and the decorative arts. Sheila Blair retired from the Norma Jean Calderwood University Professorship of Islamic and Asian Art at Boston College and the Hamad bin Khalifa Endowed Chair in Islamic Art at Virginia Commonwealth University, positions she shared with her husband and colleague Jonathan Bloom. Together and separately, they have written or edited a score of books and hundreds of articles on all aspects of Islamic art. Her special interests are the uses of writing and the arts of the Mongol period. Jonathan Bloom was, until his retirement, the Norma Jean Calderwood University Professor of Islamic and Asian Art at Boston College and the Hamad bin Khalifa Endowed Chair of Islamic Art at Virginia Commonwealth University, positions he shared with his wife and colleague, Sheila Blair. Among his publications on many aspects of Islamic art and architecture, the most recent is Architecture of the Islamic West: North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula 700–1800 (2020). Umberto Bongianino is Departmental Lecturer in Islamic Art and Architecture at the Khalili Research Centre, University of Oxford. He has published articles on the Islamic facet of Norman Sicilian art, on Fatimid architecture and ceramics, and on the arts of the book in the medieval Maghrib and al-Andalus. His first monograph (2022) is titled The Manuscript Tradition of the Islamic West: Arabic Round Scripts and the AndalusÈ Identity. Razan Francis is a Visiting Scholar of Art History at the Institute of Medieval Studies of the Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. She specialises in the visual culture of the Islamic world, with a focus on Iberia and the Mediterranean. Her research explores the relationship of cultural identity and artistic practice in multi-ethnic and multireligious environments and the reception of Islamic artistic heritage in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Roberta Giunta is Full Professor of Islamic Archaeology and Art History and Islamic Epigraphy at the University of Naples L’Orientale. Since 1993 she has carried out archaeological and epigraphic research in many countries of the Near and Middle East; since 2004, she has been deputy director of the Italian Archaeological Mission in Afghanistan and since 2020 she has been director of the Italian Archaeological Mission at al-Balid

the contributors

(Dhofar, Oman). She is the author of several monographic studies and numerous papers. Ana Marija Grbanovic is a Research Associate and PhD Candidate in Islamic Art and Archaeology at the University of Bamberg. Her PhD research, Ilkhanid Stucco Revetments in Iran, c. 1256­–1335 Function, Meaning and Aesthetic Principles, is supervised by Lorenz Korn. Grbanovic obtained her MA in History of Art and Architecture of the Islamic Middle East at SOAS in 2014 and BA in Preservation of Artistic and Architectural Heritage from the University of Udine in 2012. Carole Hillenbrand was appointed Lecturer in Islamic history at Edinburgh University in 1979; she became Reader (1990) and Professor (2000–8). She was Professorial Fellow in Islamic History at St Andrews University from 2013 to 2021. She also held Visiting Fellowships at Dartmouth College, Groningen University and St Louis University. Her research output includes eight books, four edited books and many articles. In 2005 her book The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives won her the King Faisal Prize. In 2016 her book Islam: a new historical introduction won the Nayef Al-Rodhan Prize for Transcultural Understanding. Robert Hillenbrand, FBA, FRSE, Professor Emeritus of Islamic Art, Edinburgh University and Honorary Professor of Islamic Art, St Andrews University, has published eleven books, co-authored, edited or co-edited a further fourteen books, and published more than 180 articles. He has been Slade Professor at Cambridge; held visiting professorships at Princeton, UCLA, Bamberg, Dartmouth College, New York, Leiden, Cairo and Groningen; and organised ten conferences. He edits two series at Edinburgh University Press: Islamic Art and Architecture (sixteen volumes to date) and Collected Articles on Islamic Art. His interests focus on Islamic architecture (especially in Iran and Umayyad Syria), book painting and iconography. Nicole Kançal-Ferrari is associate professor at the Faculty of Architecture and Design at Marmara University, Istanbul. She is the author of several books, book chapters and articles on Turkish and Islamic art and architecture. Her interests include the material culture of the Northern Black Sea Region with a special focus on the Golden Horde and Crimean Khanates; the culture of death in the Ottoman environment; and Islamic visual and architectural culture and its agency. Richard P. McClary is a Senior Lecturer in Islamic Art and Architecture at the University of York. He received his doctorate

xxiii

xxiv

the contributors

from the University of Edinburgh. He has lectured extensively on medieval Islamic art and architecture, and has conducted fieldwork in India, Iran, Turkey, Central Asia and across the Middle East. He has published two monographs as well as articles in numerous journals and edited volumes. He is a trustee and the Research Director for the British Institute of Persian Studies. Mark Muehlhaeusler is an academic librarian and Director of the Center of Excellence for the Middle East and Arab Cultures at AUC Libraries. His research focuses on textual variation in Arabic literary papyri. Péter T. Nagy studied Arabic, Islamic art, and archaeology, and completed his DPhil at the University of Oxford (2021). His main interests include the architectural history of the Maghrib, on which he has published several articles; his doctoral thesis investigates the site of Shålla, Rabat and its fourteenth-century royal funerary complex. He now works for the National Museum of Qatar, conducting research on architecture and heritage. Bernard O’Kane is Professor of Islamic Art and Architecture at the American University in Cairo, where he has been teaching since 1980. He has also been a visiting professor at Harvard University and the University of California at Berkeley. He is the author of eleven books, among the most recent being Studies in Persian Architecture (2021) and Mosques: the 100 Most Iconic Islamic Houses of Worship (2019). A. C. S. Peacock is Bishop Wardlaw Professor of Islamic History at the University of St Andrews and a Fellow of the British Academy. He specialises in the pre-modern history and intellectual culture of the eastern Islamic world. Recent publications include Islam, Literature and Society in Mongol Anatolia (2019). Venetia Porter is Honorary Research Fellow at the British Museum, formerly Senior Curator for Islamic and Contemporary Middle East art and lead curator for the Albukhary Foundation Gallery of the Islamic World. She studied Arabic and Persian and Islamic Art at the University of Oxford, and her PhD from the University of Durham is on the history and architecture of Medieval Yemen. Her research and publications range from Yemeni history through Arabic inscriptions and amulets to contemporary art. Scott Redford is Nasser D. Khalili Professor of Islamic Art and Archaeology at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.

the contributors

Fatma M. Şen obtained her BA in the field of Turkish Language and Literature at Bo©aziçi University and her MA and PhD in Old Turkish Literature at Istanbul University. She has worked as a teacher at several schools and as a lecturer at the Istanbul University Institute of Turcology. She has edited and co-written multiple highschool textbooks on Turkish literature, edited a number of academic books, and worked as the editor of the journal Türkiyat Mecmuası. She has also published several scholarly articles and book chapters of her own, as well as translations from English to Turkish. She is currently teaching Turkish Islamic Literature at Yalova University and is a member of the editorial board of the journal Zemin. Her specialities are epigraphy, the history of Ottoman literature and culture and Turkish manuscripts. Risa Tokunaga is a Visiting Associate Professor at Kanazawa University, specialising in early Islamic Arabic and Ancient North Arabian graffiti. As a member of Saudi-Japanese missions in Tabuk province, she is conducting field surveys in search of the footsteps of ancient and medieval travellers and inhabitants of the desert. Selin Ünlüönen is the Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow in Islamic Art at Oberlin College. She received her PhD from Yale University in 2021. Rebecca Wrightson is a doctoral candidate at the Khalili Research Centre at the University of Oxford. Her work focuses on the epigraphic ceramics of the early Islamic world, including the aestheticisation of Arabic script, the socio-economic implications of ceramics as an artistic medium and the transmission of epigraphic traditions and ceramic technologies. She currently teaches art history at the University of Rhode Island.

xxv

Series Editor’s Foreword

Edinburgh Studies in Islamic Art is a venture that offers readers easy access to the most up-to-date research across the whole range of Islamic art. Building on the long and distinguished tradition of Edinburgh University Press in publishing books on the Islamic world, it is a forum for studies that, while closely focused, also open wide horizons. Books in the series concentrate in an accessible way, and – this is important – in clear, plain English devoid of technical jargon, on the art of a single century, dynasty or geographical area; on the meaning of works of art; on a given medium in a restricted time frame; or on analyses of key works in their wider contexts. A balance is maintained as far as possible between successive titles, so that various parts of the Islamic world and various media, periods and approaches are represented. Books in the series are academic monographs or composite volumes of intellectual distinction that mark a significant advance in the field. While they are naturally aimed at an advanced and graduate academic audience, a complementary target readership is the worldwide community of specialists in Islamic art – professionals who work in universities, research institutes, auction houses and museums – as well as that elusive character, the interested general reader. Professor Robert Hillenbrand

Acknowledgements

This volume has its origins in a conference entitled Inscriptions of the Islamic World held at the American University in Cairo in 2019, organised jointly by the AUC’s School of Libraries and Learning Technologies, the AUC Department of Arabic and Islamic Studies and the Centre for Anatolian and East Mediterranean Studies at the University of St Andrews. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Office of the Associate Provost for Research at AUC and, at St Andrews, the Centre for Anatolian and East Mediterranean Studies, the Honeyman Foundation and the Institute of Iranian Studies. We would like to thank the colleagues at AUC’s Rare Books and Special Collections Library – and in particular, Engy El Gammal and Assma Ismail – for the hard work, help and support in organising this conference.

‫‪In memory of‬‬ ‫‪Tariq Muehlhaeusler‬‬ ‫)‪(6.10.2000–7.10.2019‬‬ ‫َفما ل َِي ُبع ٌد بَعدَ ُبع ِد َك بَعدَ ما‬ ‫َوإِ ّني َوإِن أُه ِجرتُ َفال َهج ُر صاحِبي‬

‫رب َوالبُعدَ وا ِح ُد‬ ‫َت َي َّقنتُ أَنَّ القُ َ‬ ‫ب وا ِح ُد‬ ‫يف َيصِ ُّح ال َهج ُر َوال ُح ُّ‬ ‫َو َك َ‬

‫‪١‬‬ ‫‪٢‬‬

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction Bernard O’Kane and A. C. S. Peacock

The ubiquity of the written word on buildings and objects is one of the distinctive features of Islamic culture. Inscriptions, of course, are attested in numerous other civilisations, from ancient Greece to India, but they rarely have the prominence or visual impact of Islamic ones, even if they may be greater in number and richer in historical information. In a sense, then, Islamic inscriptions, which almost invariably will contain religious content or allusions, proclaim the distinctively Islamic character of a space even to an illiterate audience who would at least have recognised the script as that of the Quran, God’s word. However, inscriptions could also perform secular functions of proclaiming the title and ambitions of earthly kings, as well as more frivolous ones, in the form of verses that decorated objects and textiles from the Abbasid period onwards. Moreover, after the fifth/eleventh century inscriptions in tongues other than Arabic appear, such as Persian, Turkish and the Berber languages. These too fall traditionally within the scope of Islamic inscriptions. Furthermore, ‘Islamic’ inscriptions – either actually in Arabic or pseudepigraphic – appear in Christian contexts, such as monuments patronised by the post-reconquest rulers of Spain. Despite the intimate association of religion and epigraphy in the Islamic world, there is no simple definition of what constitutes an Islamic inscription, and the present volume aims in part to show the breadth of material. The study of inscriptions has traditionally been divided into two elements: an historical, philological approach that sought to record the text of inscriptions for historical data (and often neglected the religious content), and an art historical one. The earliest studies of Islamic epigraphy, exemplified by the magisterial volumes of Max van Berchem, focused on the historical information for patrons,

2

bernard o’kane and a. c. s. peacock

chronology and artists that inscriptions provided.1 Later work, such as that by Nikita Elisséeff, drew attention to the importance of inscriptions as sources for dynastic ideology and chancery protocol.2 This tradition was continued by the most comprehensive collection of Islamic inscriptions, the Repertoire chronologique d’épigraphie arabe, which records some 6,400 inscriptions on all media produced between 22/642 and 800/1398 but is far from complete.3 More seriously, though, the Repertoire neglects to give any information on, or illustrations of, the context in which an inscription appears. However, not long after van Berchem’s major works appeared, Samuel Flury’s many contributions showed an interest in aesthetics equal to considerations of dating.4 These two areas continued to be the focus of epigraphy for long after, but the chapters in this volume exemplify how much the field has expanded in the meantime. Today, together with geometric and vegetal ornamentation, inscriptions are usually recognised as one of the three main branches of decoration on Islamic art and architecture. Yet they have claim to be the most important. The single largest category of inscriptions over the whole field is those from the Quran. Indeed, the earliest Islamic manuscripts to have survived in quantity are Quranic, painstakingly calligraphed to match the holiness of their contents, an endeavour consistently lauded by jurists as that which is most pleasing to God. The Quran’s status in Islam as the eternal uncreated Word of God not only sanctifies the object on which it is placed, but on architecture also, it has been argued,5 paralleled figural images in a Christian context as a way of communicating (albeit in a much less strident fashion) the intimation of the Deity.

  1 Max van Berchem, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, part I: Égypte (Cairo: Mémoires de l‘Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1894–1903); idem. Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, part III: Asie Mineure, tome 1: Siwas, Diwrigi (Cairo, Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1917); Ernst Herzfeld, Inscriptions et monuments d’Alep, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, deuxième partie, Syrie du Nord, 2 vols (Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1955).   2 Nikita Elisséeff, ‘La titulature de NËr al-DÈn d’après ses inscriptions’, Bulletin d’études orientales 14 (1952–4): 155–96.   3 É. Combe, J. Sauvaget, G. Wiet et al. (eds), Répertoire chronologique d’épigraphie arabe (Cairo: IFAO, 1931–91).   4 Too many to list here, but see for example Samuel Flury, Die Ornamente der Hakim- und Ashar-Moschee, Materialen zur Geschichte der älteren Kunst des Islam (Heidelberg, 1912); idem, Islamisch Schriftbänder Amida-Diarbekr XI. Jarhundert (Basel, 1920); idem, ‘Le décor épigraphique des monuments de Ghazna’, Syria 6 (1925): 61–90.   5 Oleg Grabar, The Formation of Islamic Art (New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1987), p. 128.

introduction

Indeed, the practice of inscribing in the Arabic script is one of the great innovations brought about by Islam. Epigraphy was of course known both in Arabia and to Arabs in the Middle East. The pre-Islamic Arabic Ghassanid kings in Syria, for instance, erected inscriptions, but these were invariably in Greek. An extensive corpus of inscriptions survives in the ancient South Arabian script, and tens of thousands of graffiti in various Semitic dialects and scripts attest the existence of at least some basic literacy in pre-Islamic Arabia. There are some pre-Islamic Arabic inscriptions in scripts other than Arabic, such as Nabatean or even Greek. Yet very few inscriptions predate Islam that are written in Arabic and the Arabic script, and those few that do, it has been argued, represent the first glimmerings of the expression of a distinctive Arab identity.6 A handful of Arabic inscriptions (in Arabic script) from the mid-first/second century already seem to show a distinct development in orthography, perhaps related to reforms to clarify the Quranic text, although the corpus is so small it is hard to be certain these changes were not already underway before Islam. However, our earliest surviving Arabic Islamic monumental inscription, in the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem (itself also the earliest surviving Islamic architectural monument), is quite different from its rough and unsophisticated predecessors on tombs and in graffiti. Erected by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik in 72/692, its inscriptions employ a clear and proportioned Kufic for the first time on monuments, emulating Qurans of the period. The same script was also adopted by Abd al-Malik for his coinage, doing away with the Greek and Persian coins that had been in use to date, as well as the milestones he had put up.7 These changes in epigraphic practice were evidently bound up with Abd al-Malik’s broader policy of Islamisation and Arabisation, including making Arabic the sole language of the bureaucracy. This agenda was itself prompted by the need to unify the empire after the disastrous civil war that preceded Abd al-Malik’s reign, in which Umayyad forces had attacked Mecca. The employment of the new script on coins and architecture was thus the most public embodiment of a political and religious agenda   6 For these issues see Robert Hoyland, ‘Epigraphy and the Emergence of Arab Identity’, in Petra Sijpestein (ed.), From al-Andalus to Khurasan: Documents from the Medieval Muslim World (Leiden: Brill, 2006), pp. 219–42; Robert Hoyland, ‘The Birth of Arabic in Stone’, in Sheila Blair and Jonathan Bloom (eds), By the Pen and What They Write: Writing in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017), pp. 53–67; further on pre-Islamic epigraphic practices in the Middle East see Robert Hillenbrand, ‘Islamic Monumental Inscriptions: Location, Content, Legibility and Aesthetics’, in Lorenz Korn et al. (eds), Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie 3 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012), pp. 13–38, esp. 13–17.   7 Alain George, The Rise of Islamic Calligraphy (London: Saqi, 2010), pp. 28–31, 60–74.

3

4

bernard o’kane and a. c. s. peacock

that aimed to bolster dynastic legitimacy and redefine the nature of the Umayyad state by emphasising its Islamic credentials. The close association between epigraphy and politics is a theme that emerges repeatedly in this volume.8 Sheila Blair showed in 1988 in her study of the inscriptions of the mausoleum of Öljeitü that Quranic inscriptions can be pregnant with contemporary political meaning, being carefully selected to allude to, in this case, Öljeitü’s campaign to gain sovereignty over the holy cities of the Hijaz.9 The barrier then between the political, historical and religious in inscriptions is by no means as clear-cut as earlier scholars assumed. This relationship may lie at the origins of Islamic epigraphy, but of course it does not explain all of its functions. Oleg Grabar identified five key functions of monumental inscriptions. These could be indicative, that is identifying a building, its date or patron; commemorative, inscriptions that were designed to immortalise a patron, an artist or even the ‘social, political, intellectual values that writing alone can perpetuate’; semantic, in which writing ‘gives the specific and exact meaning of architectural forms’, which Grabar argued ‘developed a unique range in Islamic architecture and may be considered peculiar to it’; iconic, where the text uses the architectural context to communicate its message, but the architectural context is secondary to the message; and finally, the formal function of ornament.10 In four out of five of these functions, then, the textual content of the inscription, rather than the aesthetics, is crucial to   8 See for instance the chapters by McClary, Abou Khatwa, Carole Hillenbrand and Peacock.   9 Sheila Blair, ‘The Epigraphic Program of the Tomb of Uljaytu at Sultaniyya: Meaning in Mongol Architecture’, Islamic Art 2 (1987 [published 1988]): 43–96. Her arguments were later refined in idem, Text and Image in Medieval Persian Art (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014), pp. 122–7. Earlier Oleg Grabar, ‘The Inscriptions of the Madrasa-Mausoleum of Qaytbay’, in Dickran K. Kouymjian (ed.), Near Eastern Numismatics, Iconography, Epigraphy and History: Studies in Honor of George C. Miles (Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1974), pp. 465–8 had valiantly attempted a similar undertaking, but as Dina Montasser has shown, this was unfortunately undermined by his misreading of Quranic inscriptions on the monument and her conclusion that the use of the SËrat al-Fat˙ on this (and many other Mamluk monuments) was not intended to celebrate victory but was designed to commemorate the inauguration of the religious foundation through the grace of God, seeking His blessing and reward in the afterlife: Dina Montasser, ‘Modes of Utilizing Quranic Inscriptions on Cairene Mamluk Religious Monuments’, in Bernard O’Kane (ed.), Creswell Photographs Re-examined: New Perspectives on Islamic Architecture (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2009), pp. 187, 202–3. 10 Oleg Grabar, ‘Graffiti or Proclamations: Why Write on Buildings?’, in Doris Behrens-Abouseif (ed.), The Cairo Heritage: Essays in Honor of Layla Ali Ibrahim (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2000), pp. 69–75.

introduction

their interpretation. Yet, if inscriptions were delivering a message, who was their audience? It is generally assumed rates of literacy were low, although as has also been pointed out literacy is a spectrum. Undoubtedly, many viewers of inscriptions could identify Quranic quotations from the context and a handful of words that would bring to mind the memorised text.11 A full decipherment of the text was thus unnecessary for the reader to glean the gist of the meaning. Similar considerations probably apply to the inscriptions on ceramics and objects that are often in verse; recognition of just a few letters would have brought to mind verses which the user would have already known, and it is striking how frequently the same verses are repeated on ceramics from Iran of the sixth/ twelfth–seventh/thirteenth centuries, for example.12 However, some inscriptions are written in scripts that are so elaborate that even with concentrated study of high resolution images in modern office conditions they only slowly yield up their secrets. Inscriptions may be placed in locations where they are barely – or not at all – visible to the naked eye. The function of inscriptions was thus not necessarily simply to communicate, or even to ornament. Inscriptions may on occasion have fulfilled an apotropaic function, but the written word, especially of the Quran itself, may have been considered to have had a value in its own right, irrespective of being read, at least by mortal eyes. The audience for such inscriptions, it has been suggested, was God rather than man.13 Despite the religious associations of such inscriptions – or rather, perhaps precisely because of them – the practice of inscribing buildings and gravestones remained contentious, at least in theory.14 Putting God’s word in a place where it might be defiled or damaged sparked opposition among some religious scholars, although in practice these objections seem to have been largely sidelined in the long run. Nonetheless, not every inscription was pious, or illegible. By the Mamluk period it was common practice to inscribe parts of waqfiyyas (endowment documents) on buildings to establish beyond doubt their legal status, and such inscriptions were, by their very 11 Irene A. Bierman, Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text (Berkeley: University of Los Angeles, 1998), pp. 24–7. 12 See for example Oliver Watson, Ceramics of Iran: Islamic Pottery in the Sarikhani Collection (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2021), with texts and translations of the ceramics illustrated, and the chapters by Abouseif and Bauden in this volume. 13 Hillenbrand, ‘Islamic Monumental Inscriptions’, p. 21. 14 Mohammad Gharipour and Òrvin Cemil Schick (eds), ‘Introduction’ in idem, Calligraphy and Architecture in the Muslim World (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 2013); Leor Halevi, ‘The Paradox of Islamization: Tombstone Inscriptions, Qurånic Recitations, and the Problem of Religious Change’, History of Religions 44 (November 2004): 120–52.

5

6

bernard o’kane and a. c. s. peacock

nature, intended to be read.15 Indeed, medieval Muslims, or at least their elites, lived in a world where they were surrounded by the written word on almost every conceivable object. Some impression of these is given by our most intact surviving medieval Islamic palace (or palace city), the Alhambra in Spain, which is adorned with well over 3,000 inscriptions, comprising votive verses, the dynastic motto, Quranic verses, but also poetry specifically composed for a given room or space, often by senior members of the Nasrid court.16 Yet this doubtless reflects only in limited fashion the ubiquity of the written word. The Abbasid Kitåb al-Muwashshå, a guide to elegant behaviour for the dandies of Baghdad, gives long lists of the appropriate verses to inscribe on given objects, including coins, vessels, belts, rings, doors, clothing, parts of the body such as hands, feet and forehead, and even apples.17 It also makes it clear how limited a corpus has come down to us compared to that which existed. Many of the objects it recommends inscribing are textiles, and inevitably only a handful of these have survived. Moreover, alongside such more or less artistic inscriptions, the habit of graffiti flourished, with visitors to shrines, for example, regularly inscribing their names or apposite verses. Indeed, the fourth/tenth-century Kitåb Adab al-Ghurabå, which records graffiti on the theme of nostalgia, shows in almost every anecdote it records how the practice of writing extempore verses on walls, rocks or other surfaces was embedded in the culture of the literate elite.18 In short, inscriptions occupy a central place in early and medieval Islamic culture, and are open to investigation from a wide variety of perspectives – both art historical and philological, and as evidence for political and social history. The present volume departs from previous collective studies of Islamic epigraphy, which tend to be predominantly art historical in approach, concentrating on the aesthetic aspects of inscriptions and their calligraphy.19 Such aspects are 15 Leonor Fernandes, ‘The Foundation of Baybars al-Jashankir: Its Waqf, History, and Architecture’, Muqarnas 4 (1987): 35–6. 16 José Miguel Puerta Vílchez, Reading the Alhambra: A Visual Guide to the Alhambra through its Inscriptions (Granada: The Alhambra and Generalife Trust and Edilux, 2015). 17 AbË l-Êayyib Mu˙ammad b. Is˙åq b. Ya˙yå al-Washshå, al-Muwashshå aw al-Ûarf wa’l-Ûurafå, ed. Kamål Mu߆afå (Cairo: Maktabat al-KhånjÈ, 2015), pp. 212ff. 18 Patricia Crone and Shmuel Moreh (trans), The Book of Strangers: Medieval Arabic Graffiti on the Theme of Nostalgia (Princeton: Marcus Wiener, 2000). 19 See for example, Mohammad Gharipour and Òrvin Cemil Schick (eds), Calligraphy and Architecture in the Muslim World (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 2013); also Sheila Blair and Jonathan Bloom (eds), By the Pen and What They Write: Writing in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017). A useful overview of

introduction

of course not neglected here, but the volume also seeks to offer a more comprehensive approach to Islamic epigraphy by including studies that draw on both philology and history. The volume focuses on the period down to the tenth/sixteenth century, and on the Islamic lands stretching from the Maghrib to Central Asia and India. The reasons for these choices deserve some explanation, for epigraphy continued to be highly important under the Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals, to say nothing of lesser known dynasties such as the Shibanids, while there are also later traditions of epigraphy in Southeast Asia and China that are not covered here.20 The period from the tenth/­sixteenth century onwards saw new developments in epigraphy, in the form of the much more widespread use of alternatives to Arabic such as Persian and Turkish, in which inscriptions were increasingly written in verse rather than prose.21 While some such elements can be detected in earlier periods, the emergence in the sixteenth century of these ‘gunpowder empires’, whose identity was increasingly intertwined with their sectarian affiliations as Sunni or Shiite, marks a turning point in the history of the Islamic world where it is convenient to draw a line. To do justice to these rich epigraphic traditions would not be possible within the confines of a single volume. The present volume is divided into five sections. The first deals with the relationship between inscriptions and royal power. The audience for inscriptions is addressed in many papers, and is the focus of Jonathan Bloom’s chapter. He shows how, contrary to some previous research, inscriptions on the outside of buildings for public consumption were not just the prerogative of the Fatimids, but had earlier histories across the Mediterranean. This is tempered by his Islamic epigraphy remains Sheila Blair, Islamic Inscriptions (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998); for a comparative approach see Anthony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015). 20 See for example Chen Da-sheng and Ludvik Kalus, Corpus d’inscriptions arabes et persanes en Chine 1. Province de Fu-jian (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1991); Barbara Stöcker-Parnian, ‘Calligraphy in Chinese Mosques: At the Intersection of Arabic and Chinese Calligraphy’, in Gharipour and Schick, Calligraphy and Architecture, pp. 139–58; in Southeast Asia there are very few pre-modern monumental inscriptions, meaning it is something of an exception to the comments above regarding the ubiquity of Arabic script on buildings. This is doubtless related to the continuation of indigenous traditions of architecture and writing after the coming of Islam. There is however a tradition of funerary epigraphy, see Da-sheng and Kalus above and Claude Guillot and Ludvik Kalus, Les monuments funéraires et l’histoire du Sultanat de Pasai à Sumatra (Paris: Cahiers d’Archipel, 37, 2008); for epigraphy on seals from the region see Annabel Teh Gallop, Malay Seals from the Islamic World of Southeast Asia: Content, Form, Context, Catalogue (Singapore: NUS Press, 2020). 21 Bernard O’Kane, The Appearance of Persian on Islamic Art (New York: Persian Heritage Foundation, 2009).

7

8

bernard o’kane and a. c. s. peacock

judgement, dispiriting to the rulers usually commemorated in the inscriptions, that the number of people who actually read them may have been extremely limited. Coinage is another interesting topic in relation to audiences. Its ubiquity is a double-edged sword, ensuring both its diffusion but also its conservative tendency to include images whose reason for inclusion may have been long superseded.22 Its links with architectural imagery and inscriptions are explored by Richard McClary, showing parallels in coinage and monuments over a wide range from Egypt to Central Asia. The relations of inscriptions and royal propaganda are further examined by Roberta Giunta in her chapter covering all the known examples of inscription for the important Seljuq rulers Malikshåh and Tutush in the late eleventh century. The proliferation of laqabs testifies to the tendency of self-aggrandisement (even if drafted by the chancery). She also shows how the fashion for cursive rather than Kufic was taken up by the Seljuqs in their later works and was quickly passed on to adjacent territories. The reigning sultan’s titles are the most prominent part of the epigraphy of one of the domed monuments at Chisht; the neighbouring Ghurids were as aware of the power of inscriptions as the earlier Seljuqs and Ghaznavids. Viola Allegranzi shows how close analysis and new readings can tease new meanings from an already heavily studied building. Previously thought to be a tomb, her research identifies it as probably a prayer hall attached to a larger madrasa, possibly from a slightly earlier period. Part II discusses a class of inscriptions that only recently have been thought to be worthy of attention, those relating to piety in the form of sacred names, personal prayers (duås) and hadith. Bernard O’Kane examines the architectural representations of the name of the Prophet Mu˙ammad, and in particular a frequently occurring variety in which the name is repeated in star and polylobed shapes. These have a surprising number of overlapping resonances, from intercession, light and the roseate qualities associated with the Prophet to, where hexagrams are concerned, connections with the apotropaic qualities of the prophet Solomon and his wisdom. Another aspect of the name of the Prophet Mu˙ammad is discussed by Umberto Bongianino and Péter Nagy. They note a phenomenon that was confined to the Maghrib, the use of barakat Mu˙ammad squares. This emerged in the eighth/fourteenth century in the Marinid period, but also had a resurgence after the middle of the eleventh/ seventeenth century under the Alawid sultans. They argue that the connecting link is in the baraka (blessings) connected to the shurafå, 22 See Jere L. Bacharach, Islamic History through Coinage (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2006), pp. 3–4.

introduction

or the Alawid descendants of Mu˙ammad, who inherited it from the Prophet. In addition, its exclusive use in the square Kufic format is indicative of its status as much as an icon as a text. Razan Francis investigates the surprising use of thirteenth-century Arabic Islamic supplications in a convent in Burgos patronised by the Christian kings of Castile and other monuments in Iberia. This is less surprising when the number of funerary tomb markers incorporated as spolia in monuments built under Christian patronage is taken into account. The vitality of these supplications is further supported by the writings of earlier jurists on the merits of such supplications in a funerary context. The eighth/fourteenth-century complex of ShaykhË is one of medieval Cairo’s better known monuments, but Noha Abou-Khatwa shows what can be added to our knowledge through the critical examination of the historic sources concerning the founder and the documentation of previously unknown hadith in the buildings. They affirm that at that time the documentation of hadith assumed sacramental status, and that the founder was invested in this activity and in the practice of Sufism that the foundation furthered. Although some of the previous papers studied the interaction of epigraphy with history and society, this is foregrounded in the next section, ‘Inscriptions, History and Society’. Venetia Porter shows that the examination of even a small fraction of the original number of Aswan tombstones enriches our understanding of social history, particularly in the Fatimid period. The frequency of females echoes their importance in Fatimid society. The use of Quranic extracts corresponds with those noted in larger collections, but the indications of craftsmen are particularly interesting, including a dyer, a potter and two goldsmiths, one of whom may even have been of Italian origin. Although the Marwanid inscriptions on the walls of Mayyafariqin and Diyarbakır have long been admired for their aesthetic qualities, Carole Hillenbrand investigates the extent to which their aim of propaganda was successful. Two conflicting tendencies were relevant, the first the importance of siting them low enough to be easily read, the second high enough to preserve them from either casual vandalism or even the tendency of later rulers to obliterate the works of their predecessors. She estimates that the latter may have been paramount, according their epigraphy a primarily symbolic purpose. In his chapter ‘The rise of new epigraphic languages in the medieval Islamic east. The interplay of Persian, Turkish and Arabic on inscriptions’, Andrew Peacock examines the emergence of alternatives to Arabic as languages of epigraphy in the eastern Islamic world. In both cases inscriptions in the vernacular often employ hard to read versions of floriated Kufic. While Turkish is initially only found in royal titulature, by the late seventh/thirteenth century it is used for funerary inscriptions in the Golden Horde. The chapter argues that

9

10

bernard o’kane and a. c. s. peacock

the rise of Persian and Turkish, which begins in the sixth/eleventh century, is connected not to the need for communication in the vernacular but rather to political shifts that promoted the use of these languages in Central Asia. Nicole Kançal-Ferrari and Fatma M. S¸ en trace the slowly growing interest in the epigraphy of a little-studied area, the Crimea, which was under the Golden Horde Mongols for more than a century and a half and was later under Crimean Khanate and Ottoman rule. In this liminal area inscriptions in Arabic, Turkish and Persian (or a mix of these) have been found. The authors point out how the corpus, of which they present extensive samples, has great value in supplementing written histories. Relevant disciplines to their work include social, religious, cultural and ethnic history, Turkish and Arabic philology, cross-regional research, and onomastics – a list that is equally relevant to many of the other chapters in this volume. Part IV concentrates on inscriptions added to ceramics, metalwork and Safavid paintings. Becky Wrightson tackles a large body of materials on which inscriptions have often been noted but never studied in a systematic fashion. The makers of Samarra ware aimed them at a broad non-royal audience. Signatures and good wishes, always in Arabic, are the most common inscriptions, although non-literate craftsmen evidently celebrated more their decorative possibilities, leading to a blurring of text and ornament. Serendipitously, the chapters of Doris Behrens-Abouseif and Frédéric Bauden complement each other by examining metalwork – a corpus that for all its abundance has been little studied due to the great difficulty of deciphering the often nearly illegible calligraphy, which even sometimes is written in colloquial Arabic. Behrens-Abouseif charts the rising importance of poetry on a wide variety of material including trays, candlesticks, medical boxes and, in particular, drinking vessels. The latter’s texts include poems by well-known poets as well as some that evidently were specially written for the pieces on which they are displayed. This corpus is also distinctive for its many examples in which the work of art is itself speaking to its audience. Pen boxes were emblematic of the power of the chancery and ultimately the ruler. The twenty-two examined by Frédéric Bauden are mainly Mamluk but also include earlier and contemporary examples from Mosul, Egypt and Syria. There is an interesting correlation between the verses used in one of the stories from The Thousand and One Nights and those found on pen boxes; his detailed analysis suggests that the metalwork examples came first. As with the examples studied by Behrens-Abouseif, the craftsmen sometimes chose verses from existing poets, and on other occasions epigrams specifically composed for the objects. Here too the inscriptions also occasionally speak directly to the audience. Selin Ünlüönen also examines inscriptions that are usually overlooked, those that are seemingly part of the decoration in the

introduction

paintings of Shah Êahmåsb’s Khamsa of NiΩåmÈ. Intriguingly, these present a challenge to the viewer in that they are partially blocked by figures in the painting. Here too, as in the previous examples, the poetry is characterised as itself speaking to the viewer. The final part of this volume concentrates on different areas, style and function. While the early Islamic graffiti in Arabia studied by Risa Tokunaga may lack the elegance of some later inscriptions, the inscribers were still keen to make their work as aesthetically pleasing as possible. They did this by adding or omitting alifs, for instance, or by using spelling that do not always reflect the orthography of the period. The move from Kufic to cursive scripts has often been analysed, but Scott Redford proposes a new motif for the dichotomy: the wish to distinguish inscriptions that relate to the hereafter from those where meaning was paramount. The division is accompanied by a spatial differentiation, with the sacred Kufic examples being placed physically higher than the lower cursive ones. The move within the reign of NËr al-DÈn has also often been cited as one oppositional to Fatimid practice, but here NËr al-DÈn’s changing method of selfpresentation is foregrounded. Minute examination of the corpus of surviving Iranian lustre mihrabs permits Sheila Blair to show how some of their inscriptions were moulded separately and added to the clay base before firing – the process of luting. She also shows how Quran manuscripts may have provided the impetus for the practise of juxtaposing different scripts within the mihrabs. The craftsmen’s attention to rhythm and balance led them to place smaller inscriptions on the upper stems of the lower one, a solution frequently copied in later architectural examples. Although epigraphers have frequently mined the epigraphic data for information about craftsmen, this has never been done more thoroughly in the case of Ilkhanid stucco workers than by Ana Marija Grbanovic. This detailed survey enables her to chart the mobility of craftsmen as well as to discuss such matters as workshop structures and provenances and their relationship to the patrons who commissioned the work. The Qutb Minar in Delhi, the tallest in pre-modern Islamic architecture and an iconic symbol of Islam in South Asia, has surprisingly not had a detailed discussion of its many prominent inscriptions before Robert Hillenbrand’s chapter. The balance between inscriptions and ornament and aesthetics and legibility are analysed, the results being adjudged frequently to the detriment of the texts. The chapters presented here can only offer snapshots of a developing field, which has recently become the focus of increased interest after a period of relative neglect. New inscriptions continue to come to light, and old ones are subject to new readings and interpretations. It is worth noting, for example, the recent publications of inscriptions

11

12

bernard o’kane and a. c. s. peacock

from early Islamic Central Asia by Nastich,23 which includes numerous either unpublished or previously inadequately published inscriptions, as well as the series of volumes by Mehmet Tütüncü dealing with Turkish epigraphy.24 However, continuing research on Islamic epigraphy may become easier with the increasing online publication of databases on selected fields.25 The major database, the Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique, has had a search feature added to it which now makes it much more user-friendly.26 The year in which we write this is the centenary of the virtual founder of the discipline of Islamic epigraphy, Max van Berchem, and has been celebrated by a conference on the theme ‘Où en est l’épigraphie arabe/islamique 100 ans après la mort de Max van Berchem?’27 Aside therefore from our own modest contribution, it is heartening to see that research on the subject continues apace. Bibliography Bacharach, Jere L., Islamic History through Coinage (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2006). Bierman, Irene A., Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text (Berkeley: University of Los Angeles, 1998). Blair, Sheila, ‘The Epigraphic Program of the Tomb of Uljaytu at Sultaniyya: Meaning in Mongol Architecture’, Islamic Art 2 (1987 [published 1988]): 43–96. Blair, Sheila, Islamic Inscriptions (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998). Blair, Sheila, Text and Image in Medieval Persian Art (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014). Blair, Sheila and Jonathan Bloom (eds), By the Pen and What They Write: Writing in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017).

23 V. N. Nastich, Musulmanskaya Epigrafika Fergany i Semirechya: Pamyatniki arabskogo pisma XI–XVII vv na Teritorii Kyrgyzstana (St Petersburg: Herzen State Pedagogical University, 2019). 24 For example Mehmet Tütüncü, Turkish Jerusalem (1516–1917): Ottoman inscriptions from Jerusalem and other Palestinian cities (Haarlem: SOTA, 2006); idem, Karadeniz Kuzeyinde Osmanlı Kitabeleri: Ukrayna, Moldova, Rusya, Gürcistan, Litvanya (Heemstede: SOTA, 2020). 25 The Database of Ottoman Inscriptions (comprising Arabic, Turkish and Persian inscriptions): http://info.ottomaninscriptions.com; The Monumental Inscriptions of Historic Cairo: https://islamicinscriptions.​ cultnat.org. 26 This must be accessed through its new University of Liège website: http://www.epigraphie-islamique.uliege.be/thesaurus/. An online search may also bring up the old site http://www.epigraphie-islamique.​ org/epi/login.html which does not have the search function. 27 https://maxvanberchem.org/fr/centenaire-max-van-berchem/8-francais/​ 190-max-van-berchem-symposium.

introduction

Chen Da-sheng and Ludvik Kalus, Corpus d’inscriptions arabes et persanes en Chine 1. Province de Fu-jian (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1991). Combe, É., J. Sauvaget, G. Wiet et al. (eds), Répertoire chronologique d’épigraphie arabe (Cairo: IFAO, 1931–91). Crone, Patricia and Shmuel Moreh (trans), The Book of Strangers: Medieval Arabic Graffiti on the Theme of Nostalgia (Princeton: Marcus Wiener, 2000). Eastmond, Anthony (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015). Elisséeff, Nikita, ‘La titulature de NËr al-DÈn d’après ses inscriptions’, Bulletin d’études orientales 14 (1952–4): 155–96. Fernandes, Leonor, ‘The Foundation of Baybars al-Jashankir: Its Waqf, History, and Architecture’, Muqarnas 4 (1987): 21–42. Flury, Samuel, Die Ornamente der Hakim- und Ashar-Moschee, Materialen zur Geschichte der älteren Kunst des Islam (Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1912). Flury, Samuel, Islamisch Schriftbänder Amida-Diarbekr XI. Jarhundert (Basel: Frobenius, 1920). Flury, Samuel, ‘Le décor épigraphique des monuments de Ghazna’, Syria 6 (1925): 61–90. Gallop, Annabel Teh, Malay Seals from the Islamic World of Southeast Asia: Content, Form, Context, Catalogue (Singapore: NUS Press, 2020). George, Alain, The Rise of Islamic Calligraphy (London: Saqi, 2010). Gharipour, Mohammad and Òrvin Cemil Schick (eds), Calligraphy and Architecture in the Muslim World (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press 2013). Grabar, Oleg, ‘The Inscriptions of the Madrasa-Mausoleum of Qaytbay’, in Dickran K. Kouymjian (ed.), Near Eastern Numismatics, Iconography, Epigraphy and History: Studies in Honor of George C. Miles (Beirut: Ameircan University of Beirut, 1974), pp. 465–8. Grabar, Oleg, The Formation of Islamic Art (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1987). Grabar, Oleg, ‘Graffiti or Proclamations: Why Write on Buildings?’, in Doris Behrens-Abouseif (ed.), The Cairo Heritage: Essays in Honor of Layla Ali Ibrahim (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2000), pp. 69–75. Guillot, Claude and Ludvik Kalus, Les monuments funéraires et l’histoire du Sultanat de Pasai à Sumatra (Paris: Association Archipel, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, 2008). Halevi, Leor, ‘The Paradox of Islamization: Tombstone Inscriptions, Qurånic Recitations, and the Problem of Religious Change’, History of Religions 44 (November 2004): 120–52. Herzfeld, Ernst, Inscriptions et monuments d’Alep, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, deuxième partie, Syrie du Nord, 2 vols (Mémoires de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1955). Hillenbrand, Robert, ‘Islamic Monumental Inscriptions: Location, Content, Legibility and Aesthetics’, in Lorenz Korn et al. (eds), Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie 3 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2012), pp. 13–38. Hoyland, Robert, ‘Epigraphy and the Emergence of Arab Identity’, in Petra Sijpestein (ed.), From al-Andalus to Khurasan: Documents from the Medieval Muslim World (Leiden: Brill, 2006), pp. 219–42. Hoyland, Robert, ‘The Birth of Arabic in Stone’, in Sheila Blair and Jonathan Bloom (eds), By the Pen and What They Write: Writing in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017), pp. 53–67.

13

14

bernard o’kane and a. c. s. peacock

Montasser, Dina, ‘Modes of Utilizing Quranic Inscriptions on Cairene Mamluk Religious Monuments’, in Bernard O’Kane (ed.), Creswell Photographs Re-examined: New Perspectives on Islamic Architecture (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2009), pp. 187–218. Nastich, V. N., Musul’manskaya Epigrafika Fergany i Semirech’ya: Pamyatniki arabskogo pis’ma XI–XVII vv na Teritorii Kyrgyzstana (St Petersburg: Herzen State Pedagogical University, 2019). O’Kane, Bernard, The Appearance of Persian on Islamic Art (New York: Persian Heritage Foundation, 2009). Stöcker-Parnian, Barbara, ‘Calligraphy in Chinese Mosques: At the Intersection of Arabic and Chinese Calligraphy’, in Gharipour and Schick, Calligraphy and Architecture, pp. 139–58. Tütüncü, Mehmet, Turkish Jerusalem (1516–1917): Ottoman Inscriptions from Jerusalem and Other Palestinian Cities (Haarlem: SOTA, 2006). Tütüncü, Mehmet, Karadeniz Kuzeyinde Osmanlı Kitabeleri: Ukrayna, Moldova, Rusya, Gürcistan, Litvanya (Heemstede: SOTA, 2020). Van Berchem, Max, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, part I: Égypte (Cairo: Mémoires de l‘Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 1894–1903). Van Berchem, Max, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, part III: Asie Mineure, tome 1: Siwas, Diwrigi (Cairo: IFAO, 1917). Vílchez, José Miguel Puerta, Reading the Alhambra: A Visual Guide to the Alhambra through its Inscriptions (Granada: The Alhambra and Generalife Trust and Edilux, 2015). al-Washshå, AbË l-Êayyib Mu˙ammad b. Is˙åq b. Ya˙yå, al-Muwashshå aw al-Ûarf wa’l-Ûurafå, ed. Kamål Mu߆afå (Cairo: Maktabat al-KhånjÈ, 2015). Watson, Oliver, Ceramics of Iran: Islamic Pottery in the Sarikhani Collection (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2021).

PART I

INSCRIPTIONS AND ROYAL POWER

CHAPTER TWO

The Fatimid Public Text Revisited Jonathan M. Bloom

The buildings of the Fatimid period in Cairo (358/969–567/1171) are notable for their extensive use of Arabic inscriptions that decorate both exteriors and interiors. Carved in stone or cut in plaster, they employ a distinctive angular script embellished with leaves and tendrils that is often known as ‘foliated’ or ‘floriated’ Kufic. Scholars have long been interested in these inscriptions: as early as 1889, the Swiss epigrapher Max van Berchem (1863–1921) published an article on the inscriptions of the Mashhad al-Juyushi, a Fatimid structure on the Muqattam overlooking Cairo, followed by a series of articles on Fatimid architectural inscriptions, culminating in the first volume of his monumental Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum (MCIA).1 Gaston Wiet (1887–1971) continued van Berchem’s work studying the content of Fatimid inscriptions in his volume of the MCIA.2 Meanwhile the Swiss epigrapher Samuel Flury (1874–1935), who had also worked under van Berchem and was an accomplished artist, turned to the stylistic development of Fatimid inscriptions and perfected the system of drawing tables of

  1 Max van Berchem, ‘Une mosquée de temps des fatimites au Caire: Notice sur le Gâmi el Goyûshi’, Mémoires de l’Institut Égyptien II (1889): 605–19; idem, ‘Notes d’archéologie arabe: aonuments et Inscriptions fatimites’, Journal Asiatique, sér. 8, 17 (1891): 11–95; idem, ‘Notes d’archéologie arabe (I): monuments et inscriptions fatimites (suite)’, Journal Asiatique 18 (1891): 46–96; idem, ‘Notes d’archéologie arabe (II): monuments et inscriptions fatimites’, Journal Asiatique, 19 (1892): 377–407; idem, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum I: Égypte 1 (Cairo: Mémoires de la mission archéologique française au Caire, 1894–1903).   2 Gaston Wiet, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum I: Égypte 2, Mémoires de l’Institut français d’archéologie du Caire (Cairo: IFAO, 1929–30).

18

jonathan m. bloom

individual letter forms to analyse script.3 The inscriptions on Fatimid buildings in Cairo also inspired my own work on early Fatimid architecture in the 1970s and 1980s and led Caroline Williams to publish two articles connecting inscribed buildings to the veneration of saints in the period.4 In her 1998 book, Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text, the late Irene Bierman took the study of Fatimid inscriptions in a more theoretical direction. In it, she argued that the Fatimid period in Egypt marked a significant change in the ways that authority used writing, moving it from the interiors of buildings to their exteriors in order to address group audiences in public spaces.5 She noted that the Fatimids ‘made writing a significant public art’ (p. 1), ‘accessible to the whole membership of the society, ruling and ruled, traders, servants, foreigners, Muslims, Jews, Christians, men, and women’ (p. 4). She wrote that previously, however, ‘those in authority [had] displayed writing in public spaces in a limited fashion, placing [inscriptions] at urban thresholds and on lintels over the entrances of some major buildings’ (p. 3). ‘Before the changes initiated by the Fatimids most officially sponsored writing addressed to a group audience was placed inside sectarian spaces. Moreover, even with that space, writing was subordinate in visual importance to other signs of power displayed there.’ (p. 8). In addition to architectural inscriptions, Bierman stated that the Arabic writing on the clothing of the Fatimid ruling group and on the trappings of their horses was intended to impress those who watched the ceremonies in which they participated, and she argued that such display ‘seems not to have been paralleled in other Muslim or Christian practice’. She further maintained that the Fatimids presented their esoteric doctrines in a distinct script, in which ‘vines and floral terminations extrude from various letters and fill the ­background …, an innovation that separated the writing in these bands from the traditional script of officially sponsored writing … [­breaking] the linkage between officially sponsored writing and the Book hand’(p. 89). She concluded that Fatimid practice became part of the Cairene tradition of ‘writing signs’, as ‘Ayyubid (1171–1250/567–648) and Ba˙rÈ Mamluk (1250–1389/648–791)

  3 Samuel Flury, Die Ornamente der Hakim- un der Ashar-Moschee (Heidelburg: C. Winter, 1912).   4 Jonathan M. Bloom, ‘The Mosque of al-Hakim in Cairo’, Muqarnas 1 (1983): 25–36; Caroline Williams, ‘The Cult of Alid Saints in the Fatimid Monuments of Cairo. Part I: The Mosque of al-Aqmar’, Muqarnas 1 (1983): 37–52; idem, ‘The Cult of Alid Saints in the Fatimid Monuments of Cairo. Part II: The Mausolea’, Muqarnas 3 (1985): 39–60.   5 Irene A. Bierman, Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998).

fatimid public text revisited

military rulers used public texts in specific locations in ways similar to those of the Fatimid wazÈrs before them.’ Over the past twenty years Bierman’s hypothesis has found a wide and appreciative audience, ranging from specialised studies of Fatimid architecture and art or of Egyptian inscriptions to far more general discussions of the role of writing in Islam, writing in other cultures and writing at other times and places, as well as of Islamic history.6 In reviewing the book in 2000, I commended the author for having proposed an interesting idea, but found that she presented the evidence selectively.7 Not only had the Fatimids used ‘public texts’ long before they moved from North Africa to Egypt, but also their use of the ‘public text’ was part of a larger phenomenon, not only in the North Africa of their Aghlabid predecessors but in the wider Mediterranean world, both Muslim and Christian, of the period. The 2019 conference in Cairo on inscriptions of the Islamic world presented an ideal opportunity for me to explore these ideas further, as I had previously explored the erasure of North African inscriptions of the Aghlabid and Fatimid periods in a previous article.8 Let us begin by dismissing two misconceptions: scripts and textiles. It is well known that the Fatimids employed a distinctive angular script whose letters were embellished with leaves, tendrils and flowers, usually known as foliated or floriated Kufic.9 Although it is most commonly associated with the Fatimids in Egypt, the script is not exclusive to the Fatimids and was used in Egypt before they arrived, as demonstrated by an undated inscription found at the Bir al-Watawit in Cairo [Figure 2.1]. Van Berchem first published this inscription more than a century ago at the end of his catalogue of Fatimid inscriptions, because he could identify it stylistically as

  6 In June 2020 I found, for example, 146 citations of the book on Google Scholar. The most recent book to build on Bierman’s approach is Jennifer A. Pruitt’s Building the Caliphate: Construction, Destruction, and Sectarian Identity in Early Fatimid Architecture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2020).   7 Jonathan M. Bloom, review of Anna Contadini, Fatimid Art in the Victoria and Albert Museum and Irene Bierman, Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text, Journal of the American Oriental Society 120, no. 1 (2000): 271–3.   8 Jonathan M. Bloom, ‘Erasure and Memory: Aghlabid and Fatimid Inscriptions in North Africa’, in Anthony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 61–75.   9 Sheila S. Blair, ‘Floriated Kufic and the Fatimids’, in Marianne Barrucand (ed.), L’Égypte Fatimide: Son Art et Son Histoire, Actes du colloque organisé à Paris les 28, 29 et 30 mai 1998 (Paris: Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1999), pp. 107–16.

19

20

jonathan m. bloom

Figure 2.1  Carved stone inscription from the Bi’r al-Watawit, Cairo, dated 355/966. After Max van Berchem, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, I Égypte, pl. XVIII, no. 3.

Fatimid but could not date it.10 Some years later Gaston Wiet was able to identify the inscription, thanks to his reading of a text by al-MaqrÈzÈ that dated the inscription to 355/966, three years before the Fatimid army arrived in Egypt.11 So the script was not a Fatimid invention, but an invention adopted by the Fatimids. Nor was foliated Kufic an Egyptian development, for it was used at exactly the same time at the mosque of Nayin in Iran, which Flury dated c. 350/960 [Figure 2.2].12 It is unlikely that the Egyptians got the idea of the script from Iran, or vice versa, so it seems plausible to imagine that both instances derive from a common source, presumably somewhere between Egypt and Iran, namely Baghdad, although no inscriptions survive from that city at this time. However, as Ernst Herzfeld (1879–1948) remarked many years ago, ‘To underrate

10 van Berchem, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum I: Égypte 1, p. 79 and pl. XVIII.3. 11 Gaston Wiet, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum I: Égypte 2, Mémoires de l’Institut Français Archéologique du Caire (Cairo, 1929–30), pp. 91ff. 12 First published by Henri Viollet and Samuel Flury, ‘Un monument des premiers siècles de l’hégire en Perse’, Syria 2 (1921): 226–34, 305–16 and Samuel Flury, ‘La Mosquée de Nâyin’, Syria 11 (1930): 43–58 after photographs by Arthur Upham Pope; Sheila S. Blair, The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana (Leiden: Brill, 1992), pp. 38–40.

fatimid public text revisited

Figure 2.2  Carved plaster inscription from the mosque of Nayin, Iran, c. 350/960. Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

Baghdad is to underrate Rome’.13 The presence of the script in such varied situations suggests furthermore that it was appreciated for its decorative, rather than its polemic, potential. The use of inscribed textiles was also not unique to the Fatimids. The problem is that the evidence is skewed: few Islamic textiles have survived outside of Egypt, which has an unusually dry climate conducive to the preservation of organic materials. Most of the Egyptian finds are fragments of †iråz, lengths of linen cloth with embroidered or tapestry-woven inscriptions and bands of decoration. Many were indeed produced under the Fatimids, but many others, although discovered in Egypt, were produced for their Abbasid predecessors and contemporaries in Baghdad and Central Asia.14 A few more-complete medieval Islamic textiles have survived in European church treasuries. Perhaps the best surviving complete example of a Fatimid †iråz is the so-called Veil of St Anne, a loomlength piece of cream-coloured linen decorated with three parallel tapestry bands about six inches wide woven in coloured silk and gold thread, one along either side and a central band with medallions between them, bearing the names of the Fatimid caliph al-MustalÈ 13 Ernst Herzfeld, ‘Damascus—Studies in Architecture I’, Ars Islamica 9 (1942): 40. 14 Ernst Kühnel and Louisa Bellinger, Catalogue of Dated Tiraz Fabrics: Umayyad, Abbasid, Fatimid (Washington, DC: National Publishing Company, 1952).

21

22

jonathan m. bloom

bi-llåh (r. 1094–1101) and his vizier al-Af∂al (1094–1121), indicating that it was made in the royal workshop in Damietta and the date [48]9, equivalent to 1096–7. The inscription states: ّ ‫[علىّ ولىّ هللا صلّى‬-١ ‫ا]هّلل عـ[ـلـ]ـيه اإلمام أبو القاسم المستعلى باهلل أمير‬ ‫المؤمنين صلوات هللا عليه وعلى آبائه الطاهرين وأبنائه األكرمين‬ ‫[أ]بنا[ئه] األكرمين و [الـ]سيّد األج ّل األفضل سيف اإلمـ[ـا]م جالل ا[إل]سالم‬-٢ ‫أبنائه األكرمين السيّد األج ّل األفضل سيف اإلمام جالل اإلسالم شرف األ[نا]م‬-٣ . . . ‫ ممّا عمل في طراز الخاصّه بدمياط في سنة تسعـ‬. . .-٤ 1. [AlÈ is the friend of G]od; may God [bless] him. Imam AbË ‘l-Qåsim al-MustalÈ bi-llåh, emir of the Believers, may God bless him, his pure-hearted ancestors and his very worthy descendants. 2. [His] very worthy [descendants]. The most illustrious lord, al-Af∂al, Sword of the Imam, Splendor of Islam 3. His very worth descendants. The most illustrious lord, al-Af∂al, Sword of the Imam, Splendor of Islam 4. among the works ordered in the private textile factory of Damietta in the year ??9 Now in the Cathedral of Apt in Provence, north of Marseilles, the textile was intended to be made into an aba, or mantle, with the central band containing the medallions falling down the wearer’s back. It appears to have been acquired directly during the Crusades, for both Isoard, the bishop of Apt, and Raimbaud de Simiane, the lord of Apt, participated in the First Crusade, although there is no documentary evidence to prove that these men acquired the textile in the Levant. It is less likely, but possible, that it was given as a gift by an Egyptian embassy to the Crusaders at Antioch in late 1097 or given to Frankish ambassadors who came to Cairo in 1098.15 Although no Egyptian saddlecloths from the Fatimid period are known to survive, on the basis of textual evidence, Bierman stated that the writing on the horse-trappings of the Fatimid ruling class was intended to impress those who watched the ceremonies in which they participated.16 A contemporary inscribed saddlecloth from Central Asia does survive, however, in the socalled Suaire de Saint-Josse in the Louvre, which was found in a church near Calais. It is drawloom-woven samite silk, originally measuring about 1 × 2 m, made for the Turkish commander AbË 15 Ludvik Kalus and Frédérique Soudan, Thesaurus d’épigraphie islamique [http://www.epigraphie-islamique.uliege.be], fiche 6997. See Georges Marçais and Gaston Wiet, ‘Le «Voile de Sainte Anne» d’Apt’, Monuments et Mémoires Publiés par l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 34, no. 1–2 (1934): 177–94. 16 Bierman, Writing Signs, p. 8.

23

fatimid public text revisited

ManßËr BukhtegÈn before his death in 961. Depicting elephants, Bactrian camels and dragons in the main field and borders, it also bears a dedicatory inscription, offering glory and good wishes to the ­commander.17 The complicated nature of drawloom weaving, in which much time was spent preparing the loom, suggests that multiple identical examples would have been produced, and the size and design would have been appropriate for saddlecloths for AbË ManßËr’s troops. So there is no reason to believe that the Fatimids were the only Muslim dynasty to have inscribed textiles on their riding animals. Returning to inscriptions on buildings, Bierman’s main thesis was that ‘the universal social practice among groups in the eastern Mediterranean was to use officially sponsored writing to mark sectarian spaces by placing writing inside those spaces … In contrast, only to a very limited extent was officially sponsored writing addressed to a mixed audience … in … public spaces.’18 In other words, according to Bierman, in pre-Fatimid times Arabic inscriptions in Muslim buildings had been inside those buildings, Hebrew inscriptions were inside Jewish buildings, and Greek or Coptic inscriptions were inside Christian buildings, although she confessed that – apart from the Arabic inscriptions – there was very limited evidence to work from. While Bierman focused on sites in the eastern Mediterranean region, she overlooked any evidence from North Africa, specifically Ifriqiya, the province roughly equivalent to Tunisia where the Fatimids had spent the first six decades of their rule before moving to Egypt. For example, both the mosque of Bu Fatåtå (223–6/838–41) at Sousse and the mosque of Mu˙ammad b. KhayrËn/Mosque of the Three Doors (252/866–7) in Kairouan have prominent inscriptions on their exterior façades.19 On the former, the inscription [Figure 2.3] offers God’s blessings on [?] al-Aghlab b. IbråhÈm and states that it was built to proclaim His name by the hands of … [the person’s name is missing]: ‫لذكر فيه اسم هللا على يدى‬

17 https://www.louvre.fr/oeuvre-notices/suaire-de-saint-josse-0. Accessed 29 June 2020. Sophie Makariou (ed.), Islamic Art at the Musée du Louvre (Paris: Louvre editions, 2012), pp. 114–17. 18 Bierman, Writing Signs, p. 21. 19 Bierman actually mentions this mosque, along with the Armenian church at Achtamar, as exceptions that prove the rule of ‘not using writing as a visually significant marker in the public space’. Bierman, Writing Signs, p. 35. For these, and many of the other buildings discussed in this article, see Jonathan M. Bloom, Architecture of the Islamic West: Islamic Architecture in North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula 700–1800 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2020).

24

jonathan m. bloom

Figure 2.3  Carved stone inscription on the façade of the mosque of Bu Fatåtå, Sousse (Tunisia), 838–41. Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

Not only is the inscription on the exterior of the building, but it is the earliest surviving example of a monumental inscription integral to a building’s structure and decoration to survive from the Islamic west.20 The angular inscription on the mosque of Mu˙ammad b. KhayrËn in Kairouan [Figure 2.4] contains two Quranic texts in the upper band: ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم يايها الذين امنوا اتقوا هللا وقولوا قوال سديدا يصلح لكم اعمالكم ويغفر لكم‬ ‫ذنوبكم‬ ‫ومن يطع هللا ورسوله فقد فاز فوزا عظيما‬ Believers, be mindful of God, speak in a direct fashion and to good purpose, and He will put your deeds right for you and forgive you your sins. Whoever obeys God and His Messenger will truly achieve a great triumph (33:70–71 ‘The Joint Forces’). ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم هلل االمر من قبل ومن بعد‬ God is in command, first and last (fragment of 30:4 ‘The Byzantines’) ‍followed by the foundation inscription ‫امر ببنا هذا المسجد مهمد بن خيرون المعافري االندلسي تقربا الى هللا ورجا لمغفرته و رحمته‬ ‫سنة‬ Mu˙ammad b. KhayrËn al-MaåfirÈ al-AndalusÈ ordered the construction of this mosque, wishing to be closer to God and in the hope of His pardon and mercy in the year …

20 K. A. C. Creswell, Early Muslim Architecture, Vol. II (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940 [R1979]), p. 248.

fatimid public text revisited

Figure 2.4  Carved stone inscription on the façade of the mosque of Mu˙ammad b. KhayrËn (Mosque of the Three Doors), Kairouan, Tunisia, 866–7. Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

Although the actual date is missing, a medieval author recorded it as 252/866–7.21 Another Kufic inscription across the bottom band records the restoration of the mosque in 844/1440–1, presumably when the cuboid minaret on the left side was added and some of the inscription blocks rearranged.22 ‫الحمد هلل على نعمه وصلى هللا على سيدنا محمد جدد بنا هذا المسجد المبارك عام اربع واربعين‬ ‫وثماني ماية نحمد هللا و نصلي على سيدنا محمد واله‬

21 Bernard Roy and Paule Poinssot, Inscriptions arabes de Kairouan, assisted by Louis Poinssot, Publications de l’Institut des Hautes Études de Tunis (Paris: C. Klincksieck, 1950), p. 63, where they cite a passage in Fagnan’s translation of Ibn IdhårÈ’s al-Bayån al-Mughrib: ‘In 252 Mu˙ammad b. ÓamdËn al-AndalusÈ al-MaåfirÈ built the holy mosque in Kairouan that carries his name’ [author’s translation from the French]. 22 Roy and Poinssot, Inscriptions arabes de Kairouan, pp. 61–4; Georges Marçais, L’Architecture musulmane d’occident (Paris: Arts et Metiers Graphiques, 1954), pp. 47–8; G. Kircher, ‘Die Moschee des Mu˙ammad b. HairËn (“Drei-Tore-Moschee”) in Qairawån/Tunesien. Erster Bericht’, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologlischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 26 (1970): 141–68.

25

26

jonathan m. bloom

Thus there can be no doubt that Arabic texts were already visible to the public at large on the exteriors of third/ninth-century buildings in Ifriqiya, long before the arrival of the Fatimids. In addition, many of these buildings also have inscriptions on their interiors, and there seems to be no significant difference between the content of interior and exterior inscriptions, as they often contain both Quranic verses and foundation texts, as elsewhere in the lands of Islam. For example, the entrance to the tower in the Ribat of Sousse has a plaque dated 206/821, and the courtyard of the Congregational Mosque at Sousse (236/851), for example, is encircled by a long angular inscription, part of which is concealed behind a later porch [Figure 2.5].23 The façade of the prayer hall at the Zaytuna Mosque at Tunis also carries an inscription, although it too was concealed by the addition of a porch. Within the buildings themselves there are even more inscriptions, for example around the bases of the domes in front of the mihrabs at Kairouan and Tunis, and there are other areas that might once have had inscriptions but do not today. It is difficult to determine whether the inscriptions across the courtyard façades of these mosques were incidentally obscured or purposefully concealed by later viewers who found their contents objectionable.24 Had they been purposefully concealed, it would be a strong argument in favour of the power of their content. Arabic texts were also used on the exteriors of buildings in al-Andalus, which is known to have had a mixed population of Muslims, Christians and Jews. For example, the heavily damaged and heavily restored portal of the Great Mosque of Córdoba, known as the Båb al-Wuzurå’, or Vizier’s Gate (and later as the Puerta de San Esteban, St Stephen’s Gate; Figure 2.6) is a rectangular opening surmounted by a horseshoe arch of composite brick voussoirs alternating with limestone ones carved with foliate decoration enclosed within a continuous rectangular frame, known in Spanish as an alfiz. The arch itself encloses a blank semicircular lunette, which is outlined by a thin band bearing the inscription commemorating the amir Mu˙ammad I’s expansion and consolidation of the mosque. It is the oldest monumental inscription to survive from al-Andalus, apart from one carved on a capital in the interior of the mosque. The inscription states: ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم أمر األمير أكرمه هللا محمد بن عبد الرحمن ببنيان ما حكم به من هذا‬ ‫ في سنة إحدى وأربعين ومائتين على‬. . . ‫المسجد وإتقائه رجاء ثواب هللا عليه و ذخره به فت ّم ذلك‬ ‫بركة هللا وعونه مسرور و‬

23 Bloom, Architecture of the Islamic West: figs 1.8 and 1.19. 24 Bloom, ‘Erasure and Memory’, pp. 61–75.

fatimid public text revisited

Figure 2.5  Carved stone inscription around the courtyard of the Congregational Mosque of Sousse (Tunisia). Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

[Bismillåh] The amir – may God honor him – Mu˙ammad b. Abd al-Ra˙mån, ordered the restoration of that which he deemed ­necessary in this mosque and its consolidation, in the hopes of God’s retribution and his profit and recompense [in the future life]

27

28

jonathan m. bloom

Figure 2.6  Carved stone inscription around the lunette over the Bab al-Wuzarå (Vizier’s Gate) at the Great Mosque, Córdoba. 241/855–6. Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

for this work. And that was finished … in the year 241 [855–6] with the blessings of God and His help. MasrËr and …25 Although this inscription is much smaller and less legible than the Kairouan inscription, it is clearly on the exterior of a building, potentially visible to all viewers, whatever their religious affiliation. In addition, Evariste Lévi-Provençal published many inscribed plaques from fourth/tenth-century al-Andalus. While some are epitaphs, others document such activities as the construction of a qanat (underground canal), the restoration of a façade, the construction of a ßawmaa (minaret), the construction of a fountain, or the construction of a burj (tower-fortress). It is impossible to say with any certainty where many of them were originally located – whether on the interior or exterior of the building – but it seems likely that at least some of them would have been placed in the open. There can be no doubt, however, that the inscription on the façade of the Mosque of Bab Mardum in Toledo [Figure 2.7] was meant for public viewing,

25 E. Lévi-Provençal, Inscriptions arabes d’Espagne (Leiden and Paris: Brill, 1931), pp. 1–2.

fatimid public text revisited

Figure 2.7  Cut brick inscription on the façade of the mosque of Bab Mardum, Toledo, 390/999–1000. Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

as at the Mosque of Bu Fatåtå in Sousse. The inscription, worked in cut brick across the façade, reads: ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم اقام هاذا المسجد احمد ابن حديدي بن مله ابتغاء ثواب بعون هللا على يدى‬ ‫موسى إبن على البناء وسعادة فتم في المحرم سنة تسعين وثلث مائة‬ giving the names of the patron, A˙mad b. ÓadÈdÈ, and the builders, MËså b. AlÈ and Saåda, as well as the date of completion (Mu˙arram 390/December 999–January 1000).26 26 Ludvik Kalus and Frédérique Soudan, Thesaurus d’épigraphie islamique [www.epigraphie-islamique.org], fiche 5785.www.epigraphie-slamique.org.

29

30

jonathan m. bloom

Returning to Ifriqiya, we are on apparently less certain ground when considering the architecture of the Fatimids, for a building such as the Congregational Mosque of Mahdia, constructed in the second decade of the tenth century but totally rebuilt in the 1960s, currently bears no inscriptions, whether inside or out. Considering the importance of inscriptions in Aghlabid architecture, both inside and outside, and the importance of inscriptions on later Fatimid buildings in Egypt, it is surprising that there are no inscriptions on the Mahdia mosque. The existence and importance of monumental writing for the early Fatimids, furthermore, is confirmed by the early eighth/fourteenth-century Maghribi historian Ibn IdhårÈ, who reports that the MahdÈ, upon assuming power, had ordered the names of his predecessors erased from ‘mosques, cisterns, forts and bridges’ and replaced with his own.27 Yet there are at least two places on the portal of the Mahdia mosque where inscriptions might once have been placed: the blank entablature just under the cornice and the lunette over the portal itself [Figure 2.8]. Fragmentary inscriptions found in Tunisia and attributed to the Fatimid period support the idea that the Fatimids used inscriptions before they moved to Egypt. For example, a marble plaque with a floriated inscription stating ‘Enter it in peace forbearing [from fear]’ was found reused on the eighth/fourteenth-century Zawiya ­al-Gharyaniyya in Kairouan. It is thought to have come from one of the gates of Mansuriya, the second Fatimid capital in Ifriqiya, although it is not known whether the inscription dates from the Fatimid period or the Zirid occupation of the site after c. 973.28 Another marble inscription found reused on Kairouan’s Tunis gate is certainly Zirid because it is dated to 437/1045–6. It too is thought to have come from Mansuriya, called the ‘City of the Glory of Islam’.29 The Burj al-Arif, a small and enigmatic freestanding pavilion ascribed to the Fatimid period that once stood near Mahdia, had two stories of tall narrow niches separated by an inscription in Kufic script. Although the text is not legible from the drawing made by Charles Tissot in the nineteenth century, the inscription was clearly meant to be read by all who passed by.30

27 Ibn IdhårÈ al-MarråkushÈ, Kitåb Bayån al-Maghrib (Histoire de l’Afrique du Nord et de l’Espagne Musulmane), eds G. S. Colin and É. Lévi-Provençal (Beirut: Dar Assakafa, 1967), vol 1. p. 159. 28 Jonathan M. Bloom, Arts of the City Victorious: Islamic Art and Architecture in Fatimid North Africa and Egypt (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2007), p. 39. 29 Bloom, Arts, p. 187 and fig. 155. 30 Charles Tissot, ‘Note sur le Bordj el-Arîf (Régence de Tunis)’, Annuaire de la Société Archéologique de la Province de Constantine (1854–5): 95–8 and pl. 7 in 1856–7; Marçais, Architecture, pp. 87–8.

fatimid public text revisited

Figure 2.8  Portal of the Congregational Mosque of Mahdia, Tunisia, 303/916, showing possible location of inscriptions. Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

Bierman was correct in realising that such texts conveyed power, judging from the evidence their subsequent reception. A carved stone plaque set in the east façade of the Great Mosque of Sfax [Figure 2.9] originally had six lines of text in an elegant floriated

31

32

jonathan m. bloom

Figure 2.9  Mutilated Fatimid or Zirid inscription on the façade of the Great Mosque of Sfax, Tunisia, 378/988. Photo: Jonathan Bloom.

and foliated script typical of both Fatimid and Zirid inscriptions, although the letters are unusually compressed as if the designer had to fit a long text in a small space. The inscription is missing several phrases and even one complete line, which have been carefully chiselled away.31 The date of the inscription, 378 spelled out in words at the bottom left, has not been defaced, so we know it records the restoration of the mosque carried out in 988 ce. Because this date falls during the reign of al-ManßËr b. BuluggÈn b. ZÈrÈ (r. 379/843–386/996), who was the Zirid governor for the Egyptian Fatimid caliph al-AzÈz (r. 365/975–386/996), the missing phrases were surely the names and titles of the patron and his overlord, as well as praises and blessings on them and their works. Once the Zirids had renounced their Fatimid suzerains, these names and particularly Shii sentiments would have been deemed offensive and were removed. At the same time the obvious erasure surely called

31 Bloom, Arts, p. 8; Georges Marçais and Lucien Golvin, La Grande Mosquée de Sfax, preface by H. H. Abdul-Wahab, Institut National d’Archéologie et Arts de Tunis, Notes et Documents, vol. iii (Tunis: Institut National d’archéologie et arts, 1960).

fatimid public text revisited

attention to the missing words, which most readers would in any case have found challenging to decipher because the inscription is written in a difficult-to-read script. The inscription in Sfax and its defacement raise several interesting issues. The fact that foliated Kufic had made it to the Maghrib within two decades of its first appearance in Egypt suggests that far from having a polemic character, the particular script was adopted because of its formal and aesthetic qualities, which filled the otherwise empty spaces between ascending letters. The mutilation of the text indicates that some people read it and found it objectionable, but one wonders how many people on the streets of Sfax actually read the words or merely recognised that it was writing, with only the vaguest idea of its content. Was this the same situation in Cairo? Were any Fatimid inscriptions similarly defaced? Was the public actually able to read Bierman’s ‘public texts’? That so many Fatimid texts actually survive in Cairo suggests that most people on the street did not pay too much attention to what the inscriptions actually said, although as Bierman noted, the distinctive style of writing probably connoted that state officials were saying it. Although the content of the inscriptions may have been important to those who put them up, they were actually shouting into the wind. Moreover, the general phenomenon of public writing was not unique to the Fatimids. As we have seen, it was not only found in Egypt, the Maghrib and al-Andalus but also in contemporary Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia. For example, the portal of the Jurjir mosque in Isfahan is datable to the third quarter of the fourth/tenth century (350/960–375/985), exactly contemporary with the Fatimids’ arrival in Cairo. The inscription on it contains Quran 3:16, which, as Sheila Blair argued many years ago, was meant to advertise the building’s function as a Mutazilite foundation.32 Nor was public writing limited to the Muslim lands alone. In 1993, the Italian archivist Armando Petrucci wrote about the revival of public writing in medieval Italy.33 Public writing, he argued, had flourished in the cities of the Roman Empire between the first and the third centuries ce and then disappeared in early medieval Europe. The epigraphy of the early Middle Ages, such as it was, was dependent on book scripts.34 Between the fifth/eleventh and the seventh/thirteenth centuries, however, and exactly the period when the Fatimids were ruling in Egypt, a new style of epigraphy developed in such cities as 32 The mosque was built by the Buyid vizier al-Så˙ib b.Abbåd before his death in 385/995; it may be a mosque already mentioned as standing by al-MaqdisÈ (writing in 375/985). Blair, The Monumental Inscriptions, pp. 52–3. 33 Armando Petrucci, Public Lettering: Script, Power, and Culture, trans. Linda Lappin (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1993). 34 Ibid., p. 3.

33

34

jonathan m. bloom

Salerno and Pisa, which were prospering thanks to their domination of Mediterranean commerce with the Muslim cities of Sicily, Egypt, North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula. Petrucci never asked, however, whether the revival of public writing in Italy was inspired by the public writing merchants had seen in cities controlled by Muslims, but the idea is intriguing. The Duomo of Salerno, begun in 1076–7 and completed in 1084–5, is a good example, for it used monumental writing to convey a political message using formal solutions directly inspired by lateantique models.35 Archbishop Alfano created the new monumental graphic language of Roman capitals in which Robert Guiscard (d. 1085), Norman Duke of Apulia, Calabria and Sicily, had his own name and titles, along with his claim to rulership, inscribed on a marble band running across the base of the pediment [Figure 2.10]. Might Robert have seen public writing on the Muslim buildings of Sicily, which he began conquering in 1061? At the same time, in the rich commercial centre of Pisa, a major revival of monumental epigraphy inspired by ancient models occurred beginning in 1064 with the construction of the Duomo. An inscription in large square capital letters commemorated the Pisan conquest of the Balearic Islands, which had been held by the Muslim Taifas of Dénia and Majorca. The inscription was mounted adjacent to the very doors of Majorca through which the conquerors had marched, and which they took home as a trophy.36 According to Petrucci, the ruling class of the Italian communes wanted and knew how to use the symbolic language of monumental writing and brought it out from the interior of sacred buildings into the urban space teeming with the activities of citizens, many of whom were now literate.37 It is likely that by the time the Fatimids came to Egypt in the second half of the fourth/tenth century, a significant portion of the population would have been able to recognise Arabic script, even if they could not read a complex text. It is no accident that at this same time the more legible rounded scripts – that are still used today – were codified as book hands, paper became the preferred medium for copying books, and we have evidence for the production of ­small-format copies of the Quran destined for individual readers.38

35 Ibid. 36 Karen Rose Mathews, Conflict, Commerce, and an Aesthetic of Appropriation in the Italian Maritime Cities, 1000–1150 (Leiden: Brill, 2018), p. 123. 37 Petrucci, Public Lettering, p. 8. In a development parallel to what we have already seen in the lands of Islam, the names of artisans also began to appear on monuments together with the name of the patron. 38 Jonathan M. Bloom, Paper Before Print: The History and Impact of Paper in the Islamic World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001).

fatimid public text revisited

Figure 2.10  Inscription in the name of Robert Guiscard on the façade of the Duomo (San Matteo) of Salerno, 1085. Photo: Berthold Werner, Wikipedia.

The revival of public writing in Christian Europe differed, however, in one significant way from what happened in the lands of Islam, because in Europe ancient models inspired monumental lettering, and it was totally unrelated to contemporary book hands. In the Muslim lands, the monumental angular scripts, whether embellished with leaves or not, were not revived but had been used for monumental writing since earliest times. In sum, the Fatimids were not unique in their use of public texts, for this type of inscription was used not only in Egypt, not only under the Fatimids, not only in the Maghrib, and not only in the lands of Islam, but – as the field of Mediterranean studies is showing us – throughout the ­interconnected worlds of the Middle Ages.

35

36

jonathan m. bloom

Bibliography Bierman, Irene A., Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998). Blair, Sheila S., ‘Floriated Kufic and the Fatimids’, in Marianne Barrucand (ed.), L’Égypte Fatimide: Son Art et Son Histoire, Actes du colloque organisé à Paris les 28, 29 et 30 mai 1998 (Paris: Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1999), pp. 107–16. Blair, Sheila S., The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana. Supplements to Muqarnas (Leiden: Brill, 1992). Bloom, Jonathan M., Architecture of the Islamic West: Islamic Architecture in North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula 700–1800 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2020). Bloom, Jonathan M., Arts of the City Victorious: Islamic Art and Architecture in Fatimid North Africa and Egypt (London: Yale University Press, 2007). Bloom, Jonathan M., ‘Erasure and Memory: Aghlabid and Fatimid Inscriptions in North Africa’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 61–75. Bloom, Jonathan M., Paper Before Print: The History and Impact of Paper in the Islamic World (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001). Bloom, Jonathan M., Review of Anna Contadini, Fatimid Art in the Victoria and Albert Museum and Irene Bierman, Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text, Journal of the American Oriental Society 120, no. 1 (2000): 271–3. Creswell, K. A. C., Early Muslim Architecture, Vol. II (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940 [R1979]). Flury, Samuel, ‘La Mosquée de Nâyin’, Syria 11 (1930): 43–58. Ibn Idhari al-MarråkushÈ, Kitåb al-Bayån al-Maghrib (Histoire de l’Afrique du Nord et de l’Espagne Musulmane), eds G. S. Colin and É. LéviProvençal (Beirut: Dar Assakafa, 1967). Kalus, Ludvik and Frédérique Soudan, Thesaurus d’épigraphie islamique, www.epigraphie-islamique.org. Kircher, G., ‘Die Moschee des Mu˙ammad b. HairËn (“Drei-Tore-Moschee”) in Qairawån/Tunesien. Erster Bericht’, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäooglischen Instituts Abteilung Kairo 26 (1970): 141–68. Lévi-Provençal, E., Inscriptions arabes d’Espagne (Leiden and Paris: Brill, 1931). Makariou, Sophie (ed.), Islamic Art at the Musée du Louvre (Paris: Louvre editions, 2012). Marçais, Georges, L’Architecture musulmane d’occident (Paris: Arts et Metiers Graphiques, 1954). Marçais, Georges and Lucien Golvin, La Grande Mosquée de Sfax (with a preface by H. H. Abdul-Wahab), Institut National d’Archéologie et Arts de Tunis, Notes et Documents, vol. iii (Tunis: Institut National d’archéologie et arts, 1960). Marçais, Georges and Gaston Wiet, ‘Le «Voile de Sainte Anne» d’Apt’, Monuments et Mémoires Publiés par l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 34, no. 1–2 (1934): 177–94. Mathews, Karen Rose, Conflict, Commerce, and an Aesthetic of Appropriation in the Italian Maritime Cities, 1000–1150 (Leiden: Brill, 2018).

fatimid public text revisited

Petrucci, Armando, Public Lettering: Script, Power, and Culture, trans. Linda Lappin (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1993). Roy, Bernard and Paule Poinssot, Inscriptions arabes de Kairouan, assisted by Louis Poinssot, Publications de l’Institut des Hautes Études de Tunis (Paris: C. Klincksieck, 1950). Tissot, Charles. ‘Note sur le Bordj el-Arîf (Régence de Tunis)’, Annuaire de la Société Archéologique de la Province de Constantine (1854–5), 95–8 and pl. 7 in 1856–7. Van Berchem, Max, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum I: Égypte 1. Mémoires de la Mission Archéologique Française au Caire, 19, Cairo, 1894–1903. Van Berchem, Max, ‘Une mosquée de temps des fatimites au Caire: Notice sur le Gâmi el Goyûshi’, Mémoires de l’Institut Égyptien II (1889): 605–19. Van Berchem, Max, ‘Notes d’archéologie arabe: monuments et inscriptions fatimites’, Journal Asiatique, sér. 8, 17 (1891): 11–95. Van Berchem, Max, ‘Notes d’archéologie arabe (I): monuments et inscriptions fatimites (suite)’, Journal Asiatique 18 (1891): 46–96. Van Berchem, Max, ‘Notes d’archéologie arabe (II): monuments et inscriptions fatimites’, Journal Asiatique, 19 (1892): 377–407. Viollet, Henri and Samuel Flury, ‘Un monument des premiers siècles de l’hégire en Perse’, Syria 2 (1921): 226–34, 305–16. Wiet, Gaston, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum I: Égypte 2. Mémoires de l’Institut Français Archéologique Du Caire, Cairo, 1929–30.

37

CHAPTER THREE

Micro and Macro Power Projection in the Medieval Islamic World: The Architectural and Numismatic Epigraphic Evidence Richard P. McClary Inscriptions played a major role in the development and expression of kingship in the ancient Iranian world1 and this tradition continued throughout the Islamic period. Alongside the proclamation of the ruler’s name in the Friday prayer, the issuance of epigraphic coinage has traditionally been the standard marker of a ruler’s legitimacy.2 The aim of this chapter is to go beyond these two elements and examine the links between the form and specific textual content of the micro and mobile coinage, and that seen in the immobile and monumental architectural inscriptions across the dår al-Islåm, from the fifth/eleventh to the seventh/thirteenth centuries. This phenomenon can be seen in several different dynastic contexts, from the Umayyads onwards, and from the Maghrib to Turan. While horizontal bands of inscriptions are the most common format of presenting text monumentally, the three case studies discussed below look at specific examples of the use of circular forms, allowing for comparative analysis between textually and aesthetically related architectural and numismatic case studies produced within the same cultural milieux. They address primarily textual roundels, but the final section expands the discussion to include some examples of similarly formatted anthropomorphic and zoomorphic images. The case studies deliberately span a large area, from Central Asia to

  1 Matthew P. Canepa, ‘Inscriptions, Royal Spaces and Iranian Identity: Epigraphic Practices in Persia and the Ancient Iranian World’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), p. 10.   2 Jonathan M. Bloom, ‘Erasure and Memory: Aghlabid and Fatimid Inscriptions in North Africa’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), p. 61.

power projection in the medieval islamic world

Anatolia and Egypt. The reason for such a vast scope is to highlight the general commonalties that transcend not just different regions and styles, but also different aspects of Islamic belief and rulership. The specificity of both form and content, but vast differences in not only scale and media but, significantly, mobility, are what strikes at the heart of the argument. In order to approach the subject from each end of the scale this chapter addresses a variety of media, namely stone and stucco on buildings and gold and silver coins. The aim in all cases is to attempt to highlight the close relationship between micro and macro examples of dynastic identity and the projection of power and legitimacy. The first section consists of a study of some of the roundel inscriptions in the Shah Fazl tomb, a Qarakhanid monument built in the fifth/eleventh century in the far northeast of the Fergana Valley in what is now Kyrgyzstan, and how they can be related to inscriptional composition of Qarakhanid coinage. This is followed by an examination and comparison of a roundel on the al-Aqmar mosque, built under the Fatimids in Cairo, and the contemporaneous coinage issued by the same rulers. The final section addresses Rum Seljuq coinage of the seventh/thirteenth century, and the nature of the relationship between the iconography seen on a small scale on coins and on a far larger scale on monuments, especially in stone at the Izz al-DÈn KaykåËs I hospital in Sivas in central Anatolia. Stucco roundels and silver coins: the Shah Fazl tomb and Qarakhanid use of Quran 9:33 The first, and chronologically earliest, of the three case studies focuses on the far northeast of the dår al-Islåm. The Shah Fazl tomb is the earliest Qarakhanid structure to survive largely intact. It is located in the village of Safid Buland, at the northeastern end of the Fergana Valley, in Kyrgyzstan, close to the border with Uzbekistan.3 The tomb, dated to 447–51/1055–60, was built for the Qarakhanid ruler Mu˙ammad b. Naßr by his son Muizz al-Dawla Abbås.4 The austere and unornamented exterior represents the pinnacle of honesty to form, with a solid brick mass topped by a stepped octagonal zone of transition and an unusually attenuated dome. This is in total contrast to the richly decorated, and originally polychromatic, interior, which featured a wide array of different decorative and epigraphic styles on almost all of the available surfaces.5 The current   3 The tomb is located at 41.746327 N, 75.250544 E.   4 Sheila Blair, The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 1992), pp. 128–9.   5 For studies of the building see Ernst Cohn-Wiener, ‘A Turanic Monument of the Twelfth Century a.d.’, Ars Islamica 6, no. 1 (1939): 88–91, and Richard P. McClary, Medieval Monuments of Central Asia:

39

40

richard p. mcclary

Figure 3.1  Safid Buland, Kyrgyzstan. Exterior and interior of the Shah Fazl tomb (447–51/1055–60). Credit: Ziyautdin Babakhanov, Åthår al-islåm al-tårÈkhiyya fÈ al-Itti˙åd al-SufyÈtÈ/ Historical Monuments of the U.S.S.R. (Tashqand: al-Idåra al-DÈnÈya li-MuslimÈ Åsiyå al-Wus†á wa-Qåzåqstån, 1962), pl. 12.

appearance of both the interior and the exterior of the tomb is marred by large steel armatures which were installed in the second half of the twentieth century in order to prevent further structural damage, but it was documented by Ernst Cohn-Wiener in the 1930s, when it was in a far better preserved state than it is now [Figure 3.1].6 The building is in a remote location, away from major urban centres, and is near a range of mountains, with a river flowing nearby. These geomorphic characteristics fit into a distinctive pattern of tomb construction across the wider Iranian world in the fifth and sixth/eleventh and twelfth centuries and are in contrast to the more common urban location of several other Qarakhanid tombs.7 Qarakhanid Architecture of the 11th and 12th Centuries (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020), pp. 23–52.   6 I am indebted to Robert Hillenbrand for allowing me access to, and use of, his copies of Ernst Cohn-Wiener’s photographs of the building.   7 For a study of this phenomenon see Richard P. McClary, ‘On a Holy Mountain? Remote and Elevated Funerary Monuments in Medieval Islam’, in Francine Giese, Anna Pawlak and Marcus Thome (eds), Tomb – Memory – Space: Concepts of Representation in Premodern Christian and Islamic Art (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018), pp. 13–24. For the

power projection in the medieval islamic world

The mural stucco revetment is divided into three registers. The dado section features a series of blind tri-lobed pointed arch panels, topped by a narrow inscription band. Above this there is the wide band of three full and two half squares on each wall, each filled with either full or half roundels respectively. At the top of the walls, above the roundels in squares, is the largest inscription band, written in Persian. This is the earliest dated structure to use Persian, and the rich array of different inscriptions is but one of the elements that makes this such an important monument [Figure 3.2]. The extensive use of plaster roundels incised with geometric forms at the Samanid palace in the citadel of Afrasiyab8 indicates that while the overall internal aesthetic of the Shah Fazl tomb is both unique and innovative, the craftsmen responsible were clearly drawing deeply from the well of long-established regional styles of mural decoration. The major register of ornament consists of a series of sixteen large squares, twelve on the flat wall and four split by a corner. Each square has a semicircle one each of its four sides, with carved ornament in the corner sections. These occupy well over half of the total height of the wall. In the middle of each square is a richly ornamented roundel. These alternately feature either carved relief or incised patterns in the stucco surface. The outer edge of all but one of the carved relief roundels feature Quranic inscriptions, with a rich array of geometrical patterns inside. It is these roundels that are the main focus here, in the context of trying to gain a clearer understanding of the nature of micro and macro dynastic power projection through epigraphy. There are five roundels that retain the majority of their inscriptions around the rim, with the one on the right of the west wall simply consisting of a repeat of al-mulk li-llåh (‘dominion belongs to God’). The length of the kåf can be seen to have been compressed or elongated throughout the inscription, presumably as part of the design process to ensure that all the repeats were in full. Despite this, there are three repeats of al-mulk that lack the following li-llåh. This proves, if nothing else, that the inscriptions were carved by hand and in situ, rather than created by way of small re-useable or large singleuse moulds or stencils. The inscription features an almost identical form for both the mÈm and the hå, the only d ­ ifference being the ligature following the mÈm. most comprehensive study of the extant corpus of Qarakhanid tombs, see McClary, Medieval Monuments, especially pp. 23–106, 213–36, 273–81 and 285–90.   8 I. Akhrarov and L. Rempel’, Reznoi shtuk Afrasiyaba (Tashkent: Izdatelstvo Literatury I Iskusstva Gafura Galima, 1971), pp. 34–43 is still the most detailed study of the stucco revetments from the Samanid palace in Afrasiyab.

41

42

richard p. mcclary

Figure 3.2  Safid Buland, Kyrgyzstan. Southwest corner of the interior of the Shah Fazl tomb. Credit: Ziyautdin Babakhanov, Åthår al-islåm al-tårÈkhiyya fÈ al-Itti˙åd al-SufyÈtÈ/ Historical Monuments of the U.S.S.R. (Tashqand: al-Idåra al-DÈnÈya li-MuslimÈ Åsiyå al-Wus†á wa-Qåzåqstån, 1962), pl. 13.

Two of the roundels on the south wall, on the left and right, feature Quranic inscriptions, with the one on the right featuring Quran 9:33. The passage reads: It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to show that it is above all [other] religions, even if the disbelievers hate it.9 The use of Quran 9:33 around the rim of a circle is seen on the great majority of Qarakhanid coinage issued from the fifth/eleventh

  9 The Quran, trans. by Mohammad Abdel-Haleem (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 119.

power projection in the medieval islamic world

43

Figure 3.3  Stucco roundel on the right side of the south wall in the Shah Fazl tomb (left) and a Qarakhanid dirham naming Naßr b. Ali, minted in Uzgend in 398/1007–8 (Private Collection) (right), with Quran 9:33 around the edge. Photo: Richard P. McClary.

and sixth/twelfth centuries.10 However, the roundels in the Shah Fazl tomb appear to be the only recorded instance of the use of this specific passage in the context of early Islamic architecture in Iran and Central Asia [Figure 3.3]. Despite the use of patterns in the middle of the roundels and text in the middle of the coins, this use of the same visual idiom and textual content on both a macro, immobile scale and a micro, highly mobile scale is a phenomenon that can be associated with legitimacy and power projection. SËrat al-Tawba (Repentance) is a Medinan sËra and the only one in the Quran that does not start with ‘bismillåh al-ra˙mån al-ra˙Èm’. Verse 33 is known as the ‘prophetic mission’ verse and was generally only inscribed on architecture in the earliest period, as it can be found on the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, the Kaba in Mecca and the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina.11 This verse is

10 See, for example, all the dirhams from a hoard found in Krasnaia Rechka (Michael Fedorov, ‘The Krasnaia Rechka Hoard of Qarakhanid Dirhams (401–42/1010–51)’, The Numismatic Chronicle 165 (2005): 355–8), and all the ones found in a hoard at Dzhalalabad (Michael Fedorov, ‘The Dzhalalabad Hoard of Qarakhanid Dirhams (ad 1009–39) as a Historical Source’, The Numismatic Chronicle 163 (2003): 361–5). 11 For details of the usage of Quran 9:33 on a metal plaque at the north entrance, and the large outer face mosaic inscription band of the octagonal arcade at the Dome of the Rock, see Marcus Milwright, The Dome of the Rock and its Umayyad Mosaic Inscriptions (Edinburgh: Edinburgh

44

richard p. mcclary

also found on large numbers of the third/ninth-century funerary stelae from Egypt.12 The Qarakhanids were relatively new converts to Islam, in a region that was still undergoing Islamisation in the fifth/eleventh century. It therefore makes sense that they chose to use an inscription for a royal tomb that was associated with the most important early Islamic monuments. They also placed Quran 9:33 around the edges of their coins in a similar manner as can be seen around the edge of the earliest truly Islamic, and purely epigraphic, coins of the post-reform period under the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik (r. 65–86/685–705) in the late first/seventh century.13 The Qarakhanids were also maintaining a degree of numismatic continuity, as the coinage of the preceding Samanids, who they had replaced as rulers of the lands north of the Oxus, also tended to feature Quran 9:33 around the edge of their coins [Figure 3.4]. A fifth, only recently published,14 inscription survives around the edge of the roundel on the left of the north wall. It consists of Quran 6:162–163, which are both verses addressed directly to Mu˙ammad, and the first of the two refers to death, making it a very fitting choice to be placed within a tomb. The text reads: Say, ‘My prayers and sacrifices, my life and death, are all for God, Lord of all the Worlds. He has no partner. This is what I am commanded, and I am the first to devote myself to Him.’15 The mention of oneness of God, through his command to Mu˙ammad to proclaim that He has no associate (lå sharÈka lahu), may well be of some significance, as the use of the word ‘sharÈk’ connects the inscription with the one immediately opposite it on the south wall, featuring Quran 9:33, which ends in the etymologically related word ‘mushrikËn’. University Press, 2016), p. 77 and p. 163. See ibid., p. 163 for details of the use of the same passage in Mecca in 140/758. 12 Quran 9:33 is one of the two most common verses (along with Quran 23:7) to be found on the collection of third/ninth-century funerary stelae from Aswan. Michael Rogers, ‘Calligraphy and Common Script: Epitaphs from Aswan and Akhlat’, in Priscilla P. Soucek (ed.), Content and Context of Visual Arts in the Islamic World (University Park and London: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1988), p. 107. 13 Gold dinars with Quran 9:33 around the obverse margin were issued in Damascus from 77 ah onwards, and silver dirhams were issued from the following year onwards by mints in the Mashriq (Luke Treadwell, ‘Abd al-Malik’s Coinage Reforms: The Role of the Damascus Mint’, Revue Numismatique 6, no. 165 (2009): pp. 373–4). See Milwright, The Dome of the Rock, p. 178, fig. 7.5 for an image of one of the dinars. 14 McClary, Medieval Monuments of Central Asia, p. 41. 15 The Quran, trans. Abdel-Haleem, p. 93.

power projection in the medieval islamic world

Figure 3.4  Samanid dirham naming Naßr II b. A˙mad, minted in Shash (Tashkent), Uzbekistan in 318/930–1, with Quran 9:33 around the edge (Private Collection). Photo: Richard P. McClary.

The recess of each of the four cardinal polylobed arches in the octagonal zone of transition had a central roundel, slightly smaller than the ones on the walls below, which also featured Kufic inscriptions around the edges. Two retain enough to decipher, the one in the south, which has bismillåh al-Ra˙mån al-Ra˙im, followed by Quran 45:36–7 and the one in the east, which has [bismi]llåh al-Ra˙mån al-Ra˙Èm, followed by Quran 9:128. In both cases the inscription starts at the three o’clock position. As with 9:33, Quran 45:36–7 is another passage that does not appear to have been used in the context of architecture in the region until much later, although the extensive losses to the corpus make such assertions tentative at best. The two verses state: So praise be to God, Lord of the heavens and earth, Lord of the worlds. True greatness in the heavens and the earth is rightfully His: he is the Mighty, the Wise.16 16 The Quran, trans. Abdel-Haleem, p. 326.

45

46

richard p. mcclary

Figure 3.5  Qarakhanid copper fals, minted in Ilaq, near Shash (Tashkent) in 395/1004–5 (Private Collection). Photo: Richard P. McClary.

It is thus quite fitting that it is placed near the top of the structure, looking down. In both of the surviving upper roundel inscriptions the final mÈms have an extended vertical tail ending with a foliated tip, which is in contrast to the ones on the lower roundels, but in a similar manner to the elaborate foliated and knotted Kufic Persian inscription band located above at the top of the zone of transition [Figure 3.1]. Despite the roundel inscriptions being considerably simpler and smaller, and in a different language to the horizontal band, the use of common decorative motifs serves to tie the entire programme of inscriptions inside the tomb together into a more cohesive whole. These roundels in the zone of transition feature even more intricate and complex geometric patterns than the ones on the lower walls of the tomb and are a tour de force of the stucco carvers’ art. Before moving on the second part of the chapter, it is worth considering a Qarakhanid copper fals, minted in Ilaq, near Shash (Tashkent) in 395/1004–5 that has a very similar appearance to the later Fatimid coins discussed below. The coin features two concentric circles of text, with two horizontal lines in the middle, starting with Mu˙ammad [Figure 3.5].17 The use of the same visual aesthetic at a much earlier date, far to the east, and issued by an avowedly Sunni dynasty, suggests that previous claims as to the distinctively Ismaili nature of this format18 must be viewed with some scepticism.

17 The coin, in the author’s collection, is unpublished, but fits into the categories Album 3430 and Kochnev 144. 18 Irene A. Bierman, Writing Signs. The Fatimid Public Text (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1998), p. 62.

power projection in the medieval islamic world

Fatimid roundels as dynastic identifiers Having examined one particular instance of this micro and macro, immobile and portable, usage of epigraphy in roundel form, attention now turns to the Fatimids. The earliest Fatimid epigraphic roundels in Cairo are on the west and north sides of the northern minaret of the mosque of al-Óåkim, now encased in later material.19 However, perhaps the most famous example of a monumental epigraphic roundel in the medieval Islamic world is the one on the portal of the Fatimid al-Aqmar mosque, built in Cairo in 519/1125–6.20 The roundel, in carved stone, is in the middle of the ribbed hood over the entrance in the centre of the façade. A full third of the inscription is given over to bismillåh al-ra˙mån al-ra˙Èm, with the other two thirds containing the last section of Quran 33:33. The text reads: God wishes to keep uncleanness away from you, people of the [Prophet’s] House, and to purify you thoroughly.21 The main significance of the passage in terms of Fatimid ideology is the mention of the people of the Prophet’s house (‘ahl al-bayt’) [Figure 3.6]. The same elements as are found on the al-Aqmar portal are also seen in the main mihrab of the slightly later mausoleum of Sayyida Ruqayya, built less than ten years later, in 527/1133. In this case the text of Quran 33:33 has migrated to the top of the mihrab, and the roundel has Mu˙ammad repeated in an interlocking pattern, arranged around a central Ali.22 A contemporaneous dinar issued in 518/1124 by al-ManßËr replicates the visual appearance of the al-Aqmar roundel, although there are two concentric circles of text on the coin, in contrast to the one on the portal, which has a scrolling vegetal pattern in the outer

19 Only the one on the north side is legible, and features Quran 5:58 around the edge. See Bernard O’Kane, ‘Monumental Calligraphy in Fatimid Egypt: Epigraphy in Stone, Stucco, and Wood’, in Assadullah Souren Melikian-Chirvani (ed.), The World of the Fatimids (Toronto: Aga Khan Museum, 2018), p. 145. 20 The small building, on a plot near the site of the Great Eastern Palace, was begun in 516/1122, and the façade has been described as the most beautiful surviving example of Fatimid stonework (Jonathan M. Bloom, Arts of the City Victorious. Islamic Art and Architecture in Fatimid North Africa and Egypt (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007), pp. 139–40). 21 The Quran, trans. Abdel-Haleem, p. 268. 22 Caroline Williams, ‘The Cult of Alid Saints in the Fatimid Monuments of Cairo Part II: The Mausolea’, Muqarnas 3 (1985): pp. 45–6. See p. 45, pl. 7 for an image of the mihrab.

47

48

richard p. mcclary

Figure 3.6  Cairo, Egypt. Central roundel over the entrance to the al-Aqmar mosque. Photo: Richard P. McClary.

Figure 3.7  Cairo, Egypt. Al-Aqmar roundel (left) and Fatimid dinar dated 518/1124, naming al-ManßËr (Private Collection). Photo: Richard P. McClary.

band.23 While it has been claimed that the use of concentric circles of text, be it on coins or buildings, and especially the use of Quran 9:33, is a sign of Ismailism,24 as the Qarakhanid coin in figure 3.5 shows, this was not necessarily the case [Figure 3.7]. 23 This connection between Fatimid coinage and architectural roundels has been previously noted by Bierman (Bierman, Writing Signs, p.63 and p. 82). 24 Bierman, Writing Signs, pp. 118–19.

power projection in the medieval islamic world

The coin on the right in Figure 3.7 shows the same circling band of Kufic, as well as two horizontal words in the centre, as at al-Aqmar. Minted just a year earlier, the coin and the building show that the Fatimids were using virtually identical visual means to demonstrate a distinctive religious authority and identity on both a micro and macro scale. However, in this case it is a visual and formal correlation, rather than one involving a specific textual correlation, as the coin has Quran 9:33 in the outer circle, and the Fatimid variant of the shåhåda, which ends in AlÈ walÈ Allåh in the inner circle. The way that light from within the mosque would shine through the ajouré carved stone roundel at night is akin to the way that sunlight reflects off the golden surface of the far smaller coin, but on a far larger scale, and may be viewed, in part, as a manifestation of the importance of light in the Fatimid’s Ismaili tawÈl (esoteric interpretation).25 Subsequently, the use of epigraphic roundels in the context of both architecture and numismatics, as well as a wide range of other portable objects, was to proliferate in Cairo under the Ayyubids and later the Mamluks. Bloom has recently noted that there is some degree of similarity between the epigraphic roundel, with four words written radially and sharing the central mÈm on a marble plaque to the left of the mihrab in the Great Mosque of Kairouan, and the design of several similar, and equally unusual, Fatimid coins minted in Sicily in the fifth/eleventh century.26 The roundel in Kairouan is smaller in scale than the other architectural roundels under discussion, and hints at the existence of a unified approach that ran across the continuum of scale, from the smallest to the largest examples of public epigraphy. The roundel form, as seen on the al-Aqmar façade as well as on the earlier minaret at the al-Hakim mosque, has been referred to as a sign of Ismailism.27 However, as has been shown above, it was a far more universal symbol, one that was employed by Sunni Muslim dynasties who wanted to represent their power and legitimacy in both mobile and immobile, but aesthetically related, forms in a variety of media and scales.28

25 O’Kane, ‘Monumental Calligraphy’, p. 145. 26 See Bloom, ‘Erasure and Memory’, pp. 64–6, including fig. 17. It is assumed that the slab was taken from a long-destroyed Fatimid mosque. 27 Bierman, Writing Signs, pp. 130–1. 28 Another example of the use of monumental epigraphic stone roundels can be seen in the fat˙nåma set into the walls of Antalya by the Rum Seljuq sultan. See Scott Redford and Gary Leiser, Victory Inscribed: The Seljuk ‘Fetihnåme’ on the Citadel Walls of Antalya, Turkey (Istanbul: AKMED, 2008).

49

50

richard p. mcclary

The lion and sun motif in Rum Seljuq Anatolia While the focus of the previous two dynastic examples was on inscriptions, the same phenomenon of micro and macro, mobile and immobile, examples of related forms and motifs can also be seen in the context of figural and zoomorphic images, integrated with text. Shifting attention back to another frontier region of the medieval Islamic world, there is relevant material to be found in the coinage and architecture of Rum Seljuq Anatolia in the seventh/thirteenth century. The use of symbols alongside text, on both the coinage and the buildings, allowed for a wider range of the mixed population of the region, many of whom were Christian and not necessarily literate in Arabic, to understand the meaning of the signs being used by the ruler. The combination of imperial imagery and religious texts can be seen in the hospital founded by Sultan Izz al-Din KaykåËs in Sivas in 614/1217.29 The spandrels of the arch around the muqarnas hood of the portal accessing the complex each feature fragmentary remains of zoomorphic sculpture.30 Although damaged they appear to be a pair of confronted lions. The right-hand sculpture is more intact, but has less surviving surface decoration than the other one [Figure 3.8]. The lion has long been considered an apotropaic animal, and the connotation of power associated with lions is demonstrated by the name of sultans such as Kılıç Arslan II (meaning ‘Sword Lion’).31 This practice of installing affronted lions in high relief in a conspicuous public location, above an inscription naming the ruler, was not the exclusive preserve of the Rum Seljuqs. It can be seen on the walls of Mayyafariqin (Silvan), where the Ayyubid ruler of the city, al-Aw˙ad, used the same device, with a sun in between the lions, on the city walls in 599/1203 to commemorate his rebuilding of them.32

29 For studies of the complex see Sedat Çetinta∞, Sivas Darü∞∞ifası 614–1217 (Istanbul: TC Òstanbul Üniversitesi Tıp Tarihi Enstitüsü, 1953) and Richard P. McClary, Rum Seljuq Architecture 1170–1220: The Patronage of Sultans (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017), pp. 91–178. 30 For the most detailed study of the figural carvings on the portal and east Èwån of the Sivas hospital see McClary, Rum Seljuq Architecture, pp. 100­–9. 31 A pair of lions were set into the base of the kiosk in Konya built by Kılıç Arslan II. See Friedrich Sarre, Der Kiosk von Konia (Berlin: Verlag für Kunstwissenschaft, 1936), p. 12, fig. 6 for an image of one of the lions, and ibid., pl. 1 for it still in situ before the collapse of most of the structure. 32 See Antony Eastmond, Tamta’s World. The Life and Encounters of a Medieval Noblewoman from the Middle East to Mongolia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017), p. 100, fig. 25 for an image of

power projection in the medieval islamic world

Figure 3.8  Sivas, Turkey. Fragmentary pair of lions on the upper section of the portal of the Izz al-DÈn KaykåËs hospital. Photo: Richard P. McClary.

The only other surviving figural sculptures in the Sivas complex are the two roundels on the spandrels of the east Èwån, visible immediately after passing through the portal and into the courtyard. Although both are damaged, it is clear from the ray-like form of the surrounding triangular decoration that the north roundel represents the sun, and the central area, featuring a face in its original state, based in part on the somewhat better-preserved face in the moon on the other side of the arch, is surrounded by the fragmentary remains of the shahåda in cursive epigraphy33 [Figure 3.9]. For the avoidance of doubt, written below the sun, in two lines, is:          ‫صورت‬           ‫شمس‬      

ßËrat shams (‘image of [the] sun’)

The integration of possibly pre-Islamic solar imagery with the Islamic profession of faith is an example of the syncretic nature of the dynasty and predates its use on later Rum Seljuq coins, as well as on seals [Figure 3.10].34 A comparison can be made with a slightly later silver dirham coin, minted in Sivas in 640/1242–3, which features a striding lion in side profile beneath an anthropomorphised sun. The survival of the lions and the inscription. The same page has a translation of the text as well. 33 Ali Haydar Bayat, ‘Sivas Darü∞-S¸ifasının Bilinen ve Bilinmeyen Kitabeleri’, in Ibrahim Yasak (ed.), Selçuklular Döneminde Sivas Sempozyumu Bildirileri (Sivas: Sivas Valili©i, Òl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlülü©ü, 2006), p. 361. 34 A Rum Seljuq metal seal with a lion and sun motif was sold by Bonhams in London in 2013, sale 21359, lot 34 (https://bonhams.com/auctions​ /21359/34).

51

52

richard p. mcclary

Figure 3.9  Sivas, Turkey. Epigraphic sun and moon roundels on the spandrels of the east Èwån of the Izz al-Din KaykåËs hospital. Photo: Richard P. McClary.

Figure 3.10  Rum Seljuq tile with anthropomorphised sun, from Kubadabad palace (Karatay Madrasa Museum, Konya) (left) and a silver dirham minted in Sivas in 640/1242–3 naming Ghiyåth al-DÈn Kaykhusraw II (David Collection, Copenhagen C74). Photo: Richard P. McClary.

the coins, as well as glazed tiles from the contemporary Kubadabad palace35 [Figure 3.10], demonstrates the widespread use and diffusion of the lion and sun imagery in royal contexts across the Rum Seljuq sultanate in a variety of materials and scales. 35 For a similar shaped tile to the one in Figure 3.10 and also from Kubadabad, but featuring a lion, see Rüçhan Arık, Kubad Abad: Selçuklu Saray ve Çinileri (Istanbul: Türkiye Ò∞ Bankası, 2000), p. 107, fig. 116.

power projection in the medieval islamic world

Figure 3.11  Rum Seljuq gold dinar naming Ghiyåth al-DÈn Kaykhusraw II (American Numismatic Society, New York 1962.126.2).

It is Ghiyåth al-DÈn Kaykhusraw II, who ruled as Rum Seljuq sultan from 634/1237–643/1246, who is credited with the introduction of the lion and sun motif on Rum Seljuq coins.36 The most obvious feature of the motif as it appears on these coins is the solar disc, which is shown as a full circle above the lion’s back. The lion in most cases walks to the right, with one paw raised, with the Abbasid Caliph cited in a cursive inscription above the lion. A huge number of coins of this type are known in silver, but there are also some very scarce issues in gold as well. One of these features two addorsed lions, in the same manner as the pair on the portal of the Sivas hospital [Figure 3.11].37 As the building is cardinally orientated, the sun rises between the two stone lions every morning, thus creating a similar image as is seen on the later gold dinars. Conclusion The scale and grandeur of monumental architectural inscriptions can impress the viewer in the context of either the centre of power, or as a physical signifier of such power at somewhat more remote

36 Shailendra Bhandare, ‘Transregional Connections: The “Lion and Sun” Motif and Coinage between Anatolia and India’, in A. C. S. Peacock and Richard P. McClary (eds), Turkish History and Culture in India: Identity, Art and Transregional Connections (Leiden: Brill, 2020), p. 227. An alternative reading of the symbolism of the lion and sun coin is noted by AflåkÈ, who commented that disaffected members of the court thought that the sun element was a crypto-portrait of Ghiyåth al-DÈn Kaykhusraw II’s Georgian wife, GurjÈ KhåtËn (Eastmond, Tamta’s World, pp. 239–41). However, the earlier examples in Sivas and the use of the symbol across the wider region makes this highly unlikely to have been the ruler’s intention. 37 See Bhandare, ‘Transregional Connections’, p. 227.

53

54

richard p. mcclary

locations such as the Qarakhanid tomb in Safid Buland. In contrast, the inscriptions on valuable, personal and small-scale coinage were able to, and are known to have, travelled over great distances. This allowed them to reach a far wider and more diverse audience, while imparting the same message, in terms of both the visual language of form and decoration, as well as on occasion the specific epigraphic content. The coinage issued by rulers across the medieval Islamic world augmented large-scale architectural inscription programmes and acted as a dispersible way of broadcasting the same message that was expressed in far greater detail on the wide range of ‘buildings which speak’ across the Islamic world. By looking at three examples, spread across the medieval Islamic world, it is clear that across the specific regional and dynastic aesthetics, a broader theme and means of projecting a more unified sense of power projection and legitimisation can be seen. There is a correlation between a small, tactile and mobile form of textual power projection on the one hand, and a monumental, immobile form on the other. They mark either end of a continuum of coherent visual language that served to reinforce both the supremacy of Islam, and the dynastic entity responsible for upholding the intertwined political and religious authority on earth. Despite the significant differences between the three different political contexts discussed above, and the variety of different epigraphic and iconographic approaches, it is clear, and indeed not particularly surprising, that in each case there was an attempt to create a unified aesthetic and visual link between forms of imperial power projection and legitimacy at either end of the scale. There are many unanswered questions that remain, especially concerning the visibility and intended audience of some of the architectural examples. The striking similarity between the smallscale Qarakhanid coinage and large-scale stucco roundels at Safid Buland are easy to see, but who the primary intended audience was for the internally located roundels is somewhat harder to establish. The audience is clearer to ascertain in the context of the al-Aqmar roundel, as it was adjacent to the Fatimid palace in the centre of the city. The examples on the Sivas hospital combine the two aspects of public, external imagery, and somewhat more private, internal text and imagery. While the building was a public space, it can be assumed that more people would have seen the outside than the inside, and it is the internal inscriptions that are overtly religious in nature, with the more universal and ruler-associated lion figures and the foundation inscription naming the sultan on the outside. The micro and macro examples of inscriptions discussed here engaged individuals, and society more broadly, as both the referent, or viewer, who passively received the message, and simultaneously as the disseminator of the message through the act of travelling, and

power projection in the medieval islamic world

thus distributing coinage with the same visual and/or textual content. This duality made the individuals engaging with the message, be it temporarily as a visiting merchant or pilgrim, or permanently as a resident of the city or region, as interlocutors in the distribution as well as reception of the signs of legitimacy and authority inscribed on both the buildings and coinage of any given society. Bibliography Akhrarov, I. and L. Rempel’, Reznoı˘ shtuk Afrasiyaba (Tashkent: Izdatelstvo Literatury i Iskusstva Gafura Galima, 1971). Arık, Rüçhan, Kubad Abad: Selçuklu Saray ve Çinileri (Istanbul: Türkiye Ò∞ Bankası, 2000). Bhandare, Shailendra, ‘Transregional Connections: The “Lion and Sun” Motif and Coinage between Anatolia and India’, in A. C. S. Peacock and Richard P. McClary (eds), Turkish History and Culture in India: Identity, Art and Transregional Connections (Leiden: Brill, 2020), pp. 203–47. Bayat, Ali Haydar, ‘Sivas Darü∞-S¸ifasının Bilinen ve Bilinmeyen Kitabeleri’, in Ibrahim Yasak (ed.), Selçuklular Döneminde Sivas Sempozyumu Bildirileri (Sivas: Sivas Valili©i, Òl Kültür ve Turizm Müdürlülü©ü, 2006), pp. 351–65. Bierman, Irene A., Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998). Blair, Sheila, The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana (Leiden: Brill, 1992). Bloom, Jonathan M., Arts of the City Victorious: Islamic Art and Architecture in Fatimid North Africa and Egypt (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007). Bloom, Jonathan M., ‘Erasure and Memory: Aghlabid and Fatimid Inscriptions in North Africa’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 61–57. Canepa, Matthew P., ‘Inscriptions, Royal Spaces and Iranian Identity: Epigraphic Practices in Persia and the Ancient Iranian World’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 10–35. Çetinta∞, Sedat, Sivas Darü∞∞ifası 614–1217 (Istanbul: TC Òstanbul Üniversitesi Tıp Tarihi Enstitüsü, 1953). Cohn-Wiener, Ernst, ‘A Turanic Monument of the Twelfth Century a.d’, Ars Islamica 6, no. 1 (1939): 88–91. Eastmond, Anthony, Tamta’s World: The Life and Encounters of a Medieval Noblewoman from the Middle East to Mongolia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017). Fedorov, Michael, ‘The Dzhalalabad Hoard of Qarakhanid Dirhams (ad 1009–39) as a Historical Source’, The Numismatic Chronicle 163 (2003): 361–75. Fedorov, Michael, ‘The Krasnaia Rechka Hoard of Qarakhanid Dirhams (401–42/1010–51)’, The Numismatic Chronicle 165 (2005): 354–63. McClary, Richard P., Rum Seljuq Architecture 1170–1220: The Patronage of Sultans (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017). McClary, Richard P., ‘On a Holy Mountain? Remote and Elevated Funerary Monuments in Medieval Islam’, in Francine Giese, Anna Pawlak and

55

56

richard p. mcclary

Marcus Thome (eds), Tomb – Memory – Space: Concepts of Representation in Premodern Christian and Islamic Art (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018), pp. 13–24. McClary, Richard P., Medieval Monuments of Central Asia: Qarakhanid Architecture of the 11th and 12th Centuries (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020). Milwright, Marcus, The Dome of the Rock and its Umayyad Mosaic Inscriptions (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2016). O’Kane, Bernard, ‘Monumental Calligraphy in Fatimid Egypt: Epigraphy in Stone, Stucco, and Wood’, in Assadullah Souren Melikian-Chirvani (ed.), The World of the Fatimids (Toronto: Aga Khan Museum, 2018), pp. 142–59. The Quran, translated by Mohammed Abdel-Haleem (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005). Redford, Scott and Gary Leiser, Victory Inscribed: The Seljuk ‘Fetihnåme’ on the Citadel Walls of Antalya, Turkey (Istanbul: AKMED, 2008). Rogers, Michael, ‘Calligraphy and Common Script: Epitaphs from Aswan and Akhlat’, in Priscilla P. Soucek (ed.), Content and Context of Visual Arts in the Islamic World (University Park and London: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1988), pp. 105–37. Sarre, Friedrich, Der Kiosk von Konia (Berlin: Verlag für Kunstwissenschaft, 1936). Treadwell, Luke, ‘Abd al-Malik’s Coinage Reforms: The Role of the Damascus Mint’, Revue Numismatique 6, no. 165 (2009): 357–81. Williams, Caroline, ‘The Cult of Alid Saints in the Fatimid Monuments of Cairo. Part II: The Mausolea’, Muqarnas 3 (1985): 39–60.

CHAPTER FOUR

The Monumental Inscriptions of the Great Seljuqs Maliksha¯ h and Tutush: Observations on Texts, Protocols and Writing Styles Roberta Giunta A recent article announced the undertaking of a project aimed at gathering the corpus of the monumental inscriptions commissioned by the Islamic dynasties of Central Asian Turkic origin, over the fourth/tenth to seventh/thirteenth centuries.1 During this period, on both monuments and artefacts, commissioners and artisans are known to have focused increasing attention on the inscriptions, as testified by the evident and significant changes in the structures of texts, explications of hierarchies of power, protocols of authorities, and in the choices of language and styles of writing. Over the years, many of these inscriptions have received significant scholarly attention. Others, however, especially those found in archaeological contexts and in incomplete or fragmentary state, still require indepth analysis, aimed at detecting clues that can serve in dating and contextualisation. While engaged in studying those inscriptions of the rich Ghaznavid epigraphic corpus dating from the fifth/eleventh century, the author viewed it as necessary to organise systematically the contemporary Seljuq production, in the conviction that comparative analysis of these two corpora and their distinctive features would reveal useful aspects, gradually improving knowledge and opening to still further exploration. This short contribution presents the oldest group of royal inscriptions of the Great Seljuqs, and the most substantial as currently known: those bearing the names of the brothers Malikshåh (r. 465–85/1073–92) and Tutush (r. 471–88/1078–95). These amount to about twenty inscriptions, many of them intact and in good condition, made in just over ten   1 Roberta Giunta and Viola Allegranzi, ‘Ghaznavid, Qarakhanid and Seljuq Monumental Inscriptions and the Development of Royal Propaganda: Towards an Epigraphic Corpus’, in Sheila R. Canby, Deniz Beyazit and Martina Rugiadi (eds), The Seljuqs and their Successors: Art, Culture and History (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020), pp. 113–28.

58

roberta giunta

years (475/1082–3 to 488/1095) and coming from different parts of the territories they once controlled. Our first aim has been to review the published data2 and organise them in chronological order of the inscriptions – r­ egardless of the territorial origin – focusing mainly on the protocols of the two rulers and the most important palaeographical aspects. Four inscriptions from the Umayyad Great Mosque in Damascus, dating to 475/1082–3, are the earliest recognised for the Seljuq rulers.3 Carried out ten years after Malikshåh’s rise to power, these constitute an epigraphic programme aimed at celebrating a project of restoration and reconstruction of the building.4 They are executed on four rectangular marble slabs (nos. 1–4), originally placed on the pillars supporting the dome at the centre of the prayer hall transept.5 The inscriptions are carved in relief and executed in simple Kufic with lightly ornamented apexes.6 The texts are distributed in horizontal lines (17 lines, nos. 1, 3, 4; 16 lines, no. 2) and have the same structure.   2 For the bibliographical references on the inscriptions, we have mainly referred to the Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique (Fondation Max van Berchem de Genève), hereinafter TEI.   3 In the fragmentary inscription of the madrasa in Khargird, Iran, the only names still legible are those of the wazÈr NiΩåm al-Mulk and of the supervisor of the works, probably SadÈd al-Mulk al-IßfahånÈ. The inscription, unfortunately undated, has been ascribed to a period between 465/1072 and 470/1077, and thus to the first five years of Malikshåh’s reign (Sheila S. Blair, The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana. Leiden: Brill, 1992, pp. 149–52, 258. See also TEI, no. 6712). However, given the absence of the name of any dynastical ruler, this inscription will only be considered because of the main characteristics of the Kufic style in which it was executed. For the same reasons, this presentation does not discuss the inscription on the southern door of the Maqåm IbråhÈm, or Mausoleum of Íåli˙Èn, in Aleppo, dating to 479/1086–7 and bearing the name of AbË Shujå A˙mad, one of Malikshåh’s sons (TEI, no. 6672), nor that on the northern dome of the Great Mosque of Isfahan, in the name of Tåj al-Mulk and dated 481/1088–9 (TEI, no. 6686).   4 The works refer to the domed hall (‫)القبة‬, the maqßËra (‫)المقصورة‬, the roof (‫)السقف‬, the windows (‫)الطاقات‬, the pillars (‫ )األركان‬and their marble covering (‫)ترخيم األركان‬.   5 Slabs no. 1 (100 × 60 cm; TEI, no. 6646) and no. 2 (120 × 57 cm; TEI, no. 6647) are held in the National Museum of Damascus (inv. nos. A.5 and A.7). For slabs no. 3 (100 × 50 cm; TEI, no. 6648) and no. 4 (dimensions not transmitted; TEI, no. 6649), the current provenance is unknown, although these could still be in their original positions.   6 The only two slabs for which I have photographic documentation are those held at the National Museum of Damascus (nos. 1, 2), made during cataloguing and study work on epigraphic finds that I carried out in 2008–9 as part of the Damascus Museum Project directed by Paolo Matthiae (Sapienza Università di Roma). The TEI provides only a photo of slab no. 1 (no. 6646; photo library Max van Berchem no. 493).

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

They mention, in addition to Malikshåh in his capacity as sultan of the dynasty, the caliph al-MuqtadÈ (r. 467/1075–487/1094), the emir of Syria Tutush, the wazÈr NiΩåm al-Mulk, and the wazÈr who commissioned the works, Nåßi˙ al-Dawla.7 On two slabs (nos. 1 and 3) the sultan bears the titles of al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam and shåhanshåh al-aΩam, followed by the laqab8 of sayyid mulËk al-umam, the kunya (AbË’l-Fat˙), the ism and the nasab (Mu˙ammad). On slab no. 2, the titles al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam and shåhanshåh al-aΩam are again followed by the laqab of sayyid mulËk al-umam, here also with that of mawlå al-arab wa’l-ajam, as well as the kunya, the ism and the nasab, which in this case, in addition to the name of the father (Mu˙ammad), includes that of the grandfather (Dåwud). In this inscription, as in the one executed on slab no. 4, the protocol ends with the honorary title aimed at emphasising the relationship between the sultan and the caliph (yamÈn amÈr al-muminÈn). As for the laqabs on slab no. 4, the only one present is that of sayyid mulËk al-umam. In the four inscriptions, a sequence of three laqabs, united by the conjunction wåw, tåj al-dawla wa-siråj al-milla wa-sharaf al-umma, accompanies the name of the brother, Tutush. The laqabs are preceded by the title of al-malik al-ajall, which in inscriptions nos. 1, 3, and 4 is accompanied by the epithets al-muayyid and al-manßËr. The nasab of the Tutush protocol always ends with the honorary title nåßir amÈr al-muminÈn. Works carried out in 1997 in the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem led to the discovery of an epigraphic marble panel behind the Zakariyya mihrab (no. 5).9 In spite of significant corrosion on the upper left of the panel, a large portion of a restoration text could be deciphered. This is dated to 476/1083–4 or 477/1084–5,10 thus one or two years later than the four inscriptions of the Jåmi of Damascus. The text, executed in simple Kufic with only slightly triangular apexes, is inscribed on four lines and mentions the same authorities as in the previous inscriptions, with the exception of the wazÈr NiΩåm   7 The caliph is introduced by the expression khilåfat al-dawla al-abbåsiyya ayyåm; the sultan by fÈ dawla; the emir of Syria by wa-ayyåm. The name of the minister NiΩåm al-Mulk – attested on only two of the four slabs (nos. 1, 3) – is preceded by the expression fÈ ayyåm wizåra.   8 For the translation of the laqabs see below, Table 4.1.   9 The inscription was cited for the first time in Mehmet Tütüncü, Turkish Palestine (1069–1917): Inscriptions from al-Khalil (Hebron), Nabi Musa and Other Palestinian Cities under Turkish Rule (Haarlem: Corpus of Turkish Islamic Inscriptions 2 / Türk Òslam Kitabeleri Dizisi 2, 2008), pp. 21–2, no. 123. The first deciphering of the text was provided by Khader Salameh, ‘A New Seljuq Inscription in the Masjid al-Aqsa, Jerusalem’, Levant 41/1 (2009): 107–17. Cf. also TEI, no. 33329. 10 The numerals of the tens and hundreds are fully legible; for the numeral of the units only the initial letter sÈn.

59

60

roberta giunta

al-Mulk, absent here. The protocol of the sultan occupied the corroded part of the panel and has almost completely disappeared. On the basis of the tracing of the letters and a rough calculation of space it was assumed that the kunya and ism were preceded by the titles [al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam] and [shåhanshåh],11 the latter without the adjective al-aΩam. Neither laqabs nor nasab have been traced. Tutush is again mentioned in this inscription after the sultan,12 as commissioning the work, bearing the same protocol as in inscriptions nos. 1, 3 and 4 of Damascus, with the addition of the epithet al-muΩaffar. The name of the emir is followed by a request to God for his benefit, ‫أعزالـله نصره‬, ‘may God make his victory glorious’. Until the end of the 1990s, in the northwestern wall of the Great Mosque of Ani in Anatolia, there was known to be a small portion of an epigraphic stone band, in slightly flowered Kufic, bearing a construction text in the name of amÈr MinËchihr b. Shåwur (no. 6).13 The works took place during the sultanate of Malikshåh,14 whose protocol was entirely reconstructed. The titles al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam and shåhanshåh al-a[Ωam] were followed by a single laqab ([malik al-mash]riq wa’l-maghrib),15 the kunya (AbË’l-Fat˙), the ism and nasab (this time Alp Arslan instead of Mu˙ammad). The date, which would almost certainly have appeared at the end of the text, has been lost; a date of c. 479/1086–7 has been proposed by Sheila Blair.16 During the reign of Malikshåh, an important epigraphic programme was executed in the domed hall built in the form of a freestanding pavilion, at the behest of his minister NiΩåm al-Mulk, in the centre of the Abbasid hypostyle prayer hall of the Great Mosque of Isfahan. The main inscription, in perfect state of preservation, is enclosed in a continuous horizontal band running along the inner base (no. 7).17 Carved in relief in backed brick, the inscription contains a construction text,18 and is again characterised by the sobriety of a simple Kufic with sporadic decorative elements on the letters and field. In addition to the official titles attested in previous inscriptions, for the first

11 Here and elsewhere, square brackets are used to indicate missing and reconstructed parts of the texts. 12 The sultan’s name is preceded by that of the caliph, which is introduced by the expression naßr min Allah li’l-imåm. 13 The text refers to the building of the minaret (‫ ;)المـنارة‬TEI, no. 6620. 14 The sultan’s name is introduced by the expression fÈ dawla. 15 This same laqab is attested in the inscription of the Great Mosque of Isfahan (cf. below, no. 7). 16 Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, p. 158, no. 60. In the Répertoire Chronologique d’Épigraphie Arabe (RCEA), vol. VII, no. 2707, the inscription is classified as year 466/1074. 17 TEI, no. 6687. 18 The basmala is immediately followed by: ‘he ordered the construction of this qubba’ (‫)أمر ببناء هذه القبة‬.

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

time, the name of Malikshåh19 bears a sequence of three laqabs, malik al-mashriq wa’l-maghrib, rukn al-islåm wa’l-muslimÈn and muizz al-dunyå wa’l-dÈn. Of these, the first laqab also appeared in the epigraphic band of Ani (no. 6); the other two find their first attestation here. Once again, the protocol ends with the nasab, which as in one of the inscriptions in the Great Mosque of Damascus (no. 2), mentions the names of the father (Mu˙ammad) and the grandfather (Dåwud); moreover, the protocol ends with the title of yamÈn khalÈfat Allah amÈr al-muminÈn. In this inscription, the name of the sultan is followed by the same request to God as seen after the name of Tutush in the Jerusalem inscription (no. 5). The inscription is undated; dating to 479–80/1086–7 has been proposed by Sheila Blair.20 Two inscriptions with the name Malikshåh are known from Aleppo. The first is dated to 480/1087–8 and is executed on a stone slab (75 × 50 cm), recovered from a well on the north side of the citadel (no. 8).21 As in the case of the inscriptions of the Great Mosque of Damascus (nos. 1–4) and that of the al-Aqsa Mosque of Jerusalem (no. 5), the text develops in horizontal lines (in this case five) and is executed in simple Kufic with some slightly expanded apexes. This is an inscription celebrating the construction of an unspecified building, by order of the sultan, during the emirate of AbË Shujå Alp Åqsunqur.22 The sultan bears the official titles found in all previous inscriptions and a sequence of five laqabs, two of which, sul†ån ar∂ Allåh and jalål al-dawla, are attested for the first time. The nasab communicates only the name of the father (Mu˙ammad), and as in two of the Damascus inscriptions (nos. 2, 4), the protocol ends with the title yamÈn amÈr al-muminÈn. Two towers of the citadel of Diyarbakır,23 in Anatolia, until at least 2000 preserved two inscriptions, dated 481/1088–9 (no. 9) and 482/1089–90 (no. 10).24 Each was enclosed within superimposed horizontal bands, and were executed in the same type of floriated Kufic. The two inscriptions contain texts of constructions25 commissioned by Malikshåh during the governorship of AbË AlÈ al-Óasan b. Abd 19 Unlike the inscriptions of the Great Mosque of Damascus (nos. 1–4) and of Ani (no. 6) the sultan’s name is introduced by the expression fÈ ayyåm. 20 Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, p. 160, no. 61. 21 TEI, no. 6676. The second inscription of Aleppo is from three years later; see below, no. 12. 22 The sultan’s name is preceded by the expression indicating the commissioning of the work (‫)أمر بعمله‬. The name of the emir is introduced by the expression fÈ ayyåm. 23 The tower is known as Selçuklu Burcu. 24 TEI, nos. 6685 and 6692. 25 As in the Aleppo inscription (no. 8), the first of the two inscriptions (no. 9) contains the verbal form ‫أمر بعمله‬. The initial part of the second inscription has not been reconstructed.

61

62

roberta giunta

al-Malik. The sultan’s protocol, repeated identically in both, consists of the official titles of al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam and shåhanshåh al-aΩam; five laqabs, of which målik bilåd Allah, muÈn khalÈfat Allah26 and jalål al-dawla wa-jamål al-milla were absent in the previous inscriptions; the kunya, the ism and the nasab (Alparslan). As in the Isfahan inscription (no. 7) the titles of the sultan are followed by a prayer to God to glorify his victory (‫)أعزالـله نصره‬. The same date of 482/1089–90 is indicated in a fifth Seljuq restoration text in the Jåmi of Damascus, originally placed in the northern portico of the court and again executed in simple Kufic carved in low relief (no. 11).27 This inscription mentions only the name of Tutush, with the same protocol as in the four inscriptions of the prayer hall, but with the addition of a new laqab, a∂ud al-dÈn. At Aleppo, the second inscription known for Malikshåh was on the minaret of the Great Mosque, destroyed in 2013, and bore the date 483/1090–1 (no. 12).28 The inscription, referring to construction works29 carried out during the sultan’s reign, was distributed in five parts on the lowest level of the minaret.30 The main inscription was enclosed in a rectangular band that ran along the four sides; three inscriptions were in rectangular bands that adorned the east, south and west faces; the fifth, the only one distributed over two lines, was enclosed in an oblong cartouche on the south face of the minaret, below the previous bands. The protocol of the sultan was in the main band; the date in the oblong cartouche. All the inscriptions were in refined floriated Kufic; the last three words of the second epigraphic band on the east side were in cursive. The official titles, at the beginning and the end of the protocol, were the same as in the previous inscriptions. There were six laqabs, of which only sayyid al-umam appeared for the first time in the sultan’s epigraphic

26 The deciphering of this laqab in the second inscription (no. 10) is missing in all previous published readings. We propose it on the basis of a comparison with the first inscription (no. 9), where it is perfectly recognisable. 27 The basmala is followed by the expression ‘he ordered the restoration of this wall’ (‫)أمر بتجديد هذا الحائط‬. TEI, no. 6690. Lacking photographic documentation, it has been impossible to ascertain the type of Kufic used in the inscription. 28 TEI, no. 6696. 29 The work involved only the minaret (‫)المأذنة‬. For the use of the verb jaddada, in the meaning of ‘remplacer une construction antérieure par une autre entièrement nouvelle’, see Ernst Herzfeld, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum; deuxième partie: Syrie du Nord; Inscriptions et Monuments d’Alep, vol. I (Le Caire: Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire 76, 1955), p. 162. 30 The name of the sultan is introduced by fÈ dawla.

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

protocol. His name is again followed by ‘may God make his sultanate triumphant’ (‫)نصر الـله سلطانه‬. Two other inscriptions in the name of Malikshåh are recorded in Diyarbakır. The first, dated 484/1091–2, is located on the western side of the façade of the prayer hall of the Great Mosque (no. 13),31 and is carved in relief in an elaborate floriated and knotted Kufic on a background of vegetal scrolls. The text refers to construction/­ restoration work of the building,32 carried out at the order of the sultan during the governorship of Mu˙ammad b. Mu˙ammad. Both the official titles and the four laqabs (sayyid mulËk al-umam, mawlå al-arab wa’l-ajam, muizz al-dunyå wa’l-dÈn and jalål aldawla), are attested in earlier inscriptions. In the invocation to God that follows the protocol, a long duration of his sultanate is implored (‫)أدام الـله سلطانه‬. The second inscription, dated 485/1092–3, the year of death of Malikshåh, testifies to a further intervention in the city wall during the governorship of JahÈr b. Mu˙ammad, and appears on the semicircular tower known as Fındık Burcu, located east of Båb Mardin (no. 14).33 The construction text is in floriated Kufic; a new laqab, malik al-mulËk, appears in the sultan’s protocol; the invocation for the benefit of his sultanate is identical to that of the previous inscription. The corpus of Malikshåh inscriptions probably includes two other epigraphs, found in a fragmentary state in areas far from each other, and different from those presented so far. The first is a construction/restoration text34 discovered during the excavations of the site of Tepe Madrasa in Nishapur, in the historic region of Khurasan (no. 15);35 the attribution to Malikshåh was proposed by Sheila Blair on the basis of the reconstruction of some titles that fall within his protocol, and in the absence of specific references, was placed in the period of his years of power (465–85/1072–92).36 The inscription 31 TEI, no. 6705. 32 The verbal form, ‫أمربعمله‬, leaves the ambiguity of an activity of construction (as reported in TEI) or of restoration (Max van Berchem, Inschriften aus Syrien, Mesopotamien, und Kleinasien gesammelt im Jahre 1899 von Max Freiherrn von Oppenheim, I, Arabische Inschriften (Leipzig: Beiträge zur Assyriologie und Semitischen Sprachwissenschaften 7/1, 1909), p. 88, no. 124 B). 33 TEI, no. 6711. 34 For the use of the verb jaddada, see note 29. 35 In both cases, the absence of the sultan’s name imposes caution: signified by the italics used for the identification numbers of these ­inscriptions. 36 Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, pp. 170–1, no. 64. It should be noted that, due to typographic error, the conversion of the dates in the common date is incorrectly given as 1065–1085, in both the description and tables (pp. 170, 267).

63

64

roberta giunta

consists of a large epigraphic band in carved terracotta, in cursive script, of which approximately fifty fragments were recovered.37 The most recognisable elements of the protocol can be found on about twelve fragments; these enabled the scholar to identify the two official titles of al-sul†å[n al-mu]aΩΩam and shå[hanshåh al-aΩam], and albeit with some hesitation, five honorary titles ([mawlå al-a] rab [wa’l-ajam], [sul†ån a]r∂ [Allah], [målik bilåd Allah], [ruk]n al-i[slåm wa’l-muslimÈn] and [muizz] al-dunyå wa’l-d[Èn]), all of which are present in other Malikshåh inscriptions. The second and last inscription is only proposed as a hypothesis, since it is a fragment of very small dimensions, found near the top of the remaining part of the southern wall of the citadel of Urfa (Edessa) in eastern Anatolia (no. 16).38 On this fragment, rotated ninety degrees counter-clockwise from its proper orientation, a single word is engraved in Kufic with slightly triangular apexes, certainly related to the term ‫الملوك‬, al-mulËk, which we believe to be the second part of a laqab. Based on the technique of execution and the style of writing, the epigraphic fragment is perfectly placed in the second half of the eleventh century. Malikshåh conquered the city in 479/1086–7,39 shortly after the Seljuq takeover of neighbouring Diyarbakır.40 The presence of the honorific malik al-mulËk in one of his inscriptions in the Diyarbakır city wall, dated to 485/1092–3 (no. 13), leaves open the possibility that it is the same laqab, and that the fragment is the only remaining part of an epigraphic band celebrating his takeover of the citadel. Moreover, from a palaeographic point of view, a close comparison can be made with the inscription known from Jerusalem, of 476 or 477/1083–5 (no. 5). In 485/1092, on the death of Malikshåh, Tutush became sultan of Syria; his brother Ma˙mËd I became sultan of Persia and Iraq. Tutush first bears the titles al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam and shåhanshåh al-a[Ωam] in the fifth Seljuq inscription known from the Diyarbakır city walls, dated 486/1093–4 (no. 17).41 The inscription is carved in 37 Charles Wilkinson, Nishapur: Some Early Islamic Buildings and Their Decoration (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986), pp. 110–15, figs 1.98–1.111. The maximum height of the fragments is 58 cm. Most of the fragments are in the Iran Archaeological Museum, Tehran; some specimens are in the Metropolitan Museum, New York. 38 Roberta Giunta, ‘The Arabic inscriptions of the Citadel of al-Ruhå (Urfa/S¸anlıurfa)’, in Cristina Tonghini (ed.), From Edessa to Urfa. The Fortification of the Citadel (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2021), pp. 94–5, no. 9. 39 E. Honigmann, ‘Orfa’, Encyclopédie de l’Islam, First Edition, vol. 3 (1934), p. 1066. 40 Max van Berchem and Joseph Strzygowski, Amida (Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung; Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1910). 41 The inscription is found on the western part of the city wall; TEI, no. 6719.

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

relief in floriated Kufic. Its protocol contains the same sequence of three laqabs first attested in the four inscriptions from the prayer hall of the Jåmi of Damascus (nos. 1–4). In this case, however, the second element of each laqab is followed by an adjective: tåj al-dawla al-qåhira, siråj al-umma al-zåhira, sharaf al-milla al-båhira. The kunya (AbË SaÈd), ism and nasab (Mu˙ammad) are followed by the title of nåßir amÈr al-muminÈn. In the following year, 487/1094–5, the second Seljuq inscription on the minaret in Aleppo (having noted, above, that of Malikshåh), commemorates the construction work42 carried out during the years of power of Tutush (no. 18). The protocol of the ruler differs from that of the previous inscription only in a different combination of the sequence of laqabs: tåj al-dawla al-qåhira wa-sayyid al-umma al-båhira.43 An inscription executed on the four sides of a stone altar, originally placed to the left of the mihrab of the Madrasa al-Sibåiyya in Damascus, contains the name of Tutush preceded by four auspicious terms, ‘glory, success, sublime fortune and everlasting victory’ (‫)عز وإقبال ودولة عالية ونصر دائم‬, introduced by the basmala. The undated text, in floriated Kufic carved in relief,44 has been attributed to 488/1095–6 (no. 19).45 In this case Tutush bears the title al-malik al-muaΩΩam with the further epithets al-manßËr and al-muΩaffar, and four laqabs, this time without the conjunction wåw: a∂ud al-dÈn, tåj al-dawla, siråj al-mi[lla], [sharaf al-umma]. The inscription ends with the kunya and the ism of the ruler. The elements of the protocols This earliest part of the epigraphic corpus of the Great Seljuqs includes nineteen inscriptions:46 the name of Malikshåh occurs with certainty in thirteen epigraphic bands (in Damascus, Jerusalem and Aleppo, all in Bilåd al-Shåm, nos. 1–5, 8, 12; at Ani and Diyarbakır in eastern Anatolia, nos. 6, 9, 10, 13, 14; in Isfahan, Iran, no. 7); in five cases he is mentioned together with his brother Tutush 42 ‫أمر بإتمام هذه البنية‬. TEI, no. 32759. 43 The title shåhanshåh is given in the inscription in the incorrect form of shåh shåh. 44 For photographs of this inscription see Dominique Sourdel and Janine Sourdel-Thomine, ‘Dossiers pour un corpus des inscriptions arabes de Damas’, Revue des Études Islamiques 47/2 (1979), pl. VIII. 45 TEI, no. 6993. Three other inscriptions found in the same building are ascribed to this same date, all in floriated Kufic (cfr. TEI, nos. 32701, 32703, 42604). 46 The list of inscriptions of Malikshåh prepared by Sheila S. Blair, published in 1992 (Monumental Inscriptions, p. 163, n. 9), could not include the Jerusalem inscription (no. 4) – discovered in 1997 – nor that of Urfa (no. 15), published in 2021.

65

66

roberta giunta

(nos. 1–5). In two inscriptions (at Nishapur, Iran and at Urfa, in eastern Anatolia, nos. 15 and 16) the attribution to Malikshåh is proposed only on the basis of the still recognisable titles. Tutush is mentioned as the sole authority of the dynasty in four epigraphic bands (at Damascus, Aleppo and Diyarbakır, nos. 11, 17–19). Both rulers are named only in texts about the construction or restoration of buildings or parts of buildings. In some cases the mention is strictly related to an official recognition of their political role; in others they are mentioned as commissioners of the works. The main inscriptions of the first case are the four texts in the prayer hall of the Jåmi of Damascus (nos. 1–4) and the one in the al-Aqsa Mosque (no. 5): the two rulers, in their positions as supreme sultan of the dynasty and emir of Syria respectively, appear after the caliph, constituting a political hierarchy in which ‘l’antagonisme des pouvoirs spirituel et temporel ressort d’une manière frappante’.47 Moreover, the four coeval inscriptions of the Jåmi of Damascus provide the first evidence, in dated Islamic epigraphs, of the use of the official title of al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam.48 This title is also carried by Malikshåh in all subsequent inscriptions, always inextricably linked to the ancient Persian title of shåhanshåh al-aΩam.49

47 Max van Berchem, ‘Notes d’archéologie arabe. Monuments et inscriptions fatimites’, Journal Asiatique 17 (1891): 422. 48 IbråhÈm the Ghaznavid (r. 451–92/1059–99), whose years of reign roughly coincided with those of Malikshåh, bears the title al-sul†ån al-aΩam in the inscription carved on a marble arch frame and on that of a ‘mi˙råb-like’ panel, also in marble, discovered at Ghazni, Afghanistan. Unfortunately, in both cases the inscriptions are very fragmentary and do not preserve any trace of date. Roberta Giunta, ‘Testimonianze epigrafiche dei regnanti ghaznavidi a ≈aznÈ’, in Michele Bernardini, Natalia L. Tornesello (eds), Scritti in onore di Giovanni M. D’Erme (Università degli Studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, Series Minor 68, Napoli 2005), pp. 535–8. In the Ghaznavid context, the title of al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam seems to be attested only on some coins issued by Farrukhzåd (443–51/1052–9), IbråhÈm and Bahråmshåh (C. E. Bosworth, ‘The titulature of the early Ghaznavids’, Oriens 15 (1962): 224; Roberta Giunta, and Cécile Bresc, ‘Listes de la titulature des Ghaznavides et des Ghurides à travers les documents numismatiques et épigraphiques’, Eurasian Studies 3, no. 2 (2004), p. 189). 49 This title was introduced by the Buwayhids and is first found in the inscriptions of three of the five wooden plaques bearing the name of A∂ud al-Dawla Fanå Khusraw (338–72/949–83), which most probably belonged to a tomb at Kufa, and bear the date 363/973–4 (Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, pp. 6. 41–6, no. 10). No Ghaznavid ruler bears the title of shåhanshåh in monumental inscriptions. We note, however, that in the verse inscription in the Persian language of the Ghaznavid palace in Ghazni (late elevent–early twelfth century), the name of Ma˙mËd (388–421/998–1030) is preceded by the title shåh. See Viola Allegranzi, Aux sources de la poésie ghaznavide.

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

The two titles are also attested in the Tutush protocol but only in the inscriptions of 486 and 487 (1093–5, nos. 17, 18). In the five Bilåd al-Shåm inscriptions of 475 and 476–7 (1082–5; nos. 1–5) he bears the title al-malik al-ajall, while in the last inscription in his name (488/1095–6; no. 19), that of al-malik al-muaΩΩam. The relationship with the caliphal authority is enshrined only in the inscriptions of Bilåd al-Shåm (nos. 1–4, 8, 12, 17, 18) and Iran (nos. 7, 15) under the honorific titles of nåßir amÈr al-muminÈn (in the Tutush protocol) and yamÈn amÈr al-muminÈn and yamÈn khalÈfat Allåh amÈr al-muminÈn (in the Malikshåh protocol). In all inscriptions bearing the name of Malikshåh, both those emphasising his political role and those in which he acts as a patron, there is always mention of the local authority, whose name is placed after the sultan’s, with one exception known from the inscription of Ani (no. 6).50 It is interesting to note that, in the inscription of the Madrasa al-Sibaiyya in Damascus (no. 19), the protocol of Tutush, who commissioned the work and is the only authority mentioned in the text, is introduced by a number of auspicious terms, which are typical of benedictory inscriptions on artefacts – mainly ­metalwork – and rarely found in monumental inscriptions.51 The protocol of Malikshåh includes twelve laqabs. All of these are attested in more than one inscription, with the exception of sayyid al-umam, which appears only in the inscription on the minaret of the Jåmi in Aleppo (no. 12), and malik al-mulËk,52 attested in one of the inscriptions on the Diyarbakır city wall (no. 14), but also with an attribution of a fragment of inscription found on the citadel of Urfa (no. 16). The number of laqabs of Tutush is far fewer, and with the exception of a∂ud al-dÈn, present in two inscriptions from Damascus (nos. 11 and 19), the honorifics are constructed with the terms al-dawla, al-milla and al-umma, generally in a single rigid sequence (tåj al-dawla wa-siråj al-milla wa-sharaf al-umma), emphasised by adjectives (al-qåhira, al-zåhira, al-båhira) in the cases of the inscriptions of the Diyarbakır wall (no. 17) and Aleppo minaret (no. 18). Les inscriptions persanes de Ghazni (Afghanistan, XIe–XIIe siècles) (Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle, 2019), p. 119. 50 The prominent position assumed by Malikshåh in the epigraphic texts and the frequent specification that construction activities took place during his reign (fÈ dawla) or in his times (fÈ ayyam) provided Sheila Blair with further evidence for an attribution of the fragmentary Nishapur inscription to this sultan. Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, p. 171. 51 In this regard, it is worth mentioning that a long sequence of auspicious terms appears on the upper section of a number of marble slabs, originally placed in the entrance area of the Ghaznavid palace in Ghazni (https://ghazni.bdus.cloud/islamic/finds/marble/dado-panels/dado-inte​ rlaced-arches-2). 52 This laqab is the Arabic version of the Persian title shåhanshåh.

67

68

roberta giunta

With few exceptions, the protocols of the two rulers always includes the nasab.53 The father of both, Alp Arslan (r. 455–65/1063–73), is mentioned with the Arabic name Mu˙ammad, in the Malikshåh inscriptions from Syria, Iran and Jerusalem; the Turkic name Alp Arslan is mentioned in Anatolian epigraphic texts.54 In the Tutush protocol, in six inscriptions (nos. 1–5, 11), Alp Arslan is recorded with only the laqab of malik al-islåm; the name Mu˙ammad occurs in only two inscriptions from the period of the Tutush sultanate (nos. 17 and 18). In some inscriptions of the Great Mosque of Damascus (nos. 2, 4, 11) and in that of the Great Mosque of Isfahan (no. 7) the genealogy also includes the name of the grandfather, recorded only with the Arabic name Dåwud (Chagrï Beg, r. 431–55/1040–63) [Table 4.1]. Main palaeographic characteristics All the inscriptions, with the exception of that of the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem (no. 5) and possibly the inscription of Urfa (no. 15), are in relief, carved in marble, stone or baked brick. Based on the style of writing, epigraphs can be divided into three distinct groups: inscriptions in simple Kufic (Group A); inscriptions in ornamental Kufic (Group B); and inscriptions in cursive (Group C). Group A: These inscriptions, which include the two engraved ones, are eight in number (nos. 1–5, 7, 8, 16) and are inscribed in a chronological span of five years, from 475/1082–3 to 480/1087–8.55

53 In the protocol of Malikshåh, the nasab seems to be absent only in the inscription of the al-Aqsa mosque (no. 5), which, as mentioned, is not entirely reconstructible. In the case of Tutush, however, we note the absence of the nasab in the inscription of the Madrasa al-Sibåiyya of Damascus (no. 19). 54 ‘Those [the inscriptions] in the Caucasus and Jazira use his Turkish name because Turkish power there was strongest’. Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, p. 159. 55 As discussed above, the dating proposed for inscription no. 7 (Isfahan) is based on hypotheses; concerning the epigraphic fragment found at Urfa (no. 16), if this were indeed part of a programme of Malikshåh, we could then hypothesise its dating to 479–80/1086–8. For the present, the inscriptions of this group exclude that of Tutush in the Jåmi of Damascus of 482/1089–90 (no. 11), given the above-noted lack of photographic documentation and the generic description of the writing as ‘coufique’ (TEI, no. 6690).

475/1082–83 (479/1086–87) (479–80/1086–87) 480/1087–88 481/1088–89 482/1089–90 483/1090–91 484/1091–92 485/1092–93 486/1093–94 487/1094–95 (465–85/1073–92) 47[6] or 47[7]/1083–85 47[6] or 47[7]/1083–85

Damascus Ani Isfahan Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Aleppo Nishapur Jerusalem Jerusalem

Damascus Isfahan Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Ani Diyarbakır Nishapur Aleppo Damascus Jerusalem

1–4 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 17 18 15 5 5

1–4 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 6 17 15 18 1–4 5

475/1082–83 (479–80/1086–87) 480/1087–88 481/1088–89 482/1089–90 483/1090–91 484/1091–92 485/1092–93 (479/1086–87) 486/1093–94 (465–85/1073–92) 487/1094–95 475/1082–83 47[6] or 47[7]/1083–85

Date

nos. Location

Malikshåh Tutush [Malikshåh] Tutush Tutush The most exalted king

[Malikshåh] Malikshåh Malikshåh The king of kings Malikshåh The supreme king of kings

Tutush

Malikshåh The glorious sultan

Ruler

Table 4.1  Titles and laqabs attested in the inscriptions of Malikshåh and Tutush

[‫شا[هنشاه األعظم‬ ‫( األعظم‬sic) ‫شاه شاه‬ ‫الملك األجل‬

[‫شاهنشاه األ[عظم‬

‫شاهنشاه األعظم‬

‫السلطـ[ـان المـ]ـعظم‬ [‫]السلطان المعظم‬ [‫]شاهنشاه‬

‫السلطان المعظم‬

Official and honorary titles

Damascus Jerusalem Damascus Diyarbakır Aleppo Damascus Aleppo Aleppo Nishapur Isfahan

1–4 5 11 17 18 2, 4 8 12 15 7

Damascus Damascus Jerusalem Diyarbakır

Aleppo

Aleppo Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır

1–4 11 5 17

18

8 12 13 14

nos. Location 19 Damascus

488/1095–96

Damascus

19

Ruler

Tutush The glorious king 475/1082–83 Tutush 47[6] or 47[7]/1083–85 Defender of the Commander of the faithful 482/1089–90 486/1093–94 487/1094–95 475/1082–83 Malikshåh 480/1087–88 Right hand of the Commander of the faithful 483/1090–91 (465–485/1073–92) [Malikshåh] (479–480/1086–87) Malikshåh Right hand of God’s caliph, the Commander of the faithful Date Ruler 488/1095–96 Tutush Crown of the state 475/1082–83 Tutush 482/1089–90 Crown of the state, light of the community, 47[6] or 47[7]/1083–85 nobility of the nation 486/1093–94 Tutush Crown of the victorious state, light of the shining nation, nobility of the brilliant community 487/1094–95 Tutush Crown of the victorious state, lord of the brilliant nation 480/1087–88 Malikshåh 483/1090–91 Glory of the state 484/1091–92 485/1092–93

Date

nos. Location

Table 4.1 (continued)

‫جالل الدولة‬

‫تاج الدولة القاهرة وسيد األمة الباهرة‬

[‫تاج الدولة وسراج الملة [وشرف األمة‬ ‫تاج الدولة القاهرة وسراج األمة الزاهرة وشرف الملة الباهرة‬

‫تاج الدولة وسراج الملة وشرف األمة‬

Laqabs ‫تاج الدولة‬

‫]يمين أمير المؤ]منين‬ ‫يمين خليفة الـله أمير المؤمنين‬

‫يمين أمير المؤمنين‬

‫ناصر أمير المؤمنين‬

‫الملك المعظم‬

Official and honorary titles

Isfahan Aleppo Aleppo Nishapur Damascus

Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Aleppo Nishapur Aleppo

7 8 12 15 19

8 9 10 12 15 12

11 19 9 10 15 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15

Damascus Damascus Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Nishapur Isfahan Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Aleppo Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Nishapur

482/1089–90 488/1095–96 481/1088–89 482/1089–90 (465–85/1073–92) (479–80/1086–87) 480/1087–88 481/1088–89 482/1089–90 483/1090–91 484/1091–92 485/1092–93 (465–85/1073–92)

1–4 Damascus 475/1082–83 13 Diyarbakır 484/1091–92 19 Damascus 488/1095–96

480/1087–88 481/1088–89 482/1089–90 483/1090–91 (465–85/1073–92) 483/1090–91

(479–80/1086–87) 480/1087–88 483/1090–91 (465–85/1073–92) 488/1095–96

Diyarbakır 481/1088–89 Diyarbakır 482/1089–90

9 10

[Malikshåh]

Malikshåh Strengthener of the world and religion

[Malikshåh] Malikshåh Lord of the nations Malikshåh Lord of the kings of nations Tutush Nobility of the nation Tutush Forearm of the religion Malikshåh Ruler of God’s country

[Malikshåh] Tutush Light of the community Malikshåh Sultan of God’s land

Malikshåh Glory of the state and beauty of the community Malikshåh Pillar of Islam and the Muslims

[‫]معز] الدنيا والد[ين‬

[‫]مالك بالد الـله‬ ‫معز الدنيا والدين‬

‫مالك بالد الـله‬

‫عضد الدين‬

[‫]شرف األمة‬

‫سيد ملوك األمم‬

[‫]سلطان أ]رض [الـله‬ ‫سيد األمم‬

‫سلطان أرض الـله‬

[‫]ركـ]ـن اإل[سالم والمسلمين‬ [‫سراج المـ[ـلة‬

‫ركن اإلسالم والمسلمين‬

‫جالل الدولة وجمال الملة‬ ‫جالل الدولة [وجمال] الملة‬

Date

481/1088–89 482/1089–90 475/1082–83 482/1089–90 47[6] or 47[7]/1083–85 (479–80/1086–87) (479/1086–87) 485/1092–93

(479–85/1086–92) 475/1082–83 480/1087–88 483/1090–91 484/1091–92 (465–85/1073–92)

nos. Location

Diyarbakır Diyarbakır Damascus Damascus Jerusalem Isfahan Ani Diyarbakır

Urfa Damascus Aleppo Aleppo Diyarbakır Nishapur

9 10 1–4 11 5 7 6 14

16 2 8 12 13 15

Table 4.1 (continued)

[Malikshåh]

Malikshåh King of the East and the West Malikshåh King of kings [Malikshåh] Malikshåh Client of the Arabs and the non-Arabs

Malikshåh Designate of God’s caliph Alp Arslan (in the nasab of Tutush protocol) King of Islam

Ruler

[‫]مولى العـ]ـرب [والعجم‬

‫]ملك] الملوك‬ ‫مولى العرب والعجم‬

[‫]ملك اإلسالم‬ ‫ملك المشرق والمغرب‬ ‫]ملك المشـ]ـرق والمغرب‬ ‫ملك الملوك‬

‫معين خليفة الـله‬ [‫معين [خليفة الـله‬ ‫ملك اإلسالم‬

Official and honorary titles

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

The specimens show many similarities: in the absence of decorative elements on the background;56 in the treatment of the apexes of the letters (oblique, slightly expanded, triangular); and in particular in the ductus of the jÈm/˙å/khå, whose bodies are prolonged in an elongated shaft with accentuated curve to the left, similar to those of the kåf and †å/Ωå. Unique features are, on the other hand: the upright appendages in the inscriptions of Jerusalem, Aleppo and Urfa; the låm-alif shafts, curved inwards in the inscriptions of the Syrian area; some bilobed ends in the inscriptions of Damascus and in that of the Great Mosque of Isfahan; and the knotted body of the hå, especially in the middle position, in the inscriptions of Damascus alone [Table 4.2]. Group B Nine Kufic inscriptions in the corpus are characterised by an accentuated ornamentation of the script: those of the Jåmi of Ani (no. 6); those of the minaret of the Jåmi of Aleppo (nos. 12, 18), that of the Madrasa al-Sibåiyya of Damascus (no. 19); and, above all, all the inscriptions of Diyarbakır (nos. 9, 10, 13, 14, 17). Most of these epigraphs date between 481 and 488 (1088–96) and are chronologically later than those in Group A. The inscription of Ani deserves specific discourse, given that from a strictly palaeographic point of view, the sole close comparison is with that of Malikshåh’s son, AbË Shujå A˙mad, originally located above the southern gate of the Maqåm IbråhÈm or Mausoleum of Íåli˙Èn in Aleppo and excluded from this study.57 The Aleppo inscription dates to 479/1086–7; the one from Ani, undated, has been attributed to the same year. On a palaeographic basis, these two inscriptions seem to represent a sort of transition between the inscriptions of Group A and Group B.58 While on the one hand they can be associated with those of the first group for the ductus of the letters, on the other hand they are distinguished by the introduction of trilobate and pentalobate flowers on the top of some bodies (in particular those of ayn/ghayn and mÈm; see Table 4.3) and by the foliate and floriated scroll undulating along the field below the letters.59 A still more elaborate flowering characterises the upper 56 A sole inscription includes sporadic chevrons: that of the pavilion of NiΩåm al-Mulk (no. 7). 57 TEI, no. 6672. See note 3. 58 It is interesting that some palaeographic features of these inscriptions are also found in epigraphic fragments from excavations of Tepe Madrasa in Nishapur, whose dating is still uncertain (Wilkinson, Nishapur, see in part. p. 110, fig. 1.97). 59 See also Janine Sourdel-Thomine, ‘Le coufique alépin de l’époque seldjoukide’, Mélanges Louis Massignon (Damas: Institut Français de Damas, 1957).

73

74

roberta giunta

Table 4.2  Selected letters from Group A (drawings by the author)

jÈm/˙å/khå Nos. 1–4 Damascus

No. 5 Jerusalem

No. 8 Aleppo

Nos. 1–4 Damascus

No. 5 Jerusalem

No. 8 Aleppo

Nos. 1–4 Damascus

No. 8 Aleppo

kåf, †å/Ωå No. 16 Urfa

låm-alif

hå Nos. 1–4 Damascus

apexes of the shafts, bodies and appendages of the inscriptions on the minaret of Aleppo and those on the towers of the Diyarbakır walls, none of which have the vegetal scroll on the field. The Diyarbakır inscriptions constitute a small group that is particularly homogeneous, mainly due to the presence of one or more crossings of the shafts of the alif-låm pair and the semicircular (or semi-oval) indentation that interrupts – generally at mid-height – the rigidity of the shafts (whether vertical, oblique or curved; see Table 4.3). These graphic solutions, which are particularly decorative, had been introduced in the citadel inscriptions by the Marwanids of Diyarbakır, a few years earlier (372–478/983–1085), as attested by the epigraphic bands of AbË Naßr A˙mad b. Marwån, dated between 420/1029 and 444/1053, located on some towers on the south and east sides.60 This circumstance would testify to the survival of a graphic repertoire specific to the city, which distinguishes the inscriptions of Diyarbakır, including those of Malikshåh and Tutush, from all other Islamic inscriptions of 60 Max van Berchem and Joseph Strzygowski, Amida (Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitatsbuchhandlung; Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1910), pp. 25–9, nos. 9–11, figs 10, 11 and pls IV/2, V, VI. We recall that A˙mad b. Marwån became vassal of the Seljuq Tughril Beg in 448/1056. See also the long inscription of A˙mad’s son, Naßr, on the bridge over the Tigris in 457/1065 (ibid., pp. 31–5, no. 13, pl. VI).

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

Table 4.3  Selected letters from Group B (drawings by the author) ayn/ghayn

No. 6 Ani

Aleppo (Maqåm IbråhÈm or Mausoleum of Íåli˙Èn)

No. 6 Ani

Aleppo (Maqåm IbråhÈm or Mausoleum of Íåli˙Èn)

mÈm

alif, kåf, †å/‰å, alif-låm, låm-alif

Diyarbakır

the second half of the fourth/tenth century. The inscription on the façade of the Great Mosque of Diyarbakır, dated 484/1091–2 (no. 12), is perhaps the most refined example among the second group, in terms of the perfect combination of vegetal elements on the letters and on the background: knots, interlacements, and apexes folded in a ‘hook’, alternately to the right and to the left. However, among Seljuq inscriptions from the second half of the fifth/eleventh century, we cannot overlook the importance of the fragmentary epigraphic band from the madrasa of Khargird, in Quhistan, on the border between Iran and Afghanistan, in which the name NiΩåm al-Mulk is preserved. The inscription ‘is a superb example of bordered Kufic’61 and reveals a level of refinement that is not found in any of the other inscriptions of this second group, from which it differs both in the outline of the letters and in the accentuated ornamentation that emerges from them. The work is one of the best examples of Kufic writing in which the vegetal motifs on the top of the shafts generate a decorative band, here giving rhythm to the entire upper half of the epigraphic field.62 Attributable to 61 Sheila Blair (Monumental Inscriptions, pp. 149–52, no. 57) undertakes a very detailed study of this inscription. 62 This script was also fairly widespread among the Ghaznavids, as evidenced by some inscriptions on tombs and marble slabs dating from the fifth/eleventh century onwards. For one of the most representative examples see a tomb found in the cemetery area of Bagh-i Bihisht (Roberta Giunta, Les inscriptions funéraires de ≈aznÈ (IVe–IXe/Xe–XVe siècles) (Università degli Studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, Series Maior

75

76

roberta giunta

the first five years of the reign of Malikshåh (465–70/1072–7), this inscription provides a valuable clue as to the evolution of the graphic repertoire in the easternmost areas of the caliphate, whose peculiarities are very clearly different from those evolving in the eastern Mediterranean basin. Group C If the reconstruction of the titling of the Nishapur epigraphic band (no. 15; Table 4.4) proposed by Sheila Blair proves correct, the inscription would represent the only evidence of a Malikshåh construction text executed in cursive script. The introduction of cursive in monumental epigraphy is still a hotly debated topic, especially given the difficult chronological identification of the numerous epigraphic fragments found out of context in the eastern Iranian area, but which can be generally dated to the fifth/eleventh century. Since it is impossible to deal with this issue in detail here, we will limit ourselves to presenting the few Seljuq epigraphic documents ascribed with a good margin of certainty to the years of reign of Malikshåh and Tutush. Within one of the epigraphic bands in floriated Kufic in the name of Malikshåh on the minaret of the Jåmi in Aleppo (483/1090–1; no. 12), there are also three words in cursive script that contain a supplication to God.63 On the impost of the arches on the east, north and west sides of the southern domed hall of the Great Mosque of Isfahan, there are still clear traces of a long cursive inscription of a religious nature enclosed in rectangular bands of carved and painted plaster.64 The discovery of a further portion of this band on the impost of the arch on the left side of the facade of the domed hall [Table 4.4] has made it possible to establish that it preceded the construction of the Èwån on the south side of the mosque courtyard,65 although it cannot be said to be contemporary with the Malikshåh inscription carved below the dome (no. 7). It does, however, reveal close similarities with the epigraphic bands of the programme of VIII – IsIAO, Roma – Fondation Max van Berchem, Genève), Naples 2003, pp. 73–81, no. 9, pls XVII–XIX) and a fragment of a slab bearing the name of Sultan IbråhÈm (Samuel Flury, ‘Le décor épigraphique des monuments de Ghazna’, Syria 6 (1925): 70, no. 4, pl. XI.1). 63 The expression is ‫أعز الـله نصره‬. Among the best-known cases of the presence of cursive characters in Kufic inscriptions from the Iranian area are the inscriptions of the minaret at Gurganj, Turkmenistan, dated 401/1010–11 (Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, pp. 13, 80–1 and 237 fig. 44) and the one at Naqsh-i Rustam, in the province of Fars, of 454/1062 (ibid., pp. 13, 130–1, 251, fig. 82). 64 The best-preserved portion of the band is on the eastern side of the hall. 65 Umberto Scerrato, ‘Sura XXIII 1–6 in a Saljuq inscription in the Great Mosque at Isfahan’, East and West 44/2–4 (1994): 249–57.

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

77

Table 4.4  Portions of Group C inscriptions

No. 15 Nishapur (after Wilkinson, Nishapur, pp. 111, 112, figs 1.99, 1.101)

Jåmi of Isfahan - Inscription on the impost of the arches of the southern domed hall (after Scerrato, sËra XXIII 1–6, fig. 1)

No. 18 Jåmi of Aleppo – inscription on the minaret (https://www.bbc.com/news/ magazine-35707634)

Tutush, carved on the third level of the minaret in Aleppo (cf. no. 18, 487/1094–5; Table 4.4), which again bear religious texts. All of the aforementioned cursive epigraphic bands are distinguished by the presence of a wavy vegetal scroll in the background. The latter, in the inscriptions of both Nishapur and Isfahan, is enlivened in cobalt blue. If the Nishapur inscription were to date to Malikshåh, the year would necessarily be after 465/1072, the date of his accession to the Persian throne, and would therefore be at least twenty years later than the Ghaznavid cursive inscriptions, whose earliest evidence is 447/1055.66 In the present state of our knowledge it is possible to hypothesise that in monumental epigraphy, cursive script in 66 Roberta Giunta, ‘The Tomb of Mu˙ammad al-HarawÈ (447/1055) at ≈aznÈ (Afghanistan) and some new observations on the Tomb of Ma˙mËd the ≈aznavid’, East and West 51/1–2 (2001). Although we find no reason to doubt that the cursive inscription carved on one of the faces of the cenotaph of Ma˙mËd b. Sebüktigin in Ghazni would date to the year of the ruler’s death (421/1030), we have preferred not to

78

roberta giunta

fully developed form made its first appearance with the dynasties of Central Asian Turkic stock: the Ghaznavids would have introduced it in their capital Ghazni in the first half of the fifth/eleventh century, the Seljuqs then using it in Khurasan in the early second half of the same century, and quickly spreading it to the territories of the Mediterranean basin under their control. Conclusion This first part of the corpus of Seljuq sultanic inscriptions is worthy of interest for their number and status of preservation (many are still in original position), the protocols of the two rulers examined and the variety of writing styles observed. Moreover, the first comparisons made with the epigraphic documentation of the Ghaznavid contemporaries provide very promising results. Most of the epigraphs bear their relative dates, making it possible to establish a chronological sequence and observe the development of the texts in terms of content and writing. Unfortunately, four inscriptions are undated – the Kufic inscription from the Jåmi of Ani (no. 6), the Kufic (no. 7) and cursive inscriptions from the Jåmi of Isfahan, and the cursive inscription from Nishapur (no. 15) – all of which could proffer important information, especially in relation to the development of Kufic and cursive writing during the second half of the fifth/eleventh century, particularly in the eastern Mediterranean area. The dates of c. 479/1086–7 and 479–80/1086–7 proposed by Sheila Blair for the Ani inscription and the two Isfahan inscriptions, respectively, are unfortunately mainly based on the presence of the laqab of malik al-mashriq wa’l-maghrib in the two Kufic inscriptions, which is not further attested in the Malikshåh epigraphs.67 On the basis of palaeographic analysis, the proposed dating of the Ani inscription may prove correct. The question of the inscriptions from the southern pavilion of the Great Mosque of Isfahan is more complex. For the Kufic inscription it is only possible to hypothesise, once again on palaeographic grounds, a date no later than 480/1087; for the cursive inscription, on the other hand, we still lack archaeological, architectural and epigraphic data that would allow an attribution to the years of Malikshåh’s reign. Moreover, we cannot overlook the fact that the cursive of this inscription compares with the one made by Tutush in 487/1094–5 on the minaret in Aleppo rather than with the one in Nishapur, whose attribution take it into account, since some scholars have considered it to be many years later. 67 Doubts about the hypotheses of Blair have already been raised by Bernard O’Kane, The Appearance of Persian in Islamic Art (Biennial Ehsan Yarshater Lecture Series on Iranian Art and Archaeology, no. 4), New York, 2009, chapter 2, n. 1.

ˉ H AND TUTUSH INSCRIPTIONS OF SELJUQS MALIKSHA

to the reign of Malikshåh currently seems acceptable. We are quite certain that with progress our studies will yield new results and, as foreseen at the outset of our project, provide clues towards proposal of dates for the numerous epigraphic fragments found out of context that have not yet been analysed. Bibliography Allegranzi, Viola, Aux sources de la poésie ghaznavide. Les inscriptions persanes de Ghazni (Afghanistan, XIe–XIIe siècles), 2 vols (Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle, 2019). Berchem van, M. ‘Notes d‘archéologie arabe. Monuments et inscriptions fatimites’, Journal Asiatique 17 (1891): 411–95. Berchem van, M. Inschriften aus Syrien, Mesopotamien, und Kleinasien gesammelt im Jahre 1899 von Max Freiherrn von Oppenheim, I, Arabische Inschriften (Leipzig: Beiträge zur Assyriologie und Semitischen Sprachwissenschaften 7/1, 1909). Berchem van, M. and Joseph Strzygowski, Amida (Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung; Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1910). Blair, Sheila S., The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana (Leiden: Brill, 1992). Bosworth, C. E., ‘The Titulature of the Early Ghaznavids’, Oriens 15 (1962): 210–33. Flury, Samuel, ‘Le décor épigraphique des monuments de Ghazna’, Syria 6 (1925): 61–90. Giunta, Roberta, ‘The Tomb of Mu˙ammad al-HarawÈ (447/1055) at ≈aznÈ (Afghanistan) and Some New Observations on the Tomb of Ma˙mËd the ≈aznavid’, East and West 51/1–2 (2001): 109–26. Giunta, Roberta, Les inscriptions funéraires de ≈aznÈ (IVe–IXe/Xe–XVe siècles) (Università degli Studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, Dipartimento di Studi Asiatici Series Maior VIII – IsIAO (Roma) – Fondation Max van Berchem (Genève), Napoli 2003). Giunta, Roberta, ‘Testimonianze epigrafiche dei regnanti ghaznavidi a ≈aznÈ’, in Michele Bernardini and Natalia L. Tornesello (eds), Scritti in onore di Giovanni M. D’Erme (Università degli Studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, Series Minor 68, Napoli 2005), pp. 525–55. Giunta, Roberta, ‘The Arabic Inscriptions of the Citadel of al-Ruhå (Urfa/S¸ anlıurfa)’, in Cristina Tonghini (ed.), From Edessa to Urfa. The Fortification of the Citadel (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2021), pp. 82–99. Giunta, Roberta and Cécile Bresc, ‘Listes de la titulature des Ghaznavides et des Ghurides à travers les documents numismatiques et épigraphiques’, Eurasian Studies 3, no. 2 (2004): 161–243. Giunta, Roberta and Viola Allegranzi, ‘Ghaznavid, Qarakhanid and Seljuq Monumental Inscriptions and the Development of Royal Propaganda: Towards an Epigraphic Corpus’, in Sheila R. Canby, Deniz Beyazit and Martina Rugiadi (eds), The Seljuqs and their Successors. Art, Culture and History (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020), pp. 113–28. Herzfeld, Ernst, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum; deuxième partie: Syrie du Nord; Inscriptions et Monuments d’Alep, vol. I (Le Caire: Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire 76, 1955).

79

80

roberta giunta

Honigmann, E., ‘Orfa’, Encyclopédie de l’Islam, First Edition, vol. 3 (1934), pp. 1062–7. RCEA = Répertoire Chronologique d’Épigraphie Arabe, eds É. Combe, J. Sauvaget, G. Wiet et al. (Cairo: IFAO, 1931–91), 18 vols. Salameh, Khader, ‘A New Seljuq Inscription in the Masjid al-Aqsa, Jerusalem’, Levant 41/1 (2009): 107–17. Scerrato, Umberto, ‘Sura XXIII 1–6 in a Seljuq Inscription in the Great Mosque at Isfahan’, East and West 44/2–4 (1994), pp. 249–57. Sourdel, Dominique and Janine Sourdel-Thomine, ‘Dossiers pour un corpus des inscriptions arabes de Damas’, Revue des Études Islamiques 47/2 (1979): 119–71. Sourdel-Thomine, Janine, ‘Le coufique alépin de l’époque sekjoukide’, Mélanges Louis Massignon (Damas: Institut Français de Damas, 1957), pp. 301–17. TEI = Ludvik Kalus, Frédéric Bauden, Frédérique Soudan, Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique, édition 2020, http://www.epigr​aphie-islamique. uliege.be. Tütüncü, Mehmet, Turkish Palestine (1069–1917): Inscriptions from al-Khalil (Hebron), Nabi Musa and Other Palestinian Cities under Turkish Rule (Haarlem: Corpus of Turkish Islamic Inscriptions 2 / Türk Òslam Kitabeleri Dizisi 2, 2008). Wilkinson, Charles, Nishapur: Some Early Islamic Buildings and Their Decoration (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986).

CHAPTER FIVE

New Epigraphic Data from a Ghurid Monument at Chisht-i Sharif: Expressing Power and Piety in Sixth/ Twelfth-Century Afghanistan Viola Allegranzi Chisht-i Sharif (also known as Khwaja Chisht, or, simply, Chisht) is located in modern Afghanistan, about 140 km east of Herat along the course of the Hari Rud.1 Two domed structures in brick [Figures 5.1 and 5.2], locally designated as gunbads or khånqåhs, are the sole vestiges attributable to the second half of the sixth/ twelfth century, when the region was controlled by the Ghurid/ Shansabanid confederation.2 The monuments are freestanding at about 20 m from each other and have sometimes been interpreted as two domed mausoleums due to their architectural layout and the presence of an extended graveyard in their surroundings. However, surveys and aerial photographs leave little doubt about their having been part of a larger complex, whose history and original plan remain conjectural.3 Marc Le Berre surveyed the site in 1952 and carefully described the two monuments, which he labelled as ‘structure A’

  1 I am grateful to Arturo Annucci, Francesco Chiabotti, Roberta Giunta, Christine Noelle-Karimi and Michael O’Neal for sharing thoughts and references that considerably improved the present study. Special thanks are due to Alka Patel, who first aroused my interest in the inscriptions at Chisht and led me to discover Josephine Powell’s archives.   2 The monuments were largely ruined in the early twentieth century and have since further deteriorated. Photographs of the southwestern structure taken in 1910, 2006 and after more recent restoration are presented in Brendan Cassar and Sara Noshadi (eds), Keeping History Alive: Safeguarding cultural heritage in post-conflict Afghanistan (Paris-Kabul: UNESCO, 2015), pp. 22, 94, 218.   3 A general plan of the site, together with plans and elevations of the domed structures, are published by Rafi Samizay, Islamic Architecture in Herat: A study towards conservation (Kabul: Ministry of Information and Culture, 1981), pp. 16–19.

82

viola allegranzi

Figure 5.1  The two domed structures in Chisht-i Sharif, view from the south. Photograph: Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–118), Courtesy of Special Collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

Figure 5.2  The two domed structures in Chisht-i Sharif, view from the northeast. Wikimedia Commons (uploaded December 2009, downloaded September 2020).

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

(the southwestern dome) and ‘structure B’ (the northeastern dome) – these designations will be adopted hereafter.4 The present study concentrates on the more ruined and less investigated structure B [Figure 5.3], and, in particular, on its epigraphic programme. This is motivated by the emergence of previously unpublished inscriptions,5 documented through photographs taken by Josephine Powell (1919–2007) around 1960, but only recently digitised and made accessible.6 The monument has a rectangular plan (8.11 × 5.60 m), two archways on the south and north sides, and two blind walls on the east and west sides. A mihrab is set on the inner west wall, offset towards the south entrance, and another niche (possibly a second mihrab) is located on the exterior of the east wall [Figure 5.2]; moreover, Le Berre noted traces of a prolongation of the structure towards the north, east and west. The northern archway and the dome collapsed in the second half of the twentieth century. The fragmentary nature of the inscriptions recorded both inside and outside structure B fosters the adoption of a broad comparative perspective. Such an approach can largely benefit from a renewal of studies on the history and architecture of the Ghurid sultanate (544–612/1149–1215).7 Recent literature has put the accent on the   4 See Le Berre’s report in Warwick Ball, Archaeological Gazetteer of Afghanistan: Catalogue des sites archéologiques d’Afghanistan (Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1982), vol. 1, p. 76, no. 212. The record is translated in English in idem, Archaeological Gazetteer of Afghanistan: Revised Edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), pp. 88–90, no. 212 (see ibid. for an updated bibliography of the site). I was unfortunately unable to access the architectural study authored by Le Berre (1960) and kept in the archives of the Délégation Archéologique Française en Afghanistan, as well as the forthcoming volume edited by Ute Franke and Thomas Urban, reporting on recent surveys in the Herat province (Herat Province Survey: Documentation of Archaeological Sites and Monuments in Herat Province, Ancient Herat, vol. 1).   5 A previous version of my reading of these inscriptions is given in the Appendix of Alka Patel, Iran to India: The ShansabanÈs of Afghanistan, c. 1145–1190 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2021), p. 345.   6 Josephine Powell’s photographic archive has been kept at Harvard Fine Arts Library since 2007 and is accessible online through the portal: https://library.harvard.edu/collections/photographer-archives. I am deeply thankful to Joanne Bloom (Harvard Fine Arts Library) who allowed me to reproduce the photographs illustrating this issue [Figures 5.1, 5.3–5.10].   7 See, on history: Clifford Edmund Bosworth, ‘The Ghurids in Khurasan’, in A. C. S. Peacock and Deborah G. Tor (eds), Medieval Central Asia and the Persianate World. Iranian Tradition and Islamic Civilization (London: I. B. Tauris, 2015), pp. 210–21; Michael O’Neal, ‘Ghurids’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 3rd ed. (2015/3), online edition; Michael O’Neal, ‘Some New Numismatic Evidence for Ghurid History’, in Olga M. Yastrebova (ed.), Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference of Iranian Studies, vol. 2, Studies on Iran and the Persianate World

83

84

viola allegranzi

Figure 5.3  The northeastern domed structure (structure B), view from the southwest. Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–144), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

complex political organisation of the Shansabanid confederation, whose parallel branches ruled over different appanages of a large territory spanning from eastern Khurasan to northern India. The political fragmentation had an impact on state-sponsored monuments that

after Islam (St Petersburg: The State Hermitage Publisher, 2020), pp. 199–221; and on architecture: Finbarr Barry Flood, Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval ‘Hindu- Muslim’ Encounter (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009); Robert Hillenbrand, ‘The Architecture of the Ghaznavids and Ghurids’, in Carole Hillenbrand (ed.), Studies in Honour of Clifford Edmund Bosworth, II, The Sultan’s Turret (Leiden: Brill, 2000), pp. 124–206; Alka Patel, ‘Architectural Cultures and Empire. The Ghurids in Northern India (ca. 1192–1210)’, Bulletin of the Asia Institute 21 (2007): 35–60; Alka Patel, Iran to India. Studies related to individual ­monuments are mentioned further in the text.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

raised tension between an imperial, far-reaching artistic language and a diversified, locally based tradition. The analysis of the Ghurid inscriptions at Chisht has the objective of replacing an under studied monument in the framework of Ghurid architectural and epigraphic production. Such a reappraisal not only provides some indications of the chronological attribution and function of structure B, but also contributes to a better knowledge of the interaction of secular and religious themes as reflected in the material culture of sixth/twelfthcentury Afghanistan. The inscriptions of ‘structure B’ at Chisht: old and new data In spite of its ruined state, the northeastern domed structure at Chisht still bears traces of a lavish epigraphic programme including numerous inscriptions executed in variously ornamented scripts. Some epigraphic bands have totally or partially vanished, some others were documented during the twentieth century but are now lost. An overall study of the inscriptions is further complicated by the absence of a complete photographic survey allowing detailed observation of the architectural decoration of the monument. Thus, an overall – yet still incomplete – review of the epigraphic programme is only made possible by collecting photographs taken at different times and from different angles, and gathering information from a number of previous studies. A total of fourteen inscriptions (six of which are split into two or more epigraphic bands) have been recorded in the domed structure. Table 5.1 summarises the location, form and, wherever possible, the content of individual inscriptions. The Répertoire Chronologique d’Épigraphie Arabe only records the text inscribed on the right-hand jamb of the south portal [no. 1a, Figure 5.4].8 The section from the same inscription preserved on the left-hand jamb [no. 1b, Figure 5.5] was read by Gaston Wiet in a short report devoted to Chisht’s domes.9 The fragmentary text on the portal was later transcribed and briefly discussed by Sheila S. Blair, who compared it with the inscriptions of the Shah-i Mashhad madrasa and of the Minaret of Jam (see below).10 In the section devoted to epigraphy in his highly valued digest of Ghaznavid and Ghurid architecture, Robert Hillenbrand repeatedly evokes the monuments   8 RCEA, vol. VIII, no. 2928.   9 Gaston Wiet, ‘Appendice 1: Les coupoles de Tschist’, in André Maricq and Gaston Wiet, Le Minaret de Djam. La découverte de la capitale des Sultans Ghorides (XIIe–XIIIe siècles) (Paris: C. Klincksieck, 1959), p. 70 and pls VIII–IX. Previous descriptions of the site by Ernst Diez (1924) and Richard N. Frye (1952) are reported in ibid., p. 70. 10 Sheila S. Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan: Islamic Architecture in Eastern Iran on the Eve of the Mongol Invasions’, Muqarnas 3 (1985): 82–3 and pl. 13.

85

86

viola allegranzi

Table 5.1  Inscriptions recorded in the northeastern domed structure (‘structure B’) at Chisht-i Sharif Exterior 1a

1b

Location: South portal, on the right-hand jamb. Description: Terracotta. Section of an epigraphic band originally framing the portal. One line. Angular script. Bibliography: RCEA, VIII, No. 2928, Wiet, ‘Les coupoles de Chisht’, p. 70; Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, p. 82; TEI, No. 6292. Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. [...‫العمـ]ـار[ة(؟) السـ]ـلطان المعظـ[ـم‬...] [… build]in[g (?) al-s]ul†ån al-muaΩΩa[m ...] Location: South portal, on the left-hand jamb. Description: Terracotta. Section of an epigraphic band originally framing the portal. One line. Angular script. Bibliography: Wiet, ‘Les coupoles de Chisht’, p. 70; Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, p. 82; TEI, No. 6292. Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. [...] ‫[ بتأريخ ربيع اآلخر سنة‬...] […] At the date of rabÈ II of the year […]

Interior 2a

Location: Intrados of the south entrance arch, rectangular panel at the springing of the arch, east side. Description: Terracotta. One line. Angular script. Bibliography: Ball, Archaeological Gazzetter, No. 121 (mention). Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫المعظم‬ al-muaΩΩam

2b

Location: Intrados of the south entrance arch, rectangular panel at the springing of the arch, west side. Description: Terracotta. One line. Angular script. Bibliography: Ball, Archaeological Gazzetter, No. 121 (mention); Hillenbrand, ‘The Architecture’, p. 175, pl. 21. Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫السلطان‬ al- sul†ån

3a

Location: West wall, large blind niche above right of mihrab, on the arch. Description: Plaster. One line. Angular script. The text has several lacunae. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. [‫ ا]ألعظم مـ[ـالـ]ـك رقاب األمم مو[لى ملو]ك العرب والعـ[ـجم‬...] […a]l-aΩam m[ål]ik riqåb al-umåm maw[lå mulË]k al-arab wa al-a[jam]

3b

Location: West wall, large blind niche above left of mihrab, on the arch. Description: Plaster. One line. Angular script. Only the final section of the text is extant. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. [‫ أ]مير المؤمنـ[ـين‬...] [… a]mÈr al-mumin[Èn]

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

Table 5.1 (continued) Interior 4

5

6a

6b

7

8

9

Location: West wall, large blind niche above right of mihrab, inside the arch. Description: Plaster. Four roundels arranged in a square. Curvilinear script. The roundel at bottom right is lost. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫ عمر‬ ]‫]أ]بو بـكـ[ـر‬ ‫علي‬ ]‫]عثمان‬ [A]bË Bak[r]; Umar; [Uthmån]; AlÈ Location: West wall, large blind niche above left of mihrab, inside the arch. Description: Four roundels arranged in a square. Curvilinear script. The roundels at top right and at the bottom are highly damaged. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫إبراهيم‬ )‫]محـ]ـمد (؟‬ (‫عيسی (؟‬ … [Mu˙a]mmad (?); IbråhÈm; …; Ïså (?) Location: West wall, large blind niche above right of mihrab, rectangular panel inside the niche. Description: Plaster. One line. Curvilinear script. Only the final section of the text is extant. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫]سبحان الـلـ]ـه (؟) والحمد لـله‬ [Glory](?) and praise be to God! Location: West wall, large blind niche above left of mihrab, rectangular panel inside the niche. Description: Plaster. One line. Curvilinear script. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. [‫وال إله إال الـله والـله أكـ[ـبر‬ There is no god but God; God is the Great[est]! Location: West wall, large blind niche above left of mihrab, inside the niche. Description: Plaster. Star-shaped medallion in the centre of the square panel. Angular script. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫الـله‬ God Location: West wall, twin blind niches above the mihrab, rectangular panel inside the right niche. Description: Plaster. One line. Angular script Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫الـله أكبر‬ God is the Greatest! Location: West wall, twin blind niches above the mihrab, rectangular panel inside the left niche. Description: Plaster. One line. Angular script. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫الـله أكبر‬ God is the Greatest!

87

88

viola allegranzi

Table 5.1 (continued ) Interior 10

11

12

13

14

Location: West wall, small blind niche above left of mihrab, rectangular panel inside the niche. Description: Plaster. Three lines extant. Angular script. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫الـله أكبر‬ God is the Greatest! Location: West wall, small blind niche above left of mihrab, square panel inside the niche. Description: Plaster. One line. Curvilinear script. Some sections are lost at bottom right of the panel. Bibliography: Patel, Iran to India, p. 345. ‫عمل محمد أبي بكر‬ ‫]ا]لمعروف‬ [... ‫]بــ‬ The work of Mu˙ammad AbÈ Bakr known [as …] … (?) Location: West wall, outer epigraphic band framing the mihrab. Description: Plaster. One line. Curvilinear script. Highly damaged, only few sections visible at top left. Bibliography: – Undeciphered Location: West wall, inner epigraphic band framing the mihrab, Description: Plaster. One line. Angular script. Highly damaged, only few sections visible at top left. Bibliography: – Undeciphered Location: West wall, inner epigraphic band framing the mihrab, at the top of the corner motif. Description: Plaster. Roundel. Angular script. Bibliography: – ‫الـله‬ God

in Chisht, and provides a reading of the epigraphic panel at the west springing of the south arch in structure B [no. 2b, Figure 5.6].11 The corresponding panel at the east springing of the entrance archway has so far remained unpublished [no. 2a, Figure 5.3].12 A fresh examination of the photographic documentation from Chisht has led to the emergence of new epigraphic data: in particular, Powell’s photographs provide multiple views of the middle section 11 Hillenbrand, ‘The Architecture’, pp. 173–93, pls 21, 24–7. The epigraphic panel is also reproduced in Dominique Sourdel and Janine SourdelThomine, La civilisation de l’Islam classique (Paris: Arthaud, 1968), fig. 189. 12 Also reproduced in Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, pl. 15.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

Figure 5.4  The inscription on the right-hand jamb of the portal of structure B (No. 1a). Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–114), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

Figure 5.5  The inscription on the left-hand jamb of the portal of structure B (No. 1b). Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–113), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

89

90

viola allegranzi

Figure 5.6  Sections of the south archway (with inscription No. 2b) and of the west wall of structure B. Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–144), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

of the inner west wall, where some compartments of an elaborate wall revetment in carved plaster are visible [Figures 5.7, 5.9–5.10].13 The decoration includes several epigraphic bands recording royal titles (Nos. 3a–b), a craftsman’s signature (no. 11), as well as religious invocations and doxologies (Nos. 4–10, 14). The texts of the two epigraphic bands framing the mihrab (Nos. 12–13) are too fragmentary to be reconstructed [Figures 5.9–5.10]. Notwithstanding this update of the repertory of inscriptions from the northeastern Ghurid monument in Chisht, the epigraphic data remains fragmented and can

13 ‘Un décor en plâtre très chargé’ is mentioned in Le Berre’s report (Ball, Archaeological Gazetteer1, no. 212), but the plaster decoration vanished later on, as shown in a photograph by B. O’Kane https://www.archnet. org/sites/3927?media_content_id=41649.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

Figure 5.7  The plasterwork on the middle section of the west wall of structure B. Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–107), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

Figure 5.8    Section of the secular inscription inside structure A, containing the laqab ‘Shams al-dunya wa’l-dÈn’. Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–136A), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

91

92

viola allegranzi

Figure 5.9  View on the west wall of structure B, with inscriptions Nos. 3–9, 12–13. Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–109), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

only be interpreted and contextualised through comparisons with coeval monuments and sources. Secular inscriptions: memories of rulers and craftsmen The two brothers Ghiyåth al-DÈn and Muizz al-DÈn Mu˙ammad b. Såm were the heads of the Ghurid sultanate during its heyday. The eldest, Ghiyåth al-DÈn (r. 558–99/1163–1203), reigned from the capital of Ghur, Firuzkuh, and was responsible for Ghurid expansion in Khurasan. The youngest, Muizz al-DÈn, held Ghazni from 569/1173 onwards, leading military expeditions from there in the direction of India and eventually becoming the supreme head of the sultanate after the death of his brother (r. 599–602/1203–6).14 14 See O’Neal, ‘Ghurids’.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

Figure 5.10  View of the west wall of structure B, with inscriptions Nos. 3b, 5, 6b, 7, 9–14. Josephine Powell (1959–1961, No. AF46–108), Courtesy of Special collections, Fine Arts Library, Harvard University.

Both domed structures in Chisht-i Sharif have been attributed to Ghiyåth al-DÈn Mu˙ammad b. Såm on the basis of their ­inscriptions.15 However, the discrepancy between the royal titles recorded in the two monuments has led to the conclusion that they were erected in two different phases of the sultan’s long-lasting reign.16 The date jamÈd al-awwal [i.e. jumådå I] 562 (4 March 1167), is still legible inside structure A,17 while the date on the portal of structure B 15 Such an attribution is already put forth by Frye in 1952 (quoted in Wiet ‘Les coupoles de Tschist’, p. 69), relying on the outer inscription of structure B; the name of the sovereign inside structure A was first read by FikrÈ SaljËqÈ, Risåla-yi Mazåråt-i Haråt. Ta liqåt (Kabul, 1967), p. 157. 16 Sourdel and Sourdel-Thomine, La civilisation, p. 240. 17 Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, p. 82 and pl. 12. The date is recorded in Persian: this was not entirely new at that time, although the use

93

94

viola allegranzi

is truncated and cannot be reconstructed (cf. no. 1.b and below). Inscriptions containing royal titles are therefore the main sources for a tentative chronological attribution of the monument. The evolution of and variations on Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s titles In the inscription running at the springing line of arches inside structure A, the name of the eldest Mu˙ammad b. Såm, confidently identified by his kunya AbË’l-Fat˙, is associated with the non-sultanic title al-malik al-muaΩΩam and with the ruler’s early laqab Shams al-Dunyå wa’l-DÈn [Figure 5.8].18 It can be inferred from JËzjånÈ’s chronicle (completed in 658/1260) that the sovereign changed his laqab from Shams al-DÈn to Ghiyåth al-DÈn some time after his assumption of the sultanate in Firuzkuh, supposedly in 558/1163.19 As far as numismatic data are concerned, the honorifics al-sul†ån and ghiyåth al-dÈn seem to be first adopted on coins minted during the caliphate of al-Musta∂È bi-llåh (566–75/1170–80).20 On the south portal of structure B, only two sections of a once imposing epigraphic band are preserved. On the right-hand jamb, the title al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam is still legible, although some letters are damaged [no. 1a, Figure 5.4]. This title usually marks the beginning of Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s titulature and would have been followed by the expression shahanhshåh al-aΩam (see below). It can be argued that of Persian remained very limited in Ghurid monumental epigraphy. For a broader discussion of the epigraphic use of Persian from the fifth/eleventh century onwards, see Bernard O’Kane, The Appearance of Persian on Islamic Art (New York: Persian Heritage Foundation, 2009); Roberta Giunta, ‘Les inscriptions persanes dans l’épigraphie monumentale de la ville de Ghazni (Afghanistan) aux 6e-7e/12e-13e siècle’, in Carlo Giovanni Cereti (ed.), Iranian Identity in the Course of History: Proceedings of the Conference Held in Rome, 21–24 September 2005 (Roma: IsIAO, 2010), pp.163–80; Viola Allegranzi, Aux sources de la poésie ghaznavide. Les inscriptions persanes de Ghazni (Afghanistan, 11e–12e siècles) (Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle, 2019), vol. 1, pp. 207–40. 18 Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, p. 81; TEI, no. 37804 (reading by Ludvik Kalus). 19 Min˙åj-i Siråj JËzjånÈ, Êabaqåt-i NåßirÈ, ed. Abd al-Óayy ÓabÈbÈ (Kabul: Anjuman-i tårÈkh-i Afghånistån, AHS 1342–3/1963–4), vol. 1, p. 354. See the discussion in Finbarr Barry Flood, ‘Ghurid Monuments and Muslim Identities: Epigraphy and Exegesis in Twelfth-century Afghanistan’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 42, no. 3 (2005): 266; Patel, Iran to India, pp. 194, 211. Later dates for the changing of titles were maintained by Maricq and Wiet (Le Minaret de Djam, p. 39) and Sourdel and Sourdel-Thomine (La civilisation, p. 240). 20 Florian Schwarz, Sylloge Numorum Arabicorum Tübingen. Ghazna/ Kabul XIV d Huråsån IV (Tübingen-Berlin: Ernst Wasmuth Verlag, ˘ 809–11; Flood, ‘Ghurid Monuments’, p. 266, fn. 11. 1995), p. 70, nos.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

the preceding section of the epigraphic band contained the starting formula of a foundation text, as suggested by the fragmented word [al-im]år[a] visible at the lower edge of the preserved epigraphic band. The inscription would have originally framed the portal, ending on the left-hand jamb with the expression of the date. Unfortunately, only the introductory formula bi-tarÈkh and the name of the month (rabÈ II) survive [no. 1b, Figure 5.5]. The title al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam is repeated on the intrados of the south arch, split in two rectangular panels facing one another at the springing points of the arch. Strangely enough, al-muaΩΩam is recorded on the east side [no. 2a, Figure 5.3] and al-sul†ån on the west side [no. 2b, Figure 5.6], which seems to contradict the right-to-left direction of Arabic script. This may suggest that the inscription addresses a potential reader facing the mihrab set in the west wall. Similar epigraphic bands, containing a condensed expression of the sovereign’s titles, can be observed on the Ghurid portal of the Great Mosque in Herat: here the titles al-sul†ån [al-muaΩΩam (?)] and [shahanshåh (?)] al-aΩam are inscribed at the top of two engaged columns flanking the portal’s inner frame.21 Royal titles are also discernible in the epigraphic bands framing the arches of the two large blind niches on the inner west wall of structure B [Figure 5.9]. The text of the right-hand arch can be reconstructed as follows: [al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam shahanhshåh (?) a]l-aΩam m[ål]ik riqåb al-umåm maw[lå mulË]k al-arab wa’la[jam] (no. 3a). The titulature continues on the left-hand arch, where only the expression [qasÈm (?) a]mÈr al-mumin[Èn] is partly legible in the final section of the epigraphic band (no. 3b). Inscriptions naming Ghiyåth al-DÈn are exhibited by some other outstanding monuments in northwestern Afghanistan: the Minaret of Jam (570/1174–5), located 70 km east from Chisht and widely believed to mark the site of Firuzkuh,22 the Great Mosque of Herat (597/1201) and the mausoleum annexed to its eastern wall, probably conceived as the burial place of Ghiyåth al-DÈn himself (beginning of the seventh/thirteenth century, demolished in the 1950s).23 21 The inscriptions are unpublished. See reproductions in A. Melikian Chirvani, ‘Eastern Iranian architecture: Apropos of the GhËrid Parts of the Great Mosque of Haråt’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 33, no. 2 (1970), pls VII–VIII. 22 Three inscriptions containing a more or less extended titulature of the sovereign are located at different heights on the minaret’s shaft. Maricq and Wiet, Le Minaret de Djam, pp. 26–8; Ralph Pinder-Wilson, ‘Ghaznavid and GhËrid minarets’ Iran 39 (2001): 168–9; Janine SourdelThomine, Le Minaret ghouride de Jåm: Un chef d’oeuvre du XIIe siècle (Paris: De Boccard, 2004), pp. 129–33. 23 Melikian Chirvani, ‘Eastern Iranian Architecture’, pp. 323–4; Bernt Glatzer, ‘Das Mausoleum und die Moschee des Ghoriden Ghiyat ud-Din in Herat’, Afghanistan Journal 7 (1980): 15–18; Robert Hillenbrand,

95

96

viola allegranzi

Comparisons with such epigraphic documents are essential for reconstructing and contextualising the fragmented inscriptions recorded inside and outside Chisht’s structure B. In all these monumental inscriptions, AbË’l-Fat˙ Mu˙ammad b. Såm bears the laqab Ghiyåth al-Dunyå wa’l-DÈn and is unequivocally designated as sul†ån. However, while the title al-sul†ån al-aΩam mostly occurs on coins,24 the majestic binomial al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam shahanshåh (or shåhanshåh) al-aΩam is preferred on monuments.25 It is also noteworthy that the string of honorifics appended to the name of Ghiyåth al-DÈn vary in length and form from one site to another, thereby bearing witness to the continual evolution and variations of the sovereign titulature during his longlasting reign.26 Although the name of the sovereign is lost in the inscription inside structure B at Chisht, an identical sequence of titles can be found in the inscriptions in the Great Mosque and in the mausoleum of Herat, and on the Qutb Minar in Delhi,27 all dating back to the last decade of Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s reign. On the contrary, none of the titles recorded inside Chisht’s structure B match with the honorifics listed

‘The Ghurid Tomb at Herat’, in Warwick Ball and Leonard Harrow (eds), Cairo to Kabul: Afghan and Islamic Studies Presented to Ralph PinderWilson (London: Melisende, 2002), pp. 136–43. 24 This title was reserved to the supreme sultan and thus distinguished Ghiyåth al-DÈn from his younger brother Muizz al-DÈn, mostly referred to as al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam. Nevertheless, numismatic data contradicts this hierarchical principle in some cases, see Flood, ‘Ghurid Monuments’, pp. 266–7; O’Neal, ‘Some New Numismatic Evidence’, pp. 210–11. 25 This Perso-Arabic sequence of titles was first adopted by the Seljuq Sultan Malikshåh (465–85/1073–92), see Roberta Giunta, ‘The Corpus of Seljuk Inscriptions in the Great Mosque of Isfahan. A Project for a Web Database’, in Bruno Genito (ed.), Digital Archaeology from the Iranian Plateau (1962–1977). Collected Papers on the Occasion of the 10th Anniversary of the Demise of Umberto Scerrato (Napoli: Università degli studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, 2014), pp. 124 ff. 26 Roberta Giunta and Cécile Bresc, ‘Listes de la titulature des Ghaznavides et des Ghurides à travers les documents numismatiques et épigraphiques’, Eurasian Studies 3, no. 2 (2004): 161–243; Flood, Objects of Translation, pp. 93–107. 27 Joseph Horovitz, ‘The Inscriptions of Mu˙ammad Ibn Såm, Qu†buddÈn Aibeg and Iltutmish’, Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica, 1911–1912 (1914): 17–18, no. X. On the Qutb Minar, the same titles are attributed to Muizz al-DÈn (ibid., pp. 16–17, no. IX). However, it is highly unlikely that the inscriptions in Chisht commemorated Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s younger brother, since no monumental text in his name is extant in the northwestern regions of the Ghurid sultanate, where Muizz al-DÈn delegated power to other family members after having become supreme sultan (O’Neal, ‘Ghurids’).

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

in structure A,28 and only a few of them are included in the royal inscriptions on the Minaret of Jam (570/1174–5)29 and in the complete titulature of Ghiyåth al-DÈn given in the colophon of a Quranic manuscript dated 584/1188–9.30 The cross-check of documents is hindered by the fact that most monumental inscriptions have significant lacunae, and that the form and length of the royal protocol may vary depending on the context and medium. Nevertheless, the previous considerations suggest that the epigraphic programme of the domed structure B reproduced – on its portal and on the inner west wall – more or less extended versions of the titulature adopted by Ghiyåth al-DÈn in the last part of his reign. The artisan’s discreet presence The only other secular inscription inside Chisht’s structure B appears in the lower section of the blind niche located on the west wall, at the left-hand edge of the plaster revetment [no. 11, Figure 5.10]. The text, in curvilinear script, opens with the formula amal ‘work of’ (or umila ‘made by’) and accordingly contains the signature of an artisan. His proper name Mu˙ammad and the kunya AbÈ Bakr (in genitive case)31 were followed by a sobriquet, as suggested by the text of the second line: al-marËf [bi-] ‘known as’, but the last section of the text is mostly lost. The generic introductory formula amal does not allow ascertainment as to whether the name refers to an architect or a decorator, but the location of the inscription inside the monument, in a compartment of the stucco architectural decoration, argues in favour of the second hypothesis. Fragmentary craftsmen’s signatures are preserved on other Ghurid monuments: on the Minaret of Jam, an inscription of two lines in curvilinear letters ascribes the work to the architect (mimår) AlÈ b. IbråhÈm al-[NÈsh]åbËrÈ.32 On the façade of the Shah-i Mashhad madrasa in Garjistan (571/1176) – located 80 km north from Chisht – the beginning of an inscription in angular letters reading amal Mu˙ammad […] has been documented, and another inscription

28 TEI, no. 37804. 29 Sourdel-Thomine, Le Minaret ghouride, pp. 129–33 (cf. al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam shahanhshåh al-aΩam; qasÈm amÈr al-muminÈn). However, the text on the lower part of the minaret, containing the longest version of Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s protocol, is too fragmentary to allow a proper comparison. 30 Flood, ‘Ghurid Monuments’, pp. 267–9, fig. 1 (cf. […] al-sul†ån al-muaΩΩam shahanhshåh al-aΩam målik riqåb al-umåm […] qasÈm amÈr al-muminÈn). 31 It seems that a bin is missing – or replaced by a Persian i‰åfa – between the two names. 32 Sourdel-Thomine, Le Minaret ghouride, pp. 133–4.

97

98

viola allegranzi

on the eastern side of the main Èwån records the name of A˙mad b. Ma˙mËd, but the role of both individuals in the construction project remains unclear.33 The above-mentioned inscriptions are executed in carved terracotta on the exterior of the monuments, while the signature of an artisan appears in an inscription in carved plaster running at the base of the dome inside the mausoleum of Salår KhalÈl (known as Båbå Óåtim), next to the village of Imam Sahib in northern Afghanistan. Here the name Mu˙ammad b. A˙mad b. Ma˙mËd is recorded at the end of a religious text, and possibly refers to the master of the stucco workshop who accomplished the architectural decoration of the funerary chamber.34 Artisan’s signatures are not unusually inscribed on Iranian monuments dating from the fifth/eleventh century onwards;35 however, a small group of stucco signatures is preserved from the pre-Mongol period. Most of them are inserted in epigraphic bands adorning the mihrab36 or the qibla wall37 of mosques or mausoleums, as it is 33 Bernt Glatzer, ‘The Madrasah of Shah-i-Mashhad in Badgis’, Afghanistan 25 (1973): 55, nos. 3, 5. Also see Abdul Wassay Najimi, ‘The Ghurid Madrasa and Mausoleum of Shah-i Mashhad Ghur’, Iran 53 (2015): 157, who provides a fuller reconstruction of the second text, although the reading of the initial and final sections of the epigraphic band cannot be verified on photographs. 34 Janine Sourdel-Thomine, ‘Le mausolée dit de Baba Hatim en Afghanistan’, Revue des études islamiques 39 (1971): 315; Assadullah Souren Melikian Chirvani, ‘Baba Hatem: Un chef d’oeuvre inconnu d’époque ghaznévide en Afghanistan’, in A. Tajvidi and M.Y. Kiani (eds), The Memorial Volume of the Vth International Congress of Iranian Art and Archaeology, Tehran-Isfahan-Shiraz, 11th–18th April 1968 (Tehran: Wizårat-i farhang wa hunar, 1972), vol. 2, p. 115. 35 Sheila S. Blair, The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana (Leiden: Brill, 1992), p. 8. For a broader discussion on signatures on monuments and objects produced in the medieval Islamic world, see Sheila Blair, ‘Place, Space and Style: Craftsmen’s Signatures in Medieval Islamic Art’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 230–48. 36 See examples from the first Great Mosque in Zuzan (probably late tenth– early eleventh century) Chahryar Adle, ‘Trois mosquées du début de l’ère islamique au Grand Khorassan: Bastam, Noh-Gonbadan/haji-piyadah de Balkh et Zuzan d’après des investigations archéologiques’, in Rocco Rante (ed.), Greater Khorasan: History, Geography, Archaeology and Material Culture (Berlin-Munich-Boston: De Gruyter, 2015), pp. 105–9, fig. 15) and from the Great Mosque of Dandanqan (49[…]/1096–1106, Blair, Monumental Inscriptions, pp. 191–3, no. 73). 37 See the epigraphic cartouches above the mihrab in the imåmzåda Ya˙yå b. Zayd at Sar-i Pul (probably beginning of the twelfth century), A. David H. Bivar, ‘SeljËqid Ziyårats of Sar-i Pul (Afghanistan)’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 29, no. 1 (1966): 60, pl. 1), and in the mausoleum of PÈr-i Óamza Sabza PËsh at Abarquh (probably

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

the case in Chisht. This tradition of recording the name of stucco craftsmen (usually introduced by amal and most likely referred to the head of a workshop) is well attested in the Ilkhanid period (midseventh/thirteenth–mid-eighth/fourteenth centuries), when numerous decoration or redecoration interventions were accomplished in religious monuments across Iran.38 Religious inscriptions: an unusual collection of pious phrases Inscriptions with religious content have traditionally received less scholarly attention than those with secular content, which are, revealingly, qualified as ‘historical’ inscriptions.39 Some recent studies demonstrate that a contextualised analysis of religious inscriptions may open new perspectives on the religious policy and practice in medieval Islamic societies.40 Nevertheless, these works mostly concentrate on Quranic inscriptions, and several questions remain concerning the proper interpretation and the socio-­historical implications of other kinds of religious inscriptions (˙adÈths, prayers, doxologies, and so on). As far as Ghurid epigraphy is concerned, Finbarr Barry Flood has paved the way for a re-consideration of Quranic quotations on monuments and coins as signs of the

mid-twelfth century, Ïråj Afshår, Yådgårhå-yi Yazd, vol. 1, Khåk-i Yazd (Tehran: Anjuman-i åthår-i millÈ, AHS 1348/1969–70), pp. 343–4, 569, no. 201/4). 38 Ana Marija Grbanovic, ‘Beyond the Stylistic Idiosyncrasies: Notes Regarding the Identity and Mobility of Ilkhanid Stucco Craftsmen in Central Iran’, in Lorenz Korn and Anja Heidenreich (eds), Proceedings of the 11th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, vol. 2, Islamic Archaeology (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2020), pp. 607–19; see also her chapter in the present volume. 39 The paucity of studies devoted to religious inscriptions is highlighted by Robert Hillenbrand, ‘Islamic Monumental Inscriptions Contextualized: Location, Content, Legibility and Aesthetics’, in Lorenz Korn and Anja Heidenreich (eds), Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie, vol. 3, In memoriam Marianne Barrucand (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2012), pp. 19–20. 40 See, for instance Carole Hillenbrand, ‘Some Thoughts on the Use of the Quran in Monumental Inscriptions in Syria and Palestine in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, in Robert G. Hoyland and Philip F. Kennedy (eds) Islamic Reflections, Arabic Musings: Studies in Honour of Professor Alan Jones (Warminster: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2004), pp. 277–87; Sheila S. Blair, ‘Invoking God’s Protection: The Iconography of the Quranic Phrase fasayakfÈkahum allåh’, in Shahin Aryamanesh (ed.), Farr-e Firouz. Distinguished Scholar of Cultural Heritage of Persia (vol. 5): Special Edition in Honor of Dr. Firouz Bagherzadeh (Tehran: Aryaramna Press, 2019), pp. 181–206; see also her chapter in the present volume.

99

100

viola allegranzi

sectarian affiliation of the sultans.41 This scholar dealt in particular with the Quranic inscription on the Minaret of Jam and its connections with the doctrine of the pietistic sect of the Karråmiyya, to which Ghiyåth al-DÈn adhered until his conversion to the Shafii madhhab, which took place by 595/1199.42 Alka Patel further stresses the value of religious inscriptions as tangible signs of the changing religious policy and of the intra-Sunni conflicts permeating the Ghurid sultanate, and suggests that the sultan also sponsored groups other than the Karråmiyya before his conversion to Shafiism.43 A contextual issue regarding the Ghurid monuments at Chisht-i Sharif is that of their possible association with the Chishtiyya Sufi order, allegedly founded in Chisht by AbË Is˙åq ShåmÈ (d. 328/940) and destined to spread in India, where it was introduced by MuÈn al‑DÈn SijzÈ (d. 627/1230).44 A connection between Chisht’s domed structures and this †arÈqa is maintained in previous literature,45 but is questioned by Patel.46 The most imposing monument related to the Chishtiyya in Chisht is the shrine of Qu†b al-DÈn MawdËd ChishtÈ (d. 527/1132–3, locally known as Sul†ån MawdËd ChishtÈ),

41 Flood, ‘Ghurid Monuments’; idem,Objects of Translation, pp. 93–107; idem, ‘Islamic Identities and Islamic Art: Inscribing the Quran in Twelfth-century Afghanistan’, in Elizabeth Cropper (ed.), Dialogues in Art History, from Mesopotamian to Modern: Readings for a New Century (Washington, DC: National Gallery of Art, 2009), pp. 91–118. 42 Two different versions of Ghiyath al-DÈn’s conversion are given by JËzjånÈ (Êabaqåt-i NåßirÈ, vol. 1, p. 362) and Ibn al-AthÈr (al-Kåmil ­fi’l-TarÈkh, ed. C. J. Tornberg, vol. 12 (reprint Beirut: Dår Íådiq, 1399/1979), pp. 151–2, 154). See commentary in Clifford Edmund Bosworth, ‘The Early Islamic History of GhËr’, Central Asiatic Journal 6 (1961): 129–32. Ibn al-AthÈr relates the episode under the year 595; JËzjånÈ associates Ghiyath al-DÈn’s conversion to Shafiism with Muizz al-DÈn’s adoption of the Hanafi doctrine after his installation in Ghazni (569/1173). The date of 595 for Ghiyath al-DÈn’s conversion is retained by Flood, who also noted that a Karråmi Quran was dedicated to the sultan in 584/1188–9 (see references above, note 41); while Bosworth (‘The Ghurids in Khurasan’, p. 213) ascribes the episode to an earlier phase of the sultan’s reign. On the Karråmiyya and its fortune in Ghur see also C. E. Bosworth, ‘Karråmiyya’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., vol. 4 (1978), pp. 667–9. 43 Patel, Iran to India, pp. 197–9, 210. 44 Gerhard Böwering, ‘‡eštÈya’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 5, pp. 333–9; Blain Auer, ‘Chishtiyya’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 3rd ed.(2016/1), online edition. The difficulties in reconstructing the early history of the order in Khurasan depend on the fact that most sources on the Chishtiyya are compiled in India from the fourteenth century onwards. 45 Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, pp. 83–4; Flood, Objects of Translation, p. 101. 46 Patel, Iran to India, p. 217.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

which was renovated in the twentieth century and whose foundation date remains unknown.47 Most religious inscriptions on Ghurid monuments consist of Quranic passages and ˙adÈths; this is also the case with Chisht’s structure A, where several verses from the Quran (3:18–19; 2:255–7; 112; 20:8; 49:23–4), as well as a list of divine names (al-asmå al-˙usnå) are inscribed inside and outside the monument.48 Conversely, no Quranic passage has been preserved in structure B – although we may suppose that the two abraded inscriptions framing the mihrab [nos. 12–13, Figures 5.7, 5.10] had a Quranic content; but several epigraphic cartouches on the interior west wall rather display short religious formulae or invocations. The longest text is split between two epigraphic panels located at mid-height of the largest blind niches [nos. 6a–b, Figure 5.9], on whose arches royal titles are recorded [cf. nos. 3a–b and above]. The beginning and the end of the inscription are damaged, but the whole text can be confidently reconstructed as reading: [sub˙an Allå]h wa’l˙amdu li-llåh / wa lå ila illa’llåh wa’llåhu ak[bar] ([Glory] and praise be to God! / There is no god but God; God is the Great[est]!). The combination of these four doxologies is acknowledged in the most authoritative collections of ˙adÈths as the most pleasing orison one can address to God, and accordingly became widespread in supererogatory prayers. The inscription of these phrases above a mihrab is therefore not surprising per se; yet, similar expressions are very uncommon in the epigraphic repertory of the time. An interesting comparison can be made with two epigraphic bands on the inner sides of the Èwån of the Shah-i Mashhad madrasa, where the same doxologies are arranged in a different order (each band reads: Allåhu akbar Allåhu akbar lå ila illa’llåh Allåhu akbar wa Allåhu’l-˙amd).49 The takbÈr alone (Allåhu akbar) appears on three rectangular cartouches included in the twin niches above the mihrab [nos. 8–9, Figure 5.9] and in the small niche at the left-hand edge of the extant wall revetment [no. 10, Figure 5.10].50 Despite the takbÈr being among 47 Samizay, Islamic Architecture, p. 50. The monument is mentioned by ÓåfiΩ-i AbrË in the early ninth/fifteenth century, see Christine NoelleKarimi, The Pearl in its Midst: Herat and the Mapping of Khorasan from the Fifteenth to the Nineteenth Centuries (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2014), p. 31. 48 Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, p. 82; TEI, no. 37804. The occurrence of Quran 112 (on the arch of the interior east wall) and of Quran 20:8 (on the façade) went unnoticed in previous studies. 49 Najimi (‘The Ghurid Madrasa and Mausoleum’, p. 157) read the inscriptions and recognised in the text the so-called takbÈr al-tashrÈq, usually recited during the Festival of Sacrifice. 50 A fourth epigraphic panel containing the takbÈr was likely located in the small niche only partially preserved at the right-hand edge of the composition [Figure 5.7].

101

102

viola allegranzi

the most common formulae employed by Muslims in prayers and invocations, it is rarely found in monumental epigraphy. A parallel can be drawn with a marble panel with niche design retrieved in the vicinity of Ghazni: the invocation Allåhu akbar is incised inside the niche, while an epitaph is recorded in the frame.51 The panel was most likely part of a funerary monument, but the dating of the object and its inscriptions remain uncertain. Epigraphic roundels are inserted into the geometric design on the background of the two large blind niches. Beneath the arch of the right-hand niche, roundels arranged in a square contained the names of the first four caliphs [no. 4, reading from top right to bottom left, Figure 5.9].52 Four roundels are similarly displayed in the left-hand niche [no. 5]: at top-left, the name ‘IbråhÈm’ is clearly legible. It likely refers to the Biblical prophet Abraham, who holds a prominent position in the Quran and in the Islamic tradition, being considered the founder of the Kaba and of the true religion, sealed by the prophet Mu˙ammad.53 Although the remaining roundels are badly damaged, it can be argued that they did contain mentions of three more prophets. The name of Mu˙ammad was probably inscribed at top right (where only a final dål or låm is well visible, alternative readings would be ‘DawËd’ or ‘IsmåÈl’) or at bottom right (where a ˙å is discernible, a possible reading would be ‘Ya˙yå’); while the name of ‘Ïså’ (or MËså’?) seems to be inscribed at bottom left. However, the exact sequence of the inscriptions is unclear and their reading remains tentative. Finally, at the bottom of the left-hand niche, Allåh is inscribed at the centre of a star-shaped geometric composition [no. 7]; it can be argued that an identical inscription adorned the corresponding medallion in the right-hand niche, deeply abraded. The word Allåh is also visible at the top of the corner motif in the undeciphered epigraphic band composing the mihrab’s inner frame [no. 14, Figure 5.10]. The names of the RåshidËn caliphs – associated with those of the prophet Mu˙ammad, and of the two sons of AlÈ, al-Óasan and al-Óusayn – are traced in square angular letters (maqilÈ) on a marble panel retrieved from Ghazni. Other inscriptions on the same object allow attribution to the time of the Ghaznavid Sultan IbråhÈm (r. 451–92/1059–99) and to contend for its use in a funerary ­context.54 The names of Mu˙ammad and of the first four caliphs are 51 See: https://ghazni.bdus.cloud/islamic/finds (Inv. no. IG0063). 52 The roundel at bottom right, which most likely mentioned Uthmån, is no longer visible on photographs. 53 Heribert Husse, ‘Abraham’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 3rd ed. (2008/1), online edition. 54 Pinder-Wilson, ‘Ghaznavid and GhËrid Minarets’, pp. 160–1, figs 12–13. The association of the caliphs’ names with those of the first descendants of AlÈ is unusual in a Sunni context such as the Ghaznavid

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

also inscribed into roundels on the back wall of the mihrab in the ribå† of the Ghurid military commander AlÈ b. Karmåkh (Karbiwala, Pakistan, late sixth/twelfth-century).55 This monument is centred around a funerary chamber and designated as masjid in the foundation inscription. Moreover, small-sized inscriptions naming the RåshidËn are discernible on four inscribed tiles inserted in a knotted element adorning the monumental text on the portal of the Shåh-i Mashhad madrasa,56 as well as in a roundel on the back wall of the main Èwån in the Hanafi madrasa at Zuzan (616/1219–20).57 Contrarily, no inscriptions mentioning a series of prophets are known from this period. It should be noted, though, that several Biblical prophets (including IbråhÈm and Ïså) are evoked in Quran 19 (the sËra of Mary), whose entire text is inscribed on the shaft of the Minaret of Jam.58 Moreover, part of Quranic verse 2:127, alluding to IbråhÈm and IsmåÈl ‘raising the foundations of the House’ (that is, the Kaba), is preserved on the right-hand jamb of the Arch of Bust.59 Epigraphic tiles in stucco or brick of various shapes, originally inserted in geometric panels, are known from other sites – such as the palaces in Lashkari Bazar and Ghazni, which invariably contain the word Allåh executed in angular script [cf. nos. 7, 14].60 From the above, it emerges that the religious inscriptions adorning the qibla wall of Chisht’s structure B comprise an unusual set of pious formulae: if a few comparisons are known for the individual texts,

55 56

57

58 59 60

Sultanate. Notwithstanding the mention of the ruler’s name on the object, this latter may be related to the private patronage of a member of the Shiite community in Ghazni. Holly Edwards, ‘The Ribå† of AlÈ b. Karmåkh’, Iran 29 (1991): 92, pls IXa, Xa. These miniaturised inscriptions have been read by the present author thank to high resolution photos from Bernt Glatzer’s archives, digitised and made accessible by the Austrian Academy of Sciences: https://​ www.oeaw.ac.at/iran/bibliothek/vor-und-nachlaesse/Shah-i-Mashhad/ (cf. ‘Section I, historical inscription continued (inscr. #2) with date of endowment’, no. 17_I-2-bw710841and ff.). Chahryar Adle, ‘Archéologie et arts du monde iranien, de l’Inde musulmane et du Caucase d’après quelques recherches récentes de terrain, 1984–1995’, Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 140e année, no. 1 (1996), fig. 3. See Sourdel-Thomine, Le Minaret ghouride, pp. 140–8; Flood, ‘Islamic Identities’. Daniel Schlumberger and Janine Sourdel-Thomine, Lashkari Bazar: une résidence royale ghaznévide et ghoride, 1B. Le décor non figuratif et les inscriptions (Paris: De Boccard, 1978), pp. 64–5. Schlumberger and Sourdel-Thomine, Lashkari Bazar, 1C. Planches, pls 132a, 139e–g; Valentina Laviola, ‘Inserting and Combining. Stucco and Brick Tiles from the Ghaznavid Royal Palace (11th–12th c.) in Ghazni’, Annali dell’Università degli studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, Sezione ­orientale 80 (2020): 205, 208.

103

104

viola allegranzi

none exists for their assemblage. Nevertheless, the content of most texts can be related to prayer and devotional practices, and support the interpretation of the structure as a prayer hall, already suggested by the presence of a mihrab. A significant parallel is constituted by the above-mentioned inscriptions inside the Èwån of the Shah-i Mashhad madrasa. In addition, the text carved at the base of the dome inside the mausoleum of Salår KhalÈl should be mentioned, featuring a long prayer addressed to the angels, to the messenger prophets, to God’s purest servants and to the prophet Mu˙ammad.61 The interpretation of structure B as a mosque is commonly accepted in the local tradition,62 however the reduced size (about 5 m2) and refined architectural decoration of the domed hall suggest that it could had functioned as a private oratory, reserved for political and/ or religious elites. A larger prayer hall might have existed on the eastern side of structure B, where a mihrab and traces of ruined structures are still visible (see above and Figure 5.2). The religious affiliation of the Ghurid monument in Chisht is not easy to reconstruct neither from epigraphic nor architectural data. A westward qibla orientation was commonly adopted by Hanafis, as well as by the pietistic sect of the Karråmiyya,63 from which it could be inferred that the prayer hall in Chisht predates Ghiyåth ­al-DÈn’s conversion to the Shafii madhhab (see above). Nevertheless, this cannot be presumed, since one cannot exclude that the sultan sponsored religious groups other than that which he adhered to, in order to gain the favour of local communities. Diversity in harmony: some notes on the epigraphic styles and visual effects of Ghurid inscriptions Artisans working on monuments sponsored by Ghurid rulers in Afghanistan inherited the epigraphic tradition elaborated in the Persianate lands during previous centuries. The palette of writing styles and ornamental devices is multifarious and the calligraphers were skilled in finding the balance between ornamentation and 61 Sourdel-Thomine, ‘Le mausolée dit de Baba Hatim’, p. 8; Melikian Chirvani, ‘Baba Hatem’, p. 114. The two studies give slightly different versions of the text. 62 Frye (1952) already refers to the monument as a mosque (quoted in Maricq and Wiet, Le Minaret de Djam, p. 70). See also Samizay, Islamic Architecture, p. 50, referring to structure A as ‘madrasa’ and to ­structure B as ‘mosque’. 63 See Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, p. 81; Flood, ‘Ghurid Monuments’, p. 276, 281–3; Patel, Iran to India, pp. 201, 214, 278–9. For a broader discussion of the orientation of monuments and cities in medieval Islam, see David A. King, ‘The Orientation of Medieval Islamic Religious Architecture and Cities’, Journal for the History of Astronomy 26 (1995): 253–74.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

legibility by concentrating the decoration in the upper section and in the background of the epigraphic band.64 Only a few remarks on palaeography find their place in this chapter, which are aimed at fostering further comparative analyses of writing styles attested on monuments, inscribed objects and manuscripts. The focus is again on the epigraphic repertory from Chisht’s structure B, where inscriptions in different materials, locations and sizes display a considerable range of writing styles and ornamental devices. As was usual in sixth/twelfth-century Afghanistan, the architectural decoration of the two domed structures in Chisht – including numerous epigraphic sections – is composed of carved terracotta and plaster: the former material is mostly used on the exterior (this extends to the intrados of the south arch in structure B), while the latter is applied on the interior.65 An overall view of the epigraphic programme of both monuments reveals the coexistence of several varieties of ornate angular and curvilinear scripts. The choice of a particular writing style is only partially influenced by the medium and seems to be unrelated to the content of the inscription. In structure B, several ornamental devices widespread from the fourth/tenth–fifth/eleventh centuries onwards are employed, often combined on the same epigraphic band. Angular letters display foliated endings [cf. nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10], while individual vegetal elements [cf. nos. 4, 5] or scrolls [cf. nos. 6, 11, 12] fill the background of inscriptions in curvilinear script.66 Knotted elements [cf. no. 1] and ornamental borders [cf. nos. 1, 2] only appear in terracotta inscriptions in angular script. A common feature shared by almost all ­inscriptions – with the exception of no. 2 – is the use of punctate endings of letters. In most cases, a single hole marks the upper or lower edge of shafts,67 while in a few instances, several holes are set up and shaped to obtain a particular design [cf. nos. 1, 12?,13].68 In the inscription on the portal [no. 1, Figures 5.4–5.5], three holes carved 64 Some Ghurid inscriptions in India are exceptional in this regard, since they were probably executed by local stone carvers, inexperienced in the use of Arabic letters and still reliant on the ornamental repertory derived from the Indian tradition. For a discussion of the visuals effects of the inscriptions on the Qutb Minar, see Robert Hillenbrand’s contribution to the present volume. 65 See Hillenbrand, ‘The Architecture’, p. 202. 66 In one instance (cf. no. 13) angular letters are combined with an elaborate vegetal ornamentation of the background. 67 Comparable inscriptions in foliated angular letters with punctate endings are recorded in Chisht’s structure A (Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, pp. 81–2, pl. 12) and in the Great Mosque of Herat (Melikian Chirvani, ‘Eastern Iranian architecture’, p. 325, pls IV–VI). 68 The inscriptions framing the mihrab are too poorly preserved to determine their original design, although they show traces of highly ­elaborate ornaments.

105

106

viola allegranzi

in the upper part of shafts give the ambiguous impression of small faces staring at the observer. Similar graphic devices, falling midway between stylised vegetal forms and animated ornaments, characterise several coeval inscriptions in curvilinear script.69 Thorough comparative analyses would be necessary to determine their origin, as well as their aesthetic and symbolic rationale.70 A fruitful approach to the analysis of the epigraphic programme in structure B consists in looking at the connections between individual inscriptions and the surrounding architecture and architectural decoration. Inscription no. 1 [Figures 5.4–5.5] conforms in location, size and writing style to secular inscriptions framing the portals of Ghurid monuments in Garjistan and Herat, and its models go back to Ghaznavid and Seljuq inscriptions in bordered angular script.71 In comparisons with other Ghurid portals, in Chisht letters occupy a larger section of the epigraphic band, which is less charged with decorative motifs. Heart-shaped knots72 replace the intricate knotted elements of the Shah-i Mashhad madrasa and, in the background, small triangles arranged in a honeycomb pattern substitute the thick palmettes visible in the Herat mosque and mausoleum. This latter feature recalls a series of epigraphic panels retrieved from the palace of Ghazni, where letters assembled from bricks and carved terracotta are bedded in a layer of plaster, subsequently moulded with a triangular honeycomb pattern.73 In Chisht, however, carved bricks compose the pattern on the background. 69 See examples from Chisht’s structure A, the Shah-i Mashhad madrasa, Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s mausoleum in Herat and the Kul Marut mosque in Peshawaran. Glatzer, ‘Das Mausoleum und die Moschee’, p. 18; Hillenbrand, ‘The Ghurid Tomb at Herat’, pp. 141–2. 70 Inspiring reflections on hybrid vegetal-anthropomorphic imagery in paintings and stuccoes from Nishapur, and their possible apotropaic or talismanic properties, are presented in Finbarr Barry Flood, ‘Animal, Vegetal and Mineral: Ambiguity and Efficacy in the Nishapur WallPaintings’, Representations 133 (2016): 20–58. 71 Blair, ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan’, p. 85. This author noted that the foundation inscriptions on the Minaret of Jam and on the Arch of Bust show a different conception, which distinguished them from the abovementioned examples in the Herat region. 72 Similar knots characterise several Ghurid inscriptions in India, and also appear on coins minted by Muizz al-DÈn in Ghazni. Flood, Objects of Translation, pp. 222–4. 73 Simona Artusi, ‘Architectural Decoration from the Palace of MasËd III in Ghazni: Brickwork and Brickwork with Stucco. A Preliminary Analysis’, in Anna Filigenzi and Roberta Giunta (eds), The IsIAO Italian Archaeological Mission in Afghanistan 1957–2007. Fifty Years of Research in the Heart of Eurasia. Proceedings of the symposium held in the Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Rome, January 8th 2008 (Roma: IsIAO, 2009), pp. 127–8. The same technique is used in a fragmentary inscription that might have contained titles of the

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

The epigraphic panels at both sides of the entrance arch [nos. 2a–b, Figures 5.3, 5.6] can be regarded as an extension and complement of the inscription on the portal. This is corroborated by the analogies with two paired inscriptions on the portal of the Herat mosque (see above), which, although differently located at the top of two engaged columns, match in content and style with the specimens from Chisht. Finally, an overall look at the wall revetment in carved plaster on the qibla wall of structure B [Figures 5.7, 5.9–5.10] reveals the perfectly balanced integration of numerous inscriptions into an elaborate scheme of architectural decoration, whose general layout and individual motifs would merit a separate study.74 Epigraphic cartouches have different shapes and sizes, some texts are split into two or more sections [cf. nos. 3–6], curvilinear and angular scripts alternate, and all these devices contribute to the harmonious diversity of the ensemble. Such an elaborate design was certainly carefully planned by the artisan, whose signature in the lower section of the left-edge niche [cf. no. 11] was possibly the only detail that broke up the symmetry of the composition. Conclusion Little remains of the medieval monuments in Chisht-i Sharif, yet a fresh examination of the epigraphic programme of a now freestanding domed structure brings to light new data about Ghurid epigraphy and visual culture. Some features, such as the combination of secular and religious texts, and of several varieties of writing styles, stem from a long-standing tradition, and were already widespread in Ghaznavid and Seljuq architecture. The presence of inscriptions of different lengths and forms bearing titles of the ruler can be more specifically related to other Ghurid monuments in Afghanistan. Less conventional details emerge from the content (cf. pious phrases connected with worship practices) and form (cf. the ubiquitous use of letters with punctate endings) of the inscriptions.

Ghurid Sultan Muizz al-DÈn. Roberta Giunta, ‘New Epigraphic Data from the Excavations of the Ghaznavid Palace of MasËd III at Ghazni (Afghanistan)’, in Pierfrancesco Callieri and Luca Colliva (eds), South Asian Archaeology: Proceedings of the 19th Meeting of the European Association of South Asian Archaeology in Ravenna, Italy, July 2007 (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2010), vol. 2, pp. 126–7. 74 Preliminary analysis points to the lack of direct comparisons with the main examples of plasterwork preserved in Ghurid monuments, namely the oratory ‘F’ in the south palace at Lashkari Bazar, and the interior decorations of the mausoleums of Salår KhalÈl (Imam Sahib) and Ghiyåth al-DÈn (Herat).

107

108

viola allegranzi

Epigraphic data reinforces the hypothesis that structure B functioned as a (private) prayer hall and that it was annexed to a larger, likely pre-existing, complex whose original function remains uncertain, although the hypotheses of a madrasa or a funerary madrasa have been advanced.75 A previously unpublished text inscribed inside the domed hall contains titles of Ghiyåth al-DÈn Mu˙ammad b. Såm, in a form and sequence that can be closely compared with inscriptions from the Great Mosque of Herat and from other monuments dating back to the 590s ah. At the same time, the presence on the same site of a second domed structure (‘A’) ascribed to the early part of Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s reign (562/1167), together with some analogies with the epigraphic programme of the Ghurid madrasa in Garjistan (571/1176), leave open the possibility of an earlier chronological attribution of structure B. Despite these open questions, it is beyond doubt that in Chisht there once existed a major complex, renovated at least twice during Ghiyåth al-DÈn’s reign, that was part of a ‘network’ of religious monuments, newly founded or restored during the Ghurid period in the region of Herat. Such monuments inherited most architectural and artistic features from the former Khurasanian tradition, while elaborating them further. These royally adorned sacred spaces were probably destined to ensure the support of local religious communities, concomitantly stressing the supreme authority of the Ghurid sultan over them. Bibliography Adle, Chahryar, ‘Archéologie et arts du monde iranien, de l’Inde musulmane et du Caucase d’après quelques recherches récentes de terrain, 1984–1995’, Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 140e année, No. 1 (1996): 315–76. Adle, Chahryar, ‘Trois mosquées du début de l’ère islamique au Grand Khorassan: Bastam, Noh-Gonbadan/haji-piyadah de Balkh et Zuzan d’après des investigations archéologiques’, in Rocco Rante (ed.), Greater Khorasan: History, Geography, Archaeology and Material Culture (Berlin-Munich-Boston: De Gruyter, 2015), pp. 89–114. Afshår, Ïraj, Yådgårhå-yi Yazd, vol. 1, Khåk-i Yazd (Tehran: Anjuman-i åthår-i millÈ, AHS 1348/1969–70). Artusi, Simona, ‘Architectural Decoration from the Palace of MasËd III in Ghazni: Brickwork and Brickwork with Stucco. A Preliminary Analysis’, in Anna Filigenzi and Roberta Giunta (eds), The IsIAO Italian Archaeological Mission in Afghanistan 1957–2007. Fifty Years of Research in the Heart of Eurasia. Proceedings of the symposium held in the Istituto Italiano per l’Africa e l’Oriente, Rome, January 8th 2008 (Roma: IsIAO, 2009), pp. 117–29. Auer, Blain, ‘Chishtiyya’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 3rd edition (2016/1).

75 Ball, Archaeological Gazetteer1, no. 212; Patel, Iran to India, 344.

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

Ball, Warwick (in collaboration with Jean-Claude Gardin), Archaeological Gazetteer of Afghanistan: Catalogue des sites archéologiques d’Afghanistan (Paris: Recherche sur les civilisations, 1982), 2 vols. Ball, Warwick, Archaeological Gazetteer of Afghanistan: Revised Edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019). Bivar, A. David H., ‘SeljËqid Ziyårats of Sar-i Pul (Afghanistan)’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 29, no. 1 (1966): 57–63. Blair, Sheila S., ‘The Madrasa at Zuzan: Islamic Architecture in Eastern Iran on the Eve of the Mongol Invasions’, Muqarnas 3 (1985): 75–91. Blair, Sheila S., The Monumental Inscriptions from Early Islamic Iran and Transoxiana (Leiden: Brill, 1992). Blair, Sheila S., ‘Place, Space and Style: Craftsmen’s Signatures in Medieval Islamic Art’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 230–48. Blair, Sheila S., ‘Invoking God’s Protection: The Iconography of the Quranic Phrase fasayakfÈkahum allåh’, in Shahin Aryamanesh (ed.), Farr-e Firouz. Distinguished Scholar of Cultural Heritage of Persia (vol. 5): Special Edition in Honor of Dr. Firouz Bagherzadeh (Tehran: Aryaramna Press, 2019), pp. 181–206. Bosworth, Clifford Edmund, ‘The Early Islamic History of GhËr’, Central Asiatic Journal 6 (1961): 116–33. Bosworth, Clifford Edmund, ‘Karråmiyya’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, vol. 4 (1978), pp. 667–9. Bosworth, Clifford Edmund, ‘The Ghurids in Khurasan’, in Andrew C. S. Peacock and Deborah G. Tor (eds), Medieval Central Asia and the Persianate World. Iranian Tradition and Islamic Civilization (LondonNew York: I. B. Tauris 2015), pp. 210–21. Böwering, Gerhard, ‘‡eštÈya’, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol. 5, pp. 333–9. Cassar, Brendan and Sara Noshadi (eds), Keeping History Alive: Safeguarding Cultural Heritage in Post-Conflict Afghanistan (Paris-Kabul: UNESCO, 2015). Edwards, Holly, ‘The Ribå† of AlÈ b. Karmåkh’, Iran 29 (1991): 85–94. Flood, Finbarr Barry, ‘Ghurid Monuments and Muslim Identities: Epigraphy and Exegesis in Twelfth-century Afghanistan’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 42, no. 3 (2005): 263–94. Flood, Finbarr Barry, Objects of Translation: Material Culture and Medieval ‘Hindu- Muslim’ Encounter (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009). Flood, Finbarr Barry, ‘Islamic Identities and Islamic Art: Inscribing the Quran in Twelfth-century Afghanistan’, in Elizabeth Cropper (ed.), Dialogues in Art History, from Mesopotamian to Modern: Readings for a New Century (Washington, DC: National Gallery of Art, 2009), pp. 91–118. Flood, Finbarr Barry, ‘Animal, Vegetal and Mineral: Ambiguity and Efficacy in the Nishapur Wall-Paintings’, Representations 133 (2016): 20–58. Giunta, Roberta, ‘New Epigraphic Data from the Excavations of the Ghaznavid Palace of MasËd III at Ghazni (Afghanistan)’,’in Pierfrancesco Callieri and Luca Colliva (eds), South Asian Archaeology: Proceedings of the 19th Meeting of the European Association of South Asian Archaeology in Ravenna, Italy, July 2007 (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2010), vol. 2, pp. 123–31. Giunta, Roberta, ‘The Corpus of Seljuk Inscriptions in the Great Mosque of Isfahan. A Project for a Web Database’, in Bruno Genito (ed.), Digital Archaeology from the Iranian Plateau (1962–1977). Collected Papers

109

110

viola allegranzi

on the Occasion of the 10th anniversary of the demise of Umberto Scerrato (Napoli: Università degli studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, 2014), pp. 115–42. Giunta, Roberta and Cécile Bresc, ‘Listes de la titulature des Ghaznavides et des Ghurides à travers les documents numismatiques et épigraphiques’, Eurasian Studies 3, no. 2 (2004): 161–243. Glatzer, Bernt, ‘The Madrasah of Shah-i-Mashhad in Badgis’, Afghanistan 25 (1973): 46–68. Glatzer, Bernt, ‘Das Mausoleum und die Moschee des Ghoriden Ghiyat ud-Din in Herat’, Afghanistan Journal 7 (1980): 6–22. Grbanovic, Ana Marija, ‘Beyond the Stylistic Idiosyncrasies: Notes Regarding the Identity and Mobility of Ilkhanid Stucco Craftsmen in Central Iran’, in Lorenz Korn and Anja Heidenreich (eds), Proceedings of the 11th International Congress on the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, vol. 2, Islamic Archaeology (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2020), pp. 607–19. Hillenbrand, Carole, ‘Some Thoughts on the Use of the Quran in Monumental Inscriptions in Syria and Palestine in the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries’, in Robert G. Hoyland and Philip F. Kennedy (eds) Islamic Reflections, Arabic Musings: Studies in Honour of Professor Alan Jones (Warminster: Gibb Memorial Trust, 2004), pp. 277–87. Hillenbrand, Robert, ‘The Architecture of the Ghaznavids and Ghurids’, in Carole Hillenbrand (ed.), Studies in Honour of Clifford Edmund Bosworth, II, The Sultan’s Turret (Leiden: Brill, 2000), pp. 124–206. Hillenbrand, Robert, ‘The Ghurid Tomb at Herat’, in Warwick Ball and Leonard Harrow (eds), Cairo to Kabul: Afghan and Islamic Studies Presented to Ralph Pinder-Wilson (London: Melisende, 2002), pp. 123–43. Hillenbrand, Robert, ‘Islamic Monumental Inscriptions Contextualized: Location, Content, Legibility and Aesthetics’, in Lorenz Korn and Anja Heidenreich (eds), Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie, vol. 3, In memoriam Marianne Barrucand (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2012), pp. 13–38. Horovitz, Joseph, ‘The Inscriptions of Mu˙ammad Ibn Såm, Qu†buddÈn Aibeg and Iltutmish’, Epigraphia Indo-Moslemica, 1911–1912 (1914), pp. 12–34. Husse, Heribert, ‘Abraham’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 3rd edition. Ibn al-AthÈr, Izz al-dÈn, al-Kåmil fÈ’l-tarÈkh, ed. Carl Johan Tornberg, vol. 12 (reprint Beirut: Dår Íådiq, ah 1399/1979). JËzjånÈ, Min˙åj-i Siråj, Êabaqåt-i NåßirÈ, ed. Abd al-Óayy ÓabÈbÈ (Kabul: Anjuman-i tårÈkh-i Afghånistån, AHS 1342–3/1963–4), 2 vols. Laviola, Valentina, ‘Inserting and Combining. Stucco and Brick Tiles from the Ghaznavid Royal Palace (11th–12th c.) in Ghazni’, Annali dell’Università degli studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’, Sezione orientale 80 (2020), pp. 197–209. Maricq, André and Gaston Wiet, Le Minaret de Djam: La découverte de la capitale des Sultans Ghorides (XIIe–XIIIe siècles) (Paris: C. Klincksieck, 1959). Melikian Chirvani, Assadullah Souren, ‘Eastern Iranian Architecture: Apropos of the GhËrid Parts of the Great Mosque of Haråt’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 33, no. 2 (1970): 322–7. Melikian Chirvani, Assadullah Souren, ‘Baba Hatem: Un chef d’oeuvre inconnu d’époque ghaznévide en Afghanistan’, in A. Tajvidi and M.Y. Kiani (eds), The Memorial Volume of the Vth International Congress of Iranian

epigraphic data from chisht-i sharif

Art and Archaeology, Tehran-Isfahan-Shiraz, 11th–18th April 1968 (Tehran: Wizårat-i farhang wa hunar, 1972), vol. 2, pp. 108–24. Najimi, Abdul Wassay, ‘The Ghurid Madrasa and Mausoleum of Shah-i Mashhad Ghur’, Iran 53 (2015): 143–69. Noelle-Karimi, Christine, The Pearl in its Midst: Herat and the Mapping of Khorasan from the Fifteenth to the Nineteenth Centuries (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2014). O’Neal, Michael, ‘Ghurids’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 3rd edition (2015/3), pp. 109–29. O’Neal, Michael, ‘Some New Numismatic Evidence for Ghurid History’, in Olga M. Yastrebova (ed.), Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference of Iranian Studies. Held on 14–19 September 2015 at the State Hermitage Museum and Institute of Oriental Manuscripts, Russian Academy of Sciences, in St Petersburg, vol. 2, Studies on Iran and the Persianate World after Islam (St Petersburg: The State Hermitage Publisher, 2020), pp. 199–221. Patel, Alka, ‘Architectural Cultures and Empire. The Ghurids in Northern India (ca. 1192–1210.)’, Bulletin of the Asia Institute 21 (2007): 35–60. Patel, Alka, Iran to India: The ShansabånÈs of Afghanistan, c. 1145–1190 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2021). Pinder-Wilson, Ralph, ‘Ghaznavid and GhËrid minarets’, Iran 39 (2001): 155–86. RCEA = Répertoire Chronologique d’Épigraphie Arabe, eds É. Combe, J. Sauvaget, G. Wiet et al. (Cairo: IFAO, 1931–91, 18 vols). SaljËqÈ, FikrÈ, Risåla-yi mazåråt-i Haråt. Ta liqåt (Kabul: n.p., 1967). Samizay, Rafi, Islamic Architecture in Herat: A Study towards Conservation (Kabul: Ministry of Information and Culture, 1981). Schlumberger, Daniel and Janine Sourdel-Thomine, Lashkari Bazar: une résidence royale ghaznévide et ghoride, 1A. L’Architecture, 1B. Le décor non figuratif et les inscriptions, 1C. Planches (Paris: De Boccard, 1978). Sourdel, Dominique and Janine Sourdel-Thomine, La civilisation de l’Islam classique (Paris: Arthaud, 1968). Sourdel-Thomine, Janine, ‘Le mausolée dit de Baba Hatim en Afghanistan’, Revue des études islamiques 39 (1971): 293–320. Sourdel-Thomine, Janine, Le Minaret ghouride de Jåm: Un chef d’oeuvre du XIIe siècle (Paris: De Boccard, 2004). TEI = Ludvik Kalus, Frédéric Bauden, Frédérique Soudan, Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique, édition 2020, http://www.epigr​aphie-islamique. uliege.be.

111

PART II

INSCRIPTIONS AND PIETY

CHAPTER SIX

Stars and Symmetry: The Name of the Prophet Muh∙ammad in Architectural Inscriptions Bernard O’Kane

The interior of the mausoleum of the Ilkhanid ruler Öljeitü at Sultaniyya is notable for having been redecorated not long after it was first built.1 In each of these two campaigns the name of Mu˙ammad figured prominently in striking compositions, both in isolation and accompanied by other sacred or revered names [Figure 6.1 a–c].2 This is arguably the zenith of a phenomenon that is striking for the variety, elegance and inventiveness of the epigraph. Although Islam-wide, their use was particularly common through the fifth/ eleventh–tenth/sixteenth centuries in the central lands of Islam.3 This study will follow the trajectory of some of the most notable examples, many of which exhibit symmetrical star designs, and will explore the reasons for their popularity. Well before its architectural manifestations, the veneration of the Prophet Mu˙ammad had a long tradition in Islam. Mu˙ammad’s status as the ‘seal of prophets’ (khatam al-nabiyyÈn) in the Quran is echoed in the shahåda which proclaims that Mu˙ammad is the

  1 For a summary of the history of the building see Sheila Blair, ‘Monumentality under the Mongols: The Tomb of UljåytË at Sultaniyya’, in Sheila Blair, Text and Image in Medieval Persian Art (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014), pp. 112–71. The first campaign is datable to 1305–13, the second largely between 1313 and 1316, with some work continuing until 1320.   2 The most complete source for the inscriptions of Sultaniyya is Abdallåh QËchånÈ, Gunbad-i Sul†åniyya bi-istinåd-i katÈbahå (Tehran: GanjÈna-yi Hunar, 1381/2002).   3 The earliest monument of Islamic architecture that survives close to its original appearance is the Dome of the Rock at Jerusalem. Its inscriptions frequently mention Mu˙ammad, underlining his position as the ultimate Prophet, although in terms of epigraphy the form of the word is not emphasised relative to its neighbours.

116

bernard o’kane

Figure 6.1  a) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü (early eighth/fourteenth century): detail of exterior tile; b) gallery stucco; c): interior painted plaster; d) Natanz, Friday mosque, painted plaster of dome chamber. Photos: O’Kane.

messenger of God. His exemplary conduct and physical qualities were lauded in a variety of sources and contexts, in the Quran itself, the compilations of accounts of his life (the sunna), his earliest biographies, and countless later hagiographies.4 His roles as ­intercessor5   4 Annemarie Schimmel, And Mu˙ammad Is His Messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety (Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press, 1985).   5 On this see, for instance, Tehnyat Majeed, ‘The Chår Mu˙ammad Inscription, Shafå a, and the Mamluk Qubbat al-ManßËriyya’, in Sebastien Günther and Todd Lawson (eds), Roads to Paradise: Eschatology and Concepts of the Hereafter in Islam (Leiden: Brill, 2017), pp. 1017–20.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

and the possessor of a divine light (the nËr Mu˙ammad) that can lead Muslims toward enlightenment have been cited as reasons for the prominence of his name in epigraphy.6 The combination of Mu˙ammad with AlÈ (both hidden and manifest) is particularly common, and I shall be examining why this was so not only in Shii but also in Sunni communities. In particular I shall examine the symmetrical star-shaped and polylobed examples to ask why they were so popular, examining their links with, respectively, the seal of Solomon and roseate metaphors for the Prophet. I shall begin by looking at examples where the name occurs by itself, followed by its appearance in combination with other names. Elements of design that will be also considered include the type of script (Kufic, cursive, bannå È7 and square Kufic) and the shape: nonsymmetrical, and square, circular and star-shaped symmetrical forms. A pilaster in the Pir-i Bakran shrine complex at Linjan (712/1312–13) near Isfahan is a good place to start.8 It displays the name Mu˙ammad in square Kufic, but in an ingenious fashion such that the negative space of the name reads the same9 as the positive (Figure 6.2, we will return to this feature of the readings of the interstices in square Kufic inscriptions). More conventionally, the name could be emphasised by being isolated in a medallion, as at the upper gallery at Sultaniyya or at an entrance portal of the mosque of al-MaridånÈ (740/1339–40) in Cairo [Figure 6.2]. At the AmÈrzåda tomb in the Shah-i Zinda in Samarqand (788/1386) the name appears in square Kufic on individual square cuerda seca tiles around the doorway, interspersed with a fewer number of square tiles with the name of AlÈ. One of the disadvantages of square Kufic is that   6 Scott Redford, ‘Intercession and Succession, Enlightenment and Reflection: The Inscriptional and Decorative Program of the Qaratay Madrasa, Konya’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 148–69.   7 Revetment usually combining unglazed and light- and dark-blue glazed rectangular tiles. The resulting script is usually also square Kufic, but examples resembling a pixilated naskh are also known. The same effect can be seen earlier in unglazed brick but with the pattern or script differentiated by raising it above the ground, as at the Friday Mosque of Gulpaygan (508/1114–15), where ‘Mu˙ammad’ in square Kufic appears in the zone of transition of the qibla dome chamber: Lorenz Korn, ‘Architecture and Ornament in the Great Mosque of Golpayegan (Iran)’, in Lorenz Korn and Anja Heidenreich (eds), Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie (Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2012), pp. 212–36, figs 5–6.   8 The most recent analysis is Ana Marija Grbanovic, ‘The Ilkhanid Revetment Aesthetic in the Buqa Pir-i Bakran: Chaotic Exuberance or a Cunningly Planned Architectural Revetment Repertoire?’, Muqarnas 34 (2017): 43–83.   9 But it should be noted that that the originals are placed vertically, which might have made reading in either direction easier.

117

118

bernard o’kane

Figure 6.2  Top: Linjan, Shrine of Pir-i Bakran (712/1312–13), engaged column (photo: O’Kane); bottom: drawing, reciprocal Mu˙ammad (after Sakkal).

different letters, such as hå and dål, are written identically, but for the designer this can be reckoned an advantage, since with the addition of the two mÈms of Mu˙ammad the name has two symmetrical components, perhaps rendering recognition easier. On these tiles the four letters read clockwise in a square so that the final dål is upside down relative to the initial mÈm – or at least they would if the initial mÈm was at the upper right corner, which is the case with only three of the tiles; on another three the initial mÈm is at the bottom left of the square; on two it is at the bottom right, and on one the bottom left.10 But the lack of consistency in placing emphasises the instantaneous visual cognisance of the name. The same form is found in tile mosaic at the left side of the qibla Èwån of the Yazd MÈr Chaqmåq mosque (841/1437); Allåh is on the right side, and both are filled with square Kufic inscriptions in smaller script.11 It is also seen in bannå È script at the top of the entrance Èwån of the Taybad funerary mosque [Figure 6.3]. Much more common in square Kufic than the isolated name of Mu˙ammad is the symmetrical fourfold repetition of the name 10 I am not including the five tiles at the bottom right which are recent replacements; they were missing in the 1920s when photographed by Cohn-Wiener: https://archnet.org/sites/2136/media_contents/29061. See also Jean Soustiel and Yves Porter, Tombs of Paradise: The Shah-e Zende in Samarkand and Architectural Ceramics of Central Asia (Saint-Rémy-en-l’Eau: Éditions Monelle Hayot, 2003), pp. 126–8. 11 Lisa Golombek and Donald Wilber, The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), fig. 450.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

Figure 6.3  Taybad, funerary mosque of Zayn al-DÈn (848/1444–5). Photo: O’Kane.

119

120

bernard o’kane

(chahår Mu˙ammad).12 This could be done in circular medallion form (sharing a central mÈm), as at the entrance to the Beyazid Pa∞a mosque (817/1414) at Amasya and in the early tenth/sixteenth-­ century Safavid work at the side of the mihrab of the Sava jåmi [Figure 6.4]. However, it was much more common to place them within a square frame. There are many ways of arranging this. The four names are spelled out in full within a square at Sultaniyya13 and the Ashtarjan jåmi 14 (both early eighth/fourteenth century Ilkhanid), with the design beginning at the outer corner, and on the early ninth/fifteenth-century Ayyubid Sulaymån mosque at Hasankeyf.15 Another form has the first mÈm of the name centrally placed and shared between all four names. This appears on a wood panel (799/1397) at the TaghrÈbirdÈ mosque at Aleppo,16 on the painted interior of the mausoleum of A˙mad Shåh (839/1436) at Bidar in the Deccan, in Anatolia on the façade of the prayer hall at the Aqquyunlu Safa Mosque (second half of the ninth/fifteenth century) in Diyarbakır, and on the entrance to the S¸ erefiye mosque (935/1529) at Bitlis [Figure 6.5]. All except the first of these permit a reading of AlÈ within the interstices of the name Mu˙ammad, a trait that also appears in the most popular form where the four initial mÈms are placed centrally adjacent to one another in a square, with that on the bottom left leading to the hå followed by, inverted, the dål and final mÈm on the lower line [Figure 6.6]. The earliest example I have been able to find is on the façade of the Ayyubid Rukniyya madrasa (621/1224) at Damascus. It was also very popular in Mamluk Cairo, being present in inlaid stone on the interior of the mausoleums of the QalåwËn (683/1284), Zayn al-DÈn YËsuf (697/1298) and Baybars (709/1309) complexes, at the mosques of al-MaridånÈ (740/1339–40) and Aqsunqur (747/1347), and at the khånqåh of Sad al-DÈn b. Ghuråb (c. 803–8/1400–6). Other examples include a panel at the Hatuniye madrasa in Karaman (783/1382),17 at the base of the minaret of the Ayyubid Rizq mosque (811/1409) at Hasankeyf,18

12 Sometimes shortened to chår Mu˙ammad: see Majeed, ‘The Chår Mu˙ammad Inscription’, p. 1015. 13 QËchånÈ, Gunbad-i Sul†åniyya, p. 72, fig. 14. For another yet different form of the chahår Mu˙ammad see ibid., p. 69, fig. 13. 14 George C. Miles, ‘The Inscriptions of the Masjid-i Jåmi at Ashtarjån’, Iran 12 (1974): pl. 1c. 15 In a different format to the others. 16 Mamoun Sakkal, Square Kufic Calligraphy in Modern Art, Transmission and Transformation, PhD dissertation, University of Washington, 2010, fig. 1.13–14. 17 Ernst Herzfeld, ‘Damascus: Studies in Architecture – III’, Ars Islamica 11–12 (1946), fig. 44. 18 The shaft of the minaret also contains angular teardrop medallions with seven Mu˙ammads in square Kufic at the edge of the frame.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

Figure 6.4  a) Sava, Friday Mosque, early tenth/sixteenth century; b) Amasya, Beyazid Pa∞a mosque (817/1414). Photos: O’Kane.

Figure 6.5  Top left: drawings of chahår Mu˙ammad and AlÈ in square Kufic as on the lower photographs; top right: as in Bidar, mausoleum of A˙mad Shåh (839/1436; bottom left: Bitlis, S¸erefiye mosque (935/1529); bottom right: Diyarbakır, Safa Mosque (second half of ninth/fifteenth century). Photos: O’Kane.

121

122

bernard o’kane

Figure 6.6  Left: drawing of chahår Mu˙ammad and AlÈ in square Kufic (after Sakkal); centre: Cairo, mausoleum of QalåwËn (683/1284); right: Cairo, khånqåh of Sad al-DÈn b. Ghuråb (c. 803–8/1400–6). Photos: O’Kane.

in wood on the minbar of the Timurid Friday mosque at Khwaf,19 and in tile at the Masjid-i Shah (1019/1611–1047/1630) in Isfahan.20 Thus the examples where the interstices of the pattern form AlÈ are considerably more numerous than the other forms – and none of the examples cited is the work of a Shii dynasty. But we need not be surprised at this. For instance, prominently displayed on the spandrels of the main entrance of the Kayseri Sultan Han (634/1237), a building erected by the ruler, is a hexagon containing the name AlÈ repeated six times in square Kufic (the shish AlÈ, to which we will return).21 The sponsoring dynasty was the Sunni Seljuqs of Anatolia. Several examples of the shish AlÈ from Sunni Mamluk Cairo are also known, for example at the shrine of Shaykh Zayn al-DÈn YËsuf (697/1298), and the mosques of AmÈr Óusayn (719/1319) and A˙mad Kuhya (c. 1324–45) [Figure 6.7],22 as well as one Ottoman example.23 We shall see as well, when we turn to the appearance of Mu˙ammad with other names, that the most frequent accompanying name is

19 Bernard O’Kane, Timurid Architecture in Khurasan (Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 1987), fig. 28.4. 20 Abdallåh QËchånÈ, Kha††-i KËfÈ-yi ma qilÈ dar masåjid-i båstånÈ-yi Isfahån (Tehran: Bunyåd-i AndÈsha-yi IslåmÈ, 1406/1985), fig. 112. 21 An even more emphatic example from Seljuq Anatolia is the mihrab of the Ulu Cami at Aksaray, whose spandrels are completed covered with a repeating shish  AlÈ pattern: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Ak∞ehir_Grand_Mosque_2.jpg. 22 The painted ceiling of the mosque of Bashtak (1336) also had a frieze of  Alis arranged in a series of triangles with the word alternately inverted: Bernard O’Kane, ‘James Wild and the Mosque of Bashtak’, in Doris Behrens-Abouseif (ed.), The Arts of the Mamluks in Egypt and Syria – Evolution and Impact (Bonn: V&R Unipress, 2012), fig. 9. 23 At the Uzun Bridge at Edirne, dated 847/1443–4: Abdülhamit Tüfekçio©lu, Erken Dönem Osmanlı Mimarîsinde Yazı (Ankara: T. C. Kültür Bakanlı©ı, 2001), pp. 267–9, fig. 252.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

123

Figure 6.7  Left: drawing of shish AlÈ (after Sakkal); centre: Kayseri Sultan Han (634/1237); right: Cairo, mausoleum of Shaykh Zayn al-DÈn YËsuf (697/1298). Photos: O’Kane.

that of AlÈ, again even in monuments patronised by Sunni clients.24 The reason is that the veneration of the Prophet’s family (AlÈ was not only the Prophet’s son-in-law but also his cousin) was by no means restricted to the Shii; the Alids as descendants of the Prophet were accorded respect and privileges unparalleled in Islamic society, regardless of political or religious affiliation.25 The vast numbers of shrines erected to members of the Ahl al-Bayt were from their inception patronised by both Sunni and Shii alike, a situation that continued through the centuries into Ottoman times.26 The fact then that this form of the name Mu˙ammad whose interstices read AlÈ was the most popular one of the many varieties of chahår Mu˙ammad should not be surprising. At Sultaniyya triangles on an outer tiled spandrel contain the two names each repeated three times, with the central AlÈs forming the intriguing optical illusion of a cube [Figure 6.1a]. Two hexagonal designs in a ninth/fifteenth-century scroll in the Topkapı Library show Mu˙ammad in square Kufic on the outside and a shish AlÈ within.27 Another of its square Kufic designs has the two names repeating four times within a medallion, a form that appears 24 See the argument explaining anti-Shii texts with the prominence of Ali in the inscriptions of the Friday Mosque of Gulpaygan in Korn, ‘Between Architectural Design and Religious Politics’, pp. 18–19. 25 See Teresa Bernheimer, The Alids: The First Family of Islam, 750–1200 (Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 2013). 26 Teresa Bernheimer, ‘Shared Sanctity: Some Notes on Ahl al-Bayt Shrines in the Early Êålibid Genealogies’, Studia Islamica 108 (2013): 1–15; Stephennie Mulder, The Shrines of the Alids in Medieval Syria: Sunnis, Shi is and the Architecture of Coexistence (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014), pp. 6–7; eadem, ‘Abdülhamid and the Alids: Ottoman Patronage of “Shii” shrines in the Cemetery of Båb al-ÍaghÈr in Damascus’, Studia Islamica 108 (2013): 16–47. 27 Gülru NecipoÌlu, The Topkapı Scroll – Geometry and Ornament in Islamic Architecture (Santa Monica: The Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities, 1995), p. 325, fig. 71, p. 336, fig. 91.

124

bernard o’kane

identically in tile mosaic on the spandrels of the entrance arch to the Ottoman Çinili Kiosk (877/1473) in Istanbul. The same combination within a medallion, but in a different layout, is found on the cuerda seca tiles within the so-called Ustad Ali Nafasi mausoleum (c. 782/1380) at the Shah-i Zinda, where they are at the interstices of octagons which also combine Mu˙ammad and AlÈ [Figure 6.8]. On the vault of the aisle next to the qibla Èwån of the Yazd Jami (second half of the eighth/fourteenth century) an outer eight-pointed star interlaces Mu˙ammad alternately in blue-and-white tile with a shish-AlÈ in the centre. On the spandrels of the mihrab (777/1375–6) the two names appear in a medallion, with the ayn of AlÈ repeated in a design of stunning originality, a six-petalled central rosette, to which we shall return [Figure 6.9]. At the mausoleum of Shåhzåda Zayd at Qumm (837/1443–4) however, the AlÈ was made explicit by writing it four times with the name Mu˙ammad,28 a variant is seen also at the shrine of KhalÈl Allåh at Bidar (c. 866/1460).29 The square and the circle seen above are among the most obvious forms of symmetrical frames; but one of the most popular is also the star. An unusual example is Mu˙ammad written in square Kufic repeated six times in a six-pointed star on a tombstone dated 835/1433 from the Shah-i Zinda in Samarqand.30 More common is the form with the word written horizontally, intersecting to make either a five- or six-pointed star. Mu˙ammad is interlaced five times on the left side of the façade of the Aqmar mosque (519/1125) in Cairo (with wa-AlÈ at the centre); but its format there is a pentagon rather than a star.31 The designers could subtly blend the pentagonal or star form to emphasise somewhat one at the expense of the other, as examples in tile from the interior of the mausoleum of Öljeitü show [Figure 6.10d]. The more common star form appears at the madrasa at Zuzan in tile (616/1219) [Figure 6.10a], and in stucco in the gallery at the mausoleum of Öljeitü (c. 712/1313) [Figure 6.10c],

28 Bernard O’Kane, ‘Timurid Stucco Decoration’, Annales Islamologiques 20 (1984), pl. II, c–d. 29 Sara Mondini, ‘Vague Traits: Strategy and Ambiguities in the Decorative Programme of the A˙mad Šåh I BahmanÈ Mausoleum’, in Stefano Pellò (ed.), Borders: Itineraries on the Edges of Iran (Venice: Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, 2016), fig. 10. The author leaves open the question of the Bahmanid dynasty’s Shii orientation at the time. 30 Bobur Aminov, ‘L’Épigraphie funéraire de la ville de Samarcande et de sa périphérie (XVe–XVIIe siècles)’, fig. 6: https://maxvanberchem.org/fr/​ activites-scientifiques/projets/epigraphie-calligraphie-codicologie-litter​ ature/13-epigraphie-calligraphie-codicologie-litterature/87-l-epigraphiefuneraire-de-la-ville-de-samarcande (accessed 14 July 2020). 31 Bernard O’Kane, The Mosques of Egypt (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2016), pp. 28–9.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

125

Figure 6.8  Left: Samarqand, Ustad Nafasi mausoleum (c. 782/1380); centre: Istanbul Çinili Kiosk (877/1473); right: scroll, Topkapı Saray Library (ninth/fifteenth century). Photos: O’Kane.

Figure 6.9  a) Yazd, Friday mosque (777/1375–6); b) Istanbul, Sakıp Sabancı Museum, Hilye, Istanbul (?) c. 1750–1800, inv. no. 400; c) London, Khalili Collection, Hilye, Istanbul (?) (1322/1904–5); d–e) Cairo, Bab al-Akhdar (549/1154–5); f) Damascus, Great Mosque (668/1269). Photos: O’Kane.

both with Allåh in the centre.32 Seven-pointed star examples are present at the Ilkhanid complex of Shams al-DÈn at Yazd (730/1330). An interesting variation is on the spandrel of the entrance Èwån of the Ashtarjan jåmi (715/1315) [Figure 6.10b], where five medial mÈms within a pentagon are connected to ten outer mÈms; on the opposite spandrel are five Allåhs. Another common variation is where Mu˙ammad is at the top horizontal bar of the star and the other four bars are composed of the RåshidËn (the first four caliphs: AbË

32 A five-pointed star version is present at the apex of the qibla dome chamber of the Varamin Friday Mosque (722/1322), surrounded by a medallion with the shahada in square Kufic.

126

bernard o’kane

Figure 6.10  a) Zuzan, madrasa (616/1219); b) Ashtarjan Friday Mosque (715/1315); c) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü (early eighth/fourteenth century), gallery; d) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü, interior. Photos: O’Kane.

Bakr, Umar, Uthmån and AlÈ) [Figure 6.11]; this appears in brick at the Gulpayagan jåmi (508/1114–15), with Allåh at the centre.33 The combination of Mu˙ammad and the RåshidËn was particularly popular in Anatolia: in stone at the outer entrance to the mausoleum of Mama Khatun at Tercan (mid-thirteenth century) [Figure 6.11a],34 33 Korn, ‘Between Architectural Design and Religious Politics’, p. 15, fig. 8. 34 An attractive combination of these five names is found on the minaret of the Great Mosque of Mardin, where double teardrop medallions show Mu˙ammad in the centre, surrounded by the names of the RåshidËn. At the no longer extant Great Seljuq Van Friday mosque the

STARS AND SYMMETRY

127

Figure 6.11  a) Tercan, mausoleum of Mama Khatun (mid-seventh/thirteenth century); b) Konya, Sahib Ata mausoleum (656/1258); c) Bey∞ehir, E∞refoÌlu mosque (696/1297). Photos: O’Kane.

in tile at the apex of the ante-qibla domes of the E∞refoÌlu mosque at Bey∞ehir (696/1297) [Figure 6.11c]35 and in Konya at the Beyhekim Mosque (c. 674/1275) (the latter with Allåh at the centre),36 the Sahib Ata mausoleum (656/1258) [Figure 6.11b] and the Tahir ile Zühre mosque (c. 679/1280).37 The six-pointed star form [Figure 6.12] is even more common than the five-pointed one, frequently accompanied in the centre by AlÈ or Allåh.38 The earliest is again in Cairo, in stucco at the apex of the

35 36

37

38

lower walls of the qibla dome chamber had a number of medallions with epigraphic five-pointed stars; whether these were Mu˙ammad repeated or Mu˙ammad with the names of the RåshidËn is unclear owing to the poor resolution of the available reproductions (kindly provided to me by Robert Hillenbrand whose article on the building is in preparation). Reading this is trickier than usual as the names are bent around the central hexagons to end on a different axis; the same applies to the Sahib Ata design. Michael Meinecke, Fayencedekorationen seldschukischer Sakralbauten in Kleinasien, Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Istanbuler Mittei­ lungen, Beiheft 13, 2 vols (Tübingen: Verlag Ernst Wasmuth, 1976), pl. 35/3. Ibid., pl. 38/3. Meinecke also notes the medallion at the base of the Çifte Minare madrasa at Erzerum (mid-seventh/thirteenth century) that contains Allåh in the centre and Mu˙ammad and four other names interlaced around it: ibid., 141. The surrounding star is eight-sided; and the reading of the other names, whether four or even possibly seven, has not been deciphered yet. Seven- and eight-pointed forms are also found in moulded and painted stucco on panels of the interior of the main burial chamber of the Shamsiyya complex (730/1330) in Yazd; the eight-pointed form is seen in tile on the ceiling of the vaults adjoining the qibla ayvån of the Yazd Friday mosque (second half of eighth/fourteenth century).

128

bernard o’kane

Figure 6.12  a) Cairo, mashhad of al-Juyushi (1085); b) Cairo, shrine of Sayyida Ruqayya (572/1135); c) Sultaniyya, mausoleum of Öljeitü; d) Malatya, Great Mosque (621/1224); e) Kirman Friday Mosque (750/1350); f) Yazd, mausoleum of Rukn al-Din (725/1325); g) Turbat-i Jam, main Èwån (first quarter of eighth/fourteenth century); h) Muradiye mosque (1435). Photos: O’Kane.

dome of the mashhad of al-JuyËshÈ (478/1085) [Figure 6.12a],39 where the outer Mu˙ammads surround three symmetrically placed AlÈs. The mihrab of the Fatimid shrine of Sayyida Ruqayya (572/1133) displays the same six-pointed star form, but with wa-AlÈ in the centre [Figure 6.12b]. Another example is found in the mihrab of the Cairo HasawåtÈ mausoleum (second quarter of sixth/twelfth century).40 Slightly later (585/1189) we see it in Syria, at the Ayyubid madrasa of Sitt al-Sham at Damascus.41 At the mausoleum of Öljeitü it appears both in moulded painted plaster on the interior42 and in stucco on the upper gallery [Figure 6.12c]. It is also present in the tiles at the apex of the qibla dome chamber of the Malatya Great 39 Thus earlier than the Malatya jåmi (621/1224) which is suggested by Scott Redford to be the earliest surviving example of Mu˙ammad in star form: ‘Intercession and Succession’, p. 166. Dr Souren MelikianChirvani has alerted me to his remembrance of an earlier example on Samanid metalware, but unfortunately his notes on this have been mislaid. 40 K. A. C. Creswell, The Muslim Architecture of Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952), vol. 1, pl. 120b. Although damaged, enough remains to make out the original design from more detailed photos in the AUC Creswell archive. 41 Abd Al-Razzaq Moaz, The Ayyubid Era: Art and Architecture in Medieval Syria (Vienna: Museum With No Frontiers, 2015), p. 76. 42 Sheila Blair, ‘The Epigraphic Program of UljåytË’s Tomb at Sultaniyya: Meaning in Mongol Architecture’, Islamic Art 2 (1987), fig. 34.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

Mosque (621/1224) [Figure 6.12d], in the vaulting of the vestibule of the Kirman Friday Mosque (750/1350) [Figure 6.12e] and in stucco at the Yazd Rukniyya (725/1325) dome chamber [Figure 6.12f] and the main Èwån at Turbat-i Jam (first quarter of the eighth/fourteenth century43) [Figure 6.12g]. In these examples the letters of Mu˙ammad intersect to form the star, but the star with the name is found in a different form in a hexagram at the Muradiye (839/1435) at Edirne, where Mu˙ammad appears in the medallion between the apices of the star, and six ayns on the intersecting triangles permit the concurrent reading of AlÈ [Figure 6.12h].44 The association of fiveand six-pointed star forms with light and the Prophet Solomon are further explored below. We have looked at some of the examples of Mu˙ammad with Allåh or AlÈ above, but the three names are also found together. One of the most prominent is in bannå È technique at the base of the dome of the Mausoleum of Öljeitü at Sultaniyya.45 A possibly slightly earlier example in painted plaster, dating from the early Ilkhanid work of 1304–10, is a recently uncovered eight-sided one in the lower walls of the dome chamber of the Friday mosque at Natanz [Figure 6.1d].46 Another, with a central mÈm, is in a square with each name repeated four times, in square Kufic tile mosaic, in the arch of the mihrab of the MÈr Chaqmåq mosque (841/1437) at Yazd. The three names are emblazoned, again in bannå È technique, on the exterior of the tomb of Zaynal Beg at Hasankeyf (878/1473).47 In fact bannå È technique was one of the most favoured media for sacred names. The examples are far too numerous to examine in detail, but a few typical ones may be noted.48 At the madrasa of

43 For the dating see Bernard O’Kane, ‘Na†anz and Turbat-i Jåm: New Light on Fourteenth Century Iranian Stucco’, Studia Iranica 21 (1992): 90–2. 44 Six semi-circles in yellow are drawn around the points of the star; they contain as yet undeciphered letters. The Friday mosque of Varzana has another interesting variation on the combination of Mu˙ammad and Ali in a six-pointed star, where on the arch leading to the qibla dome chamber the name Mu˙ammad is written in square Kufic around the circumference and Ali within: Sandra Aube, La céramique dans l’architecture en Iran au xve siècle: Les arts qarâ quyûnlûs et aq quyûnlûs (Paris: Presses de l’université Paris-Sorbonne, 2017), p. 43, fig. 18. 45 Blair, ‘The Epigraphic Program’, fig. 2. 46 On this see Bernard O’Kane, ‘The Gunbad-i Jabaliyya at Kirman and the Development of the Domed Octagon in Iran’, in idem, Studies in Persian Architecture (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2021), chapter 10. 47 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeynel_Bey_Mausoleum,_H​ asankeyf.jpg. 48 Again, the mausoleum of UljåytË at Sultaniyya has several examples: QËchånÈ, Gunbad-i Sul†åniyya, figs 1, 3, 13 and 15.

129

130

bernard o’kane

Khargird the southeast Èwån has Mu˙ammad with a central mÈm in bannå È script accompanied by smaller squares with AlÈ. The contemporary funerary mosque at Taybad has a variety of Mu˙ammads at the rear of its Èwån [Figure 6.3]. This surprisingly includes, immediately above the dado, a design with a central mÈm that ostensibly links a chahår-Mu˙ammad, but in which, in contravention of all the rules, necessitates retracing one’s steps to accommodate the central mÈm and final dål. I confess that I had not realised this transgression until after repeated viewings, but I imagine my reaction was matched by most viewers: the double repetition of identical square Kufic letter forms mentioned earlier gives the name an ideographic quality that invites instant perception. Another way in which symmetry was used to incorporate sacred names was with polylobes. The most spectacular example is from Sultaniyya, where the phase-two painted decoration of the soffits of the lower interior arches displays sixteen-sided polylobed medallions with Mu˙ammad and AlÈ intertwining in the centre. Forming the outer edges of the polylobes themselves are the following names: AbË Bakr,  Umar,  Uthmån, Óasan and Óusayn, arranged so that the five names span four polylobes, each therefore being repeated four times in each medallion [Figure 6.1c]. It had often been thought that the second phase of decoration at Sultaniyya emphasised Öljeitü’s conversion to Shiism; this is striking evidence to the ­contrary.49 Slightly later is the Shamsiyya at Yazd (730/1330), where the painted soffits of the arches of the tomb chamber contain two patterns, one of which has repeated polylobed medallions with the name Mu˙ammad repeated eight times, while in the other these epigraphic medallions are relegated to the edges of the composition where they appear in half-form at regular intervals.50 The polylobed form recalls the shish-AlÈ rosette of the Yazd Friday mosque [Figure 6.9a]. The rosette in turn is intimately connected with one of the most common metaphors for the Prophet Mu˙ammad, the rose, an expression of his supernatural beauty. While the pictorial tradition for this did not gain traction until the Ottoman period, the earlier descriptions of his attributes, whether in the form of a hilye or in other texts, emphasise his perfume-like perspiration and his roseate complexion. The metaphor was made explicit in many Ottoman paintings, both in devotional manuscripts and in those connected with the hilye.51 49 Blair, Text and Image, p. 124. 50 Yuka Kadoi, ‘Aspects of Frescoes in Fourteenth-Century Iranian Architecture: The Case of Yazd’, Iran 43 (2005): 234, fig. 24. 51 Christiane Gruber, ‘The Rose of the Prophet: Floral Metaphors in Late Ottoman Devotional Art’, in David Roxburgh (ed.), Envisioning Islamic Art and Architecture: Essays in Honor of Renata Holod (Leiden: Brill, 2014), pp. 223–49; eadem, The Praiseworthy One: The Prophet

STARS AND SYMMETRY

Several Ottoman calligraphic compositions, many associated with hilyes, also contain the phrase innå Allåh alå kull shay qadÈr, ‘Truly, God has power over all things’ [Figure 6.9b–c]. The unusual feature of the calligraphic representation of this is the way in which the phrase is repeated several times (usually four or five), and the word alå is written much larger than the other words in the phrase. The resulting composition has been accurately described as sphragistic or seal-like,52 but it may be possible to attribute other connotations to the design. The preposition alå is on the face of it an unlikely word to signal out for emphasis: what would have struck the eye of any half-literate viewer immediately, before reading ‘the small print’ next to it, is that it is a homograph for AlÈ.53 The usual version of the hilye transcribed is after a description attributed to Ali, so this may be a direct reference to him. In addition, in those compositions where the ayns of alå are linked so that they form a design with a polylobe, a visual resemblance is formed of a rosette, perhaps echoing his intimate familial links with the Prophet. As we have seen above, referencing AlÈ in itself is no sign of Shii leanings, but it is interesting that several Ottoman devotional manuscripts display paintings of a rose inscribed with the name of Mu˙ammad which have petals named after not only such expected groups such as the RåshidËn or the Ashara al-Mubashshara (the Ten Promised Paradise), but also the names of Óasan and Óusayn.54 The combination of the eight names of Allåh, Mu˙ammad, the RåshidËn, plus Óasan and Óusayn are also those most prominently displayed in monumental medallions on royal Ottoman mosques, from the Ye∞il Cami in Bursa onwards.55 The same grouping was noted above on

52 53 54

55

Mu˙ammad in Islamic Texts and Images (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2018), pp. 297–8. Gruber, ‘The Rose of the Prophet’, pp. 240–3. As also noted in J. M. Rogers, Empire of the Sultans: Ottoman Art from the Collection of Nasser D. Khalili, exh. cat. (London: Nour Foundation, 1995), p. 254, cat. no. 180. Gruber, ‘The Rose of the Prophet’, figs 10.8–9. This combination has also been noted in Korn, ‘Between Architectural Design and Religious Politics’, pp. 19–20. An interesting combination of a ten-sided star with the names of the Ashara al-Mubashshara in Kufic and Mu˙ammad in the centre is found on two medallions on the minaret of the Rizk mosque (811/1409) at Hasankeyf: Peter Schneider, Die RizkMoschee in Hasankeyf: Bauforschung und Baugeschichte, Byzas 8, Veröffentlichungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Istanbul (Istanbul: Ege Yayınları, 2008), pp. 198, 220, pl. 27b. But does the usual position of the names of Óasan and Óusayn on the wall furthest from the qibla indicate a slightly inferior status? In addition to the Sultaniyya medallions, another early Iranian display of the eight names is seen on medallions on the qibla Èwån of the Muzaffarid prayer hall (1366–77) added to the Isfahan Friday mosque: Luf†allåh Hunarfar,

131

132

bernard o’kane

the polylobed medallions at Sultaniyya, but several earlier examples are also known. The earliest seem to be on three mosaic inscriptions datable to 554/1159 of NËr al-DÈn at the Great Mosque of Damascus.56 Slightly later on they appear on the Seljuq dome chamber at Qurva (575/1179) in northwest Iran,57 and on a panel on the qibla wall on the Mosque of NËr al-DÈn in Mosul datable to the period of Badr al-DÈn Lulu (631/1233–657/1259).58 The Ottoman manifestations thus provide more surprising evidence of an abiding appeal to an audience beyond the divisions of sectarianism, a finding that has also been replicated in text-based studies of the period.59 Another connotation of the five- and six-sided star designs of the name of Mu˙ammad needs to be recalled, namely its relationship to the prophet Solomon. The pentagram and hexagram have long histories as decorative motifs, beginning in pre-Islamic times60 and appearing consistently in buildings and artefacts throughout the Islamic world from the Umayyad period onwards.61 In Islamic lore the seal of Solomon was given to him by God; it bore God’s name and enabled

56 57 58 59

60

61

GanjÈna-yi åthår-i tårikhÈ-yi Ißfahån, 2nd ed. (Tehran: Chåpkhåna-yi ZÈbå: 1350/1971), p. 139. Yasser Tabbaa, ‘The Mosque of NËr al-DÈn in Mosul 1170–1172’, Annales Islamologiques 36 (2002): 350. Korn, ‘Between Architectural Design and Religious Politics’, pp. 21–2 (spelled Qirva by him), figs 11–12. Tabbaa, ‘The Mosque of NËr al-DÈn’, p. 350. Vefa Erginba∞, ‘Problematizing Ottoman Sunnism: Appropriation of Islamic History and Ahl al-Baytism in Ottoman Literary and Historical Writing in the Sixteenth Century’, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 60 (2017), pp. 614–46. My thanks to Andrew Peacock for alerting me to this reference. One can also cite in support of this the numerous very prominent juxtapositions of Allåh and AlÈ in Ottoman talismanic shirts: Hülya Tezcan, Tılsımlı Gömlekler (Istanbul: Tima∞ Yaylınlarım 2011), cat. nos. 11, 18, 20, 21 (including Mu˙ammad), 33, 36 (including Mu˙ammad), 56 and 60. Cat. 60 is an Ottoman Quran dated 1660 which at the end on facing pages (ff. 396b, 397a) has the seal of Mu˙ammad (illustrated in ibid. p. 18) and a seallike emblem with the names of Allåh and AlÈ with the caption hådhå al-shikål AlÈ. The same sphragistic emblem is found in ibid., cat. nos. 11, 18, 20, 33, 43 and 56. For instance, on a third-century bce Shatkona at the Hindu-Buddhist site of Kataragama in Sri Lanka: Hilde K. Link, ‘Where Val∙l∙i Meets Murukan: “Landscape” Symbolism in Kataragama’, Anthropos 97 ˉ 1; on a Roman plate: W. Gunther Plaut, The Magen David (1997), fig. (Washington, DC: B’nal B’rith Books, 1991), p. 14. There are far too many examples to list; the source with the largest range of illustrated examples is Rachel Milstein, King Solomon’s Seal (Jerusalem: Tower of David Museum of the History of Jerusalem, n.d. [1995]). For an Umayyad example see Daniel Schlumberger, Qasr el Heir el Gharbi (Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1986), pl. 58. See also Rose Evelyn Muravchick, God is the Best Guardian: Islamic

STARS AND SYMMETRY

him to command demons and speak with animals. Its association with Solomon’s wisdom and its magical character ensured that it frequently operated as a talisman.62 It was one of the seven magic symbols, frequently associated with the names of God, found on many amulets, magic bowls and talismanic shirts.63 One of the earliest explicit associations of the hexagram and Solomon is found in a probably fourteenth-century album painting. It shows him enthroned; a demon attends him and an inscription that calls for blessings on him specifically identifies him as Sulaymån, prominently displaying a hexagram on his chest.64 The connotation may have been so well known that there was no need to explicitly call out the association in accompanying inscriptions. An example is at the Alai Darwaza (711/1311), the gate that Alå al-DÈn KhaljÈ erected at the entrance to the Quwwat al-Islam mosque complex at Delhi. Its inscriptions

Talismanic Shirts from the Gunpowder Empires, PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 2014. 62 L. Walker and P. Fenton, ‘Sulaymån b. DåwËd’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition: (accessed 29 October 2020). 63 The earliest representations of the seven magical symbols occur frequently in manuscripts of the Shams al-maårif attributed to A˙mad b.AlÈ b.YËsuf al-BËnÈ (d. 622/1225), although their traditional description is said to have been first made by AlÈ b. AbÈ Êålib. The interchangeability of the five- and six-sided star is particularly common in the seven magical symbols, although when the five-sided version was conflated with the Seal of Solomon is not clear (a rare example of their appearance side by side on architecture is on the Fatimid Bab al-Futuh [1087] in Cairo). Among the extensive literature on the seven magical symbols see, for instance, Tewfik Canaan, ‘The Decipherment of Arabic Talismans’, Berytus 4 (1937): 69–110; J. McG. Dawkins, ‘The Seal of Solomon’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2 (1944): 145–50; Georges Anawati, ‘Le nom suprème de dieu (Ism Allâh al-Azam)’, Atti del III Congresso di Studi Arabi e Islamici (Naples, 1967), pp. 14–27; Francis Maddison and Emilie Savage-Smith, Science, Tools and Magic, Part One. Body and Spirit, Mapping the Universe (London: The Nour Foundation, 1998), pp, 60, 72; Venetia Porter, ‘Islamic Seals: Magical or Practical?’, in Alan Jones (ed.), University Lectures in Islamic Studies 2 (Aldershot: Variorum, 1998), pp. 135–49; Roberta Giunta, The Aron Collection. I. Islamic Magic-Therapeutic Bowls (Rome: Istituto per l’Oriente C.A. Nallino, 2018), pp. 33, 302; Lloyd Graham, ‘The Seven Seals of Judeo-Islamic Magic: Possible Origins of the Symbols’, https://​www​.ac​a​d​e​m​ia​.edu​/15​0​9​4​28​/The​_Se​ v​en​_Se​a​ls​_of​_Ju​d​eo​-Is​l​a​m​ic​_Ma​g​ic​_Po​s​s​i​b​le​_Or​i​g​i​ns​_of_​the_Symbols, accessed 3 August 2020, p. 3; Yasmine al-Saleh, ‘Licit Magic’: The Touch and Sight of Islamic Talismanic Scrolls, PhD dissertation, Harvard University, 2014. 64 H. 2152, f. 97r; the best reproduction is in Bishr Farés, ‘Figures magiques’, in Richard Ettinghausen (ed.), Aus der Welt der islamischen Kunst: Festschrift für Ersnt Kühnel zum 75. Geburtstag am 26.101957 (Berlin: Mann, 1959), fig. 2.

133

134

bernard o’kane

mention the founder as being possessed of the wisdom of Moses and Solomon,65 and carved prominently in sandstone on the adjacent soffits of its arches are several large hexagrams. The hexagram subsequently became a particularly popular decorative motif in Islamic monuments erected by Mughal emperors,66 Solomon’s association with wisdom perhaps being a sufficient reason for its prominence. Some interesting visual juxtapositions of the symbols of the prophets Mu˙ammad and Solomon are also found in Ottoman manuscripts. Mu˙ammad bore a mark between his shoulders that was regarded as the ‘seal of Prophethood’ (muhr al-nubuwwa). It is found in several Ottoman and Iranian devotional manuscripts,67 sometimes in two versions,68 but could also be displayed on facing pages and in equal size with the seal of Solomon.69 Dervi∞ Ibrahim Efendi, the Ottoman author of the Gül Risalesi (Rose Treatise) (1184/1770) that built on the metaphor of the rose to celebrate the Prophet’s sacred attributes, also displayed a seal of Solomon on a page facing a representation of a rose symbolising the cosmic dimensions of Mu˙ammad’s relationship to God.70 This association of Solomon’s prophetic prowess with that of Mu˙ammad may also have been present in many of the epigraphic star forms noted earlier. The Seal of Solomon was evidently also found on medieval flags. The Catalan Atlas of 1375 shows the seal as part of the flag of the Karamanids, and an interesting variant is found in its representation of the flag of the Isfendiyarid dynasty.71 Between each of the six triangular points of the latter are semicircles, a composite of the polylobed rosette and the seal of Solomon.72 Although there 65 Sunil Kumar, ‘Assertions of Authority: A Study of the Discursive Statement of Two Sultans of Delhi’, in Muzaffar Alam, Francoise ‘Nalini’ Delvoye and Marc Gaborieau (eds), The Making of Indo-Persian Culture: Indian and French Studies (Delhi: Manohar, 2000), p. 45. 66 John Burton-Page, ‘The Sitara-i Sulaymån in Indian Muslim Art’, in C. E. Bosworth et al. (eds), The Islamic World from Classical to Modern Times, Essays in Honour of Bernard Lewis (Princeton, NJ: Darwin Press, 1989), pp. 75–87; Vikramjit Singh Rooprai, ‘Our Heritage: God’s Hexagram’: https://vikramjits.wordpress.com/2014/07/03/gods-hexag​ ram/. 67 Francesca Leoni, Power and Protection: Islamic Art and the Supernatural, exh. cat. (Oxford: Ashmolean Museum, 2016), cat. nos. 60, 62 and 64; Gruber, The Praiseworthy One, fig. 1.6 68 Gruber, The Praiseworthy One, fig. 25. 69 Ibid., fig. 36. 70 Gruber, ‘The Rose of the Prophet’, p. 247, fig. 10.15 71 See https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5d/1375_At​ las_Catalan%2C_Europe_02.jpg; http://expositions.bnf.fr/ciel/catalan/​ index.htm (accessed 31 August 2020). 72 This composite form is also seen on an undated carved stone, presumably Ottoman, in the cemetery at Eyyup, Istanbul: https://www.quora.​ com/What-is-the-seal-of-Solomon.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

is no independent verification of the form of the Isfendiyarid flag, the reliability of the Catalan Atlas in this respect is enhanced by its probable accurate representation of the Mamluk flag.73 Another indication of the correspondence of the polylobed rosette and the hexagram is found in two tenth-century examples, in stucco at the palace in Afrasiab beside Samarqand and on two limestone panels from a house excavated north of Fustat.74 There are two Fatimid examples, on a metal tray from the late fifth/eleventh-century Tiberias Fatimid metalwork hoard75 and slightly later on the Bab al-Akhdar (549/1154–5) of the shrine of Óusayn in Cairo.76 The latter has two medallions, each containing a circle to which six polylobes are attached. Within the circle on the left is a hexagram composed of two interlacing triangles; within that on the right is a six-pointed star surrounded by a further six-lobed rosette [Figure 6.9d–e]. It appears shortly after on the minaret of the Almohad Kutubiyya madrasa in Marrakesh (c. 1158),77 in 595/1198–9 on the portal of the Madrasa of

73 It is also surprising that verification of the form of the Mamluk flag is difficult to obtain, but Sultan Selim is noted to have taken possession of a flag emblazoned with a lion, the same symbol on the Catalan Atlas: Evliya Çelebi, Seyahatname, apud Jane Hathaway, A Tale of Two Factions: Myth, Memory, and Identity in Ottoman Egypt and Yemen (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2003), p. 97. It has also been noted that ‘the map demonstrates a great deal of knowledge about the economic, political, and religious situation in the Near East and North Africa by showing trade routes, sites of raw materials and resources, and the numerous dynasties around the Mediterranean’: Ballandus, ‘Cartography, Maritime Expansion, and “Imperial Reality”: The Catalan Atlas of 1375 and the Aragonese-Catalan Thalassocracy in the Fourteenth Century’, https://ballandalus.wordpress.com/2014/08/​ 27/cartography-maritime-expansion-and-imperial-reality-the-catalan-a​ tlas-of-1375-and-the-aragonese-catalan-thalassocracy-in-the-fourteenth​century/, accessed 6 August 2020. 74 I. Akhrarov and L. Rempel, Resnoi Shtuk Afriasiaba (Tashkent, Izdatelstvo Literatury i Iskusstva, 1971), p. 35, fig. 13; Hassan Mohamed el-Hawary, ‘Une maison de l’époque toulounide’, Bulletin de l’Institut d’Égypte 14 (1933), p. 86, pl. IX a–b. 75 Elias Khamis, The Fatimid Metalwork Hoard from Tiberias. Tiberias: Excavations in the House of the Bronzes, Final Report, Volume II, Qedem, volume 55 (Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013), pp. 338–9, no. 321. 76 K. A. C. Creswell, The Muslim Architecture of Egypt. Volume 1. Ikhshids and Fatimids a.d. 939–1171 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952), p. 273. 77 Xavier Salmon, Maroc almoravide et almohade: architecture et décors au temps des conquérants 1055–1269 (Paris: Lienart éditions, 2018), p. 211, fig. 281. The design is found among the preparatory drawings inside the minaret, although I do not know of its appearance elsewhere inside the building as it now stands.

135

136

bernard o’kane

Abu’l-Fawåris at Maarrat al-Numån,78 and in 670/1271–2 a similar six-pointed star interlaced with a rosette was added in restorations by the Mamluk sultan Baybars to the mosaics in the Great Mosque of Damascus [Figure 6.9f].79 One geographically and chronologically close example to the Karamanid flag is also found carved in stone at the door of the Ilkhanid tomb tower (c. 730/1330) of Shaykh Óaydar at Mishkinshahr in Azerbaijan.80 One aspect of the five- and six-pointed stars we have encountered also needs to be considered: their connection to light.81 Although in Arabic the sign associated with Solomon is usually rendered as the khatam Sulaymån, the seal of Solomon, in Persian it is more 78 Lorenz Korn, Ayyubidische Architektur in Ägypten und Syrien. Bautätigkeit im Kontext von Politik und Gesellschaft 564–658/ 1169–1260, Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Kairo, Islamische Reihe Bd. 10 (Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag, 2004), vol. 2, Tafel 43/127. 79 Thésaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique, fiche no. 2273: http://www.epigrap​ hie-islamique.uliege.be. I am most grateful to Heba Mostafa for alerting me to this example. A related example may be the interlacing fivepointed star on the north minaret of the Hakim mosque in Cairo (1003) which also has small circles interlaced with the points of the stars: Jennifer Pruitt, Building the Caliphate: Construction, Deconstruction and Sectarian identity in Early Fatimid Architecture (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2020), p. 76, fig. 3.5. 80 Jamål TuråbÈ Êabå†abåi, Åthår-i båstånÈ-yi Ådharbayjån (Tabriz: Anjumån-i Åthår-i MillÈ, 2535/1976), vol 2, p. 622, fig. 421. An identical design is found on an undated tombstone near the mausoleum of Shaykh JibråÈl at Kalkhuran: ibid., vol. 2, p. 228, fig. 121, and, also in carved stone, on the spandrels of a doorway at the Mausoleum of Shaykh Shihåb al-DÈn (early tenth/sixteenth century) at Ahar, also in Azerbaijan: ibid., 2:391, fig. 229. An interesting variation in found in the Mamluk KhåtËniyya madrasa at Jerusalem, where the polylobing has twelve sides and the triangles are further interlaced in the centre: Michael Hamilton Burgoyne: Mamluk Jerusalem: An Architectural Study (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1987), p. 354, fig. 31.12. 81 The association of stars with solar or planetary forms is recorded in craftsmen’s terms for eight-pointed stars (zuhra, Venus) and twelve or more pointed stars (shamsa, sun), by Herzfeld in twentieth-century Aleppo: Ernst Herzfeld, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, deuxième patrie: Syrie du nord, inscriptions et monuments d’Alep, Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 76 (Cairo, 1955), p. 124, n.1. He notes that these reflect Babylonian ideas. See also Finbarr B. Flood, Palaces of Crystal, Sanctuaries of Light: Windows, Jewels and Glass in Medieval Islamic Architecture (unpublished PhD thesis, 3 vols, University of Edinburgh, 1993), vol. 1, p. 15. On the connection generally between decorative star forms and light symbolism see James W. Allan, ‘“My Father is a Sun, and I am the Star”: Fatimid Symbols in Ayyubid and Mamluk Metalwork’, Journal of the David Collection 1 (2003): 25–47.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

frequently referred to as the sitåra-yi Sulaymån, the star of Solomon. Many of the star forms noted above were displayed on mihrabs, and it has been surmised that it was an equivalent to the hanging lamp form that was so often portrayed there, and may even have preceded the earliest of them (eight-pointed), as in the Ikhshidid example from the mosque of Ibn ÊËlËn in Cairo.82 The presence of eightpointed stars in early mihrabs, such as those of the Dome of the Rock (fourth/tenth century), the Aqsa mosque (Ayyubid) and the Haram al-Khalil, Hebron (732/1331–2),83 may also attest to representation of the nËr Mu˙ammad, in accordance with the exegesis of many commentators on the ayat al-nËr, the Light Verse.84 An example of an eight-pointed star with the name of Mu˙ammad in the Yazd Friday mosque was mentioned above; another appears in stucco in the gallery at Sultaniyya [Figure 6.1, right]. The association with light is underlined by the employment of the six-pointed star, with or without the added rosette elements, in the circular window above the mihrabs of many Mamluk monuments in Cairo and Jerusalem [Figure 6.11].85 82 Finbarr B. Flood, ‘Light in Stone: The Commemoration of the Prophet in Umayyad Architecture’, in Jeremy Johns (ed.), Bayt al-Maqdis, Part II: Jerusalem and Early Islam, Oxford Studies in Islamic Art, 9, part 2 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 335–7. However, rather than assuming that the mihrab is contemporary with the foundation of the mosque, I would suggest that its use of strongly projecting stucco palmettes argues for an Ikhshidid dating. See also Margaret S. Graves, ‘The Lamp of Paradox’, Word & Image 34, no. 3 (2018): 239–40. 83 Flood, ‘Light in Stone’, figs 1, 3, 12–14. There have been various opinions on the dating of the Aqsa mihrab; Pruitt, Building the Caliphate, Fig. 5.6, considers it to be Umayyad. Above the mihrab is an inscription recording its restoration (tajdÈd) by Íalå˙ al-DÈn; the inscription itself had been judged to be a later, but accurate, Mamluk copy of the original: Robert Hillenbrand, ‘The Ayyubid Aqsa: Decorative Aspects’, in Robert Hillenbrand and Sylvia Auld (eds), Ayyubid Jerusalem: The Holy City in Context 1187–1250 (London: Al-Tajir World of Islam Trust, 2009), p. 313. Miriam Rosen-Ayalon, ‘A Neglected Group of Mi˙råbs in Palestine’, in M. Sharon (ed.) Studies in Islamic History and Civilisation in Honour of Professor David Ayalon (Leiden and Jerusalem: Brill, 1986), p. 554, suggested the central star may be later on the grounds that it cut into the surrounding design; Ellen Kenney, ‘Mixed Metaphors: Iconography and Medium in Mamluk Glass Mosaic Decoration’, Artibus Asiae 66 (2006): 199 n. 72 however, asserts that ‘the mosaic design around this boss actually seems to relate directly to the mosaic design, as evidenced by the small fleur-de-lis motifs of mother-of-pearl that radiate from its circumference’. For a detailed illustration of the boss in question see Hillenbrand and Auld (eds), Ayyubid Jerusalem, pl. LXXXVI. 84 Flood, ‘Light in Stone’, pp. 339–44. 85 Others include, in Cairo, the madrasa of Inål al-YËsufÈ (794/1393), the mosque of Jamål al-DÈn YËsuf al-Ustadår (809–10/1407), the mosque of AbË Bakr b. Muzhir (884/1480) and the mosque of Qijmås al-Is˙åqÈ

137

138

bernard o’kane

The examples discussed have ranged mostly from the central Islamic lands of Egypt, Syria, Turkey and, in particular, Iran, and are mostly from a limited time span, the fifth/eleventh to the tenth/ sixteenth centuries. Also particularly in Iran it would have been possible to include later examples. A specific Iranian link is with the legendary figure of Jamshid, builder of Persepolis, who both by Arab and Persian historians86 and in Persian poetry87 is conflated with Solomon. But the links with Iran may have broader cultural significance, given the associations there of light remarked on above with astral symbolism and the transmission of divine right.88 This is seen in two areas, one being various iconographic depictions of farr or khwårnah, the concept of divine glory in Iran that was seen as pertaining to kings and prophets,89 and the second in the popularity of the philosophy of Illuminationism, as propounded by Shihåb al-DÈn Ya˙yå SuhrawardÈ (d. 587/1191) and his numerous followers.90 The two are specifically linked by SuhrawardÈ, who wrote of ‘the suprasensory reality, which the ancient Persians called Xvarneh … which, having risen from astral incandescence, remains as a dominating force in the human world’.91 Or again: ‘Whoever knows philosophy, and perseveres in thanking and sanctifying the Light of Lights, will be bestowed with royal Kharreh and with luminous Farreh, and – as

86 87 88 89

90

91

(886/1482): Flood, Palaces of Crystal, vol. 3, pls 79, 90–1 and figs 40, 44 and 47; in Jerusalem, the Khatuniyya madrasa (780/1380), Michael Hamilton Burgoyne, Mamluk Jerusalem: An Architectural Study (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1987), fig. 31.12. Prods Oktor Skjærvø, ‘JAMŠID i. Myth of Jamšid’, Encyclopaedia Iranica: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/jamsid-i (accessed 29 October 2020). Mahmoud Omidsalar, ‘JAMŠID ii. In Persian Literature’, Encyclopaedia Iranica: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/jamsid-ii (accessed 29 October 2020). I am indebted to Heba Mostafa for her suggestions in this regard. See Gherardo Gnoli, ‘Farr(ah)’, Encyclopedia Iranica, https://iranicao​ nline.org/articles/farrah; Abolala Soudavar, ‘Farr(ah) ii. Iconography of farr(ah)/Xᵛarǝnah’, Encyclopedia Iranica https://iranicaonline.org/artic​ les/farr-ii-iconography (accessed 15 October 2020). See Hossein Ziai, ‘Illuminationism’, Encyclopaedia Iranica: https://​ iranicaonline.org/articles/illuminationism (accessed 29 October 2020). See also Suzan Yalman, ‘Ala Al-Din Kayqubad Illuminated: A Rum Seljuq Sultan as Cosmic Ruler’, Muqarnas 29 (2012), pp. 151–86. Henri Corbin, Spiritual Body and Celestial Earth: From Mazdean Iran to ShÈite Iran (London: I. B. Tauris, 1990), p. 125, translated from Suhrawardi’s al-Mu†åra˙åt. Corbin himself notes that ‘This Light of Glory, which is preeminently the attribute of the Amharaspands and Ïzads, is above all manifested among terrestrials beings in the form of the royal Xvarnah (Kava≠m Xvarnah, which is also Farr-i Yazdån, the divine Light of Glory which image remains so living for the IshråqiyËn theosophers, the disciples of SuhrawardÈ)’: ibid., p. 274, n. 30.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

we have said elsewhere – divine light will further bestow on him the cloak of royal power and value. Such a person shall then become the natural Ruler of the Universe.’92 The links were also frequently echoed in Persian poetry, which for major Sufi figures such as RËmÈ and Abd al-Ra˙mån JåmÈ was one of the most important media for transmission of their ideas.93 How was farr represented in Iranian visual culture? There are several candidates, among the best known being the ram and a pair of wings.94 Others include the flaming halo95 and the related lotus-sunflower and sun-disk.96 These can be connected to the Sasanian rosette that was featured prominently not only in Sasanian but even in Umayyad iconography,97 and this in turn, if arguably with a less obvious charge, on the rosettes that have featured in the examples above, both independently and with the hexagram. The symbolism of light, both pre-Islamic and Islamic, is a topic that is too vast to be addressed adequately in the scope of this chapter.98 But we may note that astral symbols of power were commonplace in pre-Islamic civilisations,99 and with the many references in the Quran to the connections of light with God and Mu˙ammad100 it is   92 SohravardÈ, The Book of Radiance, ed. and trans. Hossein Ziai (Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 1998), pp. 84–5.   93 Wheeler M. Thackston, ‘Light in Persian Poetry’, in Jonathan Bloom and Sheila Blair (eds), God is the Light of the Heavens and the Earth: Light in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), pp. 174–94. He begins his article by noting that a ‘quatrain by Abd al-Rahman Jami (d. 1492) is a good example of the use of “light” in overtly religious contexts, where phrases like the “light of faith,” the “light of God,” the “light of inspiration,” and, of course, the “light of enlightenment” are frequently seen in Persian.’   94 Abolala Soudavar, The Aura of Kings: Legitimacy and Divine Sanction in Iranian Kingship (Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 2003), pp. 19–25.   95 Gnoli, ‘Farr(ah)’.   96 Soudavar, Aura of Kings, pp. 84–8.   97 Richard Ettinghausen, From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic World: Three Modes of Artistic Influence (Leiden: Brill, 1972), pp. 36–42.   98 For some recent contributions see Stephennie Mulder, ‘Seeing the Light: Enacting the Divine at Three Medieval Syrian Shrines’, in David Roxburgh (ed.), Envisioning Islamic Art and Architecture: Festschrift in Honor of Renata Holod (Leiden: Brill, 2014), pp. 88–108; Graves, ‘The Lamp of Paradox’.   99 H. P. L’Orange, Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World (Oslo: Institut for Sammenlignende Kulturforskning, 1953), pp. 35ff. 100 William Graham, ‘Light in the Quran and Early Islamic Exegesis’, in Jonathan Bloom and Sheila Blair (eds) God is the Light of the Heavens and the Earth: Light in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), pp. 43–59.

139

140

bernard o’kane

not difficult to imagine how star forms made of their names would have borne an added divine or prophetic resonance. But perhaps the last word on this should be that of al-GhazålÈ, who at the end of his exegesis of the Light Verse in the Quran writes: ‘For ‘tis a hazardous thing to plunge into the fathomless sea of the divine mysteries; and hard, hard it is to essay the discovery of the Lights Supernal that are beyond the veil.’101 Conclusion Not surprisingly, the name of Mu˙ammad is among the most celebrated in architectural inscriptions. The two-part Muslim profession of faith that mentions God as well as His Prophet also makes it expected that Allåh would be among the most frequent accompaniments to Mu˙ammad. They display enormous variety that include some of the finest masterpieces of Arabic calligraphy and design, in a wide range of scripts, settings and materials. They also raise the question of why some of their forms were so popular, in particular the symmetrical star-shaped and polylobed examples. The current buzzword of polyvalent used to describe overlapping symbolisms is almost inadequate to address the kaleidoscopic connotations of the name of Mu˙ammad (with or without those of Allåh and AlÈ), and their star and polylobed forms, bringing together the intercessory power of the Prophet, his divine light-infused associations, his rose-like qualities and the blessings which his name invokes, with the prophetic power of his renowned predecessor Solomon, a byword for wisdom and protection from evil. In any case the ingenuity of the designers in incorporating the Prophet’s name in these difference contexts is a cause for celebration. One of the encouraging trends in modern architectural design in the Islamic world is the rehabilitation of Kufic for decorative purposes.102 May the examples shown here spur designers to develop these innovative forms further. Bibliography Akhrarov, I. and L. Rempel, Resnoi Shtuk Afriasiaba (Tashkent: Izdatelstvo Literatury i Iskusstva, 1971). Allan, James W., ‘“My Father is a Sun, and I am the Star”: Fatimid Symbols in Ayyubid and Mamluk Metalwork’, Journal of the David Collection 1 (2003): 25–47.

101 Al-GhazålÈ, Mishkåt al-anwår (‘The Niche for Lights’), trans. W. H. T. Gardiner (Lahore: Shaikh Mu˙ammad Ashraf, 1952), p. 187. 102 As at the Ghadir mosque (1994) in Tehran: https://archnet.org/sites/​ 711/media_contents/15913 (accessed 28 October 2020).

STARS AND SYMMETRY

Aminov, Bobur, ‘L’Épigraphie funéraire de la ville de Samarcande et de sa périphérie (XVe–XVIIe siècles)’, https://maxvanberchem.org/fr/activites-​ scientifiques/projets/epigraphie-calligraphie-codicologie-litterature/13-​ epigraphie-calligraphie-codicologie-litterature/87-l-epigraphie-funeraire-​ de-la-ville-de-samarcande (accessed 14 July 2020). Anawati, Georges, ‘Le nom suprème de dieu (Ism Allâh al-Azam)’, in Atti del III Congresso di Studi Arabi e Islamici (Naples, 1967), pp. 14–27. Aube, Sandra, La céramique dans larchitecture en Iran au xve siècle: Les arts qarâ quyûnlûs et aq quyûnlûs (Paris: Presses de l’université ParisSorbonne, 2017). Bernheimer, Teresa, The Alids: The First Family of Islam, 750–1200 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013). Bernheimer, Teresa, ‘Shared Sanctity: Some Notes on Ahl al-Bayt Shrines in the Early Êålibid Genealogies’, Studia Islamica 108 (2013): 1–15. Blair, Sheila, Text and Image in Medieval Persian Art (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014). Blair, Sheila, ‘The Epigraphic Program of UljåytË’s Tomb at Sultaniyya: Meaning in Mongol Architecture’, Islamic Art 2 (1987): 43–96. Burgoyne, Michael Hamilton, Mamluk Jerusalem: An Architectural Study (London: World of Islam Festival Trust, 1987). Burton-Page, John, ‘The Sitara-i Sulaymån in Indian Muslim Art’, in C. E. Bosworth et al. (eds), The Islamic World from Classical to Modern Times, Essays in Honour of Bernard Lewis (Princeton, NJ: Darwin Press, 1989), pp. 75–87. Canaan, Tewfik, ‘The Decipherment of Arabic Talismans’, Berytus 4 (1937): 69–110. Corbin, Henri, Spiritual Body and Celestial Earth: From Mazdean Iran to ShÈ ite Iran (London: I. B. Tauris, 1990). Creswell, K. C. A., The Muslim Architecture of Egypt. Volume 1. Ikhshids and Fatimids a.d. 939–1171 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1952). Dawkins, J. McG., ‘The Seal of Solomon’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 2 (1944): 145–50. Erginba∞, Vefa, ‘Problematizing Ottoman Sunnism: Appropriation of Islamic History and Ahl al-Baytism in Ottoman Literary and Historical Writing in the Sixteenth Century’, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 60 (2017): 614–46. Ettinghausen, Richard, From Byzantium to Sasanian Iran and the Islamic World: Three Modes of Artistic Influence (Leiden: Brill, 1972). Farés, Bishr, ‘Figures magiques’, in Richard Ettinghausen (ed.), Aus der Welt der islamischen Kunst: Festschrift für Ersnt Kühnel zum 75. Geburtstag am 26.101957 (Berlin: Mann, 1959), pp. 156–69. Flood, Finbarr B., Palaces of Crystal, Sanctuaries of Light: Windows, Jewels and Glass in Medieval Islamic Architecture, PhD thesis, 3 vols., University of Edinburgh, 1993. Flood, Finbarr B., ‘The Iconography of Light in the Monuments of Mamluk Cairo’, in Emily Lyle (ed.) Sacred Architecture in the Traditions of India, China, Judaism, and Islam (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1992), pp. 169–93. Flood, Finbarr B., ‘Light in Stone: The Commemoration of the Prophet in Umayyad Architecture’, in Jeremy Johns (ed.), Bayt al-Maqdis, Part II: Jerusalem and Early Islam, Oxford Studies in Islamic Art, 9, part 2 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 311–59.

141

142

bernard o’kane

Al-GhazålÈ, Mishkåt al-anwår (‘The Niche for Lights’), trans. W. H. T. Gardiner (Lahore: Shaikh Mu˙ammad Ashraf, 1952). Giunta, Roberta, The Aron Collection. I. Islamic Magic-Therapeutic Bowls (Rome: Istituto per l’Oriente C.A. Nallino, 2018). Golombek, Lisa and Donald Wilber, The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988). Graham, William, ‘Light in the Quran and Early Islamic Exegesis’, in Jonathan Bloom and Sheila Blair (eds), God is the Light of the Heavens and the Earth: Light in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), pp. 43–59. Graves, Margaret S., ‘The Lamp of Paradox’, Word & Image 34 (2018): 237–50. Grbanovic, Ana Marija, ‘The Ilkhanid Revetment Aesthetic in the Buqa Pir-i Bakran: Chaotic Exuberance or a Cunningly Planned Architectural Revetment Repertoire?’, Muqarnas 34 (2017): 43–83. Gruber, Christiane, ‘The Rose of the Prophet: Floral Metaphors in Late Ottoman Devotional Art’, in David Roxburgh (ed.), Envisioning Islamic Art and Architecture: Essays in Honor of Renata Holod (Leiden: Brill, 2014), pp. 223–49. Gruber, Christiane, The Praiseworthy One: The Prophet Mu˙ammad in Islamic Texts and Images (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2018). Hathaway, Jane, A Tale of Two Factions: Myth, Memory, and Identity in Ottoman Egypt and Yemen (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2003). Herzfeld, Ernst, Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, deuxième patrie: Syrie du nord, inscriptions et monument d’Alep, Mémoires publiés par les membres de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale du Caire, 76 (Cairo, 1955). Herzfeld, Ernst, ‘Damascus: Studies in Architecture – III’, Ars Islamica 11–12 (1946). Hillenbrand, Robert, ‘The Ayyubid Aqsa: Decorative Aspects’, in Robert Hillenbrand and Sylvia Auld (eds), Ayyubid Jerusalem: The Holy City in Context 1187–1250 (London: al-Tajir World of Islam Trust, 2009), pp. 301–26. Hillenbrand, Robert and Sylvia Auld (eds), Ayyubid Jerusalem: The Holy City in Context 1187–1250 (London: al-Tajir World of Islam Trust, 2009). Hunarfar, Luf†allåh, GanjÈna-yi åthår-i tårikhÈ-yi Ißfahån, 2nd ed. (Tehran: Chåpkhåna-yi ZÈbå, 1350/1971). Husayn, Nebil Ahmed, The Memory of AlÈ ibn AbÈ Êålib in Early SunnÈ Thought, PhD dissertation, Princeton University, 2016. Kadoi, Yuka, ‘Aspects of Frescoes in Fourteenth-Century Iranian Architecture: The Case of Yazd’, Iran 43 (2005): 217–40. Kenney, Ellen, ‘Mixed Metaphors: Iconography and Medium in Mamluk Glass Mosaic Decoration’, Artibus Asiae 66 (2006): 175–200. Khamis, Elias, The Fatimid Metalwork Hoard from Tiberias. Tiberias: Excavations in the House of the Bronzes, Final Report, Volume II, Qedem, volume 55 (Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013). Korn, Lorenz, Ayyubidische Architektur in Ägypten und Syrien. Bautätigkeit im Kontext von Politik und Gesellschaft 564–658/1169–1260, Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Kairo, Islamische Reihe Bd. 10 (Heidelberg: Heidelberger Orientverlag, 2004), 2 vols.

STARS AND SYMMETRY

Korn, Lorenz, ‘Architecture and Ornament in the Great Mosque of Golpayegan (Iran)’, in Lorenz Korn and Anja Heidenreich (eds), Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie (Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2012), pp. 212–36. Korn, Lorenz, ‘Between Architectural Design and Religious Politics: Aspects of Iranian Mosques of the Saljuq Period’, in Pierfrancesco Callieri and Adriano V. Rossi (eds), Civiltà dell’Iran: Passato Presente Futuro. Atti del Convegno Internazionale Roma, 22–23 febbraio 2013 Odeion della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia della Sapienza Università di Roma Museo Nazionale d’Arte Orientale ‘Giuseppe Tucci’ (Rome: IsMEO, 2018): https://doi.org/10.20378/irb​-47012 (accessed 29 October 2020). Kumar, Sunil, ‘Assertions of Authority: A Study of the Discursive Statement of Two Sultans of Delhi’, in Muzaffar Alam, Francoise ‘Nalini’ Delvoye and Marc Gaborieau (eds), The Making of Indo-Persian Culture: Indian and French Studies (Delhi: Manohar, 2000), pp. 37–65. Leoni, Francesca, Power and Protection: Islamic Art and the Supernatural, exh. cat. (Oxford: Ashmolean Museum, 2016). Link, Hilde K., ‘Where Val∙l∙i Meets Murukan: “Landscape” Symbolism in Kataragama’, Anthropos 97 (1997): 91–100.ˉ L’Orange, H. P., Studies on the Iconography of Cosmic Kingship in the Ancient World (Oslo: Institut for Sammenlignende Kulturforskning, 1953). Maddison, Francis and Emilie Savage-Smith, Science, Tools and Magic, Part One. Body and Spirit, Mapping the Universe (London: The Nour Foundation, 1998). Majeed, Tehnyat, ‘The Chår Mu˙ammad Inscription, Shafå a, and the Mamluk Qubbat al-ManßËriyya’, in Sebastien Günther and Todd Lawson (eds), Roads to Paradise: Eschatology and Concepts of the Hereafter in Islam (Leiden: Brill, 2017), vol. 2, pp. 1010–32. Meinecke, Michael, Fayencedekorationen seldschukischer Sakralbauten in Kleinasien, Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Istanbuler Mitteilungen, Beiheft 13, 2 vols (Tübingen: Verlag Ernst Wasmuth, 1976). Miles, George C., ‘The Inscriptions of the Masjid-i Jåmi at Ashtarjån’, Iran 12 (1974): 89–98. Milstein, Rachel, King Solomon’s Seal (Jerusalem: Tower of David Museum of the History of Jerusalem, n.d. [1995]). Moaz, Abd Al-Razzaq, The Ayyubid Era: Art and Architecture in Medieval Syria (Vienna: Museum With No Frontiers, 2015). Mondini, Sara, ‘Vague Traits: Strategy and Ambiguities in the Decorative Programme of the A˙mad Šåh I BahmanÈ Mausoleum’, in Stefano Pellò (ed.), Borders: Itineraries on the Edges of Iran (Venice: Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, 2016), pp. 155–80. Mulder, Stephennie, ‘Abdülhamid and the Alids: Ottoman patronage of “Shii” shrines in the Cemetery of Båb al-ÍaghÈr in Damascus’, Studia Islamica 108 (2013): 16–47. Mulder, Stephennie, ‘Seeing the Light: Enacting the Divine at Three Medieval Syrian Shrines’, in David Roxburgh (ed.), Envisioning Islamic Art and Architecture: Festschrift in Honor of Renata Holod (Leiden: Brill, 2014), pp. 88–108. Mulder, Stephennie, The Shrines of the Alids in Medieval Syria: Sunnis, Shiis and the Architecture of Coexistence (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014).

143

144

bernard o’kane

Muravchick, Rose Evelyn, God is the Best Guardian: Islamic Talismanic Shirts from the Gunpowder Empires, PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 2014. NecipoÌlu, Gülru, The Topkapı Scroll – Geometry and Ornament in Islamic Architecture (Santa Monica: The Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities, 1995). O’Kane, Bernard, Timurid Architecture in Khurasan (Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 1987). O’Kane, Bernard, ‘Na†anz and Turbat-i Jåm: New Light on Fourteenth Century Iranian Stucco’, Studia Iranica 21 (1992): 85–92. O’Kane, Bernard, ‘Timurid Stucco Decoration’, Annales Islamologiques 20 (1984): 61–84. O’Kane, Bernard, ‘James Wild and the Mosque of Bashtak’, in Doris BehrensAbouseif (ed.), The Arts of the Mamluks in Egypt and Syria – Evolution and Impact (Bonn: V&R Unipress, 2012), pp. 163–81. O’Kane, Bernard, ‘The Gunbad-i Jabaliyya at Kirman and the Development of the Domed Octagon in Iran’, in Bernard O’Kane, Studies in Persian Architecture (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2021), chapter 10. Omidsalar, Mahmoud, ‘Jamšid ii. in Persian Literature’, Encyclopaedia Iranica: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/jamsid-ii (accessed 29 October 2020). Plaut, W. Gunther, The Magen David (Washington, DC: B’nal B’rith Books, 1991). Porter, Venetia, ‘Islamic Seals: Magical or Practical?’, in Alan Jones (ed.), University Lectures in Islamic Studies 2 (Aldershot: Variorum, 1998), pp. 135–49. Pruitt, Jenniffer, Building the Caliphate: Construction, Destruction and Sectarian Identity in Early Fatimid Architecture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2020). QËchånÈ, Abdallåh, Kha††-i KËfÈ-yi ma qilÈ dar masåjid-i båstånÈ-yi Isfahån (Tehran: Bunyåd-i AndÈsha-yi IslåmÈ, 1406/1985). QËchånÈ, Abdallåh, Gunbad-i Sul†åniyya bi-istinåd-i katÈbahå (Tehran: GanjÈna-yi Hunar, 1381/2002). Redford, Scott, ‘Intercession and Succession, Enlightenment and Reflection: The Inscriptional and Decorative Program of the Qaratay Madrasa, Konya’, in Antony Eastmond (ed.), Viewing Inscriptions in the Late Antique and Medieval World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 148–69. Rogers, J. M., Empire of the Sultans: Ottoman Art from the Collection of Nasser D. Khalili, exh. cat. (London: Nour Foundation, 1995). Rosen-Ayalon, Miriam, ‘A Neglected Group of Mi˙råbs in Palestine’, in M. Sharon (ed.) Studies in Islamic History and Civilisation in Honour of Professor David Ayalon (Leiden and Jerusalem: Brill, 1986), pp. 555–63. Sakkal, Mamoun, Square Kufic Calligraphy in Modern Art, Transmission and Transformation, PhD dissertation, University of Washington, 2010. al-Saleh, Yasmine, ‘Licit Magic’: The Touch and Sight of Islamic Talismanic Scrolls, PhD dissertation, Harvard University, 2014. Salmon, Xavier, Maroc almoravide et almohade: architecture et décors au temps des conquérants 1055–1269 (Paris: Lienart éditions, 2018). Schimmel, Annemarie, And Mu˙ammad Is His Messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety (Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press, 1985).

STARS AND SYMMETRY

Schlumberger, Daniel, Qasr el Heir el Gharbi (Paris: Librarie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1986). Schneider, Peter, Die Rizk-Moschee in Hasankeyf: Bauforschung und Baugeschichte, Byzas 8, Veröffentlichungen des Duetschen Archäologischen Instituts Istanbul (Istanbul: Ege Yayınları, 2008). Skjærvø, Prods Oktor, ‘Jamšid i. Myth of Jamšid’, Encyclopaedia Iranica: https://iranicaonline.org/articles/jamsid-i (accessed 29 October 2020). SohravardÈ, The Book of Radiance, ed. and trans. Hossein Ziai (Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 1998). Soudavar, Abolala, The Aura of Kings. Legitimacy and Divine Sanction in Iranian Kingship (Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publishers, 2003). Soustiel, Jean and Yves Porter, Tombs of Paradise: The Shah-e Zende in Samarkand and Architectural Ceramics of Central Asia (Saint-Rémy-enl’Eau: Éditions Monelle Hayot, 2003). Êabå†abåi, Jamål TuråbÈ, Åthår-i båstånÈ-yi Ådharbayjån (Tabriz: Anjumån-i Åthår-i MillÈ, 2535/1976). Tabbaa, Yasser, ‘The Mosque of NËr al-DÈn in Mosul 1170–1172’, Annales Islamologiques 36 (2002), pp. 339–60. Tezcan, Hülya, Tılsımlı Gömlekler (Istanbul: Tima∞ Yaylınlarım, 2011). Thackston, Wheeler M., ‘Light in Persian Poetry’, in Jonathan Bloom and Sheila Blair (eds), God is the Light of the Heavens and the Earth: Light in Islamic Art and Culture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), pp. 177–94. Tüfekçio©lu, Abdülhamit, Erken Dönem Osmanlı Mimarisinde Yazı (Ankara: T. C. Kültür Bakanlı©ı, 2001). Walker, J. and P. Fenton, ‘Sulaymån b. DåwËd’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Yalman, Suzan, ‘Ala Al-Din Kayqubad Illuminated: A Rum Seljuq Sultan as Cosmic Ruler’, Muqarnas 29 (2012): 151–86.

145

CHAPTER SEVEN

Barakat Muhammad: ˙ Notes on Square Kufic Epigraphy in the History of Morocco Péter T. Nagy and Umberto Bongianino

The French architect Maurice Mantout (1886–1953), after a decade spent with the conservation of monuments in Morocco, played a leading role in the design and construction of the Great Mosque of Paris, which he completed in 1926. The building complex includes courtyards, a garden, a minaret, a prayer hall, a bathhouse and other annexes.1 Most of the structures replicate Moroccan precedents in terms of layout, elevation and even decorative details such as capitals, stuccowork, woodwork and zillÈj (‘tile mosaic’), thereby creating a pastiche of historic landmarks. Mantout and his colleagues paid meticulous attention also to the epigraphic features of the mosque. For instance, the entrance to its prayer hall leads through a wooden screen surmounted by a square Kufic inscription that reads barakat Mu˙ammad, or ‘the blessing of Mu˙ammad’ [Figure 7.1]. This specific phrase and calligraphic form, as the architect presumably recognised, had been part of the repertoire of Moroccan craftsmen for centuries. Contrary to their absence in scholarship on Islamic art and epigraphy, such barakat Mu˙ammad squares are rather widespread in Morocco. In the old cities of Fez, Meknes, Marrakesh and elsewhere, observant visitors may spot them on mosques, shrines, city gates, ramparts, palaces and fountains. The variety of media in which they are executed is also remarkable: brickwork inlaid with zillÈj, carved or painted stucco and wood, glazed tiles, embroidered textiles, manuscripts and calligraphic panels. The earliest occurrences of the phrase,

  1 See, for instance, A. Merlin, ‘La mosquée de Paris’, L’Architecture 38, no. 20 (1925): 353–63; Naomi Davidson, ‘La mosquée de Paris: construire l’islam français et l’islam en France, 1926–1947’, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée 125 (2009): 197–215.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.1  Entrance to the prayer hall, Great Mosque of Paris, 1926. Photo by Agence Rol, 1927, image courtesy of gallica.bnf.fr/Bibliothèque nationale de France.

alongside other pious inscriptions in square Kufic, can be traced back to the Marinid dynasty (668/1269–869/1465).2 Ruling from

  2 The format of square Kufic inscriptions originated from Iran, though it also appeared in Cairo and Tunis prior to the Marinid examples; see

147

148

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

their capital, New Fez, the Marinid sultans commissioned several mosques, madrasas, zåwiyas (‘hospices’), funerary complexes and other buildings throughout their realm in present-day Morocco and part of Algeria. Perhaps most renowned are the architectural landmarks established by AbË’l-Óasan (r. 731/1331–752/1351), some of which are indeed relevant to the present discussion. The following chapter will primarily investigate the emergence of barakat Mu˙ammad squares in the Marinid period, proposing an interpretation for the meaning of this religious formula at the time. One may note that its use was virtually unparalleled in other parts of the Islamic world, which suggests that it was more than just one of many, routinely recited or inscribed, pious phrases. In other words, it is likely to have borne a local significance, one that cannot be generalised for other regions. By setting the epigraphic phenomenon into the socio-political context of fourteenth-century Morocco, we shall argue that baraka was chiefly attributed to the shurafå, or the descendants of Mu˙ammad, who inherited it from the Prophet. In that light, it is not surprising that barakat Mu˙ammad squares once again proliferated under the Alawid sultans, who came into power around 1076/1666, claiming to be shurafå themselves. After presenting some Alawid examples in a variety of media, we shall conclude by considering the ontological status of these texts through their history. Nevertheless, this study is but a preliminary attempt to discuss square Kufic epigraphy in the Maghrib region, a subject that will surely deserve further research. Square Kufic in Marinid architecture Among the Marinid buildings emblazoned with barakat Mu˙ammad squares is the funerary complex of AbË Madyan at al-Ubbad, a village located on the outskirts of Tlemcen in northwestern Algeria. The core of the ensemble visible today was commissioned by the Marinid sultan AbË’l-Óasan, who conquered Tlemcen in 737/1337 and established a new mosque, a zåwiya, a

Tehnyat Majeed, ‘The chår Mu˙ammad Inscription, shafåa, and the Mamluk Qubbat al-ManßËriyya’, in Sebastian Günther, Todd Lawso, and Christian Mauder (eds), Roads to Paradise: Eschatology and Concepts of the Hereafter in Islam (Leiden: Brill, 2017), vol. 2, pp. 1010–32; Abdelaziz Daoulatli, La Mosquée Zitouna, Tunis (Tunis: Les Éditions du Patrimoine, 2010), pp. 68–9; Rajå al-AwdÈ, ‘Naqåish Tadhkåriyya Óafßiyya’, in Diråsåt fÈ’l-Åthår wa’l-Naqåish wa’l-TarÈkh TakrÈman li-Sulaymån Mu߆afå ZbÈs (Tunis: al-Mahad al-Wa†anÈ li-l-Turåth, 2001), p. 80; and also Tehnyat Majeed, ‘The Phenomenon of Square Kufic Script: The Cases of Ïlkhånid Ißfahån and Ba˙rÈ MamlËk Cairo’, PhD thesis (University of Oxford, 2006).

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

madrasa, and a mausoleum for the Sufi saint AbË Madyan.3 The foundation inscriptions of the mosque record the beginning of its construction in 739/1339. Two barakat Mu˙ammad squares appear on this building, one on the lower part of the minaret, executed in brickwork [Figure 7.2], and the other next to the monumental portal, inlaid with green zillÈj. The architectural and decorative elements of the funerary complex suggest that both local and Marinid craftsmen participated in its ­ construction.4 As will be demonstrated below, square Kufic epigraphy was a relatively common feature of contemporary Marinid buildings, especially in Fez, but unprecedented in Tlemcen. The barakat Mu˙ammad squares at al-Ubbad can thus be attributed to travelling artisans, presumably from the Marinid capital. Two other Marinid minarets bear barakat Mu˙ammad squares, one of which belongs to the Sharabliyyin mosque in Fez, towering above the main thoroughfare of the old city, al-Talia al-Kabira [Figure 7.3]. This minaret has been plausibly attributed to Marinid patronage on the basis of its analogies with other towers erected by AbË’l-Óasan and his successor, AbË Inån (r. 749/1348–759/1358).5 The barakat Mu˙ammad square is on the southwest side of the Sharabliyyin minaret. Formed by interlocking tiles partly coated in green glaze, the inscription is in a square frame surrounded by a polylobed blind arch. The overall composition of the inscription   3 A˙mad b. Qunfudh al-Qusan†ÈnÈ, Uns al-FaqÈr wa-Izz al-ÓaqÈr, ed. Mu˙ammad al-FåsÈ and Adolphe Faure (Rabat: al-Markaz al-JåmiÈ li-l-Ba˙th al-IlmÈ, 1965), pp. 105–6; William Marçais and Georges Marçais, Les monuments arabes de Tlemcen (Paris: Albert Fontemoing, 1903), pp. 223–81; Bulle Tuil Leonetti, ‘Culte des saints et territoire: le cas de AbË Madyan à Tlemcen (VIe/XIIe–IXe/XVe siècle)’, in Cyrille Aillet and Bulle Tuil Leonetti (eds), Dynamiques religieuses et territoires du sacré au Maghreb médiéval: éléments d’enquête (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2015), pp. 209–51; Agnès Charpentier, Tlemcen médiévale: urbanisme, architecture et arts (Paris: De Boccard, 2018), pp. 90–8, 131–3, 147–8.   4 See Agnès Charpentier, ‘Un atelier voyageur, signe d’échanges entre monde abd al-wådide et mérinide’, RM2E: Revue de la Méditerranée 1, no. 2 (2014): 85–104.   5 Boris Maslow, Les mosquées de Fès et du nord du Maroc (Paris: Les Éditions dArt et dHistoire, 1937), pp. 74–9. AbË’l-Óasan reportedly founded a mosque named Saffarin in Old Fez, which may be identified with the one known today as the Sharabliyyin; Mu˙ammad b. MarzËq al-TilimsånÈ, al-Musnad al-Ía˙È˙ al-Óasan fÈ Maåthir wa-Ma˙åsin Mawlånå AbÈ’l-Óasan, ed. María J. Viguera (Algiers: al-Sharika al-Wa†aniyya li-l-Nashr wa’l-TawzÈ, 1981), p. 401; al-Óåjj MËså AwnÈ, Fann al-ManqËshåt al-Kitåbiyya fÈ alGharb al-IslåmÈ (Casablanca: Fondation du Roi Abdul-Aziz, 2010), p. 275.

149

150

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

Figure 7.2  Northwest side of the minaret, AbË Madyan mosque, al-‘Ubbad (Tlemcen), 739/1339. Photo: Péter T. Nagy.

and the brickwork decoration are notably reminiscent of those on the AbË Madyan minaret. The southeast side of the Sharabliyyin minaret displays a more elaborate text, executed in the same technique and containing the names of the Prophet and the four rightly guided caliphs. Finally, the third minaret attributed to

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.3  Southwest side of the minaret, Sharabliyyin mosque, Fez, mid-eighth/fourteenth century (?). Photo: Péter T. Nagy.

the Marinid period and emblazoned with a barakat Mu˙ammad square is in Marrakesh, attached to the so-called Qitta mosque.6 The inscription, carved into the plaster revetment and inlaid with

  6 Henri Basset and Henri Terrasse, Sanctuaires et forteresses almohades (Paris: Larose 1932), pp. 402–7. The authors call this tower ‘minaret

151

152

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

green tiles, is today difficult to see, due to the recent and rather grotesque ‘restoration’ of the building. Concerning secular architecture, while many residences dating from the Marinid period are extant in Fez, few of them seem to retain their original decoration. However, the inscription barakat Mu˙ammad is attested at least once, as part of the decoration of a house in the Suwayqat al-Dabban area of the city.7 The remains of this eighth/fourteenth-century building were pulled down in the 1910s, but portions of its tilework have survived thanks to the intervention of Alfred Bel (1873–1945). The French scholar detached some fragments from the walls, set them into concrete blocks, and deposited them in the Dar Batha Museum of the city. Although unmentioned in Bel’s publication, a square tile with a barakat Mu˙ammad inscription, painted in black glaze against an excised background, is today in one of the concrete blocks together with other zillÈj panels from the house, and must therefore share the same provenance.8 A similar tile in the Quai Branly Museum in Paris, painted in green glaze and tentatively dated to the eighth/ fourteenth century, may indicate a wider diffusion of similar inscriptions in this medium.9 No less remarkable examples of barakat Mu˙ammad squares appear in Marinid madrasas. The inscriptions are formed by carved wooden pieces nailed to the lattice screens that frame the courtyards of the Sahrij madrasa (723/1323) in Fez, the so-called Buinaniyya madrasa (736/1335–6) in Meknes [Figure 7.4], and the Misbahiyya madrasa (747/1346–7) again in Fez.10 These prestigious institutions of learning were established by order of AbË’l-Óasan, the first one when he was still hereditary prince, and the other two after he ascended the throne. In all three cases, the barakat Mu˙ammad squares represent the most conspicuous elements of the epigraphic programme. Their position above the doors that lead from the vestibules to the courtyards was presumably chosen to leave an impression on the teachers, students and other visitors who walked below them on a daily basis. Although the wooden screens have been heavily restored – if not replaced – in the past

de Moûlay El Ksour’; cf. Gaston Deverdun, Marrakech des origines à 1912 (Rabat: Éditions Techniques Nord-Africaines, 1966), vol. 1, p. 326.   7 Alfred Bel, ‘Inscriptions arabes de Fès XI: une maison privée du XIVe siècle de J.-C.’, Journal asiatique 11: 13, no. 1 (1919): 5–41.   8 Dar al-Batha Museum, inv. no. C.19.   9 Quai Branly Museum, inv. no. 74.1971.16.1. quaibranly.fr/fr/explorer-les-collections/base/Work/action/show/notic​ e/296941-carreau-de-revetement (last accessed 1 December 2022). The tile is today exhibited in the Louvre Museum, Paris. 10 Lucien Golvin, La madrasa médiévale: architecture musulmane (­Aix-en-Provence: Édisud, 1995), pp. 219–25, 232–6, 248–52.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.4  Southwest side of the courtyard, Buinaniyya madrasa, Meknes, 736/1335–6. Image from Joseph de la Nézière, Les monuments mauresques du Maroc (Paris: Albert Lévy, [1922]), plate LX.

century, they seem to have reproduced the originals faithfully, at least judging from the earliest available photographs of the buildings. It is worth noting that madrasas, in general, were powerful instruments in the hands of the Marinid sultans to educate the religious elites in conformity with their ideological and doctrinal

153

154

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

views.11 This fact may also imply the significance of barakat Mu˙ammad squares for their agenda. Mention should be made of two additional buildings, although further research would be necessary to ascribe them to the Marinid period with certainty. One is in Mila, a town near Constantine in northeastern Algeria. On either side of the east gate of the mosque of Sidi Ghanim, the brickwork once featured two barakat Mu˙ammad squares, one of which is still complete today.12 It may seem surprising to find such inscriptions in an area so remote from the Marinid centres of power; however, the Marinids occupied the region of Constantine twice, under the leadership of AbË’l-Óasan and AbË Inån.13 It is, therefore, at least possible that they commissioned the expansion of the mosque of SÈdÈ Ghånim, including the wall flanking its eastern gate, which appears to be a later addition to the early Islamic structure. The last, possibly Marinid, building relevant here is the so-called Qantarat al-Fallus, a monumental though partly ruined bridge on the Beht River, about 17 km northeast of Khemisset, halfway between Rabat and Fez.14 The brick facings of its ramps retain parts of the original decoration, including two barakat Mu˙ammad squares [Figure 7.5]. A Marinid date for the monument can be suggested on the basis of its close similarity in brickwork design with other fourteenthcentury buildings, such as the AbË Madyan and the Sharabliyyin minarets. The history and architecture of the above-mentioned buildings have thus far received so little attention in scholarship that, in some 11 See Mohamed Kably, Société, pouvoir et religion au Maroc à la fin du Moyen-Âge (XIVe–XVe siècle) (Paris: Maisonneuve et Larose, 1986), pp. 279–85; Maya Shatzmiller, ‘The Introduction of the Medresas’, in eadem, From Berber State to Moroccan Empire: The Glory of Fez under the MarÈnids (Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2019), pp. 85–93; Ahmed S. Ettahiri, ‘Genèse et rôle de la medersa au Maroc islamique’, Bulletin d’archéologie marocaine 22 (2012): 279–81. 12 Youcef Aibeche and Souad Slimani, ‘La mosquée Sidi Ghanem de Milev (Algérie)’, in François Baratte, Véronique Brouquier-Reddé and Elsa Rocca (eds), Du culte aux sanctuaires: l’architecture religieuse dans l’Afrique romaine et byzantine (Paris: De Boccard, 2018), p. 343. 13 Robert Brunschwig, La Berbérie orientale sous les Óafßides, des origines à la fin du XVe siècle (Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1940–7), vol. 1, pp. 165–9, 176–9. 14 William Marçais [notes presented at the meeting of the Commission de l’Afrique du Nord, 12 March 1929], Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques 1928–9 (1930), pp. 304–5; Daniel Eustache, Corpus des dirhams idrÈsites et contemporains: collection de la Banque du Maroc et autres collections mondiales, publiques et privées (Rabat: Banque du Maroc, 1970–1), p. 126.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.5  Northwest side of the northeast ramp, Qantarat al-Fallus bridge, Beht River, Khemisset Province, mid-eighth/fourteenth century (?), vandalised in 2017. Photo: Péter T. Nagy.

cases, even their rough date is debatable. Nevertheless, the earliest group of square Kufic inscriptions can be securely ascribed to the eighth/fourteenth century, especially given the two dated examples in the AbË Madyan complex. It is worth noting that barakat Mu˙ammad squares appear on at least four buildings commissioned by AbË’l-Óasan, which may indicate the sultan’s direct involvement in the dissemination of the epigraphic phenomenon. Part of the rationale behind the inscriptions’ positions is likely to have been visibility; indeed, viewers would have perceived them as an ostentatious feature of public texts on sultanic monuments. The importance of visibility is most evident in the Sharabliyyin minaret, where the text directly faces the pedestrians walking down one of the most crowded streets of Fez. In other words, there can be little doubt about the intentionality behind the display of these inscriptions, a feat that may well deserve to be elucidated within the framework of Marinid politics. The meaning of barakat Muh· ammad The pious expression barakat Mu˙ammad is seemingly easy to translate: ‘the blessing of Mu˙ammad’. However, the fact that this formula is virtually unattested in epigraphy outside the Maghrib cautions that the question is, in reality, less simple than it first appears. According to the anthropologist Clifford Geertz (1926–2006), baraka is ‘one of those resonant words it is better to talk about than

155

156

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

to define’.15 It is generally understood as ‘beneficent force’, ‘divine goodness’, ‘auspicious power’, or ‘blessing’ – in any case, a favour bestowed by God upon some special people, objects and places. Sources routinely describe Muslim prophets and saints as possessing baraka, thereby emphasising their ‘holiness’, which also extends to their graves and relics.16 Besides these oft-noted meanings, the Quran specifically highlights the baraka of the descendants of Mu˙ammad: ‘May the mercy of God and his blessings (barakåt) be upon you, people of the house [of the Prophet]’ (Quran 11:73). That is, baraka not only signified ‘holiness’ but also laid the basis for the social recognition, especially in Morocco, of the shurafå, who would have inherited it through their bloodline.17 Significantly for the present chapter, this notion began to gain particular momentum after the mid-thirteenth century, in parallel with the emergence of the Marinid dynasty. Among the various branches of shurafå living in the region, principally recognised were the JˆiyyËn, who claimed descent from the Prophet through the lineage of IdrÈs I (r. 172/789–175/791), the founder of the first Muslim state in Morocco. In the early eighth/­fourteenth century – according to one account, in 718/1318 – the corpse of IdrÈs I was miraculously discovered near Walila (ancient Volubilis), immediately spurring on the veneration of his grave. The contemporary sources mention masses of people visiting the site, which also testifies to the mobilising power of IdrÈs’s offspring.18 The historian and jurist Ibn al-Sakkåk (d. 818/1415) repeatedly emphasised 15 Clifford Geertz, Islam Observed: Religious Development in Morocco and Indonesia (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1968), pp. 32–3; cf. Henry Munson Jr, Religion and Power in Morocco (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1993), pp. 5–7. 16 See, for instance, G. S. Colin, ‘Baraka’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1960–2004), vol. 1, p. 1032; Geertz, Islam Observed, p. 44; Josef W. Meri, ‘Aspects of Baraka (Blessings) and Ritual Devotion among Medieval Muslims and Jews’, Medieval Encounters 5, no. 1 (1999): 46–69; Josef W. Meri, The Cult of Saints among Muslims and Jews in Medieval Syria (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 17–18, 101–19 and passim. 17 Vincent J. Cornell, Realm of the Saint: Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1998), pp. 200–1; Munson, Religion and Power in Morocco, pp. 10–13. 18 AlÈ b. AbÈ Zar al-FåsÈ, al-AnÈs al-Mu†rib bi-Raw∂ al-Qir†ås fÈ Akhbår MulËk al-Maghrib wa-TarÈkh MadÈnat Fås (Rabat: Dår al-ManßËr li-l-Êabåa wa’l-Wiråqa, 1972), p. 24; AlÈ al-JaznåÈ, Janå Zahrat al-Ås fÈ Binå MadÈnat Fås, ed. Abd al-Wahhåb b. ManßËr (Rabat: al-Ma†baa alMalikiyya, 1991), p. 15; Mu˙ammad b. AbÈ Ghålib b. al-Sakkåk, Nuß˙ MulËk al-Islåm bi’l-TarÈf bi-må Yajib alayhim min ÓuqËq Ål al-Bayt al-Kiråm, ed. NazÈha al-MurËnÈ al-AlamÈ al-IdrÈsÈ (n.p., n.d.), p. 126; see also Maya Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide: Ibn KhaldËn et ses contemporains (Leiden: Brill, 1982), pp. 140–4.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

that the descendants of the Prophet inherited his baraka, and many Sufi saints at the time were also among them.19 The shurafå, by this stage, had attained widespread recognition as an elite group in society, enjoyed financial and other privileges, and were ready to transform their status into political capital.20 In that light, it is worth noting that the proliferation of barakat Mu˙ammad squares on public buildings coincided with the emergence of a social group who vigorously claimed their share of the Prophet’s baraka. The Marinid sultans sought to secure the support of the shurafå in several ways. The first Marinid ruler to unify the territory of Morocco, AbË YËsuf (r. 656/1258–685/1286), married a sharÈfa, Umm al-Izz (d. 683/1284). Their son and successor, AbË YaqËb (r. 685/1286–706/1307), institutionalised the celebration of the mawlid, the birthday of Mu˙ammad, which had hitherto been espoused almost exclusively by his descendants.21 However, when the corpse of IdrÈs I was ‘discovered’ in 718/1318 near Walila, the sultan AbË SaÈd (r. 710/1310–731/1331) reportedly sent out an army to disband a popular gathering fuelled by the shurafå.22 ­AbË’l-Óasan, in turn, not only guaranteed their privileges but also held particularly sumptuous celebrations of the mawlid. The sultan’s private secretary, Mu˙ammad b. MarzËq (d. 781/1379), dedicates a chapter of his al-Musnad al-Ía˙È˙ to his patron’s respect towards the shurafå, emphasising the fondness and devotion with which he used to celebrate the mawlid.23 This annual event was, at least in Ibn MarzËq’s 19 Ibn Sakkåk, Nuß˙ MulËk al-Islåm, pp. 17, 32, 67, 111, 115, 121, 125 and passim; Herman L. Beck, L’image d’IdrÈs II, ses descendants de Fås et la politique sharÈfienne des sultans marÈnides, 656–869/1258–1465 (Leiden: Brill, 1989), pp. 164–6; Cornell, Realm of the Saint, pp. 199–202; Mercedes García-Arenal, Messianism and Puritanical Reform: MahdÈs of the Muslim West (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2006), pp. 217–19, 224–6. 20 See Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History, trans. Franz Rosenthal, 2nd ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967), vol. 1, pp. 50–3; Kably, Société, pouvoir et religion, pp. 293–302; Beck, L’image d’IdrÈs II, pp. 159–94; García-Arenal, Messianism and Puritanical Reform, pp. 234–8. 21 García-Arenal, Messianism and Puritanical Reform, pp. 229–31; N. J. G. Kaptein, Mu˙ammad’s Birthday Festival: Early History in the Central Muslim Lands and Development in the Muslim West until the 10th/16th Century (Leiden, New York, Köln: Brill, 1993), pp. 97–104. 22 al-JaznåÈ, Janå Zahrat al-Ås, p. 15. 23 Ibn MarzËq, al-Musnad al-Ía˙È˙, pp. 147–54; see also Ahmed Salmi, ‘Le genre des poèmes de nativité (maulËdiyya-s) dans le royaume de Grenade et au Maroc du XIIIe au XVIIe siècle’, Hespéris 43 (1956): 335–435; Kaptein, Mu˙ammad’s Birthday Festival, pp. 105–11; James Brown, ‘Azafid Ceuta, Mawlid al-NabÈ and the Development of MarÈnid Strategies of Legitimation’, in Amira K. Bennison (ed.), The Articulation of Power in Medieval Iberia and the Maghrib (Oxford: Oxford University Press and The British Academy, 2014), pp. 127–51.

157

158

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

view, an effective tool of the Marinid sultans to ingratiate themselves with the shurafå, a tradition that AbË’l-Óasan’s immediate successors also retained. Another indicator of the increasing veneration of Mu˙ammad is a little-known group of luxury manuscripts produced in the eighth/ fourteenth century, most probably in Fez. The quality of these parchment and paper codices – in terms of materials, illumination and ­calligraphy – s­ uggests that they were commissioned by the Marinid court. They contain works in praise of Mu˙ammad, including the Shamåil RasËl Allåh by al-TirmidhÈ (d. 279/892), an early treatise describing the Prophet’s appearance and qualities in detail.24 Among the extant Maghribi copies, one was part of the library of AbË’lÓasan according to its colophon,25 while another can be attributed to Marinid patronage on stylistic grounds.26 The traditions compiled by al-­TirmidhÈ subsequently formed the basis of a more extensive treatise on the sanctity of Mu˙ammad, al-Shifå bi-TarÈf ÓuqËq al-Mu߆afå by al-Qå∂È Iyå∂ (d. 544/1149).27 AbË Inån endowed a copy of the work to the Great Mosque of Taza,28 and another such manuscript belonged to the library of the sultan AbË Fåris I (r. 767/1366–774/1372).29 Finally, an anthology of poems on the Prophet’s miracles by AbË Bakr al-LakhmÈ (d. 654/1256), titled NaΩm al-Durar al-Saniyya fÈ Mujizåt Sayyid al-Bariyya, is preserved in an eighth/fourteenth-century codex in the Library of San Lorenzo de El Escorial.30 Precious books such as these would have been kept in the libraries of the sultanic palaces or endowed to mosques and madrasas, thereby promoting Mu˙ammad’s sanctity among scholars and students. The above-noted developments represent aspects of how the cult of Mu˙ammad, initially advocated by his descendants, gradually became part of Marinid policies. The emergence of barakat Mu˙ammad squares in public texts fits well with some concurrent religious practices adopted and fostered by the sultans. That is, the royal celebration of the mawlid, the production of manuscripts in praise of the Prophet and the visual proclamation of his 24 On the importance of al-TirmidhÈs book for the development of religious discourses around the sanctity of Mu˙ammad, see Annemarie Schimmel, And Muhammad is His Messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995), pp. 32–52. 25 Tunis, National Library of Tunisia, ms. 3463. 26 San Lorenzo de El Escorial, ms. árabe 1740. 27 Schimmel, And Muhammad is His Messenger, pp. 32, 46. 28 Taza, Library of the Great Mosque, ms. 550. 29 Fez, Qarawiyyin Library, ms. 262. A third, possibly Marinid copy is Doha, National Library of Qatar, ms. HC.MS.00714; ediscovery.qnl.qa/​ islandora/object/QNL%3A00015748#page/4/mode/1up (last accessed: 2 December 2022). 30 San Lorenzo de El Escorial, ms. árabe 1371.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

baraka underpinned the same political agenda. One may add that the Marinid chancellery issued registers of shurafå with a proven ­pedigree.31 The sultans thus provided manifold support for the social recognition of the descendants of Mu˙ammad, especially the JˆiyyËn, who, in return, accepted them as legitimate rulers. In the same vein, the phrase barakat Mu˙ammad would have referred not only to the Prophet’s blessing but also, more specifically, to its inheritance by the local shurafå. They certainly had a lot to benefit from the proliferation of this notion. Despite its relative popularity during the heyday of the Marinid dynasty, the use of barakat Mu˙ammad squares seems to have been somewhat short-lived, vanishing along with the royal patronage of the cult of Mu˙ammad within a few decades. When Ibn al-Sakkåk composed his book on the shurafå in the late eighth/fourteenth century, the title left no doubt about his intention: ‘Advice to the kings of Islam, informing them about their obligations towards the rights of the noble people of the house [of the Prophet]’. This was an explicit admonition to the contemporary Marinid sultans who, according to the author, were failing to show the same support for the shurafå as their exemplary predecessors.32 Be that as it may, there is virtually no evidence for barakat Mu˙ammad inscriptions dating from the ninth/fifteenth and tenth/sixteenth centuries. Barakat Muh· ammad in Alawid visual culture After a gap of about three centuries, barakat Mu˙ammad squares began to reappear in public texts from the early Alawid period, thenceforth retaining their popularity until today. The sultan Mawlåy IsmåÈl (r. 1082/1672–1139/1727) set up his capital in Meknes, not least because he was at odds with the religious circles of Fez. However, he managed to achieve reconciliation with various Sufi orders throughout his realm and funded the construction of many of their zåwiyas.33 He also made much effort to portray himself as patron of the shurafå, issued registers of legitimate descendants of Mu˙ammad – including, of course, himself – and provided them with privileges, thereby adopting a

31 al-JaznåÈ, Janå Zahrat al-Ås, p. 29; Kably, Société, pouvoir et religion, pp. 294–5; see also Beck, L’image d’IdrÈs II, pp. 161–74. 32 Ibn al-Sakkåk, Nuß˙ MulËk al-Islåm, pp. 103, 134–5. 33 Norman Cigar, ‘Société et vie politique à Fès sous les premiers Alawites’, Hespéris-Tamuda 18 (1978–9): 116–21, 147–51, 164–5; Ruggero Vimercati Sanseverino, Fès et sainteté, de la fondation à l’avènement du protectorat (808–1912): hagiographie, tradition spirituelle et héritage prophétique dans la ville de Mawlåy IdrÈs (Rabat: Centre Jacques Berque, 2014), pp. 357–90.

159

160

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

former Marinid model.34 Numerous buildings erected by Mawlåy IsmåÈl or the later Alawid sultans feature barakat Mu˙ammad squares, some of which will be highlighted below, alongside portable objects dating from the same era. The architectural patronage of Mawlåy IsmåÈl encompassed several funerary complexes. For instance, he commissioned the expansion and reconstruction of an older zåwiya in Fez, in which the Sufi scholar Abd al-Qådir al-FåsÈ (d. 1091/1680) was buried,35 and which includes barakat Mu˙ammad squares in the stucco decoration around its mihrab. Decades later, the sultan reconstructed the funerary complex of IdrÈs II in Fez, so that the core of the extant ensemble dates from c. 1132/1720, notwithstanding some later additions and restorations.36 Barakat Mu˙ammad squares constitute a standard element in various segments of the stuccowork, both inside the complex and on the street façades, parts of which are likely to date back to the twelfth/eighteenth century. Mawlåy IsmåÈl also rebuilt the shrine of IdrÈs I in the town of Moulay Idriss Zerhoun.37 34 Beck, L’image d’IdrÈs II, pp. 173–4; Cigar, ‘Société et vie politique à Fès sous les premiers Alawites’, pp. 100–6; Abdelahad Sebti, ‘Au Maroc: sharifisme citadin, charisme et historiographie’, Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales 41, no. 2 (1986): 437–9; Amira K. Bennison, Jihad and its Interpretations in Pre-Colonial Morocco (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2002), pp. 22–4; Munson, Religion and Power in Morocco, p. 22; see also Patricia Mercer, ‘Palace and Jihåd in the Early AlawÈ State in Morocco’, The Journal of African History 18, no. 4 (1977): 531–53. 35 Mu˙ammad b. al-Êayyib al-QådirÈ, Nashr al-MathånÈ li-Ahl al-Qarn al-ÓådÈ Ashar wa’l-ThånÈ, ed. Mu˙ammad ÓajjÈ and A˙mad alTawfÈq (Rabat: Dår al-Maghrib, 1977–86), vol. 2, p. 294; AwnÈ, Fann al-­ManqËshåt al-Kitåbiyya, pp. 382–3. The zåwiya complex, located in the QalqaliyyÈn district of Old Fez, subsequently came to be known by the name of Abd al-Qådir al-FåsÈ. 36 Mu˙ammad b. al-Êayyib al-QådirÈ, Kitåb Iltiqå† al-Durar wa-Mustafåd al-MawåiΩ wa’l-Ibar min Akhbår wa-Ayån al-Mia a-Óådiya ­wa’l-Thåniya Ashar, ed. Håshim al-AlawÈ al-QåsimÈ (Beirut: Dår al-Åfåq al-JadÈda, 1983), pp. 315–18; al-QådirÈ, Nashr al-MathånÈ, vol. 3, pp. 64–5, 240–1; Mu˙ammad b. Jafar al-KattånÈ, al-Azhår al-å†irat ­al-Anfås bi-Dhikr ba∂ Ma˙åsin Qu†b al-Maghrib wa-Tåj MadÈnat Fås (Fez: n.p. [lithograph], 1314/1896–7), pp. 172–84; Georges Salmon, ‘Le culte de Moulay Idrîs et la mosquée des chorfa à Fès’, Archives marocaines 3 (1905): 413–29. 37 AbË al-Qåsim al-ZayyånÈ, al-Bustån al-ÛarÈf fÈ Dawlat Awlåd Mawlåy al-SharÈf, ed. RashÈd al-Zåwiya (Rissani: Markaz al-Diråsåt wa’lBu˙Ëth al-Alawiyya, 1992), p. 186; al-Abbås b. IbråhÈm al-SamlålÈ, al-Ilåm bi-man Óalla Marråkush wa-Aghmåt min al-Alåm, ed. Abd ­al-Wahhåb b. ManßËr (Rabat: al-Ma†baa al-Malikiyya, 1993), vol. 3, p. 64; AbË al-Abbås A˙mad al-NåßirÈ, Kitåb al-Istiqßå li-Akhbår Duwal al-Maghrib al-Aqßå, ed. Jafar al-NåßirÈ and Mu˙ammad al-NåßirÈ (Casablanca: Dår al-Kuttåb, 1997), vol. 7, p. 98; Rajae Benlahmer, ‘La ville de Moulay Idriss Zerhoun: histoire, urbanisme et architecture’,

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.6  Lower part of the southeast façade, Manara pavilion, Marrakesh, 1286/1869–70. Photo: Péter T. Nagy.

It includes barakat Mu˙ammad squares in the stucco decoration of the mausoleum chamber as well as on the lantern of the minaret executed in brickwork. Finally, analogous stuccowork appears in the zåwiya of Mawlåy Abd Allåh (d. 1089/1678) in Ouazzane and in that of Mu˙ammad b. al-FaqÈh (d. 1136/1723) in Fez, both datable to the early Alawid period. A common feature of Alawid buildings in Marrakesh is the dark red paint on many of their walls, which can imitate brickwork design, assume geometric patterns, or form texts. An example particularly relevant to the present discussion is the Manara pavilion constructed in 1286/1869–70.38 Among the inscriptions of this building is a quotation from the QaßÈdat al-Burda, a renowned poem composed by AbË Abd Allåh al-BËßÈrÈ (d. c. 695/1296) in praise of Mu˙ammad. Shorter texts include two prominent barakat Mu˙ammad squares on either side of the main gate of the pavilion [Figure 7.6]. The same epigraphic

Master’s dissertation (Institut National des Sciences de l’Archéologie et du Patrimoine, Rabat, 2000), pp. 66–8. 38 Gaston Deverdun, Inscriptions arabes de Marrakech (Rabat: Éditions Techniques Nord-Africaines, 1956), pp. 210–11; Deverdun, Marrakech des origines à 1912, vol. 1, pp. 531–2; see also Julio Navarro Palazón, Fidel Garrido Carretero and José Miguel Puerta Vílchez, ‘El paisaje periurbano de Marrakech: la Menara y otras fincas de recreo (siglos XII–XX)’, in Julio Navarro Palazón and María Carmen Trillo San José (eds), Almunias: Las fincas de las élites en el Occidente islámico: poder, solaz y producción (Granada: Universidad de Granada, 2018), pp. 252–5.

161

162

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

element appears on the Bahiyya fountain dating from 1254/1838–9.39 Several other contemporary examples could be enumerated – such as the Bab al-Khamis gate and the Amri funduq (‘inn’) – all located in Marrakesh and displaying barakat Mu˙ammad squares in red paint. These cases exemplify the wide variety of contexts in which the inscriptions appeared, confirming that, just as in the Marinid period, their use was not restricted to specific building types. From this period, barakat Mu˙ammad inscriptions are equally attested in carpentry. The anaza (‘secondary mi˙råb’) of the Bab al-Gisa mosque in Fez, for instance, closely follows the square Kufic compositions of Marinid wooden screens, except for its use of polychrome paint [Figure 7.7]. Although undated, the anaza is likely to have been donated to the mosque on the same occasion as its minbar in 1109/1698.40 A similar barakat Mu˙ammad panel decorates the wooden cabinet that once contained the flotation mechanism of an elaborate water clock in the timekeepers’ room of the Qarawiyyin mosque in Fez.41 The decoration of the cabinet, just as with other components of the water clock, are notably comparable with woodwork from the early Alawid period.42 In Meknes, a barakat Mu˙ammad square appears on the lintel of the old minbar of the Najjarin mosque. This piece of furniture is similar to two other minbars commissioned by Mawlåy IsmåÈl for the great mosque of Meknes and the Lalla Awda mosque.43 Finally, datable to the ­mid-nineteenth century is a painted window frame emblazoned with barakat Mu˙ammad, once set in the wall of the zåwiya of SÈdÈ QaddËr al-AlamÈ (d. 1266/1850), and today kept in the Dar al-Jamii Museum in Meknes.44 39 See Deverdun, Marrakech des origines à 1912, vol. 1, pp. 193–4. 40 AwnÈ, Fann al-ManqËshåt, pp. 348–51. According to the inscription on the minbar, its commissioner was Abd Allåh al-RËsÈ, the governor of Fez under Mawlåy IsmåÈl. 41 See Larbi Essakali (ed.), Le mémorial du Maroc (Rabat: Nord Organisation, 1983–5), vol. 3, pp. 66–9. 42 Cf. Abd al-HådÈ al-TåzÈ, Jåmi al-QarawiyyÈn (Beirut: Dår al-Kitåb ­al-LubnånÈ, 1972), vol. 2, p. 325. The author attributes this water clock to AbË Zayd al-LajåÈ, a mathematician employed by the Marinid sultan AbË Sålim (r. 760/1359–762/1361). However, while its quadrant may conceivably be Marinid in date, that is unlikely to be the case for other parts of the water clock, including the cabinet. 43 See Abdeltif Elkhammar, ‘Mosquées et oratoires de Meknès (IXe–XVIIIe siècle): géographie religieuse, architecture et problème de la Qibla’, PhD thesis (Lyon 2 University, 2005), pp. 268–70, 285–6, 300–2; Abdeltif Elkhammar, ‘La Grande Mosquée de Meknès’, Arqueología medieval 10 (2008): 194–5. 44 Dar al-Jamii Museum, inv. no. 63.4.97; islamicart.museumwnf.org/​ database_item.php?id=object;ISL;ma;Mus01_A;30;en (last accessed: 1 December 2022); Joseph de la Nézière, La décoration marocaine (Paris: Calavas, 1924), pl. XVIII.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.7  Central part of the anaza (‘secondary mi˙råb’), Bab al-Gisa mosque, Fez, c. 1109/1698 (?). Photo: Umberto Bongianino.

Although initially conceived as a purely epigraphic element, barakat Mu˙ammad squares also appear in later manuscripts. A noteworthy example, dating from 1205/1790, is in a Moroccan copy of the Kitåb al-Fawåid wa’l-Íalåt wa’l-awåid, a collection of prayers and talismanic diagrams, compiled by the Yemeni scholar

163

164

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

Ibn Abd al-La†Èf al-SharjÈ (d. 893/1488).45 The manuscript includes two depictions of the Prophet’s mosque in Medina, reminiscent of the illustrations of the Dalåil al-Khayråt, a renowned book of prayers for the Prophet, authored by Mu˙ammad al-JazËlÈ (r. 869/1465).46 In this copy of al-SharjÈ’s work, the anonymous calligrapher added to the images several barakat Mu˙ammad squares. The same formula is stamped on the leather binding of a nineteenthcentury copy of the Dalåil al-Khayråt, encapsulating the spirit of the book [Figure 7.8].47 A more widespread phenomenon is the inclusion of barakat Mu˙ammad in calligraphic panels usually hanging from the walls of mosques and zåwiyas. The compositions feature Quranic quotations, prayers and praises for the Prophet, iconified depictions of his sandals, and diagrams of the mosques of Mecca and Medina. One such panel, today in the Subayhiyya Library in Salé, is signed by the Sufi calligrapher A˙mad al-TådilÈ al-Ribå†È and dated 1350/1932 [Figure 7.9].48 Finally, a few words should be dedicated to funerary textiles produced as covers for the cenotaphs of Moroccan saints. Datable to the twelfth/eighteenth century is a large piece of crimson silk brocade embroidered with golden inscriptions in a variety of styles.49 They contain Quranic quotations and pious invocations pertaining to Mu˙ammad’s sanctity and role as protector of the faithful. The square Kufic script not only spells out barakat Mu˙ammad but 45 Une passion marocaine: collection Pierre Bergé et Yves Saint Laurent (auction catalogue, Artcurial, Paris, 31 October 2015), lot no. 3; www. artcurial.com/fr/lot-kitab-al-fawaid-wa-salat-wa-l-awaid-compilation-deprieres-formules-et-traditions-religieuses (last accessed: 1 December 2022). 46 On manuscripts of the Dalåil al-Khayråt, see Hiba Abid, ‘Un concurrent du Coran en Occident musulman du Xe/XVIe à l’aube du XIIe/XVIIIe siècle: les Dalåil al-khayråt d’al-JazËlÈ’, Journal of Quranic Studies 19, no. 3 (2017): 45–73; Jan Just Witkam, ‘The Battle of the Images: Mecca vs. Medina in the Iconography of the Manuscripts of al-JazËlÈ’s Dalåil al-Khayråt’, in Judith Pfeiffer and Manfred Kropp (eds), Theoretical Approaches to the Transmission and Edition of Oriental Manuscripts (Beirut: Orient-Institut Beirut, 2007), pp. 67–82. 47 The Khalili Collections, Islamic Art, inv. no. MSS 1300. 48 Similar calligraphic panels, some signed by the same artist, are today in the zåwiyas of Mawlåy Abd Allåh in Ouazzane and AbË Mu˙ammad Såli˙ in Safi, and also in the Harvard Art Museum (Cambridge, MA, inv. no. 2016.206) and in the Tareq Rajab Museum (Kuwait); see Mu˙ammad al-ManËnÈ, TårÈkh al-Wiråqa al-Maghribiyya (Rabat: Jåmiat Mu˙ammad al-Khåmis, 1991), pp. 285–6; Mu˙ammad Abd al-ÓafÈΩ Khib†a al-ÓasanÈ, al-Óilya al-Nabawiyya al-Maghribiyya (Fez: ManshËråt al-Markaz al-MaghribÈ li-l-Diråsåt al-TårÈkhiyya, 2016), pp. 112–14. 49 Quai Branly Museum, inv. no. 74.1961.51; quaibranly.fr/fr/explorerles-collections/base/Work/action/show/notice/297619-couverture-detombeau/ (last accessed: 2 December 2022).

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.8  Gilt-stamped leather binding, al-JazËlÈ, Dalåil al-Khayråt, thirteenth/nineteenth century (?). Khalili Collections, Islamic Art, inv. no. MSS 1300. Image courtesy of the Khalili Collections.

also conveys the profession of faith, the names of the four rightly guided caliphs, and a formula inviting the beholder to say prayers upon the Prophet.50 Another set of funerary textiles, this time of black silk lampas and gold thread, features similar inscriptions that radiate from the central barakat Mu˙ammad square [Figure 7.10].51 Although the set is today dismembered and fragmentary, one of the 50 This particular phrase – ßalli alå Mu˙ammad alf ßalå, or ‘pray upon Mu˙ammad a thousand times’ – is attested in epigraphy since the eighteenth century; see Deverdun, Marrakech des origines à 1912, ­ vol. 1, p. 509. 51 Kuala Lumpur, Islamic Arts Museum Malaysia, inv. no. 2017.51. The fragment can be identified as a textile described by al-KattånÈ, dated

165

166

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

Figure 7.9  Calligraphic panel with iconic images, made by A˙mad al-TådilÈ al-Ribå†È, 1350/1932. Íubay˙iyya Library, Salé. Photo: Péter T. Nagy.

pieces preserves an invocation to ‘Mawlåy IdrÈs’, and its peculiar shape corroborates that it originally covered the cenotaph marking the grave of IdrÈs II.52 Conclusion In light of the above-presented corpus, it emerges that barakat Mu˙ammad squares have been a conspicuous element of Moroccan visual culture for the past seven centuries, with an apparent gap between the Marinid and the Alawid examples. They constituted a geographically circumscribed phenomenon, rigorously adhering to a set configuration of square Kufic. Indeed, while the history of Islamic epigraphy offers several examples of emblematic texts conventionally executed in a specific format or style, barakat Mu˙ammad is distinct, if not unique, in its rigid uniformity across different periods and media. Emblazoned on buildings and objects, these visual markers evidently reflected the concurrent and widespread cult of by a chronogram to 1273/1856–7 and endowed to the shrine of IdrÈs II: al-KattånÈ, al-Azhår, p. 183. 52 The portion of this textile mentioning Mawlåy IdrÈs was sold at auction in 2019; see Arts of the Islamic World (auction catalogue, Sotheby’s, London 23 October 2019), lot no. 207.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Figure 7.10  Embroidered silk cover for the cenotaph of Mawlay IdrÈs II, dated 1273/1856–7. Islamic Arts Museum Malaysia, inv. no. 2017.51 Image courtesy of IAMM.

167

168

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

the Prophet. Moreover, the socio-political dynamics between the sultans and the religious elites suggest an additional semantic level for the phenomenon. As argued in this chapter, barakat Mu˙ammad squares are likely to have served as reminders of the blessings claimed by the shurafå, a notion first embraced by the Marinids and later appropriated by the Alawids, in both cases for political reasons. The fact that barakat Mu˙ammad manifested exclusively in square Kufic format indicates that it functioned primarily as an image, or even as an icon, rather than as a text. Many comparable Islamic images could be enumerated, notably including metonymical references to the Prophet: diagrams of his tomb, verbal descriptions of his character (so-called ˙ilyas), and depictions of his footprint, sandal, turban or other relics. As demonstrated in recent scholarship, pious Muslims devised such visual expressions to mark the veneration of Mu˙ammad, creating objects that could also serve talismanic, apotropaic or healing purposes.53 Accordingly, iconified representations attained wide popularity in Morocco from the tenth/sixteenth century onwards, appearing in manuscripts of the Dalåil al-Khayråt and, more recently, in calligraphic panels [Figure 7.9]. Given the ontological status of barakat Mu˙ammad inscriptions as images, this chapter proposes that they constituted an even older tradition of prophetic icons from this region of the Islamic world. Bibliography Abid, Hiba, ‘Un concurrent du Coran en Occident musulman du Xe/XVIe à l’aube du XIIe/XVIIIe siècle: les Dalåil al-khayråt dal-JazËlÈ, Journal of Quranic Studies 19, no. 3 (2017): 45–73. Aibeche, Youcef and Souad Slimani, ‘La mosquée Sidi Ghanem de Milev (Algérie)’, in François Baratte, Véronique Brouquier-Reddé and Elsa Rocca (eds), Du culte aux sanctuaires: l’architecture religieuse dans l’Afrique romaine et byzantine (Paris: De Boccard, 2018), pp. 337–45. Arts of the Islamic World (auction catalogue, Sotheby’s, 23 October 2019). al-AwdÈ, Rajå, ‘Naqåish Tadhkåriyya Óafßiyya’, in Diråsåt fÈ al-Åthår wa’l-Naqåish wa’l-TarÈkh TakrÈman li-Sulaymån Mußtafå ZbÈs (Tunis: al-Mahad al-Wa†anÈ li-l-Turåth, 2001), pp. 71–102. AwnÈ, al-Óåjj MËså, Fann al-ManqËshåt al-Kitåbiyya fÈ al-Gharb al-IslåmÈ (Casablanca: Fondation du Roi Abdul-Aziz, 2010). Basset, Henri and Henri Terrasse, Sanctuaires et forteresses almohades (Paris: Larose 1932). 53 See, in particular, Josef W. Meri, ‘Relics of Piety and Power in Medieval Islam’, in Alexandra Walsham (ed.), Relics and Remains (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 97–120; Christiane Gruber, The Praiseworthy One: The Prophet Muhammad in Islamic Texts and Images (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2018), pp. 15–23, 280–301, 351–61; Finbarr B. Flood, Technologies de dévotion dans les arts de l Islam: pèlerins, reliques et copies (Paris: Éditions Hazan/ Musée du Louvre, 2019), pp. 141–71.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Beck, Herman L., L’image d’IdrÈs II, ses descendants de Fås et la politique sharÈfienne des sultans marÈnides, 656–869/1258–1465 (Leiden: Brill, 1989). Bel, Alfred, ‘Inscriptions arabes de Fès XI: une maison privée du XIVe siècle de J.-C.’, Journal asiatique 11: 13, no. 1 (1919): 5–41. Benlahmer, Rajae, ‘La ville de Moulay Idriss Zerhoun: histoire, urbanisme et architecture’, Master’s dissertation (Institut National des Sciences de l’Archéologie et du Patrimoine, Rabat, 2000). Bennison, Amira K., Jihad and its Interpretations in Pre-Colonial Morocco (London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2002). Brown, James, ‘Azafid Ceuta, Mawlid al-NabÈ and the Development of MarÈnid Strategies of Legitimation’, in Amira K. Bennison (ed.), The Articulation of Power in Medieval Iberia and the Maghrib (Oxford: Oxford University Press and The British Academy, 2014), pp. 127–51. Brunschwig, Robert, La Berbérie orientale sous les Óafßides, des origines à la fin du XVe siècle (Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1940–7). Charpentier, Agnès, Tlemcen médiévale: urbanisme, architecture et arts (Paris: De Boccard, 2018). Charpentier, Agnès, ‘Un atelier voyageur, signe d’échanges entre monde abd al-wådide et mérinide’, RM2E: Revue de la Méditerranée 1, no. 2 (2014): 85–104. Cigar, Norman, ‘Société et vie politique à Fès sous les premiers Alawites’, Hespéris-Tamuda 18 (1978–9): 93–172. Colin, G. S., ‘Baraka’, Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1960–2004), vol. 1, p. 1032. Cornell, Vincent J., Realm of the Saint: Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1998). Daoulatli, Abdelaziz, La Mosquée Zitouna, Tunis (Tunis: Les Éditions du Patrimoine, 2010). Davidson, Naomi, ‘La mosquée de Paris: construire l’islam français et l’islam en France, 1926–1947’, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée 125 (2009): 197–215. de la Nézière, Joseph, La décoration marocaine (Paris: Calavas, 1924). de la Nézière, Joseph, Les monuments mauresques du Maroc (Paris: Albert Lévy, [1922]). Deverdun, Gaston, Inscriptions arabes de Marrakech (Rabat: Éditions Techniques Nord-Africaines, 1956). Deverdun, Gaston, Marrakech des origines à 1912 (Rabat: Éditions Techniques Nord-Africaines, 1966). Elkhammar, Abdeltif, ‘La Grande Mosquée de Meknès’, Arqueología medieval 10 (2008): 185–99. Elkhammar, Abdeltif, ‘Mosquées et oratoires de Meknès (IXe–XVIIIe siècle): géographie religieuse, architecture et problème de la Qibla’, PhD thesis (Lyon 2 University, 2005). Essakali, Larbi (ed.), Le mémorial du Maroc (Rabat: Nord Organisation, 1983–5). Ettahiri, Ahmed S., ‘Genèse et rôle de la medersa au Maroc islamique’, Bulletin d’archéologie marocaine 22 (2012): 266–84. Eustache, Daniel, Corpus des dirhams idrÈsites et contemporains: collection de la Banque du Maroc et autres collections mondiales, publiques et privées (Rabat: Banque du Maroc, 1970–1). Flood, Finbarr B., Technologies de dévotion dans les arts de l’Islam: ­pèlerins, reliques et copies (Paris: Éditions Hazan/Musée du Louvre, 2019).

169

170

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

García-Arenal, Mercedes, Messianism and Puritanical Reform: MahdÈs of the Muslim West (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2006). Geertz, Clifford, Islam Observed: Religious Development in Morocco and Indonesia (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1968). Golvin, Lucien, La madrasa médiévale: architecture musulmane (­Aix-en-Provence: Édisud, 1995). Gruber, Christiane, The Praiseworthy One: The Prophet Muhammad in Islamic Texts and Images (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2018). al-ÓasanÈ, Mu˙ammad Abd al-ÓafÈΩ Khib†a, al-Óilya al-Nabawiyya al-Maghribiyya (Fez: ManshËråt al-Markaz al-MaghribÈ li-l-Diråsåt ­al-TårÈkhiyya, 2016). Ibn AbÈ Zar, AlÈ al-FåsÈ, al-AnÈs al-Mu†rib bi-Raw∂ al-Qir†ås fÈ Akhbår MulËk al-Maghrib wa-Ta rÈkh MadÈnat Fås (Rabat: Dår al-ManßËr ­li-l-Êabåa wa’l-Wiråqa, 1972). Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History, trans. Franz Rosenthal, 2nd ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967). Ibn MarzËq, Mu˙ammad al-TilimsånÈ, al-Musnad al-Ía˙È˙ al-Óasan fÈ Maåthir wa-Ma˙åsin Mawlånå AbÈ al-Óasan, ed. María J. Viguera (Algiers: al-Sharika al-Wa†aniyya li-l-Nashr wa’l-TawzÈ, 1981). Ibn Qunfudh al-Qusan†ÈnÈ, A˙mad, Uns al-FaqÈr wa-Izz al-ÓaqÈr, ed. Mu˙ammad al-FåsÈ and Adolphe Faure (Rabat: al-Markaz al-JåmiÈ ­li-l-Ba˙th al-IlmÈ, 1965). Ibn al-Sakkåk, Mu˙ammad b. AbÈ Ghålib, Nuß˙ MulËk al-Islåm bi’l-TarÈf bi-må Yajib alayhim min ÓuqËq Ål al-Bayt al-Kiråm, ed. NazÈha ­al-MurËnÈ al-AlamÈ al-IdrÈsÈ (n.p., n.d.). al-JaznåÈ, AlÈ, Janå Zahrat al-Ås fÈ Binå MadÈnat Fås, ed. Abd al-Wahhåb b. ManßËr (Rabat: al-Ma†baa al-Malikiyya, 1991). Kably, Mohamed, Société, pouvoir et religion au Maroc à la fin du MoyenÂge (XIVe–XVe siècle) (Paris: Maisonneuve et Larose, 1986). Kaptein, N. J. G., Mu˙ammad’s Birthday Festival: Early History in the Central Muslim Lands and Development in the Muslim West until the 10th/16th Century (Leiden: Brill, 1993). al-KattånÈ, Mu˙ammad b. Jafar, al-Azhår al-ņirat al-Anfås bi-Dhikr ba∂ Ma˙åsin Qu†b al-Maghrib wa-Tåj MadÈnat Fås (Fez: n.p. [lithograph], 1307/1889). Majeed, Tehnyat, ‘The chår Mu˙ammad inscription, shafåa, and the Mamluk Qubbat al-ManßËriyya’, in Sebastian Günther, Todd Lawson and Christian Mauder (eds), Roads to Paradise: Eschatology and Concepts of the Hereafter in Islam (Leiden: Brill, 2017), vol. 2, pp. 1010–32. Majeed, Tehnyat, ‘The Phenomenon of Square Kufic Script: The Cases of Ïlkhånid Ißfahån and Ba˙rÈ MamlËk Cairo’, PhD thesis (University of Oxford, 2006). al-ManËnÈ, Mu˙ammad, TårÈkh al-Wiråqa al-Maghribiyya (Rabat: Jåmiat Mu˙ammad al-Khåmis, 1991). Marçais, William and Georges Marçais, Les monuments arabes de Tlemcen (Paris: Albert Fontemoing, 1903). Marçais, William, [notes presented at the meeting of the Commission de l’Afrique du Nord, 12 March 1929], Bulletin archéologique du Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques 1928–9 (1930): 304–5. Maslow, Boris, Les mosquées de Fès et du nord du Maroc (Paris: Les Éditions d’Art et d’Histoire, 1937). Mercer, Patricia, ‘Palace and Jihåd in the Early AlawÈ State in Morocco’, The Journal of African History 18, no. 4 (1977): 531–53.

square kufic epigraphy in morocco

Meri, Josef W., ‘Aspects of Baraka (Blessings) and Ritual Devotion among Medieval Muslims and Jews’, Medieval Encounters 5, no. 1 (1999): 46–69. Meri, Josef W., The Cult of Saints among Muslims and Jews in Medieval Syria (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). Meri, Josef W., ‘Relics of Piety and Power in Medieval Islam’, in Alexandra Walsham (ed.), Relics and Remains (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 97–120. Merlin, A., ‘La mosquée de Paris’, L’Architecture 38, no. 20 (1925): 353–63. Munson Jr, Henry, Religion and Power in Morocco (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1993). al-NåßirÈ, AbË’l-Abbås A˙mad, Kitåb al-Istiqßå li-Akhbår Duwal al-Maghrib al-Aqßå, ed. Jafar al-NåßirÈ and Mu˙ammad al-NåßirÈ (Casablanca: Dår ­al-Kuttåb, 1997). Navarro Palazón, Julio, Fidel Carretero Garrido and José Miguel Puerta Vílchez, ‘El paisaje periurbano de Marrakech: la Menara y otras fincas de recreo (siglos XII–XX)’, in Julio Navarro Palazón and María Carmen Trillo San José (eds), Almunias: Las fincas de las élites en el Occidente islámico: poder, solaz y producción (Granada: Universidad de Granada, 2018), pp. 195–284. al-QådirÈ, Mu˙ammad b. al-Êayyib, Kitåb Iltiqå† al-Durar wa-Mustafåd al-MawåiΩ wa’l-Ibar min Akhbår wa-Ayån al-Mia al-Óådiya wa’lThåniya Ashar, ed. Håshim al-AlawÈ al-QåsimÈ (Beirut: Dår al-Åfåq ­al-JadÈda, 1983). al-QådirÈ Mu˙ammad b. al-Êayyib, Nashr al-MathånÈ li-Ahl al-Qarn al-ÓådÈ Ashar wa’l-ThånÈ, ed. Mu˙ammad ÓajjÈ and A˙mad al-TawfÈq (Rabat: Dår al-Maghrib, 1977–86). Salmi, Ahmed, ‘Le genre des poèmes de nativité (maulËdiyya-s) dans le royaume de Grenade et au Maroc du XIIIe au XVIIe siècle’, Hespéris 43 (1956): 335–435. Salmon, Georges, ‘Le culte de Moulay Idrîs et la mosquée des chorfa à Fès’, Archives marocaines 3 (1905): 413–29. al-SamlålÈ, al-Abbås b. IbråhÈm, al-Ilåm bi-man Óalla Marråkush waAghmåt min al-Alåm, ed. Abd al-Wahhåb b. ManßËr (Rabat: al-Ma†baa al-Malikiyya, 1993). Schimmel, Annemarie, And Muhammad is His Messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995). Sebti, Abdelahad, ‘Au Maroc: sharifisme citadin, charisme et historiographie’, Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales 41, no. 2 (1986): 433–57. Shatzmiller, Maya, L’historiographie mérinide: Ibn KhaldËn et ses contemporains (Leiden: Brill, 1982). Shatzmiller, Maya, ‘The Introduction of the Medresas’, in eadem, From Berber State to Moroccan Empire: The Glory of Fez under the MarÈnids (Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2019), pp. 85–93. al-TåzÈ, Abd al-HådÈ, Jåmi al-QarawiyyÈn (Beirut: Dår al-Kitåb al-LubnånÈ, 1972). Tuil Leonetti, Bulle, ‘Culte des saints et territoire: le cas de AbË Madyan à Tlemcen (VIe/XIIe–IXe/XVe siècle)’, in Cyrille Aillet and Bulle Tuil Leonetti (eds), Dynamiques religieuses et territoires du sacré au Maghreb médiéval : éléments d’enquête (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2015), pp. 209–51. Une passion marocaine: collection Pierre Bergé et Yves Saint Laurent (auction catalogue, Artcurial, Paris, 31 October 2015).

171

172

péter t. nagy and umberto bongianino

Vimercati Sanseverino, Ruggero, Fès et sainteté, de la fondation à l’avènement du protectorat (808–1912): hagiographie, tradition spirituelle et héritage prophétique dans la ville de Mawlåy IdrÈs (Rabat: Centre Jacques Berque, 2014). Witkam, Jan Just, ‘The Battle of the Images: Mecca vs. Medina in the Iconography of the Manuscripts of al-JazËlÈ’s Dalåil al-Khayråt’, in Judith Pfeiffer and Manfred Kropp (eds), Theoretical Approaches to the Transmission and Edition of Oriental Manuscripts (Beirut: OrientInstitut Beirut, 2007), pp. 67–82. al-ZayyånÈ, AbË’l-Qåsim, al-Bustån al-ÛarÈf fÈ Dawlat Awlåd Mawlåy ­al-SharÈf, ed. RashÈd al-Zåwiya (Rissani: Markaz al-Diråsåt wa’l-Bu˙Ëth al-Alawiyya, 1992).

CHAPTER EIGHT

Islamic Supplications in the Funerary Architecture of Medieval Castile Razan Francis

Upon the death of the celebrated Umayyad ˙åjib Mu˙ammad b. AbÈ Åmir al-ManßËr in 392/1002, a mawlå of King al-MustaÈn b. HËd of the Taifa of Zaragoza, with the name Shujå (literally ‘brave’ in Arabic), set out to meet King Alfonso. Soon discovering that the king had headed for al-ManßËr’s tomb in the city of Sålim (Medinaceli), Shujå followed him. There he found Alfonso sitting on a throne that he had installed over the tomb, while his wife leaned next to him. When Alfonso saw Shujå, he proudly proclaimed: ‘Can’t you see that I have seized the lands of Muslims, and sat on the tomb of their king?’ Almost as if performing his name, Shujå was ‘carried away by bravery’. He replied in defense of al-ManßËr: ‘Were the owner of this tomb to breathe while you sit over it, we would not have heard from you such abominable words, and no decision would have settled in you.’ Alfonso’s rage and imminent attack on Shujå was prevented by his wife. Standing between the two, she scolded Alfonso and affirmed Shujås words: ‘Should someone like you pride himself on such an act [sitting over the tomb]?’1 The theme of Western leaders ‘visiting’ the tombs of Muslim rulers to proclaim victory is a recurring topos in Islamic (including modern) history, and one that is difficult to corroborate.2 In fact,   1 A˙mad b.Mu˙ammad al-MaqqarÈ al-TilimsånÈ, Naf˙ al-ÊÈb min Ghußn al-Andalus al-Ra†Èb wa-Dhikr WazÈrihå Lisån al-DÈn Ibn al-Kha†Èb, eds Maryam ÊawÈl and Yousef ÊawÈl (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-ilmiyya, 2011), vol. 1, pp. 381–2.   2 Most famous among these alleged visits in modern history is that of the French General Henri Gouraud to the tomb of Saladin in Damascus. According to the popular story, Gouraud kicked the tomb and addressed Saladin, ‘arise Saladin, we have returned, and my presence here consecrates the victory of the Cross over the Crescent’.

174

razan francis

this anecdote narrated, among others, by al-MaqqarÈ (d. 1041/1631), citing Ibn SaÈd al-AndalusÈ (d. 685/1286), may have never taken place; and if it did, there is no proof of the Alfonso-Shujå drama. What interests me, however, is not the portrayal of the religious conflict in medieval Arabic sources. Rather, it is Alfonso’s movement toward al-ManßËr’s tomb, and his act of constructing a throne, that at once animate the AndalusÈ funerary realm and free it from its physical stagnation, as well as from its aesthetic isolation. The funerary realm was indeed informed by religious interaction. While this interaction still demands the attention of art and architectural historians, this article will focus on a very narrow, yet important, aspect of funerary epigraphy – specifically the presence of Islamic adiya (or supplications) in thirteenth- and early fourteenth-century Christian funerary projects in the Kingdom of Castile, in its two capital cities during this time period: Burgos and Toledo. Islamic supplications have been largely considered the domain of Andalusi residential structures or of luxury objects executed in different media. Their later seemingly effortless integration in the Christian context (in the so-called ‘mudéjar’ art and architecture) has mainly been attributed to their neutrality. In other words, these short rhymed good wishes and blessings, often comprising two or three Arabic words, were flexible in nature and posed no offence to Christians. Once crossing the religious threshold, they no longer adhered to their religious content or provenance, and hence were easily dissociated from their intended religious meaning and function. This viewpoint has been supported by a larger thesis that has considered the centuries of interfaith coexistence on the Iberian Peninsula a catalyst for an aristocratic visual culture that was cultivated by elite patronage, with a taste for luxury goods, that promoted a sophisticated artistic tradition – to which the land of al-Andalus was a main contributor. Indeed, most of the funerary projects discussed in this article belonged either to the high-­ranking royal or ecclesiastical members of the Christian community of Castile. In focusing on the use of Islamic supplications in Christian funerary projects, this article proposes an additional or alternative context, Michael Provence, The Last Ottoman Generation and the Making of the Modern Middle East (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017), p. 3. The anecdote narrating the translation of the bodies of the Nasrid royal family members from Alhambra’s raw∂a by Boabdil (Mu˙ammad XII) to Mondéjar, after signing the 1491 agreement with the Catholic Kings indicates concerns over desecration or similar manifestation of triumph. Leopoldo Torres Balbás, ‘Paseos por la Alhambra: Una necrópoli nazarí: la Rauda’, Archivo Español de Arte y Arqueología 6 (1926): 13.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

which considers the ‘funerary’ as an art category that existed on its own merits, but one that also participated in the circulation of artistic motifs in a shared multi-confessional space. Islamic supplications surviving in Christian funerary spaces, I argue, reflect aspects of Islamic funerary culture (e.g., rituals, epigraphy and art). This proposition is corroborated by Islamic tombstones that demonstrate that the incorporation of Islamic supplications was based on knowledge of the Islamic funerary world of ritual, objects and iterated words. It is in this context of artistic interaction that I would like to set my exploration. Considered one of the earliest Christian monuments to embrace AndalusÈ art, the Cistercian convent of Santa María la Real de la Huelgas in Burgos was founded in 1187 by King Alfonso VIII of Castile (1158–1214) and his wife, Leonor Plantagenet (1154–1214). In addition to housing the community of nuns, many of whom were of royal or aristocratic descent, Las Huelgas was planned from the outset as a royal dynastic burial setting.3 Hence the presence of Islamic supplications, as will be shown, precisely fits this function. The monastery’s spaces were reenacted by funerary and ceremonial processions, to which the AndalusÈ stucco decorations of the vaults created a theatrical backdrop.4 These processions often connected the old cloister with the central cloister of San Fernando through two long and narrow passageways: the Pasaje (passage of Santiago) and the Locutorio (parlour).

  3 A selected bibliography on Las Huelgas’s architecture includes: Joaquín Yarza Luaces, ‘Monasterio y palacio del rey’, in Vestiduras ricas: El monasterio de las Huelgas y su época (1170–1340) (exh. cat.) (Madrid: Patrimonio Nacional, 2005), pp. 15–34; James D’Emilio, ‘The Royal Convent of Las Huelgas: Dynastic Politics, Religious Reform and Artistic Change in Medieval Castile’, in Meredith Parsons Lillich (ed.), Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture: Cistercian Nuns and Their World, 6 (2005), pp. 191–282; Rocío Sánchez Ameijeiras, ‘El ‘çementerio real’ de Alfonso VIII en Las Huelgas de Burgos’, Ciencias sociais e humanidades 10 (1998): 77–109.   4 Juan Carlos Ruiz Souza and Gema Palomo Ferández, ‘Nueva hipótesis sobre las Huelgas de Burgos: escenografía funeraria de Alfonso X para un proyecto inacabado de Alfonso VIII y Leonor Plantagenêt’, Goya: Revista de arte 316–317 (2007): 36. On the monastic processions, see Eduardo Carrero Santamaría, ‘The Creation and Use of Space in the Abbey of Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas, Burgos: Architecture, Liturgy, and Paraliturgy in a Female Cistercian Monastery’, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 6, no. 2 (2014): 169–91. The Gothic church, situated to the north, was the final resting place for the royal family members of Castile, where now thirty-two sarcophagi are held. The most important among these, the double sarcophagus of Alfonso VIII and Leonor (both died in 1214), is placed in the nuns’ choir.

175

176

razan francis

Carved in the third quarter of the thirteenth century, the vaults display geometric, vegetal and animal motifs with no extant equivalent in either contemporaneous Christian or earlier Islamic architecture. Their heightened complexity indicates a possible imitation of motifs, mainly found on silk textiles, including those wrapped around the royal bodies in the monastery’s tombs.5 However, the transmission of Arabic inscriptions from portable objects to the vaults, I will argue, was not a coincidental byproduct of transmission, but chosen deliberately and in conformity with the funerary context. The translation of artistic motifs across media is most visible in the cloister of San Fernando. A vault that features peacocks, positioned frontally and in profile, inside pearl-band medallions, follows the compositional arrangement of luxury silk textiles with a pallia rotata motif [Figure 8.1].6 The vault’s epigraphy is carved in deep relief against a foliated background of twisting leaves. While each medallion contains the repeating cursive (naskh) supplication ‘al-yumn wa’l-iqbål’ (prosperity and good fortune), the epigraphic Kufic inscriptions on the margins feature the supplications ‘al-baraka min Allåh wa’l-yumn li llåh’ (blessing from God and prosperity to God) and ‘al-naßr li llåh al-˙amd li llåh’ (victory belongs to God, praise belongs to God).7 The Saint Sernin chasuble, probably manufactured

  5 On the monastery’s textiles see Manuel Gómez Moreno, El Panteón Real de Las Huelgas de Burgos (Madrid: CSIC, 1946); Concha Herrero Carretero, Museo de Telas Medievales: Monasterio de Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas (Madrid: Patrimonio Nacional, 1988).   6 For an excellent overview of the motif, see Patricia Blessing, ‘Weaving on the Wall: Architecture and Textiles in the Monastery of Las Huelgas in Burgos’, Studies in Iconography 40 (2019): 137–82. These textiles circulated through pilgrimage, diplomacy (or war) and trade, energised by elite consumption in the Latin West, the eastern Mediterranean and Central Asia. See María Judith Feliciano, ‘Muslim Shrouds for Christian Kings? A Reassessment of AndalusÈ Textiles in Thirteenth-Century Castilian Life and Ritual’, in Cynthia Robinson and Leyla Rouhi (eds), Under the Influence: Questioning the Comparative in Medieval Castile (Leiden: Brill, 2006), pp. 101–31. A silk fragment from the Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum in New York (Gift of John Pierpont Morgan, inv. no. 1902-1-222) is one example of such crosscultural dissemination of motifs that obscures provenance. It displays rows of pearl-band roundels inscribing elephants, winged horses and senmurvs (dog heads with peacocks’ tails). Its provenance indicates Spain, Byzantium or the Eastern Mediterranean (eleventh or twelfth centuries).   7 My reading of the inscription differs from that provided by Ocaña Jiménez. Instead of yumn I read naßr. Ocaña Jiménez, Manuel, ‘Panorámica sobre el arte almohade en España’, Cuadernos de la Alhambra 26 (1990): 91–111. This use of the cursive script reflects Almohads’ contribution to the repertoire of monumental epigraphy in Spain and North Africa, hitherto the domain of the Kufic. Introducing the cursive script,

funerary architecture of medieval castile

177

Figure 8.1  Vault with peacocks (detail). Cloister of San Fernando. Photo: Razan Francis. Patrimonio Nacional. Monasterio de Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas.

in an Almoravid tiraz in Almería, shows striking similarities to the cloister’s vault in terms of the general composition and details [Figure 8.2]. The peacocks’ tails open in a fan-like shape and their feathers’ ‘eyes’ make up the pearl-band circular shape. The large peacocks and the smaller pairs of gazelles and dogs stand on a plinth containing a Kufic text in which the phrase al-baraka al-kåmila (complete blessing) is repeated through mirroring. The naskh script in the medallions presents orthographic peculiarities: connected letters that often do not connect (e.g., the alif connecting with a succeeding låm or qåf), letters crossing each other (the alif of al-yumn resting on the horizontal register of the låm at

considered as opposing to Almoravid epigraphic trends, did not supplant the Kufic. The Almohads stylistically altered the Kufic design by elongating the vertical lines, rounding the horizontal registers below the baseline, terminating letters with a leaf shape, adding a foliated background, as well as introducing the so-called ‘motivo-tipo’ (interlacing of two words by joining their first and last verticals to form a pedimented unit). The Almoravids’ use of the cursive script was less rigorous, and certainly not on coins. See María Antonia Martínez Núñez, ‘Ideología y epigrafía almohades’, in P. Cassier, M. Fierro and L. Molina (eds), Los Almohades: problemas y perspectivas, vol. I (Madrid: CSIC-Casa de Velázquez, 2005), pp. 5–50; María Antonia Martínez Núñez, ‘Epigrafía y propaganda almohades’, Al-Qan†ara 18 (1997): 419–34.

178

razan francis

Figure 8.2  Fragment of silk compound twill with confronted peacocks, from the Chasuble of Saint Exupéry from the Church of St Sernin, Toulouse, possibly made in Almería, Spain, 1100–50. 34 cm × 24 cm. The Victoria and Albert Museum, London. Photo © Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

the end of al-iqbål), or the unusually abstracted small wåw floating decoratively between words. These details have led art historians to deduce that the vaults’ epigraphy is an illegible pseudo-script. A similar naskh rendering of ‘al-yumn wa’l-iqbål’ features in the architecture built under King Mu˙ammad b. Sad b. MardanÈsh (the ruler of sharq, or east of al-Andalus, 542/1147–567/1172), whose palaces were allowed to deteriorate. Fragments of interior stucco decoration

funerary architecture of medieval castile

179

Figure 8.3  Maqbariyya of Maryam bint AbÈ Jafar, 618/1221. White marble. 169 × 20 × 7.50 cm. Museo de Málaga (no. A/CE04957). Photo © Museo de Málaga.

from al-Dar al-Sughra in Murcia (one of Ibn MardanÈsh’s palaces, later converted into the royal monastery of Santa Clara) display the phrase ‘al-yumn wa’l-iqbål’ that once framed arched entryways.8 This type of cursive script appears on earlier and contemporary Fatimid textiles that reached the Iberian Peninsula through trade.9 Comparison of the Kufic inscriptions on the margins of this vault composition with Almohad gravestones (maqbariyya) from Málaga, such as that of Maryam bint AbÈ Jafar from 618/1221,10 reveals great stylistic resemblance: both inscriptions employ elongated verticals with letter endings taking the shape of a leaf with a circular hole, while the horizontal registers curve beyond the baseline [Figure 8.3].11 Such resemblance begins to suggest a relationship between the ­funerary and architectural.

  8 Julio Navarro Palazón and Pedro Jiménez Castillo, ‘Arquitectura Mardanisí’, in Rafael Jesús López Guzmán (ed), Arquitectura del Islam Occidental (Barcelona: Lunwerg, 1995), pp. 117–36.   9 See, for example, the twelfth-century Fatimid woven linen and silk tiraz, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum collection (no. 755-1898). The same phrase, ‘al-yumn wa’l-iqbål’, also rendered in this cursive manner, is woven into the pillow cover from Las Huelgas, retrieved from the tomb of Alfonso VIII’s daughter Leonor of Castile, who died in 1244. See Vestiduras ricas, cat. no. 42, p. 223. 10 Maryam’s tombstone, emerging from Gibralfaro in Málaga, was found cut in half, inserted as steps in the bell tower of the Iglesia de la Victoria. Maqbariyya or mqabariyya is a prismatic stele with triangular section, often placed horizontally on the ground. 11 See Lara Nebreda Martín, ‘La Mqåbriyya Malagueña de Maryam’, Boletín del Archivo Epigráfico (2019): 73–9. Now preserved at the Museo de Málaga (A/CE049573), this funerary mqabriyya was discovered cut in two halves in the Iglesia de la Victoria de Málaga in the beginning of the twentieth century. The reading of the inscription was provided by Ocaña Jimenez, ‘Nuevos datos sobre la mqåbriyya almohade malagueña del año 1221 J.C.’, Al-Andalus 11, no. 1 (1946): 446; M. Acién Almansa and María Antonia Martínez Núñez, Catálogo de las inscripciones árabes del Museo de Málaga (Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura, 1982), p. 22.

180

razan francis

Figure 8.4  Sacristy wooden door, Las Huelgas. Photo: Razan Francis. Patrimonio Nacional. Monasterio de Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas.

In contrast to these vault supplications, which are fairly legible, a miniscule supplication in Kufic of the phrase baraka kåmila (complete blessing) is almost impossible to notice. It is carved on one of the pieces that make up the western wooden door of the sacristy [Figure 8.4], and features similar plasticity of the carved details to the vault’s vegetal motif. To read the inscription properly one should either tilt one’s head to the left, almost upside down, or otherwise, rotate a photograph. Such small inscriptions resisting legibility have been interpreted as manifesting the words’ apotropaic and talismanic attributes, which were oftentimes enhanced by repetition during prayer.12 In the Pasaje and Locutorio bands of Kufic inscriptions, with the supplications al-mulk lillåh; al-shukr lillåh (sovereignty is God’s; thanks be to God), frame the vault’s central rectangular area [Figure 8.5], which exhibits a complex geometricised design of octagonal and star shapes, as well as heraldic castles. In the Locutorio, a surviving fragment on the eastern wall includes the supplications: al-yumn wa’l-salåma wa’l-izz wa’l-karåma (prosperity and safety 12 Tom Nickson, ‘“Sovereignty belongs to God”: Text, Ornament and Magic in Islamic and Christian Seville’, Art History 38, no. 5 (November 2015): 844–5, 853; Venetia Porter, ‘The Use of the Arabic Script in Magic’, in Michael C. A. Macdonald (ed.), The Development of Arabic as a Written Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 131–40; Francesca Leoni, Power and Protection: Islamic Art and the Supernatural (Oxford: Ashmolean Museum, 2016).

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Figure 8.5  Pasaje vault stucco decoration. Photo: Razan Francis. Patrimonio Nacional. Monasterio de Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas.

and glory and dignity). The supplications al-mulk lillåh and ­al-shukr lillåh became associated with two dynasties: the Almohads and the Hafsids. The Almohads increasingly used the supplication al-mulk lillåh; it almost became their motto.13 The orthographic anomaly of the Arabic epigraphy in the Pasaje suggests yet another kind of circulation across media. A rare gold Hafsid dinar, now in the British Museum, demonstrates great stylistic resemblance to the Pasaje inscriptions [Figure 8.6]. The similarity between the rendering of the letters in the Pasaje and the Hafsid dinar is striking in terms of the abstracted style of the vegetal motif (more akin to diacritics), the shallow background and the elongated narrow letters. In 1257, upon declaring himself Caliph in Tunis, al-Mustansir bi llåh introduced ‘al-shukr li’llåh’ as part of the Hafsid official epigraphic repertoire to

13 Al-mulk lillåh often appeared on coins and inscribed in Almohad architectural monuments, alongside al-˙amd lillåh (praise belongs to God) and al-baqå lillåh (permanence belongs to God), as in the bronze doors of the early seventh/thirteenth-century Almohad Pardon Portal of Seville’s Great Mosque (now Cathedral). On the exterior band framing the door we find the inscription al-˙amd lillåh alå nimatih (praise to God for his blessing), al-shukr lillåh, al-izz lillåh. Similar supplications were discovered in Seville’s Almohad palace, which was re-appropriated as the palace of the Castilian king after the conquest, before it was converted into the Convent of Santa Clara. The wall fragment, including al-shukr lillåh and al-mulk lillåh, is virtually identical, in terms of style and method of execution through templates, to that of the Locutorio.

181

182

razan francis

Figure 8.6  Hafsid gold dinar, Bijaia, Algeria, 1257–74. Diameter 29.5 mm. The British Museum © The Trustees of the British Museum.

distinguish his dynasty from the Almohads (this motto was taken up by the Marinids and Nasrids).14 How should we interpret the presence of such supplications in Las Huelgas? Was their integration viewed as appropriate because of their aforementioned neutrality? Or was their presence the product of a mere imitation of stucco decoration carved on the walls of the newly conquered Islamic residences, an imitation that perceived the Arabic words as subsidiary to ornament or merely decorative? After the reconquest of Córdoba (1238) and Seville (1248), and earlier Toledo (1085), the Christian kings moved to reside in the Islamic palaces in those cities. They could experience first-hand AndalusÈ art and Arabic epigraphy in their new dwellings. In what follows, I would like to focus on the Islamic funerary realm to argue that it was a main source on which the Catholic patrons relied in such appropriations. This argument, of course, does not undermine the circulation of artistic knowledge across media or between sacred and religious spaces. I will begin with a literal appropriation – of funerary spolia.

14 This phrase was inscribed on golden dinars, alongside al-mulk li-llåh and al-˙amd li-llåh. See Ibn KhaldËn, Ta’rÈkh Ibn KhaldËn, eds Suheil Zakkår and Khalil Sh˙ada (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 2000), vol. 6, p. 402.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

This examination will also shed light, even if briefly, on Islamic epigraphic trends in al-Andalus, and will help to trace mutations in content that occurred as a result of the use of supplications. Just as Islamic luxury objects made their way to palace treasuries and church reliquaries, and were reused (with little or no change to their appearance), Islamic funerary objects also underwent literal displacement. A great number of examples demonstrate that funerary tomb markers were incorporated as spolia in monuments built under Christian patronage. This incorporation is an excellent proof of interfaith interaction that involved the funerary world; however, it did not always adhere to the original use or meaning of the borrowed element. The case of the Torreón de los Baños de la Cava in Toledo, for example, may indicate a re-appropriation that weakened the ties of the funerary spolia with its cemetery. In fact, it may have been taken from the Islamic cemetery located near Bab al-Saqra and the Roman Circus, in or adjacent to the current site of the Torreón.15 The history of the Torreón (‘small tower’), standing on the banks of the Tagus River on the western stretches of the city, remains elusive, tainted, to this day, by Toledo’s Visigothic past [Figures 8.7–8.8].16 There is no agreement on the time of its construction. The nineteenth-century

15 Burial practices in al-Andalus, to a large extent, followed the Maliki rite. Cemeteries were located outside of the city walls to preserve the city’s hygiene, while royalty were buried in rawdas, or royal cemeteries, located in the precincts of palaces. The deceased were supposed to be buried facing the qibla, lying on the right side. Although Maliki jurists recommended preserving the anonymity of the deceased, most funerary inscriptions of al-Andalus from the late Umayyad period onward included, in addition to Quranic verses, a brief biography revealing the name of the deceased, and the date, place and/or cause of death. See Ana Echevarría, ‘Enterramientos y ritos funerarios Islámicos: De lo andalusí a lo mudéjar a través del caso Toledano’, Studia historica. Historia medieval 38 (2020): 81–112; Antonio de Juan Garcia, Enterramientos musulmanes del circo romano de Toledo (Toledo: Consejería de Educación y Cultura, 1987). 16 José Amador de los Ríos, Toledo pintoresca, ó Descripción de sus mas célebres monumentos (Madrid: Ignacio Boix, 1845), p. 285; Julio Porres Martín-Cleto, Un enigma histórico: El Baño de la Cava (Toledo: Instituto Provincial de Investigaciones y Estudios Toledanos, 1991). According to the legend, King Rodrigo (d. 711), the last Visigothic king, raped Florinda, the daughter of Don Julián, the ruler of Ceuta, whom Rodrigo had sent to fight Muslims in Gibraltar. The tower was part of Rodrigo’s baths that were situated in front of his palace, so that from this high point (mirador) he could watch his lover bathe. Ibn IdhårÈ considers Florinda’s rape the main reason behind the Muslim conquest of al-Andalus, which was facilitated by Julián’s alliance with the Muslims against Rodrigo. Ibn IdhårÈ al-MarråkushÈ, Al-Bayån al-Mughrib, eds Evariste Lévi-Provençal et al. (Beirut: Dar al-Thaqåfa, 1980), vol. 2, p. 7.

183

184

razan francis

Figure 8.7  Torreón de los Baños de la Cava, Toledo. Photo: Razan Francis.

historian and archaeologist, José Amador de los Ríos, proposed that the tower may have served as one of the abutments of an old bridge, destroyed by the flooding of 1203, as indicated by an inscription in

funerary architecture of medieval castile

185

Figure 8.8  Islamic column tombstone (amËd qabr). Torreón de los Baños de la Cava, Toledo. Marble. 38 cm (diameter) × 170 cm (height). Photo: Razan Francis.

186

razan francis

the nearby bridge of San Martín.17 According to this proposal, the Torreón was built not long after the reconquest of Toledo by Castile. On its upper level’s arched entrance, the Torreón incorporates a marble rounded Islamic funerary column (amËd qabr), somewhat similar to Greek or Roman cippi – a shape we find in al-Andalus almost exclusively in the eleventh-century Toledo region. In an Islamic cemetery, these round columns usually stood at one or both ends of the horizontal tomb slab.18 Their unusual shape, which may also be found in ninth-century Qayrawan (Tunisia),19 has been interpreted as an intentional departure from the rectangular tombstone (rujåma, law˙), prevalent under the Umayyads.20 It may be that by this departure, which occurred in the eleventh century, the Berber rulers of Toledo, the Dhu’l-Nunids (BanË DhÈ al-NËn), meant to distinguish themselves from their Umayyad rivals’ visual expressions.21 At the same time, it may be that the Dhu’l-Nunids, who were not native to the city, resorted to this Roman shape to create a historical local lineage within its heritage to assert their legitimacy. What remains of the Kufic inscription is carved inside a rectangular frame (an element reminiscent of the rectangular tombstone). To a great extent, it follows the content of contemporaneous AndalusÈ epigraphic formulas. The inscription begins with a basmala (line 1), followed by a verse from Qurån 35:5 (lines 1–4), which warns against the futility of seeking mundane pleasures: ‘O people, indeed the promise of God is truth, so let not the worldly life delude you and be not deceived about God [by the deceiver]’. In the middle of the fourth line, the inscription starts with ‘Hådhå qabr (this is the tomb of) Hishåm ibn Abd […]’. The following three lines (4–7) are indecipherable, so it is difficult to learn more about the identity

17 José Amador de los Ríos, Toledo pintoresca, p. 285. 18 María Antonia Martínez Núñez, ‘La estela funeraria en el mundo andalusi’, in Carlos de la Casa Martínez (ed), Actas del V Congreso Internacional de Estelas Funerarias. Soria 28 de abril-1 de mayo de 1993 (Soria: Diputación Provincial de Soria, 1994), pp. 422–4. 19 Echevarría, ‘Enterramientos y ritos funerarios Islámicos’, 88; María Antonia Martínez Núñez, ‘Epigrafía funeraria en al-Andalus (siglos IX–XII)’, Mélanges de la Casa de Velázquez 41, no. 1 (2011): 195–6. 20 For epigraphic analyses of caliphal tombstones see María Antonia Martínez Núñez, ‘Estelas funeraria de época califal aparecidas en Orihuela (Alicante)’, Al-Qan†ara 22 (2001): 45–76. Eadem, ‘Estela funeraria de cronología omeya aparecida en Madrid (308.921)’, Al-Qan†ara 36 (2015): 141–63; Carmen Barceló, ‘Epigrafía árabe del emirato (siglo IX). Lápida de Tudela y estela de una omeya’, Arqueología y Territorio Medieval 25 (2018): 7–27. 21 See, for example, the large number of this funerary column type now on display at the Museo de Santa Cruz (Toledo) and the Museo Arqueológico Nacional (Madrid). Martínez Núñez, ‘Epigrafía funeraria’, 181–209.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

of the deceased. The eighth (last) line has almost completely disappeared, only containing the phrase ‘the year eight’; however, based on stylistic similarities of the epigraphy and technique of carving with another funerary column from Toledo made in 458/1066, the same year has been proposed for the Torreón’s column.22 A narrow epigraphic band of a smaller size frames the rectangular epitaph on three sides. It includes the deceased as the voice of the poem. This poem emerges, with a slight variation, from the work of the Sufi AbË Óåmid al-GhazålÈ (d. 505/1111), I˙yå UlËm al-DÈn (The Revival of the Religious Sciences). The deceased addresses the visitors or passersby: ‘O People, I had a hope; its attainment was precluded by death. A man granted work should worship God; I am not alone to be displaced to where you are now looking, neither am I different from the rest of God’s people who make the transition’.23 Inscription in the rectangular frame: 1. ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم ايها النا‬ In the name of God the Compas­ 2. ‫س ان وعد هللا حق فال تغرنكم‬ sionate, the Merciful, O people, 3. ‫الحيات الدنيا وال يغرنكم باهلل‬ indeed the promise of God is 4. ‫ال[غرور ه]ذ قبر هشام بن عبد‬ truth, so let not the worldly life delude you and be not deceived about God [by the deceiver] This is the tomb of Hisham ibn Abd […] 8. [‫سنة ثمان [وخمسين واربع مائة‬

The year eight [and fifty and four hundred]

22 The tomb belongs to A˙mad b.Aßim, and is now on display at the Museo de Santa Cruz in Toledo (inv. 22.367). Elisa Encarnación Gómez Ayllón, ‘Inscripciones árabes de Toledo: Época Islámica’ (PhD dissertation, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2006), pp. 268–71. On the inscriptions see Rodrigo Amador de los Ríos, Memoria acerca de algunas de las inscripciones arábigas de España y Portugal (Madrid: Imprenta de Fortanet, 1883), pp. 231–3. While Hishåm’s tombstone could not be fully identified, a similar funerary cipus, now in Madrid’s National Archeological Museum (inv. 57478), indicates the wazÈr (minister) AbË Umar MËså. 23 AbË Óåmid al-GhazålÈ, I˙yå UlËm al-DÈn, ed. BadawÈ Êabåna (Indonesia, 2008), p. 472. For analysis of the appearance of variations of the poem in other locations (e.g., Qayrawån, Almería), see Carmen Barceló, ‘Poesía y epigrafía. Epitafios islámicos con elegía, desde Suakin a Almería’, Anaquel de Estudios Árabes 11 (2000): 123–44. There are several grammatical mistakes in both the epigraphy of the frame and that in the rectangular area, for example, the omission of an alif in hådhå or rendering al-hayåt with a tå mamdËda instead of marbˆa.

187

188

razan francis

Inscription of the border: Vertical right band: ‫يايها النا[س كان لى امل قص]ر بى عن بلوغه االجل فليتقى ا‬

Horizontal band (top): ‫هلل ربه رجل امكنه فى حياته العمل ما انا‬

Vertical left band: ‫وحدى انتقلت حيث تر وال غير جميع الور هللا ينتقل‬

O People, I had a hope; its attainment was precluded by death. A man granted work should worship God; I am not alone to be displaced to where you are [now] looking, neither am I different from the rest of God’s people who make the transition.

With the dearth of archival material that might indicate the time of the Torreón’s construction, it is difficult to interpret the motives behind the incorporation of the Islamic tomb marker. The idea that it merely served as a construction material may be weakened by the location of the Torreón on what may have been one of the major bridges that granted access to the city, and connected it with one of its major and oldest gates, the nearby Puerta del Cambrón (also known as the ‘Gate of Jews’), which itself is flanked by two similar funerary tombstones.24 If we follow Ríos’s proposition, then we may interpret this inclusion as a sign of dominance in the aftermath of Toledo’s reconquest (the column serving as a war trophy). It may also be that, just as in the case of the Dhu’l-Nunids, the use of the Islamic tombstone in the Torreón at this strategic point was meant to affirm a similar message of legitimacy, and to underscore an uninterrupted rulership in the city. While re-appropriation at the Torreón ignored the spolia’s provenance and original function, the integration of a similar Islamic columnar tombstone in the Church of San Andrés, also in Toledo, indicates knowledge of the earlier Islamic funerary use [Figures 8.9–8.10]. This example shows the emergence of a funerary type that, as we will see in the following examples, gained popularity among the elite members of Toledo’s Mozarabic families. The tomb was discovered in 1912, hidden in the wall underneath a baroque retable (as photographs show, and as reported by the Comisión Provincial de Monumentos Históricos y Artísticos to

24 It is difficult to ascertain the date of construction as the gate underwent many renovations.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Figure 8.9  Tomb of Alfonso Pérez, Church of San Andrés, Toledo. Photo © Renate Takkenberg-Krohn.

189

190

razan francis

Figure 8.10  Islamic column tombstone (amËd qabr) uncovered in 1912 in the Church of San Andrés, Toledo. Marble. 39 cm (diameter) × 205 cm (height). Photo © Renate Takkenberg-Krohn.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

the Academia de la Historia).25 While the funerary arrangement follows Roman arcosolia, its decorative programme is AndalusÈ. The sepulchral area is rectangular, framed by the repeating Latin supplication in cobalt blue that emerges from Psalm 51: Miserere mei Deus, secundum magnam misericordiam tuam (Have mercy on me, O God, according to thy steadfast love). It is decorated with figurative and vegetal stuccowork of vine scrolls and coiling leaves, and is terminated on top by a horizontal stalactite muqarnas frieze. In the recessed arched area a sarcophagus is flanked by two marble columns. The Islamic funerary column stands on the left end of the sarcophagus, following what may have been its original display. To create the desired symmetry, another plain marble column, with no epigraphy, was added on the right end. The incorporation of an Islamic spolium, almost following its original display before its arrival to the church, indicates knowledge of Islamic burial practices. When the tomb was discovered, it was missing its original epitaph. During renovations, an epitaph found in the transept area of the church, dated to 1306, was re-installed above the sarcophagus, as it was believed to have belonged to this tomb.26 Indeed, resemblance to the funerary projects that will be discussed shortly supports this proposition. The funerary ensemble seemingly, or ironically, both celebrates Alfonso Pérez, ‘the famous soldier’ from Toledo (as the epitaph tells us), as well as the Muslim person whose name is carved on the column.27 As in the previous columnar tombstone, the inscription starts with a basmala (line 1) and is dated to 9 February 1001 (lines 5–8). It names the deceased as Mu˙ammad b. Abd Allåh b. Imrån (lines 2–3).28 Rather than ending with a Quranic verse, the last three lines engage the person praying for the deceased: ‘May God have mercy from God [sic] on the one who pleaded for mercy (tara˙˙ama) for the deceased, and said supplication for him (daå lahu), Amen.’ The verb daå (‘said supplication’), as will be shown, is a clear call for one of the most favourable activities during funerals or tomb visits. The epigraphy ends with an abbreviated form of a taßliya (line 11).  1. ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬  2. ‫هذا قبر محمد بن عبد‬

In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful This is the tomb of Abd

25 Francisco Codera y Zaidín, ‘Sepulcro árabe descubierto en Toledo’, Boletín de la Academia de la Historia 62 (1913): 338–41. On the circumstances of this discovery, see María Antonia Martínez Núñez, Epigrafía árabe. Catálogo del Gabinete de Antigüedades. (Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 2008), pp. 244–6. 26 Manuel Castaños y Montijano, ‘Sepulcro mudéjar de San Andrés de Toledo,’ Toledo revista ilustrada de arte 120 (1919), 57. 27 Ibid., 59. 28 Gómez Ayllón, ‘Inscripciones arabes de Toledo,’ pp. 61–9; Évariste LéviProvençal, Inscriptions àrabes d´Espagne, vol. 2 (París-Leiden: Brill, 1931), pl. 52.

191

192

razan francis

 3. ‫هللا بن عمران توفى‬  4. ‫رحمة هللا عليه ورضو‬  5. ‫نه ليلة االحد الثنتى‬  6. ‫عشرة ليلة خلت من‬  7. ‫ربيع االول سنة احدى‬  8. ‫وتسعين وثلث مائة‬  9. ‫فرحم هللا من هللا‬ 10. ‫من ترحم عليه ودع ا‬ 11. ‫له امين وصل هللا على محمد‬

Allåh ibn Imrån [who] died God’s mercy and compassion on him Sunday night, twelfth night of February [of] the year ninety-one and three hundred May God have mercy from God [sic] on the one who pleaded for mercy (tara˙˙ama) for the deceased, and said supplication for him (daå lahu), Amen And peace be upon Mu˙ammad

This plea for God’s mercy clearly echoes that of the Latin inscription. The patron or artist executing this tomb could have chosen to expose the rear, uninscribed part of the column and hide the Arabic inscription against the wall. This would have certainly matched the plain column added on the right side. Exposing the Arabic inscription was therefore intentional. Through this appropriation, the embedded plea for mercy on both the deceased and the viewer of the Islamic tomb became part of the new Christian ensemble. The sepulchral organisation in San Andrés is first seen in the tomb of Fernán Gudiel, the Mozarab alguacil of Toledo [Figure 8.11].29 Located in the chapel of San Pedro in Toledo Cathedral, it is considered the oldest surviving Christian tomb featuring AndalusÈ aesthetics, and stylistically stands out from the rest of the Gothic structure that was built by the Crusader archbishop of Toledo, Rodrigo Jiménez de Rada.30 29 On the tomb, see Tom Nickson, Toledo Cathedral: Building Histories in Medieval Castile (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015), pp. 74; 117–20; Balbina Martínez Caviró, ‘El linaje y las armas del arzobispo toledano Gonzalo Pétrez “Gudiel” (1280–1299)’, Revista Toletum 57 (2010): 131–69; Basilio Pavón Maldonado, Tratado de arquitectura hispanomusulmana, vol. 3 (Madrid: CSIC Press, 1990), pp. 341, 348, 746; Rodrigo Amador de los Ríos, ‘Edificios mudéjares olvidados en Toledo’, Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos IV, no. 3 (1900): 132. 30 The tomb of Gudiel and the ambulatory triforium are considered the only elements in this Gothic cathedral to evoke Islamic architecture. See Henrik Karge, ‘The “Sumptuous Style”: Richly Decorated Gothic Churches in the Reign of Alfonso the Learned’, in Tom Nickson and Nicola Jennings (eds), Gothic Architecture in Spain: Invention and Imitation (London: The Courtauld Institute of Art, 2020), p. 49. While the ambulatory triforium evokes the intertwined screens of lobed arches in the Maqsura area in the Great Mosque of Córdoba, the plasterwork of Gudiel’s tomb recalls Almohad architectures. See Juan Carlos Ruiz Souza, ‘Toledo entre Europa y al‐Andalus en el siglo XIII. Revolución, tradición y asimilación de las formas artísticas en la Corona de Castilla’, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 1, no. 2 (2009): 242–7. For the building of the Toledo Cathedral in the aftermath of the victory of Las Navas de Tolosa, see David Raizman, ‘The Church of Santa Cruz and the Beginnings of Mudejar Architecture in Toledo’, Gesta 38, no. 2 (1999): 128–41.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Figure 8.11  Tomb of Fernán Gudiel (d. 1278), Chapel of San Pedro, Toledo Cathedral. Photo © Oronoz.

193

194

razan francis

The space may have served as the Gudiel family chapel.31 Here, however, the Arabic inscriptions were newly devised instead of being transposed through spolia. The tomb displays geometric carved stucco that recalls Almohad decoration. The epitaph, located above the sarcophagus, shows the year of death as 1278. It enumerates Fernán Gudiel’s various honorable attributes, among which that ‘[h]e honorably served Jesus Christ and Holy Mary and the king, and Toledo by night and day’.32 The horizonal muqarnas frieze situated on top of the rectangular ornamented area of the wall is terminated on both sides by two carved lions. During most of the nineteenth century the Arabic inscriptions that frame the sepulchral area were believed, following José Amador de los Ríos, to be related to the Marian cult. They were translated as ‘A la madre de Dios. A la virgen María’ (To the mother of God, to the Virgin Mary), with no Arabic provided.33 Only in 1900 did José’s son, archaeologist Rodrigo Amador de los Ríos, offer a new reading that revealed the repeated supplication al-yumn wa’l-iqbål. Given that the ‘al-yumn wa’l-iqbål’ occupied the same position as that of Miserere in San Andres, and likewise served as the tombs’ framing motif, can hardly be interpreted as a mere sign of a shared visual culture that flattened meaning. The Christian (Mozarabic) patrons, I argue, were most likely well aware of the meaning and symbolism of Islamic supplications and how they functioned in Islamic settings and in ritual. This sepulchral arrangement of the ‘AndalusÈ arcosolium’ is again repeated in the Convento de la Concepción Francisca in Toledo. The early fourteenth-century tomb of the canon Lupus Fernandi, who belonged to yet another prominent Mozarabic family, is located on the cloister’s eastern arm.34 The most richly ornamented among the cloister’s many tombs, it has not yet received the scholarly attention

31 With the presence of the epitaph of Fernán’s son and his granddaughters María and Uarraca Fernandez in the same space, it may be that this chapel served as a family chapel of sorts. The chapel also contains the medieval epitaph of Pedro Illán (d. 1247). The Illán family was another well-established Mozarabic Toledan family. See Tom Nickson, Toledo Cathedral, p. 118. 32 The epitaph’s inscription and its translation are provided in ibid; Sonia Morales Cano, ‘Imágenes funerarias del Toledo mudéjar’, XI Simposio Internacional de Mudejarismo: Turuel 2008 (2009), 508. Harold G. Jones III, ‘The Epitaph of Fernán Gudiel: An Anomaly of Thirteenth-Century Castilian Metrics’, Hispanic Review 43, no. 2 (1975): 169–80. 33 José Amador de los Ríos, Toledo pintoresca, p. 87. Ríos depended on an earlier translation by León Carbonero y Sol. 34 Ángel González Palencia, Los Mozárabes de Toledo en los siglos XII y XIII, doc. 396 (Madrid: Instituto de Valencia de Don Juan, 1926–30); Teresa Witcombe, ‘Maurice and the Mozarabic Charter: A CrossCultural Transaction in Early Thirteenth-Century Toledo’, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 10, no. 2 (2017): 248.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Figure 8.12  Tomb of Lupus Fernandi (d. 1312), Convento de la Concepción Francisca, Toledo. Photo © Renate Takkenberg-Krohn.

it deserves [Figures 8.12–8.14].35 The Franciscan order was established in the city around 1230, near the land that belonged to the palace of Caliph al-MamËn (later Palacios de Galiana). During the rule of 35 Morales Cano, ‘Imágenes funerarias del Toledo Mudéjar’, 509.

195

196

razan francis

Figure 8.13  Tomb of Lupus Fernandi (d. 1312), Convento de la Concepción Francisca, Toledo. Photo © Renate Takkenberg-Krohn.

Alfonso X, the Franciscans moved from the periphery to the northeast, inside the walled city (today near the Puente de Alcántara).36 Fernandi’s sarcophagus is placed in a recessed arched niche, similar to those of the Church of San Andrés and Toledo Cathedral. An adjacent, taller arch suggests the existence of another tomb; however, modern reform introduced a wall that perpendicularly cut 36 Rodrigo Amador de los Ríos, Monumentos Arquitectónicos de España. Toledo (Madrid: E. Martin y Gamoneda, 1905), pp. 353–77; Balbina Martínez Caviró, Mudéjar toledano. Palacios y conventos (Madrid: Vocal Artes Graficas, 1980), pp. 43–96; Eadem, Conventos de Toledo (Madrid: El Viso, 1990), pp. 256–85; Sonia Morales Cano, ‘Imágenes funerarias del Toledo Mudéjar’, p. 505.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Figure 8.14  Detail. Tomb of Lupus Fernandi (d. 1312), Convento de la Concepción Francisca, Toledo. Photo © Renate Takkenberg-Krohn.

through the arch, destroying its right half. The two tombs present a wide range of carved geometric plasterwork compositions in white and green. The interior of the recessed arched area of Fernandi’s tomb is decorated with a complex sebka pattern. Close to the arch’s

197

198

razan francis

apex, a white marble square epitaph with a gilt Latin inscription on alternating blue and white backgrounds reveals the year of death as 1312. The arch’s intrados are decorated with a geometric stuccowork of octagons and eight-pointed star patterns. The spandrels of the polylobed arch on the exterior wall are richly carved foliated surfaces of curling and twisting leaves. Framing the whole funerary area on top is a horizontal muqarnas frieze. It comprises both plain and ornamented units carved with the word Allåh. Mirrored along the vertical axis, the word creates the shape of a cross. The muqarnas frieze is bordered from above and below by two narrower inscription bands. The upper band displays the repeating phrase al-yumn wa’l-iqbål. The lower band vertically extends downwards on both sides to frame the arch. It then extends horizontally to the adjacent area of the taller sepulchral niche. Carved on a foliated ground, the band contains the repeating Kufic inscription åfiya kåmila shåmila (complete inclusive health). Similar to Gudiel’s tomb in Toledo Cathedral, the muqarnas frieze is flanked on both ends by projecting lions (more akin to cats), standing frontally and carved in bas-relief. Each is placed between two rectangular imposts above and below that carry the naskh inscriptions al-yumn al-dåim al-izz al-qåim (‫اليمن الدايم العز القايم‬, perpetual prosperity permanent glory).37 The lion motif may have survived from Roman funerary sarcophagi. In the Castilian context, sarcophagi were often placed in recessed arched niches, and often rested on lion supports.38 Here the lions no longer ‘carry’ the sarcophagus but are set higher to become part of the decorative ensemble. Moving to the adjacent taller arch on the right, it is compositionally almost identical to Fernandi’s tomb. The muqarnas frieze is again bordered from above and below by epigraphic bands, and is flanked by two lions, standing frontally. The upper cursive inscription repeats the phrase al-izz lillåh al-baqå lillåh (‫العز هلل البقاء هلل‬, glory is God’s, permanence belongs to God), while the lower inscription contains the repeating Kufic inscription åfiya kåmila (­complete health). On the lower register of the muqarnas frieze, small mixtilinear arches are flanked by rectangular frames, and include the alternating cursive inscriptions, al-izz lillåh (‫ العز هلل‬glory is God’s) and al-baqå lillåh (‫  البقاء هلل‬permanence belongs to God); the latter is a consolatory phrase that is, to this day, repeated at funerals. It is clear that supplications, woven into the surfaces of these examples, were found particularly suited for the occasion. 37 The hamza in both ‘al-dåim’ and ‘al-qåim’ was replaced by the letter yå. 38 See, for example, the founders’ sarcophagus in Las Huelgas; the sarcophagus of Fernando de la Cerda in the nave del Evangelio (previously resting on two lions in the arcosolium); and the sepulchre of Berenguela in the central nave.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

As mentioned earlier, in order to depart from the problematic polarised categories ‘Christian’ or ‘Muslim’ in the study of the visual and material culture of Iberia, art historians have advanced an alternative paradigm of a shared aesthetic culture. In this view, the presence of AndalusÈ decorative elements and Arabic epigraphy in Christian (and Jewish) institutions should no longer be perceived as having a religious meaning, but one that signalled a well-established Iberian artistic tradition.39 The presence of the repeated phrase al-yumn wa’liqbål, alongside AndalusÈ painted decoration in the Church of San Román in Toledo (1221), for example, has been analysed as representing the indigenous Mozarabs of Toledo, without necessarily being tied to Islam. Indeed, in thirteenth-century Toledo, Arabic was the everyday language of the Christian Mozarabic community, as well as of Muslims and Jews.40 It is very likely, however, that the Mozarabic high-ranking officials, as well as elite members of the royal circle, who were versed in Arabic, were also informed about Islamic funerary practices. Therefore, the presence of supplications was not merely a mimetic act, but reflected an intentionality based on knowledge of context. As a consequence, the supplication al-yumn wa’l-iqbål, framing the nave’s windows in San Román, could be viewed, I argue, as strongly linked to the presence of the monumental apocalyptic fresco scenes decorating the nave; to the tomb of Toledo’s Mozarabic mayor – Esteban Illán (d. 1208) – in the southern aisle; and to the series of tombstones tiling the church’s transept area. Supplications became intrinsic to Islamic funerary practices to the extent that they became part of funerary epigraphy. The guidelines for burial rituals in al-Andalus, followed during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, were based on the Maliki eschatological writing of Ibn AbÈ Zayd al-QayrawånÈ (d. 386/996) and Ibn Jallåb al-BaßrÈ (d. 378/988).41 In his al-Risåla al-Fiqhiyya, al-QayrawånÈ 39 See for example, Jerrilynn D. Dodds, ‘Mudejar Tradition and the Synagogues of Medieval Spain: Cultural Identity and Cultural Hegemony’, in Vivian B. Mann, Thomas F. Glick and Jerrilynn D. Dodds (eds), Convivencia: Jews, Muslims, and Christians in Medieval Spain (New York: George Braziller, 1992), pp. 112–31; Tom Nickson, Toledo Cathedral, p. 118. On the wider circulation of artistic motifs, see Oleg Grabar, ‘The Shared Culture of Objects’, in Henry Maguire (ed.), Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204 (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1997), pp. 115–30; Eva Hoffman, ‘Pathways of Portability: Islamic and Christian Interchange from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century’, Art History 24 (2001): 17–50. 40 Jerrilynn D. Dodds, ‘Rodrigo, Reconquest, and Assimilation: Some Preliminary Thoughts about San Román’, in Colum Hourihane (ed.), Spanish Medieval Art: Recent Studies (Princeton: Department of Art and Archaeology, 2007), pp. 215–44 (esp. 242). 41 Ana Echevarria, ‘Islamic confraternities and funerary practices: Hallmarks of Mudejar identity in the Iberian Peninsula?’, Al-Masaq: Islam and the Medieval Mediterranean 25, no. 3 (2013): 353–4.

199

200

razan francis

briefly addresses prayer over the dead during the burial ritual. His account mainly focuses on the vitality of supplications. In the chapter ‘What is Said of Supplications to the Dead’ (må yuqålu fÈ’l-duå ­lil-mayyit), al-QayrawånÈ states that ‘[supplications] said on the dead are not restricted [by a formula] and are wide in scope’ (wa-yuqålu fÈ’l-mayyit shay ghayr ma˙dËd, wa-dhålika kulluhu wåsi).42 This statement allowed a wide range of options open to improvisation, and may explain, I suggest, the broad spectrum of supplications used and the lack of uniformity among funerary inscriptions during this time.43 Ibn Jallåb al-BaßrÈ maintains in a chapter concerning burial practices, ‘Kitåb al-Janåiz’ (Book of Funerals), that the prayer on the dead is obligatory (salå wåjiba), except during sunrise and sunset, and should only include takbÈr (four times) and taslÈm (similar to all prayers). No reading is allowed during prayer, but only praising God, prayer to his messenger and supplications to the dead with what may be attainable (må tayassar).44 Earnest efforts should be made for the dead in supplication (wa-yujtahad lahu fÈ al-duå).45 How then does the presence of supplications in these Christian projects relate to the Islamic funerary space? Most tombstones that have been excavated from Spain’s Islamic cemeteries and that are now dispersed in archaeological museums include epigraphic contents that are similar to those inscribed on the columnar tombstones from Toledo. They often incorporate Quranic phrases and reveal the name of the deceased, the date of death and sometimes the circumstances of the death. They may also include poetry that contemplates the theme of death. Even when only modest financial means were available or when carving skills were lacking, as the so-called ‘graffiti tombstones’ show, providing such a narrative was vital.46 Of course, it is needless to mention the sizable and literarily elaborate tombstones of the Nasrid kings that constitute a culmination of such epigraphic tradition, where the panegyric probably compensated for their waning power after the fall of Córdoba and Seville to Castile in the mid-thirteenth century. It is curious, then, that in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries we encounter in al-Andalus a group 42 ‫ وذلك كله واسع‬،‫ويقال في الميت غير شيء محدود‬. 43 Ibn AbÈ Zayd al-QayrawånÈ, Risålat Ibn AbÈ Zayd al-QayrawånÈ, ed. A˙mad Mustafå Kåmel al-Êah†awi (Cairo: Dår al-Fa∂Èla, 2005), pp. 78–80. 44 The intended meaning of ‘attainable’ is the repertoire of supplications acquired by the tomb visitor through books or oral recitations. 45 Abu al-Qåsim Ubayd Allåh Ibn al-Jallåb al-BaßrÈ, Kitab al-TafrÈ fi al-Fiqh, ed. Husayn Bin Sålom al-Dahmåni (Beirut: Dår al-Gharb ­al-IslåmÈ, 1987), vol. 1, pp. 367–74. 46 See Barceló’s account of tombstones excavated from Guardamar (Spain) and Arrifana (Portugal). Carmen Barceló, ‘Los escritos árabes de la rábita de Guardamar’, in Rafael Azuar Ruiz (ed.), Fouilles de la Rábita de Guardamar. El ribat califal. Excavaciones e investigaciones (1984–1992) (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez, 2004), pp. 131–45 (esp. pp. 140–1).

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Figure 8.15  Tombstone fragments with the phrase ‘al-yumn wa’l-iqbal’, Alcazaba Málaga, mid-thirteenth or fourteenth centuries. Glazed ceramic. Museo de Málaga (no. A/CE08808, A/CE08827). Photo © Museo de Málaga.

of tombstones that markedly departs from this mainstream funerary epigraphic tradition. Dispensing with such lengthy narrative, they only include supplications similar to those carved in Burgos’s and Toledo’s churches and monasteries. As such, the tombstones clearly echoed the primacy of adiya in the aural space of Islamic cemeteries. Most notable among these examples are fragments of glazed ceramic tombstones that have emerged from Islamic cemeteries in southern al-Andalus (e.g., Granada, Ronda, Málaga and Algeciras). Dated to the thirteenth or fourteenth centuries, fragments emerging from the Alcazaba in Málaga feature supplications in green letters on a white background [Figure 8.15]. They include supplications that almost duplicate those in the examples analysed in this article, such as al-ghib†a al-muttaßila (continuous joy), al-yumn wa’l-iqbål (prosperity and good fortune), al-yumn al-dåim wa’l-izz al-qåim (everlasting prosperity and ever-present glory), baraka […] (blessing […]), ni ma […] (benefaction […]), al-mulk lillåh (sovereignty to God), and al-baqå lillåh (permanence belongs to God).47 The most curious 47 Manuel Pedro Acien Almansa and María Antonia Martínez Núñez, Catalogo de las inscripciones arabes del museo de Málaga (Madrid:

201

202

razan francis

Figure 8.16  ‘Ears tombstone’ from Granada or Málaga. Glazed ceramic. Instituto Valencia de Don Juan (no. 3913), Madrid. Photo © Rodrigo Roé.

Ministerio de Cultura, 1982), pp. 55–9. Martínez Núñez reports another fragment of a gravestone, glazed in lustre green, from Almohad Málaga that includes an engraved supplication, ‘al-baraka min Allåh, al-ghib†a almuttasila min Allåh’ (‘blessing from God and continuous joy from God’). Martínez Núñez, ‘La estela funeraria en el mundo andalusi’, pp. 437–8. On stamped and glazed tombstones from the Algeciras region, see Antonio Torremocha Silva, ‘La cerámica musulmana estampillada de los siglos XIII y XIV hallada en Algeciras’, Revista EPCCM 17 (2015): 349–402.

funerary architecture of medieval castile

group of tombstones, also made of glazed terracotta, is the so-called ‘ears tombstones’ (estela funeraria ‘de orejas’).48 They acquired their curious name because of their unusual shape that comprises a rectangular lower part, on top of which sits a rounded head with two side protrusions resembling human ears [Figure 8.16].49 A tombstone of this type, now exhibited in the Instituto Valencia de Don Juan (Madrid), may have originated either from Málaga or Granada. It features in a series of horizontal lines the repeating naskh phrase al-åfiyya (good health).50 This captures in a single word the longer supplication from the ˙adÈth Allahummå innÈ asaluka al-afw wa’låfiya fÈ al-dunyå wa’l-akhira (I ask you, God, for forgiveness and good health in life and death).51 It is the blurred boundary between life and death that also allowed for the al-åfiya to exist in both worlds. The ears tombstones indicate an even earlier funerary exchange among Muslims and Christians. They clearly emulate an abstracted form of a tombstone type that shares the visual characteristics of mihrab plaques (or ‘mihrab images’). The marble tombstone of a princess from twelfth-century Córdoba, with the name Badr, now displayed in the Museum of Málaga, follows this type [Figure 8.17]. It incorporates a depiction of a horseshoe arch framed by an alfiz, resting on two columns. The interior of the arched area is carved with a basmala, a taßliya, the name of the deceased, and the year of death (496/1103).52 Just as AndalusÈ luxury objects included their maker, this tombstone was also signed by its artist. The stone is carved in deep relief. The arch’s spandrels are adorned by two scallops, while the

48 In some cases these ears tombstones display on one side supplications and, on the reverse side, a painted geometric decoration. 49 Martínez Núñez, ‘La estela funeraria en el mundo andalusi’, pp. 422, 440–4; Balbina Martínez Caviró, Cerámica hispanomusulmana: Andalusí y mudéjar (Madrid: El Viso, 1991), p. 123; Leopoldo Torres Balbás, ‘Cementerios hispanomusulmanes’, Al-Andalus: Revista de las Escuelas de Estudios Árabes de Madrid y Granada XXII (1957): 140. Lara Nebreda Martín, ‘El legado andalusí de Guillermo de Osma en el Museo Arqueológico Nacional: relaciones y similitudes con el Instituto de Valencia de Don Juan’, Boletín del Museo Arqueológico Nacional 38 (2019): 120–1. 50 Manuel Gómez-Moreno, Cerámica medieval española: cursillo de ocho conferencias (Barcelona: Fidel Giró, 1924), p. 46; Manuel Pedro Acién Almansa, ‘Estelas cerámicas epigrafiadas en la Alcazaba de Málaga’, Baetica: Estudios de Arte, Geografía e Historia, vol. 1 (1978): 272–8 (esp. 276); Balbina Martínez Caviró, Cerámica hispanomusulmana, p. 123. 51 ‫اللَّ ُه َّم إِ ِّني أَسْ أَلُكَ ْالعَ ْف َو َو ْالعَ ا ِف َي َة فِي ال ُّد ْنيَا َو ْاآْلخِرَ ِة‬. 52 The inscription also states that Badr was the daughter of the amir Abu’l Hasan al-Sinhåji, who may have belonged, as historians propose, to a family involved in military affairs.

203

204

razan francis

Figure 8.17  Visigothic plaque-niches, fifth–seventh century ad, Toledo. Museo de la Iglesia de San Román, Toledo. Photo: Razan Francis.

two columns project almost freestanding, on top of which two imposts reveal the name of the carver, naqsh al-Ayyad (carving by al-Ayyad). In the Iberian context, these mihrab-like tombstones probably imitated Visigothic liturgical elements, such as the marble plaque-niches that were often placed in the church’s

funerary architecture of medieval castile

205

Figure 8.18  Tombstone of Princess Badr, Córdoba, 496/1103. White marble. Museo de Málaga (no. A/CE07999). Photo © Museo de Málaga.

altar area.53 Comparison of Badr’s tombstone with one such plaque-niche (dated between the fifth and seventh centuries,

53 See Rafael Barroso Cabrera and Jorge Morin de Pablos, ‘Materiales Visigodos de la excavación de San Pedro Martir (Toledo)’, Cuadernos

206

razan francis

Toledo) shows a similar composition [Figure 8.18].54 The two circles on the arch’s spandrels (later to be abstracted into ears) of the Visigothic plaque-niche resemble the two scallops in Badr’s tombstone; the cross located underneath the arch and the hanging alpha and omega letters were replaced by Arabic epigraphy. Curiously, this plaque-niche was found embedded in the exterior façade of the bell tower of the Church of San Andrés, where a replica is now placed in its stead. The resemblance between this Visigothic plaque-niche and mihrabs from the eastern Mediterranean or Iran betrays a common Roman root or a much earlier Roman-Sasanian exchange.55 Islamic funerary art participated in a dynamic interfaith exchange. It was shaped by eschatological writings and ritual practices, as well as informed by the art and architecture produced outside the cemetery’s boundaries, both in Iberia and across the Mediterranean. The many funerary objects that were taken (or looted) from Islamic cemeteries to become part of a Christian setting testify to this boundary crossing and artistic interaction. While such transitions into new sacred or profane environments of Christian patronage – either as spolia carrying Arabic epigraphy or as newly carved supplications in stucco – might be interpreted as a sign of victory and dominance or as symptomatic of a shared elite culture, consideration of the specificities of the Islamic funerary context is vital. The incorporation of Islamic supplications in Christian funerary projects in Toledo and Burgos, therefore, highlights the interplay of the physical and aural in Islamic cemeteries, and demonstrates knowledge of this world on the part of Christian patrons. Just as these supplications, now pointing towards the Christian patrons, indicate a shared aesthetic setting, they also reflect the centrality of adiya in Islamic funerary rituals.



de Prehistoria y Arqueología de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (CuPAUAM) 22 (1995): 199–223; Rafael Barroso Cabrera and Jorge Morin de Pablos, ‘La organización del santuario en las iglesias hispánicas de los siglos VI–VII (I): el problema de los nichos y placas-nicho visigodos’, Anuario del Departamendo de Historia y Teoría del Arte (U.A.M) XI (1999): 9–27; Jorge Morín de Pablos, Estudio HistóricoArqueológico de los Nichos y Placas-Nicho de Época Visigoda en la Península Ibérica: origen, funcionalidad e iconografía (Madrid: Audema, 2014). 54 This plaque was carved out of a Roman column, as evidenced by the concave surface of its reverse side. Ibid., p. 41. 55 See, for example, the twelfth-century mihrab plaque of Fatima KhatËn (Iran, now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, NY, Macy Fund 31.50.1).

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Bibliography Acien Almansa, Manuel and Manuel Pedro, ‘Estelas cerámicas epigrafiadas en la Alcazaba de Málaga’, Baetica: Estudios de Arte, Geografía e Historia, vol. 1 (1978): 272–8. Acien Almansa, Manuel and María Antonia Martínez Núñez, Catálogo de las inscripciones árabes del Museo de Málaga (Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura, 1982). Amador de los Ríos, José, Toledo pintoresca, ó Descripción de sus mas célebres monumentos (Madrid: Ignacio Boix, 1845). Amador de los Ríos, Rodrigo, Memoria acerca de algunas de las inscripciones arábigas de España y Portugal (Madrid: Imprenta de Fortanet, 1883). Amador de los Ríos, Rodrigo, ‘Edificios mudéjares olvidados en Toledo’, Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos IV, no. 3 (1900): 129–92. Amador de los Ríos, Rodrigo, Monumentos Arquitectónicos de España. Toledo (Madrid: E. Martin y Gamoneda, 1905). Barceló, Carmen, ‘Poesía y epigrafía. Epitafios islámicos con elegía, desde Suakin a Almería’, Anaquel de Estudios Árabes 11 (2000): 127–33. Barceló, Carmen, ‘Los escritos árabes de la rábita de Guardamar’, in Rafael Azuar Ruiz (ed.), Fouilles de la Rábita de Guardamar. El ribat califal. Excavaciones e investigaciones (1984–1992) (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez, 2004), pp. 131–45. Barceló, Carmen, ‘Epigrafía árabe del emirato (siglo IX). Lápida de Tudela y estela de una omeya’, Arqueología y Territorio Medieval 25 (2018): 7–27. Barroso Cabrera, Rafael and Jorge Morin de Pablos, ‘Materiales Visigodos de la excavación de San Pedro Martir (Toledo)’, Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (CuPAUAM) 22 (1995): 199–223. Barroso Cabrera, Rafael and Jorge Morin de Pablos, ‘La organización del santuario en las iglesias hispánicas de los siglos VI–VII (I): el problema de los nichos y placas-nicho visigodos’, Anuario del Departamento de Historia y Teoría del Arte (U.A.M) XI (1999): 9–27. al-BaßrÈ, Abu al-Qåsim Ubayd Allåh Ibn al-Jallåb, Kitab al-TafrÈ fÈ al-Fiqh, ed. Husayn b. Sålim al-Dahmåni (Beirut: Dår al-Gharb al-IslåmÈ, 1987). Blessing, Patricia, ‘Weaving on the Wall: Architecture and Textiles in the Monastery of Las Huelgas in Burgos’, Studies in Iconography 40 (2019): 137–182. Carrero Santamaría, Eduardo, ‘The creation and use of space in the Abbey of Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas, Burgos: Architecture, Liturgy, and Paraliturgy in a Female Cistercian Monastery’, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 6, no. 2 (2014): 169–91. Castaños y Montijano, Manuel, ‘Sepulcro mudéjar de San Andrés de Toledo’, Toledo revista ilustrada de arte 120 (1919). Codera y Zaidín, Francisco, ‘Sepulcro árabe descubierto en Toledo’, Boletín de la Academia de la Historia 62 (1913): 338–41. De Juan Garcia, Antonio, Enterramientos musulmanes del circo romano de Toledo (Toledo: Consejería de Educación y Cultura, 1987). D’Emilio, James, ‘The Royal Convent of Las Huelgas: Dynastic Politics, Religious Reform and Artistic Change in Medieval Castile’, ed. Meredith Parsons Lillich, Studies in Cistercian Art and Architecture: Cistercian Nuns and Their World 6 (2005): 191–282.

207

208

razan francis

Dodds, Jerrilynn D., ‘Rodrigo, Reconquest, and Assimilation: Some Preliminary Thoughts about San Román’, in Colum Hourihane (ed.), Spanish Medieval Art: Recent Studies (Princeton: Department of Art and Archaeology, 2007), pp. 215–44. Dodds, Jerrilynn D., ‘Mudejar Tradition and the Synagogues of Medieval Spain: Cultural Identity and Cultural Hegemony’, in Vivian B. Mann, Thomas F. Glick and Jerrilynn D. Dodds (eds), Convivencia: Jews, Muslims, and Christians in Medieval Spain (New York: George Braziller, 1992), pp. 112–31. Echevarria, Ana, ‘Islamic confraternities and funerary practices: Hallmarks of Mudejar identity in the Iberian Peninsula?’, Al-Masaq: Islam and the Medieval Mediterranean 25, no. 3 (2013): 345–68. Echevarría, Ana, ‘Enterramientos y ritos funerarios Islámicos: De lo andalusí a lo mudéjar a través del caso Toledano’, Studia historica. Historia medieval 38 (2020): 81–112. Feliciano, María Judith, ‘Muslim Shrouds for Christian Kings? A Reassessment of Andalusi Textiles in Thirteenth-Century Castilian Life and Ritual’, in Cynthia Robinson and Leyla Rouhi (eds), Under the Influence: Questioning the Comparative in Medieval Castile (Leiden: Brill, 2006), pp. 101–31. al-GhazålÈ, AbË Håmid, I˙yå UlËm al-DÈn, ed. BadawÈ Êabåna (Indonesia, 2008). Gómez Ayllón, Elisa Encarnación, ‘Inscripciones arabes de Toledo: Época Islámica’ (PhD dissertation, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2006). Gómez-Moreno, Manuel, Cerámica medieval española: cursillo de ocho conferencias (Barcelona: Fidel Giró, 1924). Gómez-Moreno, Manuel, El Panteón Real de Las Huelgas de Burgos (Madrid: CSIC, 1946). González Palencia, Ángel, Los Mozárabes de Toledo en los siglos XII y XIII, Doc. 396 (Madrid: Instituto de Valencia de Don Juan, 1926–30). Grabar, Oleg, ‘The Shared Culture of Objects’, in Henry Maguire (ed.), Byzantine Court Culture from 829 to 1204 (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1997), pp. 115–30. Herrero Carretero, Concha, Museo de Telas Medievales: Monasterio de Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas (Madrid: Patrimonio Nacional, 1988). Hoffman, Eva, ‘Pathways of Portability: Islamic and Christian Interchange from the Tenth to the Twelfth Century’, Art History 24 (2001): 17–50. Ibn IdhårÈ al-MarråkushÈ, Al-Bayån al-Mughrib, eds Evariste Lévi-Provençal et al. (Beirut: Dår al-Thaqåfa, 1980). Ibn KhaldËn, TarÈkh Ibn KhaldËn, eds Suhayl Zakkår and KhalÈl Sh˙ada (Beirut: Dår al-Fikr, 2000). Jones III, Harold G., ‘The Epitaph of Fernán Gudiel: An Anomaly of Thirteenth-Century Castilian Metrics’, Hispanic Review 43, no. 2 (1975): 169–80. Karge, Henrik, ‘The “Sumptuous Style”: Richly Decorated Gothic Churches in the Reign of Alfonso the Learned’, in Tom Nickson and Nicola Jennings (eds), Gothic Architecture in Spain: Invention and Imitation (London: The Courtauld Institute of Art, 2020), pp. 37–56. Leoni, Francesca, et al., Power and Protection: Islamic Art and the Supernatural (Oxford: Ashmolean Museum, 2016). Lévi-Provençal, Évariste, Inscriptions àrabes d´Espagne, vol. 2 (París and Leiden: Brill, 1931).

funerary architecture of medieval castile

Al-MaqqarÈ al-TilimsanÈ, A˙mad Ibn Mu˙ammad, Naf˙ al-ÊÈb min Ghußn al-Andalus al-Ra†Èb wa-Dhikr WazÈrihå Lisån al-DÈn Ibn al-Kha†Èb, eds Maryam ÊawÈl and Yousef ÊawÈl (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-ilmiyya, 2011). Martín-Cleto, Julio Porres, Un enigma histórico: el Baño de la Cava (Toledo: Instituto Provincial de Investigaciones y Estudios Toledanos, 1991). Martínez Caviró, Balbina, Cerámica hispanomusulmana: Andalusí y mudéjar (Madrid: El Viso, 1991). Martínez Caviró, Balbina, Mudéjar toledano. Palacios y conventos (Madrid: Vocal Artes Graficas, 1980). Martínez Caviró, Balbina, Conventos de Toledo (Madrid: El Viso, 1990). Martínez Caviró, Balbina, ‘El linaje y las armas del arzobispo toledano Gonzalo Pétrez “Gudiel” (1280–1299)’, Revista Toletum 57 (2010): 131–69. Martínez Núñez, María Antonia, ‘La estela funeraria en el mundo andalusi’, in Carlos de la Casa Martínez (ed.), Actas del V Congreso Internacional de Estelas Funerarias. Soria 28 de abril-1 de mayo de 1993 (Soria: Diputación Provincial de Soria, 1994), pp. 419–44. Martínez Núñez, María Antonia, ‘Epigrafía y propaganda almohades’, Al-Qan†ara 18 (1997): 419–34. Martínez Núñez, María Antonia, ‘Ideología y epigrafía almohades’, in P. Cassier, M. Fierro and L. Molina (eds), Los Almohades: problemas y perspectivas, vol. I (Madrid: CSIC-Casa de Velázquez, 2005), pp. 5–50. Martínez Núñez, María Antonia, Epigrafía árabe. Catálogo del Gabinete de Antigüedades (Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 2008). Martínez Núñez, María Antonia, ‘Epigrafía funeraria en al-Andalus (siglos IX–XII)’, Mélanges de la Casa de Velázquez 41, no. 1 (2011): 181–209. Martínez Núñez, María Antonia, ‘Estela funeraria de cronología omeya aparecida en Madrid (308.921)’, Al-Qan†ara 36 (2015): 141–63. Morales, Cano Sonia, ‘Imágenes funerarias del Toledo mudéjar’, XI Simposio Internacional de Mudejarismo: Turuel 2008 (2009): 505–14. Morín de Pablos, Jorge, Estudio Histórico-Arqueológico de los Nichos y Placas-Nicho de Época Visigoda en la Península Ibérica: origen, funcionalidad e iconografía (Madrid: Audema, 2014). Navarro Palazón, Julio and Pedro Jiménez Castillo, ‘Arquitectura Mardanisí’, in Rafael Jesús López Guzmán (ed.), Arquitectura del Islam Occidental (Barcelona: Lunwerg, 1995), pp. 117–36. Nebreda Martín, Lara, ‘El legado andalusí de Guillermo de Osma en el Museo Arqueológico Nacional: relaciones y similitudes con el Instituto de Valencia de Don Juan’, Boletín del Museo Arqueológico Nacional 38 (2019): 117–32. Nebreda Martín, Lara, ‘La Mqåbriyya Malagueña de Maryam’, Boletín del Archivo Epigráfico (Madrid, 2019): 73–9. Nickson, Tom, ‘“Sovereignty belongs to God”: Text, Ornament and Magic in Islamic and Christian Seville’, Art History 38, no. 5 (November 2015): 838–61. Nickson, Tom, Toledo Cathedral: Building Histories in Medieval Castile (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015). Ocaña Jimenez, Manuel, ‘Nuevos datos sobre la mqåbriyya almohade malagueña del año 1221 J.C.’, Al-Andalus 11, no. 1 (1946): 224–30. Ocaña Jimenez, Manuel, ‘Panorámica sobre el arte almohade en España’, Cuadernos de la Alhambra 26 (1990): 91–111. Pavón Maldonado, Basilio, Tratado de arquitectura hispanomusulmana, vol. 3 (Madrid: CSIC Press, 1990).

209

210

razan francis

Porter, Venetia, ‘The use of the Arabic script in magic’, in Michael C. A. Macdonald (ed.), The Development of Arabic as a Written Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 131–40. al-QayrawånÈ, Ibn AbÈ Zayd, Al-Risåla al-Fiqhiyya, ed. A˙mad Mustafå Kåmil al-Êah†åwi (Cairo: Dår al-Fa∂Èla, 2005). Raizman, David, ‘The Church of Santa Cruz and the Beginnings of Mudejar Architecture in Toledo’, Gesta 38, no. 2 (1999): 128–41. Ruiz Souza, Juan Carlos and Gema Palomo Ferández, ‘Nueva hipótesis sobre las Huelgas de Burgos: escenografía funeraria de Alfonso X para un proyecto inacabado de Alfonso VIII y Leonor Plantagenêt’, Goya: Revista de arte 316–317 (2007): 21–44. Ruiz Souza, Juan Carlos and Gema Palomo Ferández, ‘Toledo entre Europa y al‐Andalus en el siglo XIII. Revolución, tradición y asimilación de las formas artísticas en la Corona de Castilla’, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 1, no. 2 (2009): 233–71. Sánchez, Ameijeiras Rocío, ‘El “çementerio real” de Alfonso VIII en Las Huelgas de Burgos’, Ciencias sociais e humanidades 10 (1998): 77–109. Thompson, Elizabeth, Colonial Citizens: Republican Rights, Paternal Privilege, and Gender in French Syria and Lebanon (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000). Torremocha Silva, Antonio, ‘La cerámica musulmana estampillada de los siglos XIII y XIV hallada en Algeciras’, Revista EPCCM 17 (2015): 349–402. Torres Balbás, Leopoldo, ‘Paseos por la Alhambra: Una necrópoli nazarí: la Rauda’, Archivo Español de Arte y Arqueología 6 (1926): 13–42. Torres Balbás, Leopoldo, ‘Cementerios hispanomusulmanes’, Al-Andalus: Revista de las Escuelas de Estudios Árabes de Madrid y Granada XXII (1957): 144–207. Witcombe, Teresa, ‘Maurice and the Mozarabic Charter: A Cross-Cultural Transaction in Early Thirteenth-Century Toledo’, Journal of Medieval Iberian Studies 10, no. 2 (2017): 234–56. Yarza Luaces, Joaquín, ‘Monasterio y palacio del rey’, in Joaquín Yarza Luaces (ed.), Vestiduras ricas: El monasterio de las Huelgas y su época (1170–1340) (exh. cat.) (Madrid: Patrimonio Nacional, 2005), pp. 15–34.

CHAPTER NINE

The Shaykh and the Amir: Reflections on the non-Quranic Epigraphic Programme in the Buildings of Shaykhu¯ al-Umarı¯ al-Na¯s·irı¯ Noha Abou-Khatwa

Many of the monuments in Cairo reveal the stories of the personas involved, which help us understand and shed light on their raison d’être. One is always fortunate when the primary sources and the inscriptions on the walls of these edifices harmoniously weave together accounts of such individuals. With its plethora of chronicles and biographical dictionaries, no era in Egyptian history is better equipped than that of the Mamluks to offer this melodious interplay between sources and epigraphic programmes. This is crucial for several disciplines, art history, history and historiography, textual studies and Islamic studies being chief among them. They can help answer questions relating to ownership, agency, commemoration and intention. An example of such an epigraphic programme from the Mamluk period, which sheds light on the individuals and its history, is the one amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ (d. 758/1357) ordered on his buildings in Cairo: the mosque-madrasa (built in 750/1349), the sabÈl (built in 755/1354), and especially his khånqåh (built in 756/1355). This chapter examines the employment of hadith to adorn, commemorate and provide a raison d’être for construction, and the unique usage of admonitions and Sufi texts painted below the ceiling of the qibla area in the khånqåh, tracing their provenance. My analysis also considers the ostensible involvement of both the patron of the buildings, amir ShaykhË al-NåßirÈ, and the shaykh and great mu˙addith Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ, the nåΩir of the waqf, in the choice of these inscriptions. Both these men had agency and their connection showcases the nuanced relationship between the Mamluk ruling class and the ulema.

212

noha abou-khatwa

Who was amir Shaykhu¯ b. Abdalla¯ h al-Umarı¯ al-Na¯ s· irı¯ ? The chronicles of the period are replete with data relating to ShaykhË; the last section of the second volume of al-MaqrÈzÈ’s alSulËk is almost entirely dedicated to events relating to the amir and so they detail the trajectory of his career. To be highlighted are events relating to his position in the state and anecdotes describing him as an advocate of hadith and Sufism. As a young Turk, probably Qipchaq – turkÈ al-jins – he started his career when he was sold by Khawåja Umar, hence his nisba al-UmarÈ, to Sultan al-Nåßir Mu˙ammad b. QalåwËn (r. 693–4/1293–4, 698–708/1299–1309 and 709–41/1301–41). He became one of the mamålÈk al-sultåniyya close to the sultan and was raised to higher ranks after the death of al-Nåßir, especially under Sultan al-MuΩaffar ÓåjjÈ (r. 747–8/1346–7), reaching utmost power during Sultan Óasan’s second reign (r. 748–52/1347–51 and 755–62/1354–61). He was the first to assume the title amÈr kabÈr, a position of the greatest importance in subsequent Mamluk history.1 Under Sultan Óasan’s first reign, he was one of the members of the shËrå council in 748/1347.2 His abuse of power led to his arrest by the sultan in 751/1350 whereupon he was sent to prison in Alexandria, to be released only when Sultan Óasan was dethroned and Sultan al-Íåli˙ Íåli˙ (r. 752–5/1351–4) enthroned in 752/1351.3 Under this sultan in 754/1353, ShaykhË was instrumental in curbing the nuisance of the Bedouin tribes in Upper Egypt by fighting them relentlessly.4 Notwithstanding their history, ShaykhË was one of the amirs responsible for reinstating Sultan Óasan on the throne once again and deposing Sultan al-Íåli˙ Íåli˙. From this moment onwards – and until his death – he was one of the de facto rulers of Egypt alongside amirs Íirghatmish and Êåz.5 By 754/1353, al-MaqrÈzÈ tells us that   1 Jamål al-DÈn AbË’l-Ma˙åsin YËsuf Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-NujËm al-Zåhira fÈ MulËk Mißr wa’l-Qåhira (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1992), vol. 10, pp. 324–5.   2 TaqÈ al-DÈn A˙mad b.AlÈ al-MaqrÈzÈ, Kitåb al-SulËk li-Marifat Duwal al-MulËk, eds Mu˙ammad Mus†afå Ziyåda and SaÈd Abd al-Fattå˙ AshËr (Cairo: Ma†baat Dår al-Kutub wa’l-Wathåiq al-Qawmiyya 2006–7), vol. 2/iii, p. 746.   3 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2/iii, pp. 824, 841, 844.   4 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2/iii, p. 913.   5 A˙mad b.AlÈ Ibn Óajar al-AsqalånÈ, al-Durar al-Kåmina fÈ A’yån al-Mia al-Thåmina, ed. Mu˙ammad Sayyid Jåd al-Óaqq (Cairo: Dår alKutub al-ÓadÈtha, 1966–7), vol. 2, p. 39; TaqÈ al-DÈn A˙mad b.AlÈ alMaqrÈzÈ, Durar al-Uqud al-FarÈda fÈ Taråjim al-Ayån ­al-MufÈda, ed. Ma˙mËd al-JalÈlÈ (Beirut, 2002), vol. 2, p. 29; Íalå˙ al-DÈn KhalÈl b.Aybak al-ÍafadÈ, Ayån al-Aßr wa Awån al-Naßr, eds AlÈ AbË Zayd, NabÈl AbË Amsha, Mu˙ammad Mawid and Mu˙ammad Sålim Mu˙ammad (Damascus: Dår al-Fikr 1998), vol. 2, p. 249.

the shaykh and the amir

all matters of the state were in ShaykhË’s hands and he controlled everything, even the iq†ås.6 The contemporaneous historian and scholar al-ÍafadÈ sums up how wealthy and powerful the amir had become when he compares ShaykhË to the biblical QårËn and AzÈz Mißr, or Potiphar.7 He was one of the wealthiest amirs of the Bahri period with an income amounting to 200,000 dirhams per day according to al-MaqrÈzÈ, Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ and Ibn Óajar.8 In his Tadhkirat al-NabÈh, Ibn ÓabÈb tells us that he was kabÈr al-dawla (the head of state), mushÈruhå wa mudabbirhå (head of the regency council and ruler) and ­al-mutakallim fÈhå bi-’l-jumla (spokesman, by whom everything is decided).9 Historians commended him for being just, approachable, serving, generous, but most importantly, as one who does no evil.10 He loved doing good and despised corruption, Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ ­reported.11 This kindness extended to his fellow amirs whom he tried to help on every occasion.12 On the intellectual plane, ShaykhË was a lover of hadith literature; he reused, most probably after purchasing them from older waqfs, and commissioned several copies of hadith compendia, some of which survive today and are majestic examples of Mamluk calligraphy and illumination.13 It is thus not surprising that in spite of the rarity of hadith on buildings in Cairo that his three buildings are amongst only ten surviving edifices to carry hadith texts on their walls.14 This is especially relevant since the eighth/fourteenth   6 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2/iii, p. 890.   7 Al-ÍafadÈ, Ayån, vol. 2, p. 531.   8 TaqÈ al-DÈn A˙mad b.AlÈ al-MaqrÈzÈ, Kitåb al-MawåiΩ wa’l-Itibår bi-Dhikr al-Khi†a† wa’l-Åthår, ed. Ayman FËåd Sayyid (London: Muassasat al-Furqån li-l-Turåth al-IslåmÈ, 2003), vol. 4, p. 262; Jamål al-DÈn AbË al-Ma˙åsin YËsuf Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-Manhal al-ÍåfÈ ­wa’l-MustawfÈ bad al-WåfÈ, ed. Mu˙ammad Mu˙ammad AmÈn (Cairo: Ma†baat Dår al-Kutub wa’l-Wathåiq al-Qawmiyya, 2008), vol. 6, p. 260; and Ibn Óajar al-AsqalånÈ, al-Durar, vol. 2, p. 196.   9 Al-Óasan b.Umar b.al-Óasan b.Umar Ibn ÓabÈb, Tadhkirat al-NabÈh fÈ Ayyåm al-ManßËr wa BanÈh, ed. Mu˙ammad Mu˙ammad AmÈn (Cairo: Ma†baat Dår al-Kutub wa’l-Wathåiq al-Qawmiyya, 2010), vol. 3, p. 204. 10 Adim al-shar. Íalå˙ al-DÈn KhalÈl b.Aybak al-ÍafadÈ al-ÍafadÈ, al-WåfÈ bi-’l-Wafayyåt (Beirut: Oreint-Instuit Beirut, 2009) vol. 16, p. 211. 11 Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-NujËm, vol. 10, p. 286. 12 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 3/i, p. 4. 13 Examples of his commissions include manuscript 623 Hadith in the National Library of Egypt, and Yah. Ms. Ar. 24 in the National Library of Israel. 14 The usage of hadith to adorn Cairo’s Islamic structures are the topic of an article I wrote and currently being published: Noha Abou-Khatwa, ‘The Word of the Beloved Prophet of Islam: Hadiths Inscribed on Cairo’s Islamic Architecture’, in Mohammad Gharaibeh (ed.), Beyond Authenticity (Leiden: Brill, 2023).

213

214

noha abou-khatwa

century was the time when the sayings of the Prophet took on a monumental role in the spiritual and political lives of Muslims. According to Jonathan Brown and Joel Blecher, it was in Mamluk Cairo and Damascus that al-BukhårÈ and Muslim became canonical texts.15 The seventh/thirteenth and eighth/fourteenth centuries witnessed the flourishing of Sufism and great Sufi sages,16 and ShaykhË’s interest in hadith was complemented by a love of the ulema and the Sufis, as Ibn HabÈb reported. He was often in their company.17 The foundation inscription of his khånqåh describes him as ‘the poor slave – al-abd al faqÈr’18 and did not mention any of his princely titles – unlike all other amirs – which, as Behrens-Abouseif succinctly mentioned in her Cairo of the Mamluks, is ‘consistent with his self-image as a Sufi’.19 In 753/1352, he instituted a study night every Friday in his palace for the fuqahå (jurists) after which an encomiast (mådi˙) would sing panegyrics written for the Prophet.20 Another anecdote tells us that when ShaykhË was released from prison in 752/1351, Sufi shaykhs, joined by their disciples, marched out in celebratory mode to meet him since he was perceived as a patron of Sufism.21 The reception ceremony, led by some of the amirs, is described by Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ as unique. The whole of Saliba street was decorated and lit with candles in honour of his reception.22 There is much in the sources about his acts of goodness, from sending money to the Hijaz, to aiding all those he knew, and constantly being in the service of

15 Jonathan Brown, The Canonization of al-BukhårÈ and Muslim: The Formation and Function of Sunni ÓadÈth Canon (Leiden: Brill, 2007), pp. 340 and 359 and Joel Blecher, Said the Prophet of God: Hadith Commentary Across a Millennium (California: University of California Press), p. 49; and Joel Blecher, ‘Hadith Commentary in the Presence of Students, Patrons, and Rivals: Ibn Hajar and Sahih al-Bukhari in Mamluk Cairo’, Oriens 41 (2013): 262. 16 Important thirteenth-century Sufis include: Ibn ArabÈ (d. 638/1240), Jalål al-DÈn al-RËmÈ (d. 672/1273) and AbË al-Óasan al-ShådhilÈ (d. 656/1258). Martin Lings, Splendours of Quran Calligraphy and Illumination (Vaduz, Liechtenstein: Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation, 2005), pp. 37–8. Fourteenth-century Cairo witnessed Sufi masters A˙mad ibn A†å Allåh al-IskandarÈ (d. 709/1310), Mu˙ammad Wafå (d. 765/1363) and his son AlÈ Wafå(d. 807/1405). 17 Ibn ÓabÈb, Tadhkirat al-NabÈh, vol. 3, p. 204. 18 See pp. 223–4 below where the full foundation inscription in Arabic and English is recorded. 19 Doris Behrens-Abouseif, Cairo of the Mamluks: A History of the Architecture and Its Culture (New York: I. B. Tauris, 2007), p. 195. 20 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2/iii, p. 864. 21 Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-NujËm, vol. 10, pp. 259–60. 22 Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-NujËm, vol. 10, p. 260.

the shaykh and the amir

the needy.23 One can conclude that ShaykhË was not only invested in himself but in serving others as well. ShaykhË’s story ended in 758/1357 when he was struck with a sword by a disgruntled Mamluk owned by Sultan Óasan, whose name was Qu†lËkhajå al-Silåhdår.24 The amir was struck three times while sitting with Sultan Óasan in the dår al-adl. The attending amirs carried ShaykhË to his home and tended to his injuries. The sultan visited him and swore that he had nothing to do with QutulËkhajå’s actions, and ordered the latter to be tortured and executed on account of his crime. Three months later ShaykhË passed away.25 His death ushered in the new de facto ruler, who was his fellow amir Íirghatmish.26 ShaykhË was buried in his khånqåh on the south side of ÍalÈba street and not in the mausoleum built in his mosque on the north side.27 The potential reason for this change of mind will be revisited shortly. Shaykhu¯’s epigraphic programme His three extant buildings in Cairo will be discussed in a geographical rather than chronological order. The first to be analysed is his sabÈl in Óa††åba. Next will be his mosque-madrasa and khånqåh flanking the northern and southern sides of ÍalÈba street. The sabı¯ l of amir Shaykhu¯ al-Umarı¯ al-Na¯ s·irı¯ , monument number 144,28 755/1354 ShaykhË commissioned a magnificent sabÈl and trough carved in the rocks in Óa††åba in 755/1354. The sabÈl’s entrance – still s­ tanding today – is of a pointed arch, the conch of which is decorated with smaller recessed niches. The arabesque in each niche surrounds 23 Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-Manhal, vol. 6, p. 262. 24 The Mamluk’s name is given as Qu†lËkhajå by Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, and Qu†lËquja and Båy Qujå by al-MaqrÈzÈ. Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-Manhal, vol. 6, p. 261 and al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 3/i, p. 33. 25 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 3/i, pp. 33–4; Ibn Óajar, al-Durar, vol. 2, pp. 196–7; and Ibn TaghrbirdÈ, al-Manhal, vol. 6, p. 261. 26 For details on amir Íirghatmish see Noha Abou-Khatwa, ‘Shaping the Material Culture of Cairo in the Second Half of the Fourteenth Century: A Case Study in the Patronage of Amir Íirghatmish al-NåßirÈ’, in Bethany Walker and Abdelkader Al Ghouz (eds), Living with Nature and Things: Contributions to a New Social History of the Middle Islamic Periods (Gottingen: Bonn University Press, 2020) pp. 311–48. 27 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-Khi†a†, vol. 4, pp. 262–4. 28 This is the number given to the building by the Comité de conservation des monuments de l’art arabe, which is a committee established in 1881 by the monarch of Egypt Khedive Tawfiq for conservation and/or restoration of Islamic and Coptic monuments in Egypt.

215

216

noha abou-khatwa

Figure 9.1  The sabÈl of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 144, 755/1354, foundation inscription.

either a medallion with the amir’s rank, a cup since he was a cupbearer, or a medallion with benediction ‘glory to the Sultan’; in this case Sultan Óasan. The recess in the middle carries a rectangle framed with a band of lotuses and has four lines of text quoting two hadiths, followed by a foundation inscription [Figure 9.1].29 This is the only example of the usage of hadith on Mamluk sabÈls and the fourth building in Cairo to carry a hadith.30 The matn of the two hadiths fits the function of the structure and is followed by a ­foundation inscription. It reads:31 ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم قال رسول هللا صلي هللا عليه وسلم في كل ذات كبد اجر وسئل صلي هللا‬ ‫عليه أي االعمال افضل قال سقي الماء امر بانشاء هذا السبيل المبارك المبرور العبد الفقير الي هللا‬ 32 .‫تعالي شيخوا الملك الناصري وكان الفراغ في شهر ذي القعدة سنة خمس وخمسين وسبعمائة‬

29 This is the earliest surviving lotus carved on the architecture of Cairo. 30 See my article on the topic: Abou-Khatwa, ‘The Word of the Beloved Prophet’. 31 This inscription and all others that follow in this chapter are extracted from the database of the project The Monumental Inscriptions of Historic Cairo by Bernard O’Kane (https://islamicinscriptions.cultnat.org). I am grateful to the project without which this research would have been very difficult and time consuming. 32 Bernard O’Kane, The Monumental Inscriptions of Historic Cairo, https://​ islamicinscriptions.cultnat.org/About.html (accessed September 2019), no. 144.1.

the shaykh and the amir

In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful. The messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, said, ‘(he who gives a drink to) every creature (lit. living being) will be rewarded’.”33 He – blessings be upon him – was asked what is the best of acts. He said, ‘Providing water to quench thirst’.34 The poor slave of God Almighty ShaykhË (officer of) al-Malik ­al-Nåßir, ordered the construction of this blessed sabÈl, agreeable to God. It was finished in the months of Dhu’l-Qada in the year 755/1354. The two hadiths outline the function of the structure within the framework of Prophetic Sunna and in adherence to the Prophet’s instructions and his example. The first hadith admonishes the spirit of kindness towards living beings while the second one addresses quenching thirst. Together, they both inform the visitor that it is a place for all creatures to drink and that the intention behind the construction is an act of piety in accordance with Prophetic Sunna. ShaykhË’s two major constructions are his mosque-madrasa and khånqåh south of Óa††åba, both overlooking the thoroughfare of ÍalÈba; one facing the other as if in a melodious conversation [Figure 9.2]. The mosque-madrasa is six years older than the khånqåh. The mosque-madrasa of amir Shaykhu¯ al-Umarı¯ al-Na¯ s·irı¯ , monument number 147, 750/1349 While the structure is identified as a mosque in the foundation inscription band around the jambs of the portal, the contemporaneous scholar al-ÍafadÈ referred to it as a madrasa.35 For all intents and purposes, this building carried both functions since it was abundantly endowed and offered jurisprudence classes in the four madhhabs and most probably Quran recitation.36 Completed in 750/1349, it stands on the north side of ÍalÈba street. ShaykhË’s fair behaviour with builders and his thirty per cent increase of the wages given to the workers was commended by historians. When it was first built, the mosque accommodated a Friday sermon and twenty Sufis were assigned to it and to its shaykh Akmal al-DÈn Mu˙ammad al-RËmÈ,

33 This is hadith 7196 in the Musnad of Imåm A˙mad. The original text of the hadith also has the word ‫ حراء‬before ‫اجر‬. All hadiths cited in this research can be found in the searchable database of the IHSAN Network (www.ihsanetwork.org) developed by the Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation. 34 This is hadith 24368 in the Musnad of Imåm A˙mad. 35 Al-ÍafadÈ, Ayån, vol. 2, p. 535. 36 Ibid.

217

218

noha abou-khatwa

Figure 9.2  The khånqåh, to the left, and mosque-madrasa, to the right, of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ.

of whom more shortly. The Sufis were moved to the khånqåh when it was completed six years later and they increased in number.37 The inscription in question is written in thuluth carved in wood, now hanging above the mihrab [Figure 9.3]. Like his sabÈl, the text is a hadith followed by a foundation inscription speaking of the founder’s motive for ordering the construction. It only survives in part with two lines interrupted before it gives us the details of its construction. It reads: ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم قال رسول هللا صلي هللا عليه وسلم خيركم من تعلم القرآن وعلمه انشأ‬ 38 … ‫هذا‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful. The Prophet of God, peace and blessings be upon him, said the best of you is the one who learns the Quran and teaches it.39 Constructed this …

37 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-Khi†a†, vol. 4, p. 258. 38 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 147.7. 39 This is hadith 5079 in the S·a˙È˙ of al-BukhårÈ.

the shaykh and the amir

219

Figure 9.3  The mosque of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 147, 750/1349, panel above mihrab.

This mosque-madrasa is considered the first project undertaken in the wake of the Black Death, which hit Alexandria in the autumn of 748/1347, spreading through the Delta eventually reaching Cairo and escalating in January 750/1349 then disappearing before spring.40 Many of the residents of Cairo perished and most of those remaining were left with devotional fervor.41 People gathered in mosques to recite the Quran and read hadiths from the Ía˙È˙ of al-BukhårÈ.42 As the plague continued to ravage through Egypt during the winter of 748–9/1348, the recitations of Quran and Ía˙È˙ al-BukhårÈ continued for days. ShaykhË participated in the reading of the hadiths alongside the people to alleviate the calamity.43 This recitation from hadith compendia was perceived as a vehicle for divine intervention at times of grave afflictions. Using Jonathan Brown’s words, the hadith text served as a ‘synecdoche’44 to the Prophet through which the divine can be accessed. Egypt was facing a famine – a downturn that was followed by the Black Death and bouts of the pneumonic plague that left lands uncultivated. Notwithstanding these circumstances, ShaykhË found it imperative to build and overly compensate his workers to make up for the depression. Building activities in this case made available 40 Michael Dols, The Black Death in the Middle East (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977), pp. 154–5. 41 At least a third of the population of Egypt died. Dols, Black Death, pp. 172–200; Stuart Borsch, The Black Death in Egypt and England: A Comparative Study (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2005), p. 24 and R. Stephen Humphreys, ‘Egypt in the World System of the Later Middle Ages’, in C. Petry (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 457. 42 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2/iii, p. 781; Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-NujËm, vol. 10: pp. 204–5; and Dols, Black Death, pp. 246­–7. 43 Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-NujËm, vol. 10, p. 205. 44 Synecdoche is the word used by Jonathan Brown in his The Canonization of al-BukhårÈ and Muslim: The Formation and Function of Sunni Hadith Canon to describe the two works of al-BukhårÈ and Muslim.

220

noha abou-khatwa

employment opportunities for those surviving the plague. Teachers and students were provided for by the endowments bequeathed to religious-educational institutions. In turn, a lively service industry grew to support the scholastic needs of these teachers and students.45 On a humanitarian plane, the Black Death brought out the best in some. Not enough people were available for the ritual washing of the dead, which is a pious job some Muslims like to assume. Amongst a few others amirs, ShaykhË volunteered to wash the victims of the plague and shroud them so that they received a proper burial,46 a difficult and revered act of sincerity commended by several of his contemporaries. Walking across the street from the monumental portal of the mosque-madrasa we arrive at the sill of the khånqåh’s portal. The kha¯ nqa¯ h of amir Shaykhu¯ al-Umarı¯ al-Na¯ s·irı¯ , monument number 152, 756/1355 ShaykhË ordered the construction of his khånqåh in March 756/1355 and it was completed in October 756/1355.47 The amir endowed it with a Sufi shaykh, a hadith mentor, scholars teaching the four schools of jurisprudence, and others for Quran recitation.48 He also stipulated that all students would become or be Sufis, shara†a alayhim … ˙u∂Ër waΩÈfat al-taßawwuf.49 Ibn Qå∂È Shuhba recounts how hard ShaykhË worked on the construction himself – ijtahada fÈ imåratihå … wa amala fÈhå bi-nafsihi; thus implying that he was involved in the supervision of construction of the khånqåh.50 If this is indeed the case, then it is safe to conclude that he was involved in the choice of the inscriptions adorning the building. The choice of the land is quite obvious as it is across the street from his mosque-madrasa. With their perfectly proportioned minarets, the two buildings almost define Saliba street. Towering over this important Mamluk thoroughfare they claim ownership of it.

45 Gary Leiser, ‘The Madrasa in Medieval Islamic Society’, The Muslim World 76 (1986): 21–2. 46 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2, p. 783 and Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, al-NujËm, vol. 10, p. 209. 47 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-Khi†a†, vol. 4/ii, p. 762 and Jalål al-DÈn Abd al-Ra˙mån al-SuyˆÈ, Óusn al-Mu˙å∂ara fÈ Ta’rÈkh Mißr wa’l-Qåhira, ed. Mu˙ammad Abu al-Fa∂l IbråhÈm (Dår I˙yå al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1967), vol. 2, p. 266. 48 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-Khi†a† vol. 4/ii, p. 762. 49 Ibid. 50 TaqÈ al-DÈn AbË Bakr b. A˙mad b. Qå∂È Shuhba, TårÈkh Ibn Qå∂È Shuhba, ed. Adnån DarwÈsh (Damascus: Institut français de Damas, 1977–94) vol. 2, p. 76.

the shaykh and the amir

Thus, aesthetically, it makes perfect sense. The visitor is also conditioned to believe they are part of the same building programme.51 Curiously, another reason that might have been of relevance and clarifies who the amir was, or how he thought, was the fact that a shaykh called IbråhÈm al-MårdånÈ was buried on the spot where the khånqåh was constructed. ShaykhË left a wooden plaque commemorating this fact in his mausoleum there. Unfortunately, this shaykh is not mentioned in any of the primary sources. Could he have been one of the reasons behind ShaykhË choosing to be buried in the northeast corner of the qibla riwåq in the khånqåh rather than in the domed mausoleum in his mosque? Did he want to buried with this shaykh, who was ostensibly seen as a saint? This wooden plaque is no longer extant. It was last seen by Soad Mohamed Hasanein in 1977 and recorded in her MA thesis dedicated to the buildings of the amir.52 The shaykh of ShaykhË’s khånqåh, who was also the shaykh of the mosque, was Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ; the aforementioned revered friend of the amir. Ibn Qå∂È Shuhba, quoting other historians, tells that ShaykhË built the khånqåh for Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ. He was special to amir ShaykhË and for his sake the khånqåh was opened: kåna lahu wajåha inda al-amÈr ShaykhËn wa-fata˙a ­bi-sababihi ­al-khånqåh.53 This is a strong statement describing their relationship. This shaykh was the hadith scholar and teacher, leader of the Sufi ˙a∂ras and Sufi shaykh, ÓanafÈ madhhab instructor, and also the nåΩir of the waqf of the khånqåh.54 Unlike many amirs, ShaykhË did not assign himself as the administrator of the waqf and handed over the niΩåra to Akmal al-DÈn. All the anecdotes in the chronicles portray an intimate relationship between the shaykh and the amir. The amir would visit the shaykh in the khånqåh often and would lay down with his own hands the sijådat al-taßawwuf so that his Sufi ÓanafÈ mentor Akmal al-DÈn would sit on it.55 51 People at the time were excited once the khånqåh was finished and started calling the area in between Bayn al-Ajarayn just like they did with Bayn al-Qasrayn. See Ibn ÓabÈb, Tadhkirat al-NabÈh, vol. 3, p. 205. 52 Suåd Mu˙ammad Óasanayn, ‘Amål al-AmÈr ShaykhË al-UmarÈ ­al-NåßirÈ al-Mimåriyya bi-al-Qåhira’, MA thesis, Cairo University, 1977, p. 196. 53 Ibn Qå∂È Shuhba, Ta’rÈkh, vol. 3, p. 151. 54 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2/iii, p. 864 and Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-Khi†a†, vol. 4/ii, p. 764. 55 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 3/i, p. 18. Sijådat al-taßawwuf – the rug of Sufism – is used literally to identify the prayer carpet for each Sufi in a given building, or metaphorically to connote the position of a Sufi shaykh. It can also be used to describe a specific †arÈqa, for example mashyakhat al-sijåda al-bakriyya means the head of the Bakriyya †arÈqa. Sijåda has its roots in the Persian sih jåda meaning three roads. These three roads or ways are the sharÈa (outward law), †arÈqa (way) and

221

222

noha abou-khatwa

Another telling anecdote was recorded in 754/1353 when a group of people led by the qadi of one of the villages wanted to forcibly convert a Copt whom they claimed to have had a Muslim grandfather. The wålÈ (governor) disagreed with them and reprimanded the qadi. The situation escalated between all parties involved and a large fitna (civil disturbance) ensued. ShaykhË was informed and he decided that the qadi was at fault for stirring up the masses. Akmal al-DÈn was quite upset with ShaykhË’s decision and started speaking to the amir in a firm and angry tone in Turkish. ShaykhË decided to revisit the case and instead of only punishing the qadi, he punished both the wålÈ and the qadi as a result of Akmal al-DÈn’s view on what was done earlier. As he narrates the story, al-MaqrÈzÈ explains that Akmal al-DÈn had a special status with the amir: lahu ikhtißåß zåid bi-al-amÈr ShaykhË.56 Akmal al-Dı¯ n al-Ru¯mı¯ Who was Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ? His full name was Mu˙ammad b. Ma˙mud b. A˙mad al-BabartÈ or BabirtÈ, the head of all ÓanafÈs in Cairo, a renowned hadith scholar and a Sufi who was probably born in Anatolia in the 710s/1310s. His scholastic journey led him to Cairo after 740/1339 where he lived for the remainder of his life; he was buried next to the amir in 786/1384. He was an acclaimed hadith scholar and an avid author who left behind many titles. He is described as unparalleled in hadith scholarship, the best of his time, unrivalled in the decades he spent in Cairo.57 On his tombstone, recorded by AlÈ Mubårak, he is mentioned as shaykh al-hadith, since hadith scholarship was his strength. All of this makes him the perfect man to choose hadiths for the amir’s foundations.58 His trajectory shows that ShaykhË’s patronage of him and belief in his sanctity gave him the stepping-stone to become the great scholar and shaykh that he was. As the shaykh of the khånqåh, its administrator and mentor and friend of the amir, it is assumed that he was instrumental in the choice of the inscriptions we are

˙aqÈqa (truth); i.e. the three tenets of Sufism. See Abd al-Munim alÓifnÈ, Mujam Mu߆alahåt al-Taßawwuf (Beirut: Dår al-MasÈra, 1987), p. 128 and Mu˙ammad b.Abdallåh al-LawåtÈ al-ÊanjÈ Ibn Ba††Ë†a, Ri˙lat Ibn Ba††Ë†a: Tu˙fat al-NuΩΩår fÈ Gharåib al-Amßår wa Ajåib al-Asfår, ed. Mu˙ammad Abd al-Munim al-Iryån (Beirut: Dår I˙yå al-UlËm, 1987), vol. 1, pp. 56–7. 56 Al-MaqrÈzÈ, al-SulËk, vol. 2/iii, 901. 57 Mu˙ammad Abd al-Óayy al-LaknawÈ al-HindÈ, Kitåb al-Fawåid ­al-Bahiyya fÈ Taråjim al-Óanafiyya, ed. Mu˙ammad Badr al-DÈn AbË Firås al-NasånÈ (Beirut: Dår al-Marifa li-l-Êabå‘a wa-l-Nashr, 1906), pp. 195–9. 58 Óasanayn, ‘Amål al-AmÈr ShaykhË’, p. 195.

the shaykh and the amir

about to examine. His academic standing and spiritual significance would allow him to easily make these choices. Foundation inscription above the main door [Figure 9.4] Carved in six lines on a stone slab surmounting an ancient Egyptian cavetto cornice and inscribed lintel, it reads: ‫"في بيوت أذن هللا أن ترفع ويذكر فيها اسمه يسبح له فيها بالغدو‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ ‫ امر بانشا هذا المكان المبارك و الموطن‬، 59"‫واالصال رجال التلهيهم تجارة وال بيع عن ذكر هللا‬ ‫الذي ساهم العمل فيه النية و شارك العبد الفقير الي ربه جل و عال و تبارك المغترف من بحر‬ ‫نواله المعترف من افضاله بكل لطف تدارك االمير شيخو العمري الناصري عمر هللا ببقائه و‬ ‫نصره و ضاعف اسباب ثوابه و اجره و عوضه بقصور الجنان بعد امتداد عمره و تقبل اعماله‬ ‫الصالحة في سر القول و جهره وجعله خالصا لوجهه الكريم جائزا به علي الصراط المستقيم يوم‬ ‫معاده و حشره تقرب به الي هللا احتسابا و ايمانا و ابتغي به فوزا عند ربه و غفرانا و اوي به كل‬ ‫اشعث اغبر لو اقسم علي هللا البره فاواله احسانا و جمع به قوما كفاهم هم المؤنة فكفاه هللا شر‬ ‫يوم الفزع االكبر و لقاه امانا يواصلون العمل بالعلم و يقطعون الليل تسبيحا وقرآنا "تراهم ركعا‬ ‫ وكان ابتداء الشروع فيه في شهر ربيع االول سنة ست‬، 60"‫سجدا يبتغون فضال من هللا ورضوانا‬ 61 .‫وخمسين وسبعمائة و الفراغ منه و مم حواه في شهر شوال من السنة المذكورة‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful. ‘In houses which Allah hath allowed to be exalted and that His name shall be remembered therein. Therein do offer praise to Him at morning and evening. Men whom neither merchandise nor sale beguileth from remembrance of Allah.’62 The construction of this blessed place and abode, a work which (good) intentions contributed to its execution, has been ordered by the poor slave ever in need of his Majestic, Lofty and Blessed Lord, the one who scoops from the sea of His favours, who acknowledges His grace with all gratitude, the amir ShaykhË al-Umari al-NåßirÈ. May God grant him a long victorious life, duplicate ways for his requital and recompense, and grant him palaces in paradise after his long life. May God accept his good deeds, secret and public. Let these actions be sincere for God’s generous approval, and let it be a way for him to cross the straight path on the Day of Judgement, as he built this in hope of becoming closer to God and because of his belief in Him. He wanted reward and forgiveness from God and (with it) he gave shelter to anyone who is disheveled and grimy, those who are turned away by others. He gathered a people in it, sparing them the burden of finding subsistence, and on account of this, God 59 Quran 24:36 – part of 37. 60 Part of Quran 48:29. 61 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.1. 62 Translations of all Quranic verses in this chapter are from Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, The Meaning of the Glorious Quran: Text and Explanatory Translation (Hyderabad: Government Central Press, 1938).

223

224

noha abou-khatwa

Figure 9.4  The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, foundation inscription above door.

spared him the calamity of the Day of Judgement and granted him peace and safety. These people work to acquire knowledge, and spend the night in supplication and recitation of the Quran. ‘Seest them bowing and falling prostrate (in worship), seeking bounty from Allah and (His) acceptance.’ This was begun in RabÈ I of the year 756 /March-April 1355 and was finished with all its contents in Shawwal (October-November) of the same year. This foundation inscription is laden with symbolism and multiple meanings and thus deserves a research paper on its own. Only a few remarks will be made here. It refers to the building as place and abode, not specifying that it is a khånqåh. We know it is a khånqåh from the contemporaneous sources who refer to it as such. He assigned a Sufi shaykh to be in charge, as seen earlier. Yet he does not use the word khånqåh to define it. The building was definitely dedicated to Sufis of all creeds since it does not specify a certain †arÈqa and is servicing a people (qawm) gathered in it for sustenance, thus also to the destitute. It was meant to be a safe and blessed abode for those whose lives were centred on dhikr (invocation of God), this is why the verses of the Quran he uses in the beginning of the text end at dhikr Allah. The text also informs us of the group of people who were there to acquire knowledge while spending their nights in worship. One can assume that this knowledge alluded to is both earthly and heavenly; it is knowledge from the four schools of jurisprudence and other religious sciences, and more importantly,

the shaykh and the amir

knowledge of God gained by the invocation of God, and supplication and recitation. It is also a place for those in need of sustenance who were usually turned down by all others; thus his usage of the words ashath wa aghbar. The text refers to the amir as the ‘poor slave of God Almighty’, which is reminiscent of the self-description used in the signatures of scholars, calligraphers and illuminators of Qurans and hadith compendia. Shortly afterwards we find out that this poor slave is the amir ShaykhË who at the time was the de facto ruler of Egypt and Syria. His titles are nowhere to be found in this inscription, he being portrayed as a humble soul. Humility is the most important virtue of a Sufi and this was clearly displayed earlier in front of his master Shaykh Akmal al-DÈn when the issue of the forcibly converted Copt arose. Eloquently composed, the text uses literary rules of Arabic rhetoric to allude to mystical realities. For example, we find an incomplete paronomasia (jinås nåqiß) in mughtarif and mutarif. Inscriptions in the qibla area of the kha¯nqa¯h Beneath the ceiling of the qibla riwåq in the khånqåh are the most wonderous and unprecedented set of inscriptions in Cairo. Finding the textual sources from which they were taken were important for this research, and for determining that Shaykh Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ was behind their usage.63 Upon entering the qibla riwåq the band beneath the ceiling of the first aisle to the right reads [Figure 9.5]: ‫ دائرة الفلك في قبضته‬... ‫ رفعت‬... ‫ ان‬... ‫ سبحان من اقام كل موجود‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ ... ‫و شمس النهار و بدر الدجي يجريان في بحر قدرته و الكواكب كالمواكب علي ما تسخره كل‬ ‫ نفسه الي ابراهيم فجعل‬... ‫ فرفعه‬... ‫االختيار الي ادم عليه السالم و خصه بسجود ماليكته و الي‬ ... 64‫ صلي و‬... ‫فكانت‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful. Praise be to Him who created all that exists [as proof for His Glory, and instituted the banner of guidance on His Door, all universes proclaim the evidence for His Oneness, and by His Will all those who approve and the dissenters march. If you are to unveil the eye of thought (contemplation) you will see that] the cosmos is in His Fist, and you will discern the sun of day and the full moon of the night flowing in the sea of His Might; and the planets lined up in parades, each fulfilling the task it was assigned for. [Some are there to stone the demons away from his protected realm.

63 I would like to thank Mr Khalid Youssef, independent scholar, who was instrumental in finding the sources for these inscriptions. 64 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.17.

225

226

noha abou-khatwa

Figure 9.5  The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of first riwåq from courtyard, right side.

He gazed upon] Adam with the eye of preference and so he was granted the prostration of His angels. [He gazed at] Ibrahim and so [he strutted in the suite of friendship]. Pray The qibla riwåq, the band beneath the ceiling of the first aisle to the left reads [Figure 9.6]: ‫ و الي عيسي ابن مريم فكان يحي الموتي و يدعو به‬... ‫ و الي زكريا‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ ‫و الي محمد صلي هللا عليه و سلم و خصه برو(؟) و جعل امته خير امة اخرجت للناس فاكثر‬ ‫ اله يفرد في ملكه و كل‬،‫ عز و جل عز الحصر في قدرته‬... ‫االوائل الصالحين من امته تعالي‬ ... 65‫ صلي هللا‬... ‫ رضي هللا عنه‬... ‫ من عباد سقاهم‬... ‫ الدهر‬... ‫الخالئق في قبضته اقام عباد‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful, [He gazed at] Zakariyya [and granted him his wish, and at Yahya, in spite of his sterility, he became the master of his people,] and at Jesus son of Mary and so he resurrected the dead, and at Mu˙ammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and so made him special with [the night journey and with seeing Him,] and made his umma the best people. He increased the pious amongst this umma, may He be exalted … (may He be) glorified. [It is difficult] to see the boundaries of His power. God is unique in His kingdom; all creatures are in His Hand. He upheld His 65 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.21.

the shaykh and the amir

Figure 9.6  The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of first riwåq from courtyard, left side.

­ orshippers ­[throughout] the ages … and quenched their thirst … w May He be pleased with [them] … God pray [peace and blessings be upon our master Mu˙ammad]. These supplications are chosen from the book of admonitions, al-Mudhish, by the renowned Baghdadi historian and scholar Ibn al-JawzÈ (d. 597/1201). This magnum opus is made of hundreds of sections. The section chosen to be inscribed here is picked from the second half of the work from a subsection commenting and expounding on the verse huwa al-awwal wa’l-akhir.66 This is a very important verse for all Sufis. It details how God has privileged Adam and his descendants and highlights the prophets chosen from amongst them. But why Ibn al-JawzÈ? Possibly because he was an ascetic and a hadith scholar. He commissioned a madrasa in Baghdad and endowed it with hundreds of books, in addition to the 300 titles he produced in various fields.67 He is also known to have cried out of his fear of God and love for the Prophet.68 It is not a coincidence that his

66 AbË al-Faraj Abd al-Ra˙mån b.AlÈ Ibn al-JawzÈ, al-Mudhish, ed. Marwån QabånÈ (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1971), pp. 139–40. Quran 57:3. 67 Al-ÍafadÈ, al-WåfÈ, vol. 18, pp. 186–94. 68 Jonathan Brown, Hadith: Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World (Oxford: One World Publications, 2009), p. 189.

227

228

noha abou-khatwa

book would be used as a reference. In a way Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ might have seen himself in the Baghdadi scholar. The band beneath the ceiling continues in the second or rather the middle riwåq. Also starting with a basmala, the right side reads [Figure 9.7]: ‫ و ان مما يزيد بيوت العبادة جميل اثار و حسن سلوك و طهورا نورا‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ ‫ اخفي رضاه‬،‫ ان هللا اخفي ثالثا في ثالث‬:‫كالم الساده الصفوة االبرار فمن كالمهم رضي هللا عنهم‬ ‫في طاعته و اخفي غضبه في معصيته و اخفي والئه في عباده فال تحقرن شيئا من طاعاته لعل‬ ‫فيه رضاه و ال تحقرن شيئا من معاصيه فقد يكون فيه غضبه و ال تحقرن احدا من خلقه فعساه ان‬ ‫ علي خطر من نظر في‬.‫ الناس كلهم اموات اال العلماء المخلصين و المخلصون‬.‫يكون من اوليائه‬ 69 .‫ و من عني بذكر الجنة و النار سعا(؟) عن القيل و القال‬،‫عيوب الناس عمي عن عيب نفسه‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful, that which adds to the beauty of the houses of worship and enhances good legacy, conduct, purity and light are the words of the elect pious masters. To quote their words, may God be pleased with them: God hid three things in three things; He hid His acceptance in obedience to Him; He hid His anger in the defiance to His orders, and He hid His friends/saints among worshippers. So do not belittle any of His orders which perhaps will lead to His acceptance, do not belittle any of His prohibitions lest it may lead to His anger, and never look down on any of His people since they might be from amongst His chosen friends/saints. All people are mortal except the sincere ulema. The one who looks at other people’s shortcomings is in a precarious situation and becomes blind toward his own faults. He whose concern is heaven and hell keeps himself away from hearsay. This text is a perfect choice especially since it begins with a description of how to make the houses of worship more beautiful. The answer comes directly afterwards by inscribing the words of the chosen elect. The usage of al-såda and al-ßafwa, meaning Sufis, is concomitant with the function of the building. The inscription proceeds to quote them without specifying names. The text also makes a direct connection between beauty and epigraphy since inscribing knowledge passed down by Sufis adds to the aesthetics of the place. Their inscribed knowledge adds sacrament to the words being painted or carved. These same words add purity and light to the place and to its residents or visitors. This text ascribed to al-såda al-ßafwa, ‘the elect masters’ is found in an important work on Sufism, al-Anwår al-Ilåhiyya bi-alMadrasa al-ZarrËqiyya, composed by the ninth/fifteenth-century Moroccan Sufi shaykh A˙mad b. A˙mad ZarrËq al-FåsÈ, who states 69 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.15.

the shaykh and the amir

Figure 9.7  The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of second riwåq from courtyard, right side.

that this is a hadith.70 Our inscription does not refer to it as a hadith but as an aphorism. Perhaps it was a hadith of a weak isnåd and so Akmal al-DÈn could not quote it as a hadith but rather as a tradition carried through the centuries by the Sufis – which it was indeed. As promised in the beginning of this inscription, the words of the saintly is what makes a building beautiful, thus the left side of this aisle carries various sayings by the renowned third/ninth-century Egyptian Sufi sage DhË’l-NËn al-MißrÈ. Ibn Asåkir quoted parts of DhË’l-NËn in his entry on the shaykh in volume 17 of his work TårÈkh MadÈnat Dimishq.71 The inscription reads: ‫ من خوف‬... ‫ و ال (يسوء) الفقير فقره حتي‬... ‫ و من هرب من الناس‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ ... ‫ و ورع يحجره و يقين بحمله و ذكر‬... ‫ من الفقير فقره رابعه‬... ‫الغني علي ماله و اقل‬ ‫السادات الوصله و االستيناس بالناس من عالمة االفالس و ال تصفو لعامل عمل اال باالخالص‬ ‫فمن اخلص هلل لم يرج غيره و لم يخف احد سواه و السعيد توسد من الصبر و عانق الفقر و‬ ‫ و الحل بالموجود‬... ‫خالف النفس و غلب الهوي و كان مع هللا تبارك و تعالي الجود بالمودة حق‬ 72 .‫المبسوط‬ 70 A˙mad b.A˙mad ZarrËq al-FåsÈ, al-Anwår al-Ilåhiyya bi-al-Madrasa al-ZarrËqiyya, ed. Mu˙ammad IdrÈs Tayyib (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1971), p. 127. 71 AlÈ b.al-Óasan Ibn Asåkir, Ta’rÈkh MadÈnat Dimashq wa-Dhikr Fa∂lihå wa-tasmiyat man ˙allahå min al-amåthil aw ijtåza bi-nawåhÈhå min wåridÈhå wa-ahlihå (Beirut: Dår al-Fikr, 1995), vol. 17, pp. 398–442. 72 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.16.

229

230

noha abou-khatwa

In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful, he who runs away from people is saved, poverty is not pernicious to the poor … from the fear of the wealthy person for his money and … from the poor his poverty is his … and humility protects and trust saves him and remembering God … the elect, finding comfort in being in the company of people is a sign of pennilessness. Work is not pure except through sincerity, so whoever is sincere towards God does not need the support of anyone but Him, and does not fear anyone but Him. The happy person is the one who takes patience as his pillow, and embraces poverty, disobeys himself, and overcomes his own desires and is with God the Blessed and Most High. Generosity through love is the truth … It is necessary to note that this riwåq leads to a door that takes one to a qåa for Sufi ˙a∂ras.73 The choice was not haphazard. While the theme fits the function of the khånqåh well, it also leads to the area where the Sufi ˙a∂ras probably took place. This is ostensibly why the ceiling of this riwåq is the only one with squares filled with the words al-baraka al-kåmila in thuluth and in foliated kufi [Figure 9.8]. The last riwåq is that closest to the qibla wall. It is legible on the right side but only a few words remain on the left side. The right side reads [Figure 9.9]: ‫ كل هو اسمه الذي يبتدا به تيمنا و بذكره الذي اذا افتتح به عمل تم مؤيدا‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ ‫مؤبدا و الصالة علي نبيه محمد الذي شيد بنيان الهدي و ان تر المالئكة اسمه علي قوايم العرش‬ ‫حين خروا سجدا و علي اله و صحبه الذين قد بنوا معا االيمان فهي تشتد و تقوي و اسسوا بنيانهم‬ ‫علي رضوان و تقوي و هلل الحمد علي ما لهم من اعمل و مرضي و بنيه ابتغي بها واقفها عند‬ ‫ لعمارة الدار االخرة و‬... ‫ابوابا هلل (فخصها؟) اللهم كما بشرت عمارة هذه المباني الطاهرة فوق‬ ‫ان هذه الدار الي ملك الدار طريق و ان سمي اخذ سعيد السعدا فاجعل عندك السعد اعلي التحقيق‬ 74 .‫و غمر قلبه بك فان القلب بيت الرب و احشره مع اوليائك يوم القيامة مع من تحب‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful. Commencing with God’s Name gives prosperity and when His Name is remembered at the beginning, support for eternity is begotten, and blessing be upon his Prophet Mu˙ammad who constructed the building of guidance. The angels saw his name [the Prophet] inscribed on the pillars of God’s throne when they 73 The gathering of Sufis for the invocation and remembrance of God, which also includes chanting and dance in some Sufi orders. The literal meaning is ‘presence’ or ‘being present’, alluding to Divine presence. See Jean-Louis Michon and Roger Gaetani, Sufism: Love and Wisdom (Bloomington: World Wisdom Inc., 2006), p. 279 and Titus Burckhardt, An Introduction to Sufism, trans. D. M. Matheson (London: Thorsons, 1995), p. 117. 74 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.13.

the shaykh and the amir

Figure 9.8  The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, ceiling of second riwåq from courtyard, left side.

­ rostrated, and blessing be upon the Prophet’s family and comp panions who built together Faith to strengthen and solidify; they established their building on the grounds of content and piety. Praise be to God for what the endower has established at God’s door. O! God You auspiciously promised that constructing such a pure building leads to the buildings of the hereafter, and this building in this world is a pathway to the King of the world. The name it has taken is the Happiest one of the Happy, so grant him happiness in the extreme and fill his heart with Your love, as the heart is God’s abode, and resurrect him with Your saints on Judgement Day and with the people You love. This text was not found in any source and seems to have been composed especially for this building. It harks back to and is a commentary on Sufi percepts while using all the words relating to the building craft, amongst other things. It is prudent to go through these carefully chosen terms. Once again using Arabic rhetoric, the text addresses the Prophet as the one who constructed the building of guidance. It highlights the metaphorical use of epigraphy in paradise by telling the reader that the Prophet’s name is inscribed on the pillars carrying God’s throne. It refers to the Prophet’s companions as the builders of faith and those who laid the foundations of the building of content and piety. It metaphorically relates the buildings in paradise with the pious commissions on earth and then

231

232

noha abou-khatwa

Figure 9.9  The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qibla area, band beneath ceiling of third riwåq from courtyard, qibla wall, right side.

names the amir’s construction SaÈd al-Suadå, harking back to the first khånqåh endowed in Egypt by Saladin in the late sixth/twelfth ­century.75 Finally, it ends with a loaded statement, the heart is the abode of God, taking the reader to the hadith qudsÈ: My heaven and earth are not spacious enough for Me, but rather the heart of My believer.76 This inscription continues to the left with the remains of another saying by DhË’l-NËn reported by the hadith scholar and compiler alBayhaqÈ (d. 1065) in his work Shuab al-Ïmån and also by Ibn Asåkir in his Ta’rÈkh MadÈnat Dimashq.77 Left of the transept reads: ... ‫ عظمتك فخضعوا و سمع‬... ‫ وسع الناس‬... ‫فال‬... ‫ ضع ر‬... ‫ و قيل‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ 78 .‫ الملك العظيم‬... ‫ فطمعوا‬... ‫بجود‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful. It was said … leave … and not … the abiding ones perceived your 75 Monument number 480. 76 ‫ال يسعني أرضي وال سمائي ولكن يسعني قلب عبدي المؤمن‬, Hadith 450 in Sa˙i˙ ­al-BukhårÈ. 77 AbË Bakr A˙mad b.al-Óusayn al-BayhaqÈ, Shuab al-Ïmån, ed. AbË Óajar Mu˙ammad al-SaÈd BasyËnÈ ZaghlËl (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 2000), vol. 2, p. 25 and Ibn Asåkir, Ta’rÈkh MadÈnat Dimashq, vol. 26, p. 246. 78 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.14.

the shaykh and the amir

greatness and so they succumbed and [the sinners] heard of your generosity and so they became greedy…the great king. Moving on to the qåa where the ˙a∂ras probably used to take place – as they still do today79 – we see that the sayings of the Prophet were the chosen medium of communication. Beneath the ceiling of the qibla Èwån is the hadith recorded by al-TirmidhÈ (hadith #3), AbË DåËd (hadith #61), Ibn Måja (hadith #275) and Imåm A˙mad (hadith #129/1) [Figure 9.10]: ‫ مفتاح الصاله الطهور‬،‫ و تعالي الذي جعل كل مطلوب متاحا فيها‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ ‫ الواليه و‬... ‫ و مفتاح النصر‬... )‫ و مفتاح ال(؟‬... ‫ و مفتاح‬... )‫ و مفتاح البر الم (؟‬... ‫ومفتاح‬ 80 .‫ و مفتاح الفالح التقوي و العمل‬... )‫ال(؟‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful, and may He be exalted Who made all needs available in the World. The key to praying is purification, [the key to hajj (pilgrimage) is alihram – ritual consecration,] the key to reverence [is truthfulness,] the key [to heaven is proclaiming the oneness of God,] the key [to knowledge is proper questioning and proper listening,] the key to victory [is patience, the key to having more is being thankful, the key to being] a friend of God [and the key to His love is His remembrance,] the key to success is piety and work [the key to getting an answer is praying, the key to desiring the hereafter is abstention from this world, the key to faith is contemplation.] Beneath the ceiling of the west Èwån another potential hadith is inscribed: ‫ و اهال بدين‬... ‫ و رزقه من حيث ال يحتسب‬... ‫ اذا رضي هللا عن عبد‬، ‫بسم هللا الرحمن الرحيم‬ 81 .‫ في الدنيا و االخرة‬... ‫ تقبل هللا الغفور القهار‬... ‫ال فضل‬ In the Name of God, the Infinitely Good, the Ever-Merciful, if God is pleased with one of his slaves … he will bestow on him with no measure … and grant him a kin with religion which has no bias … May God the Forgiving, the Absolute Vanquisher … in this world and the hereafter … Unlike those used in the mosque or on the sabÈl where the function of the building is derived from the text, these detail virtuous 79 Nowadays, different Sufi orders from Upper Egypt flock to Cairo before the Mawlid (celebration of a saint’s birthday) of al-Sayyida Zaynab. Some of them stay in the khånqåh of ShaykhË and occasionally use this space for ˙a∂ras. 80 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.18. 81 O’Kane, Monumental Inscriptions, no. 152.19.

233

234

noha abou-khatwa

Figure 9.10  The khånqåh of amir ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ, monument number 152, 756–7/1355, qåa probably used for ˙a∂ras, south of the qibla area, band beneath ceiling of qibla/east Èwån.

behaviour and how to access it. If the Sufis need to be constantly polishing their hearts, they can do so by following the example of the Prophet and becoming virtuous. The intent behind the usage of the hadith and the other Sufi texts is rather disciplinary as it serves as a manual for the Sufis on their spiritual path and for new initiates to follow. Conclusion Inspected in tandem, the epigraphic programmes of amir ShaykhË and the reports of the primary sources complement each other well. All the events and anecdotes shared in this chapter portray an amir who was sincerely invested in hadith and Sufism. He was successful in communicating his personal interests in both disciplines through the inscriptions in his foundations. Aided and probably inspired by his shaykh, Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ, a Sufi mu˙addith who was also ShaykhË’s mentor, they delivered an eloquent message of Sunni taßawwuf to the visitors, and in the case of the khånqåh, the residents as well. It is no surprise that this is the case since hadith is the source of many fields of knowledge in Islam. Islamic mysticism – Sufism – finds its roots in hadith since all exoteric and esoteric knowledge have their source in the teachings of the Prophet. The inscriptions of the khånqåh are an excellent example of this. It is a tradition that goes back as early

the shaykh and the amir

as the third/ninth century when Sufis used hadith to educate and discipline those on a spiritual path.82 The hadiths of the Prophet used were a medium by which ShaykhË explained his act of piety. Following in the footsteps of the Prophet meant doing by his example and following his instructions. As discussed earlier, the centre of hadith studies, from Andalusia and Central Asia to Mamluk Cairo and some cities in Mamluk Syria in the late years of the seventh/thirteenth century, hadith collections became canonised and assumed sacramental status during the eighth/fourteenth century. ShaykhË was probably one of the early key players during the eighth/fourteenth century in making this possible through his patronage and support of the discipline. While the sources do not say that he was a Sufi per se, their accounts of him make it clear that he was. Moreover, his relationship with Shaykh Akmal al-DÈn al-RËmÈ supports this. His powerful position allowed him to sponsor and patronise his beliefs. There is much more to be investigated in this discourse as more questions appeared after the original sources of the Sufi texts have been identified. These texts used are an ocean of knowledge for the disciples of the khånqåh. Each aisle in the qibla riwåq carrying an inscription needs an independent commentary since it must have warranted the contemplation of the disciples. Were the original sources of these texts found in the manuscripts endowed to the khånqåh? We know that the canonical hadith collections were commissioned and endowed by ShaykhË for the building, but what about the Sufi texts: the sayings of DhË ’l-NËn, supplications and admonitions by Ibn al-JawzÈ in his al-Mudhish and the sayings referred to by the later al-FåsÈ? Were they also found in manuscript form being copied by the students in the building? The amir’s surviving hadith manuscripts are beautifully calligraphed and illuminated – would the other texts have been commissioned in the same manner? This will form the subject of my future research. Bibliography Abou-Khatwa, Noha, ‘Shaping the Material Culture of Cairo in the Second Half of the Fourteenth Century: A Case Study in the Patronage of Amir Íirghatmish al-NåßirÈ’, in Bethany Walker and Abdelkader Al Ghouz (eds), Living with Nature and Things: Contributions to a New Social History of the Middle Islamic Periods (Gottingen: Bonn University Press, 2020), pp. 311–48. Abou-Khatwa, Noha, ‘The Word of the Beloved Prophet of Islam: Hadiths Inscribed on Cairo’s Islamic Architecture’, in Mohammad Gharaibeh (ed.), Beyond Authenticity (Leiden: Brill, 2023).

82 Brown, Hadith, p. 185.

235

236

noha abou-khatwa

Al-BayhaqÈ, AbË Bakr A˙mad b. al-Óusayn, Shuab al-Èmån, ed. AbË Óajar Mu˙ammad al-SaÈd BasyËnÈ ZaghlËl (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 2000), vol. 2. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris, Cairo of the Mamluks: A History of the Architecture and Its Culture (New York: I. B. Tauris, 2007). Blecher, Joel, ‘Hadith Commentary in the Presence of Students, Patrons, and Rivals: Ibn Hajar and Sahih al-Bukhari in Mamluk Cairo’, Oriens 41 (2013): 261–87. Blecher, Joel, Said the Prophet of God: Hadith Commentary Across a Millennium (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2017). Borsch, Stuart, The Black Death in Egypt and England: a Comparative Study (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2005). Brown, Jonathan, Hadith: Muhammad’s Legacy in the Medieval and Modern World (Oxford: One World Publications, 2009). Brown, Jonathan, The Canonization of al-BukhårÈ and Muslim: The Formation and Function of Sunni ÓadÈth Canon (Leiden: Brill, 2007). Burckhardt, Titus, An Introduction to Sufism, trans. D. M. Matheson (London: Thorsons, 1995). Dols, Michael, The Black Death in the Middle East (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977). Al-FåsÈ, A˙mad b. A˙mad ZarrËq, al-Anwår al-Ilåhiyya bi-’l-Madrasa ­al-ZarrËqiyya, ed. Mu˙ammad IdrÈs Tayyib (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1971). Óasanayn, Suåd Mu˙ammad, ‘Amål al-AmÈr ShaykhË al-UmarÈ al-NåßirÈ al-Mimåriyya bi-al-Qåhira’, MA thesis, Cairo University, 1977. Al-ÓifnÈ, Abd al-Munim, Mujam Mu߆alahåt al-Taßawwuf (Beirut: Dår al-MasÈra, 1987). Al-HindÈ, Mu˙ammad Abd al-Óayy al-LaknawÈ, Kitåb al-fawå’id ­al-bahiyya fÈ taråjim al-Óanafiyya, ed. Mu˙ammad Badr al-DÈn AbË Firås al-NasånÈ (Beirut: Dår al-Marifa li-l-Êabåa wa-l-Nashr, 1906). Humphreys, R. Stephen, ‘Egypt in the World System of the Later Middle Ages’, in C. Petry (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 445–61. Ibn Asåkir, AlÈ b. al-Óasan, TårÈkh MadÈnat Dimashq wa-Dhikr Fa∂lihå wa-Tasmiyat man ˙allahå min al-amåthil aw ijtåza bi-nawåhÈhå min wåridÈhå wa-ahlihå (Beirut: Dår al-Fikr, 1995), vols 17 and 26. Ibn Ba††Ë†a, Mu˙ammad b. Abdallåh al-LawåtÈ al-ÊanjÈ, Ri˙lat Ibn Ba††Ë†a: Tu˙fat al-NuΩΩår fÈ Gharåib al-Amßår wa Ajå’ib al-Asfår, ed. Mu˙ammad Abd al-Munim al-Iryån (Beirut: Dår I˙yå al-UlËm, 1987), vol. 1. Ibn ÓabÈb, al-Óasan b. Umar b. al-Óasan ibn Umar, Tadhkirat alNabÈh fÈ Ayyåm al-ManßËr wa BanÈh, ed. Mu˙ammad Mu˙ammad AmÈn  (Cairo:  Ma†baat Dår al-Kutub wa’l-Wathåiq al-QawmÈyah, 2010), vol. 3. Ibn Óajar al-AsqalånÈ, A˙mad b. AlÈ, al-Durar al-Kåmina fÈ Ayån al-Mia al-Thåmina, ed. Mu˙ammad Sayyid Jåd al-Óaqq (Cairo: Dår al-Kutub al-ÓadÈthah, 1966–7), vol. 2. Ibn al-JawzÈ, AbË’l-Faraj Abd al-Ra˙mån b. AlÈ, al-Mudhish, ed. Marwån QabånÈ (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1971). Ibn Qå∂È Shuhba, TaqÈ al-DÈn AbË Bakr b. A˙mad, Ta’rÈkh Ibn Qå∂È Shuhba, ed. Adnån DarwÈsh (Damascus: Institut français de Damas, 1977–94), vol. 2.

the shaykh and the amir

Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, Jamål al-DÈn AbË’l-Ma˙åsin YËsuf, al-Manhal al-ßåfÈ wa’l-mustawfÈ bad al-WåfÈ, ed. Mu˙ammad Mu˙ammad AmÈn (Cairo: Ma†baat Dår al-Kutub wa’l-Wathåiq al-Qawmiyyah, 2008), vol. 6. Ibn TaghrÈbirdÈ, Jamål al-DÈn AbË’l-Ma˙åsin YËsuf, al-NujËm al-Zåhira fÈ MulËk Mißr wa’l-Qåhira (Beirut: Dår al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya, 1992), vol. 10. IHSAN Network (www.ihsanetwork.org) developed by the Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation. Leiser, Gary, ‘The Madrasa in Medieval Islamic Society’, The Muslim World 76 (1986): 16–23. Lings, Martin, Splendours of Quran Calligraphy and Illumination (Vaduz, Liechtenstein: Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation, 2005). Al-MaqrÈzÈ, TaqÈ al-DÈn A˙mad b. AlÈ, Durar al-Uqud al-FarÈda fÈ Taråjim al-Ayån al-MufÈda, ed. Ma˙mËd al-JalÈlÈ (Beirut, 2002), vol. 2. Al-MaqrÈzÈ, TaqÈ al-DÈn A˙mad b. AlÈ, Kitåb al-MawåiΩ wa’l-Itibår ­bi-Dhikr al-Khi†a† wa’l-Åthår, ed. Ayman FËåd Sayyid (London: Muassasat al-Furqån li-l-Turåth al-IslåmÈ, 2003), vol. 4. Al-MaqrÈzÈ, TaqÈ al-DÈn A˙mad b. AlÈ, Kitåb al-SulËk li-Marifat Duwal ­al-MulËk, eds Mu˙ammad Mus†afå Ziyådah and SaÈd Abd al-Fattå˙ AshËr (Cairo: Ma†baat Dår al-Kutub wa’l-Wathåiq al-QawmÈyah, 2006–7), vols 2 and 3. Michon, Jean-Louis and Roger Gaetani, Sufism: Love and Wisdom (Bloomington: World Wisdom Inc., 2006). O’Kane, Bernard, The Monumental Inscriptions of Historic Cairo (https://is​ lamicinscriptions.cultnat.org). Pickthall, Mohammed Marmaduke, The Meaning of the Glorious Quran: Text and Explanatory Translation (Hyderabad: Government Central Press, 1938). Al-ÍafadÈ, Íalå˙ al-DÈn KhalÈl b. Aybak, Ayån al-Aßr wa Awån al-Naßr, eds AlÈ AbË Zayd, NabÈl AbË Amsha, Mu˙ammad Mawid and Mu˙ammad Sålim Mu˙ammad (Damascus: Dår al-Fikr, 1998), vol. 2. Al-ÍafadÈ, Íalå˙ al-DÈn KhalÈl b. Aybak, al-WåfÈ bi-’l-Wafayyåt (Beirut: Orient-Institut Beirut, 2009), vol. 16. Al-SuyˆÈ, Jalål al-DÈn Abd al-Ra˙mån, Óusn al-Mu˙å∂ara fÈ Ta’rÈkh Mißr wa’l-Qåhira, ed. Mu˙ammad Abu al-Fa∂l IbråhÈm (Dår I˙yå al-Kutub al-Arabiyya, 1967), vol. 2.

237

PART III

INSCRIPTIONS, HISTORY AND SOCIETY

CHAPTER TEN

Tombstones from Aswan in the British Museum Venetia Porter

Amongst the holdings of the British Museum are twenty-two tombstones (twenty-one sandstone and one limestone) associated ­ with the site of Aswan, an important town situated on the Nile overlooking the First Cataract and close to the border with Nubia [Figure 10.1], whose vast necropolis has yielded several thousand tombstones, most from the Fatimid period (358/969–567/1171). The tombstones in the British Museum entered the collection at different times, the majority in 1887 through Wallace Budge, Keeper of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities between 1894 and 1924. They comprise a tiny fraction of the corpus of Aswan tombstones that, from the late nineteenth century onwards, were being removed and relocated to various museums in Egypt and elsewhere.1 Those remaining in Egypt were documented in a series of magisterial catalogues by Monneret de Villard, Gaston Wiet working with Hasan alHawari and H. Rached, and Abd al-Rahman M. Abd al-Tawwab and Solange Ory, and a significant number are reproduced in the

  1 As regards removal of the tombstones, Rageh Mohamed notes that 600 were taken out of the site in 1888. Rageh Z. Mohamed, ‘The Aswanian Islamic Tombstone’. Unpublished. Accessible from the website: https://www.academia.edu/27353799/Islamic_Tombstone_in_Aswan. Between 1892 and 1904, 2,104 tombstones were taken to Cairo, while a further 1,600 were removed during the later excavations of Abd al-Tawwab. While some were re-housed in the Aswan museum, the remainder went to the Museum of Arab Art in Cairo (as the Museum of Islamic Art was then known). See Frédéric Bauden, ‘Tombstone inscriptions and their potential as textual sources for social history’. Unrevised version of a paper that was presented at the Aswan tombstones workshop organised by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut in Aswan, 13–15 February 2010. The proceedings were never published. https:// orbi.uliege.be/bitstream/2268/254591/1/Aswan%202010.pdf., p. 5.

242

venetia porter

Figure 10.1  John Frederick Clifford Hunt (1897–1978). View of Aswan across the river photographed in 1917. H: 5.80 cm, L: 8.30 cm. Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum Af, A52.70.

Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique.2 The importance of these publications is that the inscriptions are fully transcribed along with many accompanying photographs. This rich resource has however, largely remained under exploited, a fact recognised by the organisation of a conference in 2010, which was intended to put in place an extensive research project on the subject within the context of the major project of survey and excavation of Aswan undertaken by the German Archaeological Institute in Cairo in collaboration with the Ministry of Antiquities. Focusing on the southern necropolis, these excavations took place between 2006 and 2014 led by Dr Philipp Speiser.3 The aim of this chapter is not to discuss the corpus of Aswan tombstones as a whole, but to make a modest contribution to the subject by highlighting what can be learnt from a small group in the British Museum. Starting with some brief contextual remarks about Aswan and the circumstances around the removal of the tombstones,

  2 For the catalogues, Ugo Monneret de Villard, La Necropoli Musulmana di Aswan (Cairo: IFAO, 1930); H. Hawary, H. Rached and G. Wiet (eds), Catalogue du Musée arabe du Caire. Les stèles funéraires, 10 vols (Cairo: Musée Arabe du Caire, 1932–42); Abd al-Ra˙man M. Abd alTawwab with the help of Solange Ory, Stèles islamiques de la nécropole d’Assouan, 3 vols (Cairo: IFAO, 1977–86); Gaston Wiet, ‘Stèles coufiques d’Égypte et du Soudan’, Journal asiatique 240 (1952): 273–97. See also TEI = Ludvik Kalus, Frédéric Bauden, Frédérique Soudan, Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique, édition 2020, http://www.epigraphie-islamique.uliege.be for over 200 entries on Aswan tombstones.   3 Sophia Björnesjö and Philipp Speiser, ‘The South Necropolis of the Fatimid Cemetery of Aswan’, Annales islamologiques 48 (2014): 117–34.

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

the chapter will discuss the group in the British Museum, detailing their acquisition, the key features of the content and style of the inscriptions including the names of the deceased and their nisbas, the nature of the religious texts and the materiality of the tombstones ­themselves in terms of size, style and layout.4 Aswan and the Hajj Following the Arab conquest of Egypt in 20/641, Aswan (ancient Syene) grew in importance and maintained its position as the seat of the governorate of Upper Egypt until the fifth/eleventh century. Economically secure on account of its mineral resources, particularly the gold and emerald mines in the eastern desert, it attracted merchants and traders from other parts of Egypt and beyond.5 Located just below the First Cataract, its position meant that it was a natural transition point between river and land traffic. Also of significance for its prosperity in the early medieval period was that one of the Hajj routes to Mecca, the Red Sea route, passed through Aswan. This route gained in importance during the sixth/twelfth century as a result of the expanding Crusader presence in the region when, between 1116 and 1187, a network of castles made the land routes between Egypt and Syria impassable and the Sinai route had to close. Rather than crossing the Sinai desert to Aqaba to join the Syrian Hajj route, in this alternative route, pilgrims who had assembled in Cairo would travel up the Nile, cross the desert and proceed to the port of Aidhab, whence they would cross the sea to Jeddah before heading to Mecca.6   4 I am grateful firstly for the invitation to the conference in Cairo, to Frédéric Bauden, Sheila Blair, Jonathan Bloom and Andrew Peacock for their assistance in the preparation of this chapter and their helpful comments thereafter.   5 Sophia Björnesjö, ‘The History of Aswan and its Cemetery in the Middle Ages’, in Dietrich Raue, Stephan Seidlmayer and Philipp Speiser (eds), The First Cataract of the Nile. One Region – Diverse Perspectives, SDAIK 36 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), pp. 9–13. Here Speiser also discusses the Tulunid and Fatimid tombs.   6 Although an in-depth analysis of the nisbas of the Aswan corpus remains to be done, the large number of tombstones recovered from the site may suggest that in addition to the graves of the local inhabitants, a significant number may have been those of pilgrims. This factor is certainly suggested for the port town of Aidhab visited by G. W. Murray in 1926 who counted some 3,000 graves and noted ‘the disproportionate large size of the cemeteries compared with the smallness of the town’. G. W. Murray, ‘Aidhab’, The Geographical Journal 68 (1926): 235–40; Hugh Kennedy, ‘Journey to Mecca: a history’, in Venetia Porter (ed.), Hajj: Journey to the heart of Islam (London: British Museum Press, 2012) p. 116. Graffiti of pilgrims along this route have been found at the site of Edfu and other sites around Aswan. Venetia Porter, ‘Egypt and the Hajj’, in Cäcilia Fluck, Gisela Helmecke and

243

244

venetia porter

This is the route followed by Nåßir-i Khusraw in 442/1050 (his fourth and last Hajj and the only one taken on this route) and therefore significant in the present context.7 Nåßir-i Khusraw travelled first to Asyut and Qus, where he stayed for twenty days; from there he had a choice of two routes: one through the desert, the other by river to Aswan, the one he selected in the end.8 He described Aswan as having a permanent garrison ‘to defend the city and the province’ and was charmed by the island in the middle of the Nile ‘which is like a garden with date groves, olives and other trees and crops irrigated by water-wheels.’ Nåßir-i Khusraw’s visit occurred in the month of July, and he remained in Aswan for twenty-one days waiting for the return of pilgrims from Hajj so that their camels could be rented anew. During his sojourn in Aswan, renowned as a centre of learning, he met a man by the name of AbË Abdallåh Mu˙ammad b. Falij, ‘a pious and righteous man who knew some logic’ and who helped him secure the hire of his camel which he obtained for one and half dinars. Nåßir-i Khusraw set off on a gruelling fifteen-day journey across the desert to Aidhab, arriving on 12 August. Unfortunately, the northerly wind blowing at this time meant that departure for Jeddah was not possible for another three months. He ran out of funds at this point, but his brief acquaintance with Abdallåh b. Falij from Aswan saved him, as Falij had contacted a merchant in Aidhab who had been instructed to provide Nåßir-i Khusraw with funds as necessary. Acknowledging this kind deed in his chronicle, he wrote that he had included this anecdote ‘so that my readers may know that people can rely on others, that generosity exists everywhere and that there have been and still are noble men’.9 As Kennedy has pointed out, a pilgrim without connections and status might easily have perished in such circumstances as the arduous nature of the journey and the likelihood of disease, of being robbed or worse meant that many pilgrims died on this route.10 Elisabeth R. O’Connell (eds), Egypt after the Pharaohs (London: British Museum Press, 2015), p. 162; D. Kurth, A. Behrmann, D. Buddle, Edfou VII: Die Inschriften des Tempels von Edfu, Abteilung I Übersetzung, Band 2 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2004).   7 Ibn Jubayr travelling in 1183 followed the same Red Sea route but did not go into Aswan and took the alternative desert route known as ‘the road of the two slaves’, by-passing Aswan which he simply describes as ‘a village on the banks of the Nile’. Hugh Kennedy discusses the journeys of Nasir-i Khusraw and Ibn Jubayr in ‘Journey to Mecca’ pp. 110–32; Ibn Jubayr, trans. Roland Broadhurst, The Travels of Ibn Jubayr (London: Goodword books, 2011), p. 60; Porter ‘Egypt and the Hajj’, pp. 160–3.   8 W. M. Thackston, Nåßer-e Khosraw’s Book of Travels (Coasta Mesa: Persian Heritage Foundation 1986), pp. 63–7.   9 Thackston, Book of Travels, p. 67. Other quotes from pp. 63–7; Björnesjö and Speiser, ‘The South Necropolis’, p. 2. 10 Kennedy, ‘Journey to Mecca’, p. 116.

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

Removal of the tombstones from Aswan In December 1887, a massive storm – ‘an almost unheard of event for Aswan, a real tropical downpour’ as described later, in 1952, by the architectural historian K. A. C. Creswell – devastated Aswan, causing terrible damage to the town and its old cemetery and apparently exposing many bodies in the modern cemetery. Sir Wallis Budge of the British Museum happened to be in Aswan at this time. In addition to his work on Ancient Egypt, he made regular trips to Egypt and elsewhere to buy material for the collection. The following description of the sight that greeted him in 1887 and his subsequent actions is quoted fully below because of the crucial information it provides for the tombstones subsequently acquired by the British Museum.11 Over in the old Arab cemetery which lay near one of the granite quarries in the hills, we found two of the notables lamenting the damage which the rain had done. Some of the tombs were the oldest Muhammadan sepulchers in Upper Egypt, and belonged to the earliest centuries of the Hijrah. These tombs were all built of mud, and some had pillars and friezes which suggested they were copies of Byzantine originals, also made of mud. The graceful little Kubbas were kept well whitewashed, and were striking objects in the grim and strong landscape [Figure 10.2]. At the head of every tomb of an important man was set up a large rectangular tablet of sandstone, on which were cut in Kufi characters the name of the deceased, a passage from the Kuran, and the date of his death. As many of these memorial stones dated from the third and fourth centuries of the Hijrah, their importance historically and palaeographically is evident. When we joined the notables they pointed out the terrible damage to the tombs which the rain had done. It had melted the Kubbas and pillars and the mud and plaster decorations, and the mud brick backings of the inscribed tablets of stone had collapsed, and the tablets were lying in pools of liquid mud. It was out of the question to rebuild the tombs and the notables said it was impossible to preserve the inscribed tablets in their proper place above the graves, for they would assuredly be stolen or used for building purposes. At that time there were only one or two poor examples of Kufi tombstones in the British Museum, and I was anxious

11 K. A. C Creswell, The Muslim Architecture of Egypt (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952–9), vol. I, pp. 131–3; Wallace Budge, By Nile and Tigris, A narrative of journeys in Egypt and Mesopotamia on behalf of the British Museum between the years 1886 and 1913 (London: John Murray, 1920) two vols, pp. 97–9; Sir Ernest A. T. Wallis Budge https://www.british​ museum.org/collection/term/BIOG62010.

245

246

venetia porter

Figure 10.2  John Frederick Clifford Hunt (1897–1978). Old town of Aswan showing the cemetery. Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum Af, A52.83.

to obtain a selection of those I saw before me.12 The notables were willing to let me have as many as I wanted provided I took them out of Egypt to a place where they would be preserved and respected, and I selected fourteen of the oldest and best of them without delay … The Maamur told me when he came to see me soon afterwards, that he was thankful that the British had taken possession of the stones, for he could not have protected them adequately. He then suggested that I acquire from him six other Kufi tombstones which he had in a shed near his house, and, as his price was very moderate, I did so. The representative of the Bulak museum reported the action of myself and the Maamur to his chief in Cairo, and received orders from him to take possession of all the Kufi tombstones he could find in Aswan and to dispatch them to him in Cairo on the steamer belonging to the Service of Antiquities. The removal of the tombstones is part of a wider picture of removals before and after 1887 and Creswell, writing in 1952, lamented the unscientific nature of all these removals. The emphasis on the inscription without its context was disastrous in his view and ‘resulted simultaneously in the destruction of historical and archaeological data of the first order … that is to say the correspondence between a given epigraph and the tomb to which it belonged …’ Keeping the information together would not have been difficult, he observed,

12 It is possible that these were the tombstones from Aswan acquired by Sir John Bowring, see below.

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

but ‘the stellae and monuments of Aswan had the misfortune to be Muhammadan instead of belonging to some Pharaonic dynasty’.13 Creswell’s report disproved the prevailing narrative that the tombstones had been removed from their tombs only following the flood of 1887. Two important records document the site prior to the flood and Budge’s visit: the first by Edward Lane in 1820, and a second and highly significant in this context by Félix Teynard in 1851. Lane, who accompanied his description with a sketch of the site, wrote: On the south of the ruined town is the Old Arab Cemetery which presents a striking scene … By the modern inhabitants of Aswan, this is the so-called cemetery of the Sahhabeh (the Companions of the Prophet). The tombs are constructed with crude mud brick, with few exceptions; and are or have been white-washed. Many of them are surmounted by cupolas. They are mostly small and much ruined. Among them are many small tablets or tombstones, from a foot to three feet high, inscribed in Koofee (or old Arabic) characters: generally in the flexuous style these tombstones are very numerous in the souther(n)most quarter of the cemetery. I saw a few in marble: but almost all are in sandstone.14 Clearly examining them in some detail, Lane noted that many were dated between 410 and 430 (1019–39), and that several began with Quran 112. He also commented that ‘it would be difficult for a traveler to carry away one of them: for the people of Aswan regard them with the utmost reverence.’15 As Creswell was to discover, the French photographer Félix Teynard visited the site in 1851 while in Egypt to photograph Pharaonic monuments.16 What is particularly significant about his visit is that he photographed the interior of one of the cupolas, which was filled with what look to be hundreds of tombstones, complete or in fragments [Figure 10.3]. There is no information at present as to the exact time between 1820 and 1851 when this hoard of tombstones was gathered and placed in this location and under whose instructions. It is clear however, that as early as 1838 Aswan

13 Creswell, Muslim Architecture of Egypt, p. 132. 14 Edward William Lane, Description of Egypt: Notes and Views in Egypt and Nubia (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2000), pp. 428–9, fig. 132. Lane was particularly interested in funeral rites, which he described extensively in his 1828 Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians (reprinted London: East-West Publications, 1981), pp. 503–21. For the sketch see https://journals.openedition.org/anisl/docannexe/ image/2259/img-1.jpg. 15 Lane, Description of Egypt, p. 429. 16 Creswell, Muslim Architecture of Egypt, note 3. Félix Teynard, Égypte et Nubie, 160 photographic plates, 2 vols (Paris: Goupil, 1858).

247

248

venetia porter

Figure 10.3  Félix Teynard (1817–92). Assouan, Cimetière Arabe – Inscription Funéraires, 1851–2, printed 1853–4. Imprimerie Photographique de H. de Fonteny et Cie, 23.7 × 30.9 cm. (9 5/16 × 12 3/16 in.). Metropolitan Museum of Art. Lila Acheson Wallace Gift 1976.607.82.

tombstones could be purchased, as attested by an example in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge acquired by William Hodge Mill (1792–1853), a clergyman and scholar of Sanskrit and Hebrew and a collector with a keen interest in ancient scripts, who spent much of his early career in India. While in Egypt on his way home in 1838 he acquired the tombstone dated 441/1040 (within the date range highlighted by Lane, above), along with ostraca and antiquities, and it was donated to the Fitzwilliam Museum following his death.17 Three of the sandstone tombstones from Aswan that entered the British Museum collection were also taken out of Egypt prior to the flood of 1887. They were acquired by Sir John Bowring (1792–1872), 17 Brian Muhs and Tasha Vorderstrasse, ‘Collecting Egyptian Antiquities in the Year 1838: Reverend William Hodge Mill and Robert Curzon, Baron Zouche’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 94 (2008): 243–4. Published in G. T. Martin, Stelae from Egypt and Nubia in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, c. 3000 bc–ad 1150 (Cambridge: Fitzwilliam Museum Publications, 2005), no. 125 (ace. no. E.1).

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

linguist, political economist, Member of Parliament and Governor of Hong Kong. One of these is in Coptic script.18 Bowring made donations to the museum in the 1850s and it is possible that these tombstones came to the museum then or following his death. The exact circumstances of how Bowring came to acquire these tombstones are at present unclear. The artist Robert James Hay donated a fourth tombstone said to be associated with Aswan in 1868, and all these tombstones are discussed below. These few examples show that individual Aswan tombstones were appearing on the market during the first half of the nineteenth century. It was the flood of 1887, however, that began the mass removals of tombstones, mostly to be re-housed in Egyptian museums, although others were also to enter museums abroad subsequently, including two Aswan stelae in the Louvre (dated 298/911 and mid fifth/eleventh century) acquired in 1892.19 The British Museum tombstones associated with Aswan As mentioned above, Budge, following the flood of 1887, initially selected ‘fourteen of the oldest and best’ and then a further ‘six other Kufi tombstones’ which the Mamur had ‘in a shed near his house’. Of this group of twenty, eighteen are in the British Museum, while the location of the last two remains uncertain, although the Arabist William Wright who published the British Museum group likely possessed one of the two.20 To this small corpus, we can add the two Islamic ones acquired by Sir John Bowring and a final example to enter the collection donated by the Reverend L. B. Impson in 1962. While we know that he was a chaplain to the forces and may have served in the Middle East, there is little further information about the circumstances of its acquisition.21 Also associated with the Aswan group, and an oddity amongst them is one acquired by Robert James Hay, according to museum records said to originate in Aswan but which is made of marble. The bulk of the Aswan tombstones are made from sandstone, the 18 On Bowring see https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Bowring. For the Coptic stela see https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/ object/Y_EA604. 19 See note 1 on the removals, and I am grateful to Carine Juvain for pointing these out to me. Louvre MAO 1260 and MAO 1261. 20 Wright, ‘Kufic Tombstones’, note at the end of the article, p. 348, ‘To these I may add a stone from the same cemetery, which is in my possession, bearing the same date as no. IV (412/1021).’ 21 Noted in British Museum Quarterly 26, No. 1/2 (September 1962), p. 76. Reverend Impson was rector of Wilden 1962–c.1975. He was also vicar for Swaton and Horbling and chaplain to the Forces in 1947. https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/38034/supplement/3653/ data.pdf.

249

250

venetia porter

local material. As mentioned above Lane did see in situ some marble ones, but as Frédéric Bauden has emphasised, ‘If marble stelae found their way to Aswan, it was only incidental and they should only be considered for study if they are still in Aswan.’22 Before discussing the group of sandstone tombstones, a few comments are made here about the marble example [Figure 10.4] as it is particularly interesting both in the style and content of its inscription. It was made for a Sitt al-Fajr or al-Fakhr, AshbånÈ, ‘Lady of the Dawn’, or ‘Lady of Pride’, and with a genealogy going back twelve generations and the date of her decease, 14 DhËl Óijja 554/27 December 1159.23 The style of the ‘Kufic’ script is elegant with wedge-shaped and foliate terminals to the letters. The text is framed by an interlaced band and with a band of circles at the top. The lack of context for the tombstones noted by Creswell is particularly frustrating here. A person of such importance might have been buried in a family tomb with other family members, and their relationships would have shed considerable light about the family and their possible position in Aswan society. The fact that the deceased was a woman is also of relevance, as during the Fatimid era, the status of women rose, particularly upon the accession of the Fatimid caliph al-AzÈz (r. 365/975–386/996) as his mother Darzan, his consort al-Sayyida AzÈziyya and her daughter Sitt al-Mulk held prominent positions. The title ‘Sitt al-…’ was also popular in the Fatimid era. The number of women among the deceased among the British Museum tombstones and within the Aswan corpus as a whole is discussed further below.24 Turning now to the sandstone tombstones in more detail, those acquired by Budge for the British Museum were almost immediately published by one of the leading Arabists of his day, Professor William Wright in the Society of Biblical Archaeology in 1887. In prefacing his transcriptions, he remarked on their good state of preservation but noted: archaeologically and historically they are of but little importance, as they are the tombstones of humble villagers, men and women, potters and dyers and goldsmiths and the like (my italics). Still it is interesting to see what such folk thought worth recording of themselves; and the record is, on the whole, surprisingly like that of tradesmen or peasants of our own day in a 22 Bauden, ‘Tombstone inscriptions’, p. 6. 23 https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/W_1868-1102-432. For Robert James Hay (1799–1863), traveller and artist see https://www. britishmuseum.org/collection/term/BIOG30924. 24 Michael Brett, The Fatimid Empire (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017), pp. 97 ff; see for example Sitt al-QußËr, ibid., p. 287. For Darzan’s role in the mosque of al-Qarafa see Jonathan M. Bloom, ‘The Mosque of the Qarafa’, Muqarnas 4 (1987): 7ff.

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

Figure 10.4  Marble tombstone engraved in the name of Sitt al-Fajr (or Fakhr) AshbånÈ, 554/ 1159. H: 51.50 cm, W: 21.75 cm. Acquired by Robert James Hay in Egypt and said to come from Aswan. Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum 1868,1102.432.

251

252

venetia porter

country churchyard – name, profession, date of death, and a verse from the Kor’an, in place of the Bible, setting forth the deceased’s hope of happiness in the life ever-lasting.25 It is precisely the aspect that Wright mentions so disparagingly, however, that is so fascinating about these tombstones; the number of women amongst the deceased, the craft nisbas and the recurrence of family names. This is typical of the wider corpus as noted by Frédéric Bauden in his paper at the 2010 conference. For, on the basis of a sample of more than 800 items in the Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique, Bauden was able to make connections between family members, document client relationships, highlight the use of Coptic names, delineate the numbers of crafts and clusters of deaths that could relate to natural phenomena, epidemics and so on.26 Rageh Mohamed’s paper from the 2010 conference,27 which focused on a group of fifty-eight tombstones in the Aswan museum, also noted the craft nisbas, including a silk weaver (qazzåz) as well as terms such as jåliya (slave), the number of women, the Coptic names and use of Coptic months. As highlighted by Leor Halevi in Muhammad’s Grave, the Aswan tombstones also contribute significantly towards an understanding of Islamicisation, by examining the nature of the Quranic inscriptions and which sËras appear at particular times. It was indeed on a tombstone from Aswan dated 71/691 that is found the first documented use of the shahåda.28 Turning now to the content of the twenty-one sandstone inscriptions in the British Museum from Aswan, the table below encapsulates the type of data that can be extracted from them. They are placed in chronological order, the types of inscriptions across three columns, the British Museum registration number, and the ­publication references.

25 William Wright, ‘Kufic Tombstones in the British Museum’, Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology (1887): 329–49; Bernhard Maier, Semitic Studies in Victorian Britain. A portrait of William Wright and his world through his letters (Werzburg: Ergon-Verlag 2011). 26 Bauden, ‘Tombstone Inscriptions’. 27 Rageh Z. Mohamed, ‘The Aswanian Islamic Tombstone’. He noted that these were from a place he described as ‘El-Mashhad dome’. It is possible that this is the place photographed by Teynard. https://www. academia.edu/27353799/Islamic_Tombstone_in_Aswan. 28 Bacharach, Jere L. and Sherif Anwar, ‘Early Versions of the shahada: A Tombstone from Aswan of 71 a.h., the Dome of the Rock, and Contemporary Coinage’, Der Islam: Journal of the History and Culture of the Middle East 89 (2012): 60–69. First published by Hassan M. El-Hawary, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 2 (1932): 290. (Registered as Wiet No. 929.)

408/1017

412/1021 [Fig. 10.5] 418/1027

420/1029

420/1029

421?/1030 Basmala Q25:10 [Fig. 10.7]

 4

 5

 7

 8

 9

Basmala Q9:21–2

Basmala Q41:30

Basmala Q55:26–27

Basmala Q14:52

Basmala Q112

Basmala Shahåda Basmala Q25:10

taßlÈya (+pure)

taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya (+pure)

taßlÈya

taßlÈya

taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya

Source

Reg. no.

Få†ima bnt. Jafar b. Mu˙ammad al-Sabbågh (the dyer) Jafar b. A˙mad b. AlÈ b. Mu˙ammad b. Qåsim b.Abd al-Íamad Få†ima bnt. AlÈ, b. Abdallåh b. Junåda IbråhÈm b. al-Óusain b. Is˙åq b. YaqËb b. Is˙åq b. Is˙åq Jafar b. A˙mad b. Abdallåh b. Mu˙ammad b. al-Qåsim al-TilåfÈ(?) Ya˙yå b. A˙mad, b.AlÈ b. Mu˙ammad b. Qåsim b. Abd al-Íamad b. Ya˙yå b. Badr Budge

Impson

Budge

Budge

Budge

Budge

Is˙åq b. YaqËb b. Is˙åq b. IbråhÈm Budge

Wright 5

Wright 4

Wright 3

Wright 2

Wright 1

Publication

1887,0402.1441

1962,0517.1

1887,0402.1439

Wright 8

Wright 6

1887,0402.14440 Wright 7

1887,0402.1438

1887,0402.1437

1887,0402.1436

Azhar b. Abd al-Salåm b. Is˙åq Budge 1887,0402.1434 b. Qåsim Mu˙ammad b. Íabåh al-Mawlå Budge 1887,0402.1435 (the freedman of) Óasan al-MudlijÈ Is˙åq b. Abd al-Ra˙mån b. Is˙åq Bowring 671

Inscription Name

29 Further work on the transcriptions of the British Museum tombstones was done by Mahmoud Hawari. It is possible that there are two or more tombstones in the collection but it has not been possible to verify these at the present time. These transcriptions can be found on the British Museum website under their registration numbers. See also Mahmoud Hawari, ‘Early Islamic Tombstones from Aswan’, in Cäcilia Fluck, Gisela Helmecke and Elisabeth R. O’Connell (eds), Egypt after the Pharaohs (London: British Museum Press, 2015), pp. 244–5.

10 422/1031

 6

300/912

 3

Basmala Q112

291/904

 2

Basmala

252/866

Basmala Quran Shahåda

 1

Date

Table 10.1  The sandstone tombstones in the British Museum from Aswan29

Basmala Q25:10

Basmala Q112

Basmala Q3:133 Q35:10 Basmala Q112

Basmala Q112

Basmala Q3:185

Basmala Q25:10

Basmala Q112

Basmala Q112 Shahåda Q9:33

12 424/1033

13 427/1036

14 431/1040

16 432/1040

17 443/1052

18 445/1054

19 447/1055

20 455/106 [Fig. 10.6]

Date missing

1 Greek κεραμεθς. See note 5.

21

taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya (+pure)

taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya (+pure) taßlÈya

taßlÈya (+pure)

taßlÈya (+pure)

Source

IsmåÈl b. Husain, b. Is˙åq b. YaqËb b. Is˙åq HårËn b. Ya˙yå al-Íåigh (the goldsmith) b. […] b. GhartisyånË(?) Qåsim b. Isa b. Abdallåh b. A˙mad b. AlÈ b. Mu˙ammad Få∂ila bnt. Mu˙ammad b. Abdallåh b. AlÈ, known as al-WåkibÈ(?) Mu˙ammad b. Ubaidallåh b. Musa b. Ubaidallåh b. Ubaid Iså Ubaidallåh b. Jafar b. Abd al-Ra˙mån Baraka bnt. Óusain b. Rizqallåh b. AlÈ b. Óusain b.DaËd al-Íåigh (the goldsmith) [Bara]kåt al-MakkÈ?Abil Óusain b. Óa[san]

1887,0402.1449

1889,0420.6

1887,0402.1448

1887,0402.1447

1889,0420

1887,0402.1446

1887,0402.1445

1887,0402.1444

1887,0402.1443

1887,0402.1442

Reg. no.

Bowring OA+.6412 [686]

Budge

Budge?

Budge

Budge

Budge?

Budge

Budge

ÓabÈba bnt. AlÈ b. A˙mad Budge b. Ubaydallåh (the potter from Edfu1) b. [….]Óasan, b. Qibål al-Mawlå Budge (the freedman of) Hubaira b. Óusain b. Hubaira Maiyå bnt.AlÈ, b. A˙mad b. Is˙åq Budge

Inscription Name

Basmala undeciphered taßlÈya

Basmala Q25:26

11 423/1032

15 432/1041

Basmala Quran Shahåda

Date

Table 10.1  (continued )

Wright 16

Wright 15

Wright 14

Wright 13

Wright 12

Wright 11

Wright 10

Wright 9

Publication

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

Dates and religious texts Other than the first three, the rest (4–21) belong to the Fatimid period (358/969–555/1171), with dates sometimes close together between 408/1017 and 455/1063. This range conforms to the overall corpus. As hinted but not explicitly stated by Budge, the narrow range of dates suggests that at least the Fatimid group may have come from one locale. There are even two the same year (7, 8). Again as typical of the period, all the inscriptions are in an angular ‘Kufic’ script. The reference to the deceased appears in different places in the text. In the pre-Fatimid period tombstone of Azhar (d. 252/866) (1) it appears immediately after the basmala on the second line starting with hådha qabr (this is the tomb of), whereas in most of the others the phrase occurs towards the end of the inscription. The time of death is mentioned in varying detail in conformity with how deaths are recorded in written chronicles, including how many days were left or had passed in a month.30 In the tombstone of Azhar, for example, he died on ‘Thursday, when five (nights) remained (the 25th) of Jumådå I, in the year 252 (ad 866)’. The same formula appears on a tombstone some two hundred years later, Ishåq (4) ‘died on Sunday, when five (nights) remained (i.e. the 24th) of the latter Jumåda in the year 408 (ad 1017)’. While Jafar (6) ‘died on Thursday when six days (nights) had passed (the 6th) during Mu˙arram in the year 418 (ad 1027)’. Elsewhere, the date alone is mentioned, as, for example ÓabÈba (11) who ‘died on the first of Shawwål in the year 423 (ad 1032)’. The other texts can be divided into two main areas: the religious content including references to the Prophet’s family and verses from the Quran inscriptions, and names and nisbas. As regards the religious content, the basmala is always present, and two examples also include the shahåda (3, 20). The taßlÈya, the phrase which refers to the Prophet’s family, ßalla Allåh alå Mu˙ammad al-nabÈ wa ålihi (May God bless the Prophet Mu˙ammad and his family), generally with the addition of al-†ahirÈn (the pure), is only present on the Fatimid-era examples. Bauden has also observed that the taßlÈya is virtually constant in Fatimid tombstones.31 It is clear, however, that the phrase had been used before the Fatimid era and also after, in a Sunni context.32 Wiet, writing in 1952, noted the use of the full phrase, ‘God bless the Prophet Mu˙ammad and his pure family’ on a pre-Fatimid tombstone from 30 I am grateful to Andrew Peacock for this comment. 31 Bauden, ‘Tombstone inscriptions’, p. 19. 32 Christopher Taylor suggests that the phrase was not exclusively Shii and can also be found in Sunni contexts after the end of the Fatimid period. Christopher S. Taylor, ‘Reevaluating the Shii Role in the Development of Monumental Islamic Funerary Architecture: The Case of Egypt’, Muqarnas 9 (1992), p. 7ff.

255

256

venetia porter

Aswan dated 325/936, and concluded that ‘this was the result of propaganda, a means cherished by the Fatimids to reach their goals’.33 In a seminal article on the Mosque of the Qarafa in Cairo, Jonathan Bloom embarked on a major statistical analysis of the Egyptian tombstones of the Fatimid period – some 4,000 from the cemeteries of al-Qarafa, Aswan and elsewhere published in the ten volumes of the Museum of Islamic Art.34 He noted that while there are some examples of the taßlÈya in the decades up to 300/912, the numbers begin to rise dramatically thereafter and furthermore that the addition of the word al-†åhirÈn (‘the pure’) is significant, thus concurring with Wiet that the presence of the phrase can be seen as an indicator of the spread in the acceptance of Ismaili Shiism among the population. Bloom counters the opinion that complete acceptance of Ismailism was limited to a small elite, arguing that while Ismailism was an intellectual movement, ‘its success cannot be explained by its intellectual appeal alone … its proponents [the dåÈs] concentrated mainly on the mass of ordinary people.’35 He suggests further that the debate on the spread and absorption of Ismailism tends to be based on studies of official documents and chronicles and that tombstones offer perspectives that may differ from official accounts.36 Taylor, while countering Bloom’s theory, admits that ‘[Bloom] may be right in that the Fatimids took advantage of the important role that the cult of Alid saints played in the social and religious life of Fatimid Egypt’.37 The inscriptions from the Quran among the Aswan group in the British Museum are also of interest. Leor Halevy traced the use of particular verses as part of documenting the process of Islamisation and was able to show the changing nature of Quran usage in everyday rituals, particularly as regards the dead.38 In the British Museum group, the particular sËras are listed as part of Table 10.1, and it is notable that seven out of the twenty-one tombstones are inscribed with Quran 112 (al-Ikhlåß) (2, 5, 13, 15, 16, 19, 20). Lane had already noted this, and its frequent appearance conforms with the popularity of this sËra as highlighted by Halevy. As this chapter focuses only

33 Gaston Wiet, ‘Stèles coufiques d’Égypte et du Soudan’, Journal asiatique 240 (1952) and see also Bauden, ‘Tombstone Inscriptions’, p. 20. 34 Bloom, ‘The Mosque of the Qarafa’. 35 Ibid., p. 13. 36 I am grateful to Jonathan Bloom for these insights. The complexities of Fatimid rule and the role of Sunnis are discussed in Brett, Fatimid Empire, p. 148 and elsewhere. 37 Taylor, ‘Reevaluating the Shii Role’, p. 7. See also Bloom, ‘The Mosque of the Qarafa’, p. 15 on the growing position and rivalries of the different Alid groups in Fustat and elsewhere. 38 Leor Halevy, Muhammad’s Grave: Death Rites and the Making of Islamic Society (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011).

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

on the British Museum group, it is impossible here to comment further about how representative the selection of sËras is within the wider corpus. Nevertheless, it is clear that the use of particular sËras is deliberate, and Richard McClary (elsewhere in this volume) documented the diffusion of sËra 9 (al-Tawba) v. 33, the verse known as ‘the Prophetic Mission’.39 While most inscriptions include a single passage from the Quran, two examples contain two excerpts: (14) 431/1040, which combines Q3:133 and Q35:10, and (20) engraved with Q112 and Q9:33. Women and craft nisbas A further notable feature of the tombstones in the published corpus from Aswan is the high percentage of women among the deceased, a percentage unusual within the context of Muslim tombstones as a whole. This phenomenon is confirmed within the British Museum group, as six of the twenty-one are women (5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 20) (in addition to the tombstone of Sitt al-Fajr/Fakhr discussed above). The prominent role played by women in rituals around death in the cemeteries at this period may be connected to the significance of women in Fatimid society in general, as detailed by Delia Cortese and Simonetta Calderini in Women and the Fatimids in the World of Islam.40 The British Museum group includes three craft nisbas: Få†ima, who died in 412/1021 [Figure 10.5], is the granddaughter of Mu˙ammad the dyer (5) (sabbågh); a potter is specified as coming from Edfu (11) using the Greek word qarmusi (κεραμεθς);41 and there are two references to goldsmiths (15, 20) (såigh).42 One of the antecedents of Ya˙yå al-Såigh has a name which Wright read as al-GhartisiånË, possibly suggesting an Italian origin, although the exact identity is not secure.43 Two tombstones use the term mawlå (freedman), again typical of the wider corpus.44

39 Richard McClarey, in this volume. 40 Delia Cortese and Simonetta Calderini, Women and the Fatimids in the World of Islam (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006); Bloom, ‘The Mosque of the Qarafa’, p. 14. 41 Edfu is an important Ancient Egyptian site and on the Hajj route, see above note 5. 42 On the craft nisbas see Bauden, ‘Tombstone Inscriptions’, p. 16, citing W. Diem and M. Schoeller, The Living and the Dead in Islam. Studies in Arabic Epitaphs, 3 vols (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 2004). 43 Wright, ‘Kufic Tombstones’, no. XIII, pp. 343–4. He suggests this may be intended as Graziano. 44 On the use of the term mawlå in Aswan tombstones see Bauden, ‘Tombstone Inscriptions’, p. 13

257

258

venetia porter

Figure 10.5  Sandstone tombstone engraved in the name of Få†ima bnt. Jafar b. Mu˙ammad the dyer in 412/1021. H: (with base) 64.0 cm, W: 49.0 cm. Acquired in Aswan by Sir Wallis Budge. Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum 1887,0402.1437.

Formal considerations of the tombstones in the British Museum As far as the tombstones themselves, some are more modest than others, and the range of sizes and quality point to differing status among the deceased and varying skills among the letter carvers. As regards the disposition of the inscription on the stone, Sheila Blair has suggested that carvers might lay out and carve the basic formulae, adding the name and date later. This is indeed likely as

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

Figure 10.6  Sandstone tombstone engraved in the name of Baraka bnt. Óusayn b. Rizqallåh b. AlÈ b. Óusayn b. DaËd the goldsmith in 455/1063. Acquired in Aswan by Sir Wallis Budge. Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum 1887,0402.1449.

259

260

venetia porter

Figure 10.7  Sandstone tombstone engraved in the name of Jafar b. A˙mad b. Abdallåh b. Mu˙ammad b. al-Qåsim al-TilåfÈ(?)in 421?/1030? Acquired in Egypt by the Reverend L. B. Impson. Courtesy Trustees of the British Museum 1962,0517.1.

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

some as the lines are unevenly spaced and, within the same stone, there might be different hands at work. One fascinating aspect is to see how the carver sometimes strayed into the border while trying to fit the text on the stone. It can be either a letter or a few words, or in one example (20), the extra text fills the entire border. This latter example, dated 455/1063 and made for a woman named Baraka, one of whose antecedents was a goldsmith [Figure 10.6], is virtually identical in terms of layout and calligraphic style to an example published by Wiet that had been made nearly ten years earlier in 446/1055 for a woman named ÓabÈba.45 An interesting feature of (10) dated 422/1031 is that the frame with its triangular projection at the top echoes the form of a tabula ansata, perhaps a legacy of the Roman tradition. It is hoped that this brief analysis of the tombstones associated with Aswan in the British Museum, a fraction of the wider corpus, can make a contribution to the wider study of this valuable resource. For these objects have the potential to shed light not only on epigraphy but on social history and on the practices of Islam itself proffering insights that compliment the historical narratives that contemporary chronicles present. There is, however, another important element here and that is the circumstances of the removal of these objects from their original locus, the resulting decontextualisation and the role they then play in a museum collection. This history adds yet another layer to the fascinating stories these objects tell. Bibliography Abd al-Tawwab, Abd al-Ra˙man M. and Solange Ory, Stèles islamiques de la nécropole d’Assouan, 3 vols (Cairo: IFAO, 1977–86). Bacharach, Jere L. and Sherif Anwar, ‘Early Versions of the shahada: A Tombstone from Aswan of 71 a.h., the Dome of the Rock, and Contemporary Coinage’, Der Islam: Journal of the History and Culture of the Middle East 89 (2012): 60–9. Bauden, Frédéric, ‘Tombstone inscriptions and their potential as textual sources for social history’. Unrevised version of a paper that was presented at the Aswan tombstones workshop organised by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut in Aswan, 13–15 February 2010. https://orbi. uliege.be/bitstream/2268/254591/1/Aswan%202010.pdf. Björnesjö, Sophia, ‘The History of Aswan and its Cemetery in the Middle Ages’, in Dietrich Raue, Stephan Seidlmayer and Philipp Speiser (eds), The First Cataract of the Nile. One Region – Diverse Perspectives, SDAIK 36 Berlin: De Gruyter, 2013), pp. 9–13. Björnesjö, Sophia and Philipp Speiser, ‘The South Necropolis of the Fatimid Cemetery of Aswan’, Annales islamologiques 48: 2, 2014, pp. 117–34. Bloom, Jonathan M., ‘The Mosque of the Qarafa’, Muqarnas 4 (1987): 7–20. Brett, Michael, The Fatimid Empire (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017). 45 Wiet, Stèles Funéraires No. 1250.

261

262

venetia porter

Budge, Wallis, By Nile and Tigris, A narrative of journeys in Egypt and Mesopotamia on behalf of the British Museum between the years 1886 and 1913, 2 vols (London: John Murray, 1920). Cortese, Delia and Simonetta Calderini, Women and the Fatimids in the World of Islam (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006). Creswell, K. A. C., The Muslim Architecture of Egypt (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952–9). Halevy, Leor, Rites for the Dead. Funerals and the Afterlife in Early Islam (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2007). Hawari, Mahmoud, ‘Early Islamic Tombstones from Aswan’, in Cäcilia Fluck, Gisela Helmecke and Elisabeth R. O’Connell (eds), Egypt after the Pharaohs (London: British Museum Press 2015), pp. 244–5. El-Hawary, Hassan Mohammed, ‘The Second Oldest Islamic Monument Known, Dated a.h. 71 (a.d. 691). From the Time of the Omayyad Calif Abd-el-Malik ibn Marwån’, The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 2 (1932): 289–93. El-Hawary, Hassan Mohammed, H. Rached and Gaston Wiet (eds), Catalogue du Musée arabe du Caire. Les stèles funéraires, 10 vols (Cairo: Imprimerie nationale, 1932–42). Ibn Jubayr, trans. Roland Broadhurst, The Travels of Ibn Jubayr (London: Goodword books, 2011 reprint). Kennedy, Hugh, ‘Journey to Mecca: a history’, in Venetia Porter (ed.), Hajj: Journey to the heart of Islam (London: British Museum Press, 2012) pp. 110–32. Kurth, Dieter, Almuth Behrmann et al., ‘Edfou VII: Die Inschriften des Tempels von Edfu’, Abteilung I Übersetzung, 2 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2004). Lane, Edward William, Description of Egypt: Notes and Views in Egypt and Nubia (Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2000). Maier, Bernhard, Semitic Studies in Victorian Britain. A portrait of William Wright and his world through his letters (Werzburg: ErgonVerlag, 2011). Martin, G. T., Stelae from Egypt and Nubia in the Fitzwilliam Museum, c. 3000 bc–ad 1150 (Cambridge: Fitzwilliam Museum Publications, 2005). Mohamed, Rageh Z., ‘The Aswanian Islamic Tombstone’. Unpublished. Accessible via Accademia https://www.academia.edu/27353799/Islamic_ Tombstone_in_Aswan. Monneret de Villard, Ugo, La Necropoli Musulmana di Aswan (Cairo: IIFAO, 1930). Muhs, Brian and Tasha Vorderstrasse, ‘Collecting Egyptian Antiquities in the Year 1838: Reverend William Hodge Mill and Robert Curzon, Baron Zouche’, The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 94 (2008): 223–45. Murray G. W., ‘Aidhab’, The Geographical Journal, 68 (1926): 235–40. Porter, Venetia, ‘Egypt and the Hajj’, in Cäcilia Fluck, Gisela Helmecke and Elisabeth R. O’Connell (eds), Egypt after the Pharaohs (London: British Museum Press 2015) pp. 160–3. Raue, Dietrich, Stephan Seidlmayer and Philipp Speiser (eds), The First Cataract of the Nile. One Region – Diverse Perspectives, SDAIK 36 (Berlin, De Gruyter: 2013). Taylor, Christopher S., ‘Reevaluating the Shii Role in the Development of Monumental Islamic Funerary Architecture: The Case of Egypt’, Muqarnas 9 (1992).

tombstones from aswan in the british museum

TEI = Ludvik Kalus, Frédéric Bauden, Frédérique Soudan, Thesaurus d’Épigraphie Islamique, édition 2020, http://www.epigraphie-islamique. uliege.be. Teynard, Félix, Égypte et Nubie (Paris: Goupil, 1858). Thackston, W. M., Naser-e Khosraw’s Book of Travels (New York: Persian Heritage Foundation 1986). Wiet, Gaston, ‘Stèles coufiques d’Égypte et du Soudan’, Journal asiatique 240 (1952): 273–97. Wright, William, ‘Kufic Tombstones in the British Museum’, Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology (1887): 329–49.

263

CHAPTER ELEVEN

Marwanid Inscriptions Carole Hillenbrand

In a paper published in 1920 the Swiss scholar Samuel Flury expressed a very positive view of fifth/eleventh-century Islamic inscriptions: ‘The Islamic inscription in the course of the eleventh century reached the apogee of its evolution. What later centuries produced is only variation and continuation of inherited types.’1 Flury was a great admirer of Marwanid inscriptions in particular, and his drawings [Figure 11.1]2 highlight with great skill the highly ornamental calligraphy found in some of them. Marwanid inscriptions have also attracted the attention of other Western epigraphers and specialists in Islamic art. Those who have written on this subject include Max van Berchem3 and Jean Sauvaget4 and, much more

  1 Samuel Flury, Islamische Schriftbänder Amida-Diarbekr XI. Jahrhun­ dert (Basel: Frobenius A.G., 1920), p. 7. My translation from the German text.   2 Flury, Islamische Schriftbänder, p. 11, Abb. 1: AmÈr A˙mad, 426 H (1034–5).   3 Max van Berchem, ‘Matériaux pour l’Épigraphie et l’Histoire musulmanes du Diyar-Bekr’, in Max van Berchem and Josef Strzygowski, Amida (Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung and Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1910), pp. 3–128. See also Max van Berchem,‘Arabische Inschriften’, in Carl Friedrich Lehmann-Haupt, Materialien zur älteren Geschichte Armeniens und Mesopotamiens (Göttingen: Abhandlungen der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Philologisch-Historische Klasse. Neue Folge Band IX, No. 3, 1906), pp. 125–60.   4 Albert Gabriel, Voyages Archéologiques dans la Turquie Orientale, avec un Recueil d’Inscriptions Arabes par Jean Sauvaget, 1 Texte, Cinquième Partie (Paris: De Boccard, 1940), pp. 291–356. The Marwanid ­inscriptions analysed by Jean Sauvaget are nos. 44–56, pp. 312–37.

marwanid inscriptions

Figure 11.1  Amid, inscription of 426/1035–6, one-line drawing (after Samuel Flury, Schriftbänder).

recently, Sheila Blair5 and Michael Burgoyne.6 This chapter will not, however, focus on these inscriptions as specimens of Islamic art. As a historian, my interest in epigraphy, whether it is on the monumental scale appropriate to architecture or on a much smaller scale, as in coins, is in the content of inscriptions – the matter rather than the manner. Who were the Marwanids? The dissolution and fragmentation of Abbasid power in the fourth/ tenth and fifth/eleventh centuries led to the appearance of a number of small dynasties across many areas of the Muslim world. One such dynasty was established by a Kurdish family, who came to be known as the Marwanids [Figure 11.2].7 A fierce warrior known in the sources as Bådh the Kurd, having seized power briefly in the cities of Mayyafariqin (modern Silvan) and Amid (Diyarbakır) in 372/983, was murdered by a coalition of Hamdanid and Uqaylid forces in 380/990.8 Bådh’s nephew by marriage, AbË AlÈ al-Óasan b. Marwån, having ousted the Hamdanids, then re-took possession of Mayyafariqin and Amid.9 He is regarded as the first Marwanid ruler.   5 Sheila Blair, ‘Decoration of City Walls in the Medieval Islamic World: the Epigraphic Evidence’, in James D. Tracey (ed.), City Walls. The Urban Enceinte in Global Perspective (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 488–529.   6 Michael Burgoyne, ‘A Recently Discovered Marwanid Inscription in Jerusalem’, Levant 14 (1982): 118–21.   7 Thomas Ripper, Die Marwaniden von Diyar Bakr. Eine kurdische Dynastie im islamischen Mittelalter (Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2000), Karten, no. 3, ‘Die Herrschaft der Marwaniden Emire (990/991 bis 1085/1086)’.   8 Ibn al-Azraq al-FåriqÈ, TarÈkh al-FåriqÈ, ed. BadawÈ Abd al-La†Èf Awad (Cairo: General Organisation for Government Printing Offices, 1959), p. 58; Ibn al-AthÈr, Al-Kåmil fi’l-Ta’rÈkh, ed. Carl J. Tornberg (Beirut: Dar Sader Publishers, repr. 1979), vol. ix, p. 70.   9 Ibn al-Azraq al-FåriqÈ, TarÈkh, p. 59; Ibn al-AthÈr, Al-Kåmil fi’l-tarÈkh, vol. ix, p. 71.

265

266

carole hillenbrand

Figure 11.2  Map of Marwanid territories, from 990–1 to 1085–6 (after Thomas Ripper, Marwaniden).

The Marwanid dynasty (five rulers in all) lasted almost 100 years – from 380/990 to 478/1085. AbË AlÈ ruled for seven years only. After his murder at Amid in 387/997, his brother Mumahhid al-Dawla SaÈd ruled more successfully until 401/1011. These two rather precarious reigns paved the way for the accession of a third brother, Naßr al-Dawla A˙mad, whose rule of an almost incredible fifty years marks the apogee of Marwanid power. On the death of Naßr alDawla (453/1061), the power and prestige of the dynasty declined markedly. His son NiΩåm al-DÈn Naßr succeeded him, at first only in Mayyafariqin and then two years later in Amid too. On the death of NiΩåm al-DÈn (472/1079) his son Naßir al-Dawla ManßËr, the last Marwanid ruler, came to power. The dynasty was snuffed out finally in 478/1085 by the Seljuq Turks.10 The major primary source for the history of the Marwanids of Diyar Bakr and their inscriptions is without doubt the still littleused Arabic chronicle entitled TarÈkh MayyåfåriqÈn wa-Åmid of Ibn al-Azraq al-FåriqÈ (d. after 572/1176–7). In this work Ibn al-Azraq provides detailed coverage of the history of the Marwanid dynasty, 10 For a summary of these events, see Carole Hillenbrand, ‘Marwanids’, in C. Edmund Bosworth, Emery van Donzel, Bernard Lewis and Charles Pellat (eds), Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd edition), vol. VI (Leiden: Brill, 1991), columns 626a–627a. For a detailed historical overview of Marwanid rule, see Ripper, Die Marwaniden von Diyar Bakr, pp. 29–108.

marwanid inscriptions

380/990–478/1085. This part of the chronicle, well edited by the Egyptian scholar ‘Awad in 1959, still remains untranslated, but some of its contents were summarised in two long articles written by H. F. Amedroz in 1902 and 1903.11 However, Amedroz fails to mention in either of these articles any of the information given by Ibn al-Azraq about Marwanid monumental inscriptions. Ibn al-Azraq travelled widely in the Jazira but in his chronicle he remained steadfastly attached to and proud of his home city, Mayyafariqin. When dealing with the Marwanids his account is essentially local in focus and favourably disposed to the city. He provides a number of very interesting details not found in other sources. Later writers, such as Ibn al-AthÈr and Sib† b. al-JawzÈ, also give some information about the Marwanids,12 but this is largely based on the accounts of Ibn al-Azraq. More significantly, Ibn Khallikån writes his own laudatory biography of Naßr al-Dawla.13 Exceptionally, Ibn Khallikån calls him al-KurdÈ. But he does not embellish his account of Naßr al-Dawla by mentioning his rebuilding projects or the ­architectural inscriptions which praise him. An examination of the inscriptions of Mayyafariqin mentioned by Ibn al-Azraq The medieval fortifications of Mayyafariqin dated back to Justinian’s building activities in the sixth century ad.14 However, Ibn al-Azraq points out that in the early days of Marwanid rule the fortifications of Mayyafariqin were in a crumbling state and these Kurdish newcomers were obliged to undertake comprehensive rebuilding. According to his account, AbË’l-Fawåris, the brother of the founder of the dynasty, Bådh the Kurd, had carried out substantial repairs in many parts of the fortifications: ‘(While) Bådh was busy conquering territories and armies, AbË’l-Fawåris stayed in MayyåfåriqÈn and his name is on the walls in many places and he rebuilt the walls in less than two years.’15 According to Ibn al-Azraq, the second Marwanid ruler, Mumahhid al-Dawla, invested heavily in erecting public buildings. He ruled a

11 Henry Frederick Amedroz, ‘Three Arabic Manuscripts on the History of the City of Mayyafariqin’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1902): 785–812; idem, ‘The Marwanid Dynasty at Mayyafariqin in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries a.d.’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1903): 123–54. 12 Sib† Ibn al-JawzÈ, Miråt al-Zamån 440–490, ed. Qåsim Óasan Yuzbak (Beirut: Kulliyat al-adab wa’l-ËlËm al-insåniyya, 1984). 13 Ibn Khallikån, Kitåb Wafayåt al-Ayån, trans. Baron MacGuckin de Slane (Beirut: Librairie du Liban, repr.1970), pp. 157–8. 14 Ripper, Die Marwaniden von Diyar Bakr, pp. 387–8. 15 Ibn al-Azraq, TarÈkh, p. 52.

267

268

carole hillenbrand

frontier state, which needed strong defences. Ibn al-Azraq mentions that Mumahhid al-Dawla made considerable improvements to the walls of Mayyafariqin and that his name was to be found on the outside of the city wall in no less than twenty-two places and – in addition to that – was mentioned a number of times on the inside of the wall.16 Despite this detailed information from Ibn al-Azraq, it must be admitted that there are no longer any extant signs of the name of Mumahhid al-Dawla on the walls. It is possible that his work on the walls was replaced by that of his successors, and also that his inscriptions were painted rather than carved, and thus certain to fade over time. As for the greatest Marwanid ruler, Naßr al-Dawla, Ibn al-Azraq emphasises his determination to build monuments in Mayyafariqin, to restore existing ones and to decorate them. In this respect, then, he continued the traditions established by his two immediate predecessors and he placed small settlements (presumably groups of houses) on the walls of Mayyafariqin.17 At one point Ibn al-Azraq sums up the achievements of the Marwanid rulers in building walls and writing inscriptions on them in the following passage: The wall of MayyåfåriqÈn … had remained until the rule of the BanË Marwån and many places in it had collapsed. The amÈr AbË ManßËr al-Mumahhid built many settlements (mawå∂i) and his name is on them on both the outside and inside of the wall. The amÈr AbË AlÈ (had) built settlements on it (the wall) and his name is on them. Naßr al-Dawla and NiΩåm al-DÈn built many structures consisting of towers and curtain walls and other buildings. These edifices were of the finest quality. The amount of places with his name on them which Naßr al-Dawla had built in the wall on the outside was counted and it was found to be nine places. Another report said twenty places. What he had built on the inside of the wall inside the city and on which his name was written was (also) counted and it was around thirty places. And he established villages on the wall and other settlements18 [cf. Figures 11.3 and 11.4]. So it is clear from what Ibn al-Azraq writes that the Marwanid rulers of Mayyafariqin did indeed arrange for the placing of inscriptions in their names on the walls of the city. However, the fact that Marwanid inscriptions were also put up on the walls of their other major city, Amid, does not receive mention, thanks to Ibn al-Azraq’s narrow focus on his home, Mayyafariqin. What is clear from his account,

16 Ibid., p. 86. 17 Ibid., p. 110. 18 Ibid., pp. 163–4.

marwanid inscriptions

Figure 11.3  Mayyafariqin, walls.

however, is that a family tradition of multiple public commemoration of building and restoration work developed between c. 372/983 and 453/1061. This tradition involved festooning the walls, inside and out, with dozens of inscriptions naming the rulers of the city. These were not men to hide their light under a bushel. Unfortunately, Ibn al-Azraq provides no information at all about these inscriptions. We can learn nothing of their length or content, nor whether they were of a temporary nature – perhaps painted directly onto the walls, or on wooden panels nailed into the walls, or intended to be permanent and therefore carved into the stone. Sometimes they stood out because the stone that was used was of a different colour from that of the surrounding wall, and it may have been painted. Another mystery is their location. If the name of the ruler was meant to be easily legible, a location relatively close to the ground would have made sense. But it was common practice in the medieval Islamic world for inscriptions to be located so high up as to be out of sight, and thus to lay a purely symbolic claim to the building. The evidence of the numerous medieval inscriptions at nearby Amid shows that both legible inscriptions lower down and practically illegible ones higher up mention one and the same ruler. But on present evidence the Marwanid rulers’ obsession

269

270

carole hillenbrand

Figure 11.4  Amid, walls.

marwanid inscriptions

with overloading their city walls with epigraphy claiming credit for their work is a novel feature. The choice of location for the Marwanid inscriptions The favourite locations for inscriptions were the walls of the two cities of Amid and Mayyafariqin. The extant Marwanid inscriptions are confined to these walls; their mosques and palaces have not survived. There are many more Marwanid inscriptions still extant on the walls of Amid than on those of Mayyafariqin, despite the clear evidence from the medieval sources that Mayyafariqin was the Marwanid capital. The reason for this is that the walls of Amid have stood the test of time very much better than those of Mayyafariqin, which has lost most of them. The dynasty took some time to assert control of Amid definitively, but once they did so, they derived enormous benefit from that city’s potential for publicity and prestige; after all, it still had centuries-old sturdy black basalt walls very well suited for inscriptions to be placed upon them. Mayyafariqin, on the other hand, possessed paler-coloured stone walls which have stood the test of time less well. Some extant Marwanid inscriptions The earliest extant inscription of the Kurdish Marwanid period is in the name of the first ruler of the dynasty, AbË AlÈ al-Óasan b. Marwån (ruled 380/990–387/997).19 It was inscribed on the Kharput Gate of Amid to celebrate an unnamed military victory. It is dated 386/996, is in simple Kufic, and is short and to the point: ّ ‫بسم هللا أمر بعمله األمير المنصور أبو عليّ الحسن بن مروان‬ ّ ‫أعز [هللا] نصره [في] سنة‬ ‫ست‬ ‫(و) ثمانين وثلثمائة‬ In the name of God. This has been made at the order of the victorious amir AbË AlÈ al-Óasan b. Marwån. May [God] glorify his victory. [In] the year 386. From the precarious fourteen-year period in power of the second Marwanid ruler, Mumahhid al-Dawla, a single inscription in simple Kufic script and dated 391/1001 has survived [Figure 11.5].20 It is written high up on the wall on two projecting stones on a round tower in the northeastern part of the encircling wall at Mayyafariqin.

19 Répertoire Chronologique d’Épigraphie Arabe, Étienne Combe, Jean Sauvaget and Gaston Wiet (eds) (Cairo: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1935), vol. 6, pp. 20–1. 20 Ibid., p. 41.

271

272

carole hillenbrand

Figure 11.5  Mayyafariqin, inscription of 391/1001 (after Carl LehmannHaupt, Materialien).

The top stone displays five lines of simple Kufic writing, while the stone below consists of three lines of writing. (A) ‫)هلل عليه وسلّم ممّا أمر بعمـ[ـلـ]ـه‬3(‫)له إال هللا محمّد رسول هللا صلّى ا‬2(‫(بسمله ال إ‬1) ‫) المؤمنين أطال هللا بقاءه في سنة إحدى‬5(‫)ر ممهّد الدولة ألومنصور مولى أمير‬4(‫المنصو‬ ‫وتسعين وثلثمائة‬

273

marwanid inscriptions

(B) ّ ‫) وجه هللا‬3( ‫) خاص ماله ابتغاء‬2( ‫(وأبقى عليه من‬1) ‫عز وج ّل‬ The inscription21 may be translated as follows: Bismillåh. There is no god but God; Mu˙ammad is the Messenger of God (PBUH). (This is) one of the things ordered in the year 391 by the victorious amÈr Mumahhid al-Dawla, AbË ManßËr, the client (mawlå) of the Commander of the Faithful – may God prolong his life. He (Mumahhid al-Dawla) has paid the expenses for this from his own wealth, for the sake of God, Almighty and Glorious. It is probable that this inscription of Mumahhid al-Dawla mentioning a strengthening of the Mayyafariqin fortification on its northeastern side, the most endangered area, was referring to his measures to defend the city against attacks from other nomadic tribes hovering in the vicinity. The content of the inscription has a distinctly humble religious tone, hoping for God’s favour and emphasising not his own power and personal qualities (apart from his generosity) but rather his loyalty to the Sunni Abbasid caliph. The next important inscription on the wall of Amid is dated 426/1034–5 [Figures 11.1 and 11.6]. It is in the name of Naßr ­al-Dawla22 and marks the apogee of Marwanid power and prestige. It contains two long lines of flowery Kufic script; they emphasise both the religious and military credentials of the ruler. It is positioned on a projecting square on the eastern front of the precinct on white stones recessed in the façade for greater visibility. ّ ‫بسمله مما أمر بعمله األمير السيد األج ّل المؤيّد المنصور‬ ‫عز اإلسالم سعد الدين نصر الدولة ركن‬ ‫)اء أبو نصر أحمد بن مروان أطا[ل] هللا بقاءه وأدام سلطانه شهور‬2(‫الملّة مجد األمّة شرف األمر‬ ‫سنة ست وعشرين وأربع مائه‬ C, III, 167 The text can translated as follows:

Bismillåh. This is what the amÈr, the most majestic lord, the one helped (by God), the victor, Izz al-Islåm, Sad al-DÈn, Naßr al-Dawla, the pillar of religion, the glory of the umma, the nobility of the amÈrs, AbË Naßr A˙mad b. Marwån has ordered to be done. May God lengthen his existence and make his power endure. In the months of the year 426/1034–5.

21 Ibid. See also van Berchem, ‘Arabische Inschriften’, pp. 127–8. 22 Répertoire, vol. 7, p. 8.

274

carole hillenbrand

Figure 11.6  Amid, inscription of 426/1035–6, two-line drawing (after Samuel Flury, Schriftbänder).

Once again, then, the ruler is proclaiming the good deeds he has done and the pious motivation behind them. Is there perhaps an element of sympathetic magic here in his stated wish that God will reward him for his work with long life? Three further inscriptions of the 420s a.h.,23 [Figure 11.7], 437/1045–624 [Figures 11.8 and 11.9] and 444/1052–325 [Figures 11.10 and 11.11] are of similar content. But then there is a surprise. The only Marwanid inscription known outside the province of Diyar Bakr is in Jerusalem; it is dated 445/1053–4.26 The text, transcribed and translated by Michael Burgoyne, reads as follows: ‫]بسم] هللا الرحمن الرحيم هذا ما وقف وحسب االمير السيد االجل‬