the prehistory of teh fatimid dynasty

7/30/2019 The Prehistory of Teh Fatimid Dynasty

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-prehistory-of-teh-fatimid-dynasty 1/50



The Prehistory of theFatimid Dynasty:Some Chronological and Genealogical Remarks

By Omert J. Schrier,Nieuw- Vennep, theNetherlands

0. Introduction

The following paper was triggered by the reading of Heinz Halm's fasci

nating monograph The Empire of theMahdi: The Rise of theFatimids

(1996)1). The creation of the Fatimid empire was one of themajor results

of the Isma'ili mission, achieved after a long period inwhich the da'wahad worked secretly2). The founder of themovement was rAbdallah the

Elder, the great-grandfather of the first Fatimid caliph. We will focus on

the earliest phase of themovement, with special attention to the chronolo

gical and genealogical aspects of itshistory up to the year 267/881. The

motive for reentering upon the subject was the conviction that it ispossibleto draw up a more detailed, and occasionally more correct, chronology of

some events in the history of themission. It is esssential, it seemed tome,to take into account not only the ideological character of our sources, but

also their chronological relationship. That iswhy we will startwith a sur

vey of our oldest documents, all of them deriving frommen who were de

voted to the Fatimid cause (?1). Next we will see what can be learned froma close examination of the chronological data contained in some of thesetexts.Our material compels us to treatmost dating questions in reverse or

der. Beginning, therefore,with the latest events and working our way backto earlier ones, we will treat some data concerning the lives ofcAbdallah's

') I am much indebted to my Leiden friends Gual Juynboll and Jan JustWitkam,who were always ready to lend assistance. Gual Juynboll and Han den Heijer commen

ted upon an earlier draft of this paper; I am responsible for the remaining errors.

Halm's study was originally written inGerman. Here, I will refer to the English transla

tion.

Abbreviations will be explained at the end of this paper.

2) Brett (2001) 29-48 holds that the narratives about the history of the Isma'ili mission

are mainly a product of Fatimid imagination. Daftary (2002) and Madelung (2002) ar

gued already against his thesis. This paper can be read as an implicit critique of Brett's

view. The accounts discussed in the ?? 6 and 7 can hardly have been influenced by Fati

mid propagandists, and the agreements noted in the ?? 3-4 and 6-8 between data provided by pro and anti-Fatimid sources prove that texts from both sides contain histori

cally reliable information. A survey of the problems involved is to be found in Daftary

(1990) 105-118.

Die Welt des Orients 36/2006S. 143-191, ISSN 0043-2547? Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 2006



144 Omert J. Sender

descendants (? 2), the mission in al-fIraq (? 3), and the life ofcAbdallah

himself (? 4). After an inquiry into the sources written by opponents of the

Fatimids (? 5), we will return to the biography ofeAbdallah by discussingthe information provided by these texts on this subject directly (? 6), and

indirectly, in the narratives about the conversion ofHamdan Qarmat (? 7).

Finally we will deal with the various traditions about fAbdallah's identityand descent (? 8). In an appendix some questions are treated concerningthe conversion of the famous missionary Ibn Hawsab.

In the sequel, we will refer toHalm's monograph where we simply fol

low him. In thisway we do an injustice to predecessors likeMadelung,Stern and Halm himself. In an attempt to relieve the burden of the alreadytoo

cumbersome notes,we

will adduce theworks of these and other scholars only when necessary. Halm's notes will give additional information.

In order to facilitate the reading of thispaper, we startby giving a pedigreeofcAbdallah's progeny, inwhich the names of theGrandmasters/Imamsare printed in italics, those of the Fatimid caliphs in capitals; figures referto seniority.

'Abdallah the lder

i?1?i

Ahmad Ibrahim

,_"i|-1

progeny

al-Husayn Abu eAIT uhammad

(Abu 1-Saia'laf)

I I|

' I2. Abu Muhammad 1.Sa rTd/rAti/ x 2. daughter 1.'AIT

eAbdallah al-MAHDI3)

progenyfAbd al-Rahman/ son

Muhammad al-QATM

1.The Fatimid sources.

1.1. The sources used in this paper are the same as those used by Halm,

apart from theMundzardt of Ibn al-Haytam, which was published only in

2000. They have to be divided into those originating with adherents of the

3) In anti-Ismafili sources the name ofeAbdallah is often given as 'Ubaydallah.



The Prehistoryf theFatimidDynasty 145

Fatimids and those written by opponents of the Isma^ili movement. Impartial information iswanting. Here we will give a survey of the relevant Fati

mid sources, the oldest ones we have:

- the report of an interrogation of the brother-in-law of Zakrawayh b.

Mihrawayh by the Baghdadi Minister ofWar, held in 294/907 and trans

mitted by Tabari4);- the STrat IbnHawsab, thememoirs ofMansur al-Yaman Abu 1-Qasim

al-Hasan b. Hawsab al-KufT (d. 303/914), written down by a confidant,most probably his son Jaffar,before 346/957; Ibn Hawsab was one of the

two dcfis who founded the Isma'Ili community in theYemen; the Sira it

self has been lost, but Halm succeeded in reconstructing its contents from

quotations and paraphrases that can be found in later literature5);- the Letter to the Yemenite Community of al-Imam al-Mahdl bi-llah

(henceforth: al-Mahdi), the first caliph of the Fatimid house (r. 296-322/

909-934); presumably the Letter was written shortly after al-Mahdfs arri

val in his capital Raqqada (297/910); it is cited frommemory by Ja'far b.

Mansur al-Yaman (firsthalf of the 4th/10th century) inhis Fard'id wa-hu

dud al-din6);- the STrat (al-Imam) al-Mahdi, a semi-official biography of al-Mahdi,

written during the reign of his son al-Qa'im (r. 322-334/934-946) by an

anonymous (Ibn al-Haytam?) who had access to the caliphal chancery;parts of thework have been preserved through quotations in the rUyunal

Akbar of theYemenite dari Idris rImad al-Dln (d. 872/1467); the fragments were collected by Stern and identified by Halm7);

- Ibn al-Haytam, al-Munazarat; the work was finished in 334-336/

946-947; itmainly consists ofmemories of conversations the author had

4) Tabari III 2124-2127, comp.Ill

2273.5) Halm (1981), Poonawala (2003) 356 n.22.

6) Halm (1996) 156 n.55 and p. 194; for the names of al-Mahdl, see below, nn. 19 and

188.

7) Stern (1983) 96-145; Halm (1988) 113-114. Halm supposed that Idris draw on a

Sirat al-Imdm al-Mahdi written by Ja'far b. Muhammad b. al-Haytam, but the passagesinwhich Ibn al-Haytam is referred to now prove to be derived from Ibn al-Haytam's Mu

ndzardt, see Madelung-Walker (2000) 45-46. From this factMadelung and Walker, fol

lowed by Van Ess (2002) 227, concluded that none of the passages discussed by Stern

and Halm originated from a Sirat al-Mahdl Idris, however, expressly refers to the sahib

sirat l-Imdm l-Mahdi as his source(below, n.28). Apparently,

Idris had two texts at his

disposal, Ibn al-Haytam's Mundzardt and a Sirat al-Imdm al-Mahdl It is the latter text

that interests us here. Halm pointed out that its author lived at the court inRaqqada and

Mahdiyya and had access to the caliphal correspondence. In view of the stylistic similari

ties he noticed between the Sira and what we now know to be Ibn al-Haytam's Mundzar

dt, it remains probable that the Sira was written by Ibn al-Haytam himself; alternatively,the author must have been someone from his circle. For the dating of the Sira, see the

eulogy at its end.



146Omert J.Schrier

with Abu rAbdallah al-SfT and Abu \-eAbbas, al-Mahdl's main da'Ts intheMaghrib, between Rajab 296/March 909 and Rabf II/January 9108);- al-Nurman b.Muhammad al-Tamimi al-Qadl, Iftitah (al-darwa wa-ib

tida' al-dawla), composed in 346/957; the author held high offices in theservice of al-Mahdi and his successors; forour purposes, themain importance of thework lies in the quotations itcontains from theSTrat Ibn Haw

sab', moreover, ithelps to date the Istitar al-Imam (next item), where the

Iftitah is referred to9);- the Istitar al-Imam (wa-tafarruq al-durah Jt l-jaza'ir H-talabihT) by Ah

mad b. Ibrahim al-Naysaburi; thework was published inCairo after 346/

957, apparently with the permission of the ruling caliph, presumably al

eAziz (r. 365-386/975-996); the narrative runs from eAbdallah's settlementin Salamya until the eve of the proclamation of the Fatimid caliphate(296/909)10);

- the STratJajar (al-Hajib), containing thememoirs of a loyal servant of

al-Mahdi, written down by Muhammad b. Muhammad al-Yamanl at the

request of al-fAziz11).1.2. The textsmentioned contain useful information, especially where

they are based on the memories of persons who had taken part in theevents described (STrat Ibn Hawsab and STrat Ja far) or reflect family tra

ditions of the Fatimids {STratal-MahdT and Istitar al-Imam). They were allwritten, on the other hand, after the victory of al-Mahdi in 296/909. Una

voidably, they reflect the views prevailing in the Fatimid state, views,moreover, thatwere not static, but changed in the course of time.Readingthese texts, therefore, one has always to be on the look-out for elements

thatmight be inspired by ideological motives. A conspicuous example is

provided by al-Mahdfs Letter to theYemenite Community, which was ex

plicitly meant to refute the view of some opponents. For our purposes, themost important instances of distorted information concern the title attribu

ted to the early leaders of themovement and the identity of the predecessor of al-Mahdi. In order to simplify the reading of the rest of this paperwe will devote a subsection to each of these items.

8) Madelung-Walker (2000) 174 n. 191.

9) Ivanow (1942) 7;Halm (1981) 107-108;Halm (1996) 102 and 340-342.

10) Ivanow (1942) 7-10, Halm (1996) 13; for Salamya, see below, ? 4.

n)Ivanow

(1942)10-12. The work consists of memories of Jaefar as well as reminis

cences of others about him (119.11-121.3 and 131.16-17, transl. 203-205 and 220). Itwas

composed long after the death of JaTar (123.17-18 and 131.16-17, transl. 209 and 220).Jaffar was 'a few months younger than al-Mahdr (107.19-108.1, transl. 185) and was

born, therefore, in 259-260/873 (below, ? 2.3). The last time we hear of him he is tellinga story about al-Mahdl to caliph al-Mu'izz inMansuriyya (119-120, transl. 203-204);since al-Mufizz leftMansuriyya in 361/972 (Halm [1996] 418), the scene must be dated

between 341/953 and 361/972.




1.2.1 (title): 'Abdallah had organized the Ismarili da'wa, 'call' or 'mis

sion', in favour of the hidden Imam Muhammad b. IsmafIl b. Ja'far, who

would return and bring justice and peace to thisworld. As Grandmaster of

themovement, eAbdallah bore the title of hujja: he was the living 'guarantee' that the promises would become reality. Later Grandmasters, how

ever, to begin with Muhammad b. Ahmad12), abandoned the doctrine of a

hidden Imam and presented themselves as living Imams, first in the small

circle of their confidants, latermore openly. In 286/899 this change led to

a schism in themovement. Many Isma'ilis accepted the new role of their

leaders, others seceded13). The new view became one of the basic princi

ples of the Fatimid state. The Fatimid caliph was the bearer of all the bles

singsGod had bestowedon

al-imam14).In

retrospect, their forerunners,theGrandmasters of the movement, were also styled Imams in official

texts and historical literature.A case in point is the Istitdr al-Imdm of al

Naysaburl. It derives its name from the very first part of the story, the

Imam inquestion being no other than cAbdallah the Elder.

1.2.2. (predecessor of al-MahdT): The legitimacy of the Fatimid caliphswas based on the view that theywere lineal descendants of the Prophet

through the marriage of his daughter Fatima with rAlTb. AbT Talib. It

12) Below, ? 1.2.2.

13)Madelung (1961) 56-65, Halm (1996) 62-64, with references to the sources, and

below, ? 3.2. The suggestion in Brett (1994) 32-33 that the account of the schism of 286/

899 is not historical, but a 'distorted echo' of the conflict that broke out between al-Mah

dl and the da*is Abu 'Abdallah and Abu \Abbas in 298/911 cannot be correct. Duringthe latter controversy al-MahdT's opponents reproached him for his wordly behaviour

and the lack ofmiracles after his zuhur (Halm [1996] 159-168 and the primary sources ci

ted there), whereas the objections raised by Hamdan Qarmat were of a doctrinal nature,

bearing upon the replacement of the hidden imam Muhammad b. Isma'Il by a man of

flesh andblood,

al-Mahdl himself. In theareas, moreover,

where the da'wa hadoperated under the guidance of Hamdan, this doctrine remained prevalent for decades, see

Daftary (1993) 132-133, Halm (1996) 62-66 and below, ? 8.3. Al-MahdT's loyal supporterAbu

cAbdallah al-Sf Tdeclared still in 296/909, after some hesitation, that the Imam was

Muhammad b. Ismail b. Jarfar (Ibn al-Haytam, Munazarat 56.1, tr. 107), no doubt out

of taqiya, since his revered master was living in Sijilmasa under precarious circum

stances.

Brett (1994) 30-31 acutely observes that in 296/909 Abu 'Abdallah used the title of hujjat

Allah, next to that of ibn rasiil Allah, when speaking of al-Mahdl (al-Nu'man, Iftitah250.3 and 281.11-12, ?? 225 and 254). One could add that in 288/901 Zakrawayh b.

Mihraway, another fighter for the cause of al-Mahdi, referred to his master with the term

al-hujja, see Aku Muhassin at NuwayrT XXV 247.11 and Ibn al-Dawadari VI 69.9 (onthese authors, see below, ? 5). Apparently, after the disaster of 286/899 al-MahdT al

lowed his followers to keep using the familiar title, relating it,however, toGod, not to a

hidden imam. He dropped it as soon as possible, presumably after his entry inRaqqada

(297/910), see al-Nurman, Iftitah 293.6-9 (? 265) and al-Mahdfs Letter 9.16-10.1 (=

phrase 11), comp. Kasf 6-1.

14) Halm (1986) 134-135; (1996) 19-22, 59-60, 346-354.



148 Omert J. Schrier

proved not to be easy to substantiate this claim. Halm assembled no less

than three different family trees made up by al-Mahdl and a fourth one

thatwas published by al-fAziz in 370/98015). One of the problems al-Mah

dl had to face was the identityof his immediate predecessor. According toShif itebeliefs, the imamate could only be transferred, after the death of al

Husayn b/AlT b. Abl Talib, from father to son16). The father of al-Mahdl,

however, al-Husayn b. Ahmad, had never been Imam (or Grandmas

ter)17). Al-Mahdf s predecessor was his uncle, Muhammad b. Ahmad18).In his Letter to the Yemenite Community, al-Mahdl duly acknowledgedthis fact, adding that he was Muhammad's son 'in a deeper sense of the

word' (Ji l-batin)19).When the genealogy expounded in the Letter proved

not to be tenable20), he successively presented two different family trees,in the last ofwhich he replaced his family by a quite different one21). Al

MahdT's successors preferred more normal expedients. The author of the

Sirat al-MahdT, at least, fully recognizing the role played byMuhammad

b. Ahmad, simply ignored the problem of the irregular succession22). By349/960 a more satisfactory solution had been found. In an audience held

some time after that year, caliph al-Mufizz referred to a story that is nar

rated in full in the Istitdr al-Imdm of al-Naysabun. In this tradition al

Mahdl's father al-Husayn was promoted to imam, whereas his uncle isde

picted as an impostor, who abused his position as a guardian of the youngorphan al-Mahdl by trying tobequeath the imamate to one of his own sons

and who only came to his senses when they had died, all ten of them23).

,5) Halm (1986) 133-138 and (1996) 154-159.

16)Halm (1996) 276.

17) Conclusive proof for this statement consists in that al-Mahdl, though naming his

father in his genealogy (below, n. 19), does not mention him in the list of his predecessors

(Letter 10.13-15,=

phrase 19), see Madelung (1961) 55-56 and 71-72, and below, ? 2.2.

18)Muhammad b. Ahmad is better known as Abu 1-Salaflaf (or: 1-

Salaglag;

the for

mer spelling seems the best one, see Fagnan [1910] 41 n. 1). This laqab, only used by op

ponents of the Fatimids, is better avoided. In Fatimid sources, Muhammad b. Ahmad is

also referred to as SafTd al-Kayr, e.g. Sirat al-Mahdi at Idris V 89.9-10, Istitar al-Imdm

95.19.

19) Letter 11.6-9; 12.2-3 (= phrases 24-25 and 33), comp. below, n.188. Al-Mahdi

presented himself in the Letter as fAlT b. al-Husayn (11.15,=

phrase 32), eAlTbeing the

name of the untimely deceased son of his uncle Muhammad (below, ? 2.6 with n.45).

20) The weakest point consisted in the failure to find a fitting joint betweeneAbdallah,

the forefather of the family, and Ja'far al-Sadiq (d. 148/765), the last Imam acknowl

edgedbyall Shi'ites

(below,? 8.2).21)Halm (1988) 135-138and (1996) 157-158.

22) Below, ?2.6 with n. 43.

23) Al-Nueman b. Muhammad al-Qadl, al-Majdlis wa-l-musdyardt, in Stern (1955)

31.14-27, repr. 286.2-16, discussed in Stern (1955) 13-16 and 22-23, repr. 262-267 and

274; the audience was held on account of the arrival of a letter from an eastern province,

which in its turn was a response to a letter in which al-Mueizz announced the conquest of

Sijilmasa and other cities in the Maghrib, see the text in Stern (1955) 28.7-11, repr.




Where al-Naysaburi had to name al-MahdT's forerunner, he refers to him

as sayk (not: imam)Muhammad b.Ahmad24). Seen in this light, the STrat

Jajar contains an interesting detail. The old slave, who from his early

youth had been the personal attendant of al-Mahdi and in thisway had

lived in the immediate surrounding of the latter's uncle formore than ten

years, continued to speak of the latter as the Imam25). His recollections

proved to be badly adjusted to the new reality. This may have worried the

composer of the STra, who at least apologizes profusely to his lord, imam

caliph al-rAziz, for themistakes his work may contain26).

2. The progeny ofcAbdallah the Elder

2.1. Point of departure forour investigations is a narrative from the STrat

Ibn Hawsab. Ibn Hawsab relates that,when the Imam had ordered him to

go to theYemen and to take rAllb. al-Fadl with him, he traveled from al

Qadisiyya (immediately south-west ofKufa) toMecca in the company of

one of the pilgrim caravans. Having performed the hajj, the two men

joinedthe Yemenite

pilgrimson their

wayhome.

Theyarrived in theYe

men Jt awwal sanat tamdnin wa-sittTnwa-mVatayn, 'in thebeginning of the

281.22-282.2, and, for its historical setting, Halm (1996) 397-399; comp. below, ? 8.3.

The whole account is to be found in Istitdr 95.19-96.5.

24) Istitdr al-Imdm 103.15. It is significant that in 346/957 already, al-Nueman, the

Chief Qadi of the empire, conspicuously avoided tomention the name of al-Mahdf s predecessor: wa-lammd ntahat-i l-imdmatu ild l-Mahdi... wa-qubida l-imdmu qablahu Had!

kdna fahidaind ilayhi, ftitdh157.8-9 (? 150). Following this track, aterhistoriographers ascribed the successes of Muhammad to his brother, the fake Imam al-Husayn

(IdrisIV

395-403,Hasan b. Nuh at Ivanow

[1942] 31),or to their father Imam Ahmad b.

fAbdallah (below, n. 163); see also below, nn. 28 and 120, and, for further complications,

Madelung (1961) 77-78.

Another part of the strategy to defend the position of al-MahdT is to be found in Istitdr

95.18-19: whenfAbdallah died, 'his son Ahmad, not Ibrahim (dun Ibrahim), succeeded

him as an Imam'. From a narrative point of view, the words quoted are superfluous.Their function is to underline that al-MahdT had been the eldest son of the eldest son (al

Husayn) of the eldest son (Ahmad) of the founder of the dynasty,e Abdallah.

25) Sirat Ja Jar 108.1 and 2; 109.6 and 8; 122.4-7.

26) Sirat Jajar 107.15-17; comp. below, n. 138.

The

earlyelimination ofMuhammad

gives

us a clue as to the date of theKasfi

anearly

exposition of Isma'ili tenets. The work is attributed to Jaffar b. Mansur al-Yaman. Sezgin

(1967) 578 holds that in reality it is due to Ja'far's homonymous son and was composedin the last quarter of the 4th/10th century. However, the author respectfully mentions

Muhammad b. Ahmad as an imam/hujja, Kasf 99.1-3, comp. Madelung (1961) 52-55.

Since it is unthinkable that the Fatimids allowed an ideological writing to be publishedthat contained opinions that ran contrary to their views, a date so late is impossible. The

work received its final shape before 349/960.



150Omert J.Schrier

year 268'27). The STrat al-MahdT mentions an interesting detail: Ibn Haw

sab was sent out by the uncle of al-Mahdi, Abu cAllMuhammad b. Ah

mad28). There isno reason to doubt the historicity of these statements. The

events mentioned can be dated rather precisely. The year 268 started on 1

August 881 CE. Du 1-hijja 267 coincided with 3-31 July 881 CE29). The pil

grims will have left al-f Iraq inone of the lastweeks ofDu 1-qa'da/June of

the same year. By that time, therefore,Muhammad b. Ahmad was the ac

knowledged leader of the Isma'ili movement. As Grandmaster he had suc

ceeded his fatherAhmad30). Ahmad, then, died before mid Du l-qarda267/mid June 881.

2.2. There is a second element in the STrat al-MahdT that deserves atten

tion: Ibn Hawsab was dispatched after the death of the father of al-Mahdi31). Al-Husayn, therefore, died before mid Du l-qafda 267/mid June

881, like his father. He was Ahmad's eldest son, but did not succeed

him32). He must have died during the lifetime of his father33).2.3. Still according to the STrat al-MahdT, al-Husayn left behind an

eight-year-old son, the later caliph al-Mahdi (in this subsection we will re

fer to him with his original name Sa'Id)34). In the preceding passage the

STra stated: kana mawlidu ... al-MahdT... Jt sanati sittTnawa-mi'atayni, Jt

l-laylati l-musbihatimin yawmi l-itnayni l-taniya fasara min sahri Sawwalin,

wa-qTla bal kana mawliduhu Jt sanati tis'in wa-kamsTna wa-mi9atayni9 wa

27) STrat Ibn Hawsab at al-NiTman, Iftitah 8.12-9.4 and 11.4-15.3 (? 7-8 and 11-13);

Idrts IV 399.5-12, 400.19-401.21, V 31.23-32.19; abridged in MaqrizT, Muqaffa IV

531.17-532.8 and 533.14-18.

28) wa-kana fammu l-Mahdi... huwa lladianfada l-daeiya l-Mansura Aba l-Qasimi ila

l-Yamani barda wafati walidi 1-MahdTbi-llahi... raldma dakarahu sahibu Strati l-imami

l-Mahdi, Idris V 89.11-14. Note that the text contradicts Idris' own narrative in IV 395

403. There, following the later tradition which denies that al-MahdT's uncle had been

Imam,Idris ascribed the

sendingof Ibn Hawsab to an Imam

al-Husayn,the father of al

MahdT (above, ? 1.2.2 with n.24).If the daei Ibn AbT 1-Fawaris, who ismentioned by Aku Muhassin as the one who anfada

Ibn Hawsab to the Yemen (see Madelung [1997] 122 n.3), did play a part in this connec

tion, itmust have been a minor one (forAku Muhassin, see below, ?? 5-7).

29) Halm (1996) 36 erroneously dates the hajj in June.

30) Above, ? 1.2.2 with n. 17.

31) Above, n. 28.

32) Al-Husayn is always named before his brother Muhammad, both by adherents of

the Fatimids (Istitar 95.19, see above, n. 18) and by their opponents (Aku Muhassin at

Ibn al-Dawadari VI19.16, MaqrizT,

Itti'az 13.5-6 ed. Bunz[I

26.5-6 ed.Sayyal], Muqaf

fa IV 527.12-13, Kitat 107.10 ed. Sayyid [1995]; Nuwayri omits the passage; see below ?

5). The assertion in the Istitar that he was Imam is incorrect, see above, ? 1.2.2 with nn.

17 and 24.

33) This is expressly stated by Ibn Rizam at al-Nadim, Fihrist 238.25, but within a

confused context, see below, ? 5.2-3 and ? 5.10.

34) Sirat al-Mahdi at Idris V 89.14-16; for the name of Sa'Td, see this paper, nn. 19

and 188.




wulida ... bi-madlnati rAskariMukrami Kuzistana, 6al-MahdTwas born in

the year 260, in the night leading to themorning ofMonday the 12th of

the month Sawwal (according to others he was born in the year 259); he

was born in the city of fAskarMukram inKhuzistan'35). The firstdate mayseem simply incompatible with the chronological factsmentioned earlier

in this section: ifSa'Td was born on 12 Sawwal 260/31 July 874, he was 7

years and one month old (in theMuslim calendar) inDu l-qafda 267/June

881, the lastmonth inwhich his father can have died. Closer inspectionmakes clear that the dating is based on a counting method the author also

applies at the end of his text.There he states that al-MahdT diedfi laylati l

taldta'i li-l-nisfimin sahri Rabfi l-awwali, ahadi suhuri sanati 322, wa-rum

ruhii yawma wafdtihT...

talatun wa-sittuna sanatan, li-anna mawlidahukdnafi sanati sittlna wa-mVatayni, 'in the night of (Monday to) Tuesday in

the middle of the month Rabf I, one of the months of the year 322 (4March 934); his age on the day of his death was 63 years, since he was

born in the year 260'36). In this sentence the years of al-Mahdfs death and

birth are presented as facts from which the age he had reached when he

died can be calculated. One expects the author to conclude that al-MahdT

died at the age of 61 (lunar) years (and 5months), or, less precisely, of 62

years (= 322minus 260). His reasoning proves, however, thathe, first,dis

regarded themonths, as many people do37), and, second, counted inclu

sively: 322 minus 260 (+ 1)= 63. The same method is applied in the be

ginning of the Sira. The author had two dates at his disposal: the age of Sa

fTd t the death of his father (transmitted by the family tradition of the Fa

timids), and the period inwhich Ibn Hawsab departed forMecca and the

Yemen (deducible from the latter's Sira), shortly after the demise of al

Husayn38). Counting back from the latter events, he detracted 8 from 267

35) Idris V 89.4-8 (text, erroneously: Kuristari), without reference to the STrat al-MahdT; the same is true of the passage we will quote next. The latter, however, is part of a lar

ger unity inwhich the author expresses his loyalty to al-Qa'im and which must have con

cluded the STra. Contents and argumentation (see main text) prove that both passagesare from the same hand.

As for the dating, Ibn Kallikan III 119.6-7 also mentions the year 266/879, which is at

variance with all we know from the early Fatimid sources and must be wrong.

36) STrat al-MahdT at Idris V 155.15-17, Stern (1983) 143.18-20 (no alternatives are

mentioned).

37) If it is recorded that a man lived, e.g., from 1235 till 1285, people often assume

that he was 50years

old when hedied,

withoutrealizing that,

if theman had been born

in December 1235 and died in January 1285, he had just turned 49 when he met his

death.

38) Above, ? 2.1-2. The author of the STra cannot have been unacquainted with the

STrat Ibn Hawsab, see Halm (1981) 108 and above, ? 1.1. The text does not expressly saythat the dispatch of Ibn Hawsab occurred shortly after the death of al-Husayn, but within

its context the sentence would be pointless ifwe had to assume that a long period inter

vened between the two events. Note that the text contradicts Idris' own narrative in IV




and concluded that Sa'Id was born in 260: 267 minus 8 (4- 1)= 260. For

that reason he rejected the tradition (qila) that al-MahdT was born in 259

and presented the outcome of his calculations as a fact at the end of the

Sira. Now thatwe see through his reasonings, we may conclude that the

tradition he rejected in fact contained the correct dating: SafTd/al-MahdT

was born in Sawwal 259/August 87339). The boy was, consequently, at

most eight years and one month old when his father died, ultimately inDu

l-qafda 267/June 881. Counting roughly, disregarding the months, one

can have held that he was eight years old during the whole of the year 267.

Taking into account the latterpossibility, we may conclude that al-Husayndied in 267, between 1Muharram and mid Du l-qafda, i.e. between 12

August 880 and mid June 881. Ahmad, al-Husayn's father, died some timelater in the same period. He was succeeded by his younger son,Muham

mad, who made an energetic startby extending the da'wa to theYemen.

The year 267 must have been amemorable one for the family.2.4. A generation takes at least about 17 years. Since SafId was born in

259/873, his father al-Husayn will have been born before 243/857 and his

grandfather Ahmad before 225/840. eAbdallah the Elder, then, was born

at least 51 years before his great-grandson SafId, i.e. before 208/823. In

reality, these threemen may have been born several years, perhaps even

one or two decades, before the dates mentioned40).2.5. 'Abdallah died at the latest inDu l-qa'da 267/June 881, before his

sonAhmad41).2.6. A terminusante quern for the birth of Muhammad b. Ahmad can be

deduced from a letter,written in 290/903 and directed to al-MahdT, in

which mention ismade of a son and a grandson ofMuhammad (ibnu ram

mika wa-waladuhu), both of whom had perished earlier in al-rIraq42). It

must have been the death of his legal heirs that induced Muhammad to se

cure the future of the dynasty by designating his nephew Sa'Td as his suc

cessor and, some time later, by having himmarried tohis own daughter43).

395-403. There, following the later tradition which denies that al-Mahdf s uncle had

been Imam, Idris ascribed the sending of Ibn Hawsab to an Imam al-Husayn b. Ahmad

(above, ? 1.2.2. with n. 24).

39) Al-MahdT was born in the night entering upon Monday 12 Sawwal 259, i.e. in the

night of Sunday 9 toMonday 10August 873.

^ We are speaking of legal issue, born to a formally married couple. Ivanow (1942)

54 calculated that for the Fatimid caliphs a generation took on average 23 solar years.

This would bringus to the

years236/850 for

al-Husayn,212/827 for

Ahmad,and 189/

804 foreAbdallah the Elder.

41) Above, ? 2.2, and, below, ? 7.12.

42) Istitar 102.14-15.

43) Sirat al-Mahdi at Idris V 89.16; Sirat Jajar 109.6-7. Muhammad took still other

measures to smooth the path for Sa'Id. He informed the dais of Sard's appointment and

had them swear allegiance to the new heir (Sirat Jajdr 109.7-8), and posed together with

Sa'Id and the latter's little son for one of the key figures among the dais in the famous




The son born from this couple, the later caliph al-Qa'im, saw the lightof

day inMuharram 280/March-April S9344). The marriage, then, took placein the first half of 279/892 at the latest. By that timeMuhammad had lost

his son and grandson. Muhammad's son, then, himself father,must havebeen born before (or in) 262/876 and Muhammad himself before (or in)

245/85945).

3. TabarT on the early history of the Ismalli mission

3.1. The datings on which we based our calculations in ? 2 are confirmedby independent testimony that has been preserved by TabarT. In the year

278/891-892, he narrates46), (A) the central government became aware of

the existence of a revolutionary group in the Sawad of Kufa known as the

Qarmatis (henceforth: Qarmatis). (B) The movement had started there

with the arrival of a man fromKuzistan. The man settled in al-Nahrayn.He led an ascetic and pious life and preached allegiance to an Imam of the

house of theMessenger. He won over many villagers, whom he obliged to

pray fifty imes each day and night.When he was hired by some merchants

to guard the dates they had harvested, he was accused of eating of the

dates himself and selling the pits. It soon appeared, however, that he was

innocent. This brought him new followers. (C) One day, when he was ill,an ox-driver named Karmlta [sic] took him into his house. Well nursed by

him, he recovered and resumed preaching. He now met response also from

other villages. All those who joined the community had to pay a dinar, for

the Imam, they thought. The number of converts became so large that the

missionary appointed twelve headmen, whom he compared with the apos

tles of Jesus. (D) The verysuccess

of themovement

brought it into conflictwith a rich landowner, al-Haysam. The obligation topray fiftytimes a dayleft the farmers little time for tilling the ground. Al-Haysam, who saw his

estates neglected, had the dal imprisoned and wanted to kill him, but a

maid-servant helped the latter to escape. When he was not to be found

anywhere, people said: 'He has been taken to heaven'. Later on, he ap

three-generations scene (STrat Jafar 122.4-7); he was poorly rewarded by his descen

dants; see this paper, ? 1.2.2 and nn. 19 and 188.

The year is given by the Sirat al-MahdT at Idris V 89.17-19; later traditions, men

tioning heyears277/890and 278/891 (Halm [1996]61 n. 15)or even 282/895 (IbnKallikan V 20.6-7) are worthless against the authority of the Sirat al-MahdT, see above, ? 1.2

and n.35.

45) Muhammad's son was calledcAIT, STrat al-MahdT at Idris V 89.16.

46) Tabari III 2124-2127, comp. Halm (1996) 26-27. In the following, I paraphrase,

and sometimes quote, the translation of Fields (1987), adding the symbols (A), (B) etc. to

facilitate cross-references.




peared to some of his friends and others. When they asked him about his

experience, he answered: 'No one can work evil upon me and thus control

me', which struck themwith still greater awe. Fearing forhis safety, he de

parted in the direction of Syria (ila nahiyati l-Sa'm). Nothing was heared

of him anymore. (E) People called him by the name of the ox-driver in

whose house he had lived,Karmlta. This name was later simplified toQarmat [sic], (F) TabarT winds up his storyby stating thathe had heard itfrom

one of his friends,who had been informed by amember of the staffofMu

hammad b. Dawud, who had led in person the interrogation of a prominent member of the Fatimid faction in al-fIraq, the brother-in-law of Zak

rawayh b. Mihrawayh, after the latter's defeat and death (in 294/907)47).

(G) In an addendum, TabarT notes that, according to Ibn Dawud, Qarmatwas a man from the Sawad of Kufa, an ox-driver: his ismwas Hamdan,his laqab Qarmat [sic],

3.2. The authenticity of Tabarl's account need not be doubted48). The

text testifies to the views of a group of Isma'ilis who, in consequence of the

schism of 286/899, had broken with the old leader Hamdan Qarmat and

opted, under the guidance of Zakrawayh b. Mihrawayh, for the Fatimids.

During the crisis, Hamdan had disappeared. His lieutenant and brother

in-law, eAbdan, was murdered49). It is striking that the narrative ignores

the leading part Hamdan Qarmat had played for decades in the commu

nity50). Apparently, the group presented itself as the legitimate continua

tion of the original movement. For that reason they asserted that not onlythe ox-driver, but also thefirstda% the founder of the community, was re

ferred to as 'Qarmat' (E). In thisway they tried to justify their claim to the

name of Qarmatis, under which themovement had already been known

47)At that time Ibn Dawud headed the Dlwan of the

Army (TabarTIII

2273.13-14).The staff officer himself had been present at the interrogation (TabarT III 2127.6-7 and

2266.3-4).

48) Exception must be made for some cynical comments (explicit inC, implicit in the

structuring of the story inD) that are due to the spokesman of TabarT or, less likely, to

TabarT himself.

Several times the narrator uses expressions that are borrowed from the Bible, explicitly

(the comparison with the twelve apostles, in C) or implicitly (in D: Christ's apparitionsafter his resurrection, his ascension, and the ddT's words, which are adapted from Acts

18,10 and Rom. 6,9). There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of these elements. The

villagefrom which the dal

operatedwas called

QussBahram

(below, ??7.4 and

7.9),which suggests that itwas inhabited by (East-)Syrian (= Nestorian) Christians. The local

community may well have expressed the Isma'ili message inwordings that were reminis

cent of the religious past of itsmembers. Al-Nahrayn, mentioned by TabarT (B), is the

name of the district southeast of Babylon, east of the al-Hilla branch of the Euphrates,seeHalm (1996) 28.

49) Above, ? 1.2.1 with n. 13.

50) Below, ? 7.




formore than a quarter of a century51). The chief interrogator knew the

truth,as appears from (G). In this passage, TabarT placed the two versions

next to each other, withoutmaking

a choice. Later, when he had to decide,he chose wrong52).

3.3. From a chronological point of view, several elements call for atten

tion. The most obvious one concerns the role played by al-Haysam. De

Goeje, who knew his TabarT, noted that the name of this large landowner

is found also elsewhere in the Ta'rTk53). In 250/864, al-Haysam b. al-rAla'

b. Jumhur al-fIjlTwas defeated while giving support to an fAlid revolt in

the neighbourhood ofKufa54). He was beaten again in 267/881 by Ibn AbT

al-Saj, whose responsibilities as governor of al-Haramayn and theRoad to

Mecca reached to the vicinities ofKufa55). In 269/882-883 the governor ofKufa routed al-Haysam's troops and sold his estates to the highest bidder,thus putting an end to his aspirations once and for all56). For our purpose,it is the latter date thatmatters. Since the conflict between al-Haysam and

the young Qarmati community cannot have come out of the blue, we learn

from the story in TabarT that the Ismafili da'wa in the Sawad of Kufa

started at least several years before 269/882-883. This result is in agreement with what we found in ? 2.1-3.

3.4. TabarT himself reached a similar conclusion. Some pages after the

narrative discussed in ? 3.1-3, he notes: (H) The arrival (maslr) ofQarmatin the neighbourhood of Kufa took place before the leader of theZanj was

killed. (I) That is, one of our colleagues (heard this from) Zakrawayh'sbrother-in-law:6 (J)Qarmat toldme: Iwent to the leader of theZanj. Arriv

ingbefore him I said, "I subscribe to a certain religious practice, and haveone hundred thousand swords at my command ... Ifwe agree about the

practice, Iwill join you with all my men, ifnot, Iwill withdraw." ... (K)[We did not come to an agreement. Therefore,] I lefthis city and went to

the Sawad ofKufa"'57).

51) Note the ring-composition of the narrative. The account of the origins of the Qar

matis, announced in (A), ends with the name of the eponym of themovement (E).

52) Below, ? 3.4-6.

53)De Goeje (1886) 17.

54) TabarT III 1520. Here his ism is spelled as 'al-Haydam'.

55) TabarT III 1996 and 1937 (comp. above, ? 2.1). Ibn Abl al-Saj had been appointed

by the central government, pace Halm (1967) 100.

56) TabarT III 2040. Apparently, al-Haysam was one of those potentially dangerouslocal potentates who made use of the weakening of the central government in the middle

of the 3rd/9th century and whose whims had more impact on the fate of their farmers

than the activities of great rebels like the Tulunids and Saffarids far away in Egypt or

Transoxania.

57) TabarT III 2129.18-2130.8, mainly in the translation of Fields (1987) 175. The

words 'Qarmat told me', for qala U Qarmat, are omitted by Fields. A summary of a pas

sage omitted by me is placed in square brackets.




3.5. As appears from (I), we have to do with a sequel to the reportwe

paraphrased in ? 3.1. All elements of the latternarrative proved to be in

harmony with its historical setting58). No element in its continuation

evokes suspicion either59). TabarT added the storyat the end of his account

about the origin of theQarmatis inorder to embed the latteraccount in the

chronology of the rest of his narrative, as (H) makes clear. Apparently, he

did not realize that already the main part of his narrative contained a use

ful terminusante quern60).3.6. Before discussing the chronological data, we have to clear away a

misunderstanding. De Goeje, Halm and Popovic assume that both in (H)and in (J)TabarT is speaking of Hamdan Qarmat61). Hamdan, however,

never 'came to the Sawad of Kufa'. The ox-driver had been born there62).Itwas the firstda% 'theman fromKuzistan', who 'arrived' there, and it is

he who isdesignated in (H) with the name Qarmat. TabarT fell into the traplaid by the Qarmatis new style63). The interpretation of (J) leaves more

scope for discussion. It is possible that the brother-in-law of Zakrawayhwas referring toHamdan Qarmat, although TabarT assumed (H) that he

was speaking of the other Qarmat, 'theman fromKuzistan'64). This sce

nario is improbable, however. Zakrawayh's brother-in-law was preparedto go to any length inplaying down the role of Hamdan Qarmat, that trai

tor to the Fatimid cause, as we have seen65). It isunlikely, therefore, to saythe least, that in (J) he would suddenly depict Hamdan as the former lea

der of the community, and himself as having been conversant with him.

We may conclude that, certainly in (H) and almost certainly in (J), 'Qarmat' does not refer to Hamdan Qarmat, but to 'the man from Kuzistan',

thefirst dalin the Sawad of Kufa.

3.7. In (H) TabarT posits a chronological connection between the arrival

of theman fromKuzistan in the Sawad ofKufa and the death of the leader

of theZanj. The latterwas killed in Safar 270/August 88366). The negotiations with theQarmati leader took place, therefore, before that time.We

58) Comp. above, ? 3.1 (F) and ? 3.2.

59) Basing himself on a false assumption (below, ? 3.6), Halm declared this part of the

report to be a 'Wanderanekdote', without discussing its relation to the rest of the narra

tive,seeHalm (1967) 120-121.Here De Goeje (1886) 16 and 26 and Popovic (1976) 179took a better view.

60) Above, ? 3.3.

61)De Goeje (1886) 16,26; Popovic (1976) 179;Halm (1967) 120.

62)Above, ? 3 (G) andAku

Muhassin (see below, ? 5)at

NuwayriXXV

189.15-16,Ibn al-Dawadari VI 44.12-13, MaqrizT, Itti'az 101.11-13 ed. Bunz (1152.1-2 ed. Sayyal);

in theMuqaffa the passage is omitted.

63) Above, ? 3.2.

64) Above, ?3.1 (E).

65)Above, ? 3.1 (E) and (G) and ? 3.2.

66) TabarT III 2098. The city of the Zanj was taken on 27 Muharram 270/4 August

883, TabarT III 2087-2088; Waines (1992) xvi, erroneously: in 269/882.




can go a little further. The twomen met in the city of theZanj leader (K),i.e. in al-Muktara67). During the lastphase of the revolt, the citywas being

besieged.

From Dual-qarda

267/June 881 the blockade was

effective68).It

is inconceivable that the talks were held after that date. The city had gra

dually grown from a camp of theZanj that had been established there in

256/87069). Here we have a terminuspost quern for the conversation. The

most favourable time for the negotiations fell in the years 262-266/876

879, when the power of theZanj was at itszenith. In these years they had

gradually occupied the BatTha, the salty swamplands north of Basra. In

265/878-879 theirmilitary successes brought them beyond Wasit on the

Tigris and into the Sawad ofKufa, regions where theQarmatis were well

represented70). In the view of the Qarmati leaders an anti-Abbasid coalitionwith the victorious Zanj must have been an attractive option. The Zanj

leader, on the other hand, was in the position to refuse cooperation with

the dangerous innovators. The tide turned inRabf II 266/November-De

cember 879, when the central government succeeded in sending a largeforce against theZanj. This armywas able towin back the BatTha within a

year71). By the latter date, Rabf II 267/November-December 880, the

Qarmatis will have lost their interest in an alliance with theZanj.3.8. We may conclude that TabarT's account proves that at some time be

tween 256/870 and 267/880, most probably in the period 262-267/876880, the leaders of the Ismarili community in the Sawad ofKufa thoughtthemselves strong enough to come forward and to play a role in themajorevents of their time. Itwas almost certainly the first da*i himself who negotiated with the Zanj leader. The former's arrival in al-fIraq must have ta

ken place a considerable time before these talks. This result is in agreement with the data we found in ? 2.1-3 and ? 3.3.

4. The lifeof 'Abdallah theElder (1)

4.1.We now turn to thebiography of the founder of themovement,e Ab

dallah the Elder72). The latest and best discussion of the data is due to

Halm. His results can be rendered as follows.cAbdallah was born inQuraj

67) E.g. TabarT III 1924. Al-Muktara lay 20 km, as the crow flies, southeast of Basra,near the

Tigris.68) TabarT III 1996-2000.

69)Halm (1967) 86 andWaines (1992) 109n.324.

70)TabarT III 1898 nd 1932;Halm (1996)48 and 254.

71) TabarT III 1947-1972.

72) To my knowledge, the designation 'Abdallah al-Akbar is only found in Istitar

95.17. Anti-Fatimid authors refer to him as fAbdallah b. Maymun al-Qaddah (below, ?

8.3-8).




al-'Abbas near al-Ahwaz. He settled some fortykilometers north of that

city, in'Askar Mukram. It is there that he started preaching and sending

out dais forwhat later became known as the Isma'ili cause. When he hadto flee, he went toBasra, in the company of one al-Husayn al-AhwazI. In

Basra he lived with the Banu Sahm, a clan of the Bahila, apparently as

their guest. When there too the situation became precarious, eAbdallah

fled, again accompanied by al-Husayn, to Salamya in Syria. The local

lord, the 'Abbasid Muhammad b.eAbdallah b. Salih, gladly received new

settlers in the city he was rebuilding.cAbdallah remained in Salamya until

his death. Nothing isknown ofcAbdallah's furtherfortunes, except that he

married and left two sons, Ahmad and Ibrahim. "The only two dates for

his biography which we have concern the beginning of the Isma'ili missionin Iraq: the earliest community is supposed to have been founded there in

either 875 (261) or in 878 (264), while 'Abdallah was still alive". So farmy'

summary of some informative pages fromHalm's monograph73).4.2.When trying to come to a more detailed chronology of the life ofAb

dallah, we have towork our way backwards again, startingwith his last re

sidence. Abdallah's stay in Salamya iswell documented, both by Fatimid

and anti-Fatimid sources74). One element in the narrative deserves specialattention. According to the Istitar, cAbdallah's sons Ahmad and Ibrahim

were born in Salamya75). As far as Ahmad is concerned, anti-Fatimid tradition conveys the same information76). There is no reason to doubt these

73) Halm (1996) 5-14; the quotation is from p. 14. Elsewhere (p. 23 and p.26) Halm

mentions some other aspects ofrAbdallah's biography. These will be discussed below, in

n. 76 and ? 7 respectively.

74) Fatimid: Istitdr 94.23-95.17; anti-Fatimid (see below, ? 5): Ibn Rizam at al-Nadlm

238.18; Aku Muhassin at NuwayriXXVIII 70.9-10, Ibn al-Dawadari VI 19.9-10, Maqri

zT, Itti'az 13.1-2 ed. Bunz (I 26.2 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffd IV 527.6-7, Kitat 107.8 ed.

Sayyid (1995).75) Istitdr 95.18. As to Ibrahim, we learn from a casual remark that descendants (aw

lad) of his were living in Salamya in 289/902, Istitdr 97.5. They will have perished in the

massacre caused by 'the man with the birthmark' in the next year, Istitdr 105.

76) Aku Muhassin (see below, ? 5) at Ibn al-Dawadari VI 19.11, MaqrizI, Ittiedz 13.2

ed. Bunz (I 26.2-3 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffd IV 527.7-8, Kitat 107.8 ed. Sayyid (1995); al

Nadlm and Nuwayri are silent on this detail. Halm (1996) 23 gives some credit to the ver

sion of the late Isma'ili historian Idris fImad al-DIn (d. 872/1468), who holds that Ah

mad was born in Chalus on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea, Idris IV 358.5-6,

comp. 365.9. In my view, against the witnesses mentioned in our main text, little value

can be attached to this testimony, see also the general judgement about this author inIvanow (1942) 13-14. It should be added that according to the same author eAbdallah

married for the very first time inNihawand, where a son was born to him, eAlI al-Layt

(elsewhere the same author speaks ofeAll al-Layt as a brother ofeAbdallah). When eAb

dallah had to go into hiding, he left his son as his lieutenant (by that time the latter ap

parently was of age). Later, when eAbdallah had to conceal himself even more securely,he settled in Chalus, where he married (a second time) and became father of Ahmad.

eAH and other members of the family were murdered. Thereupon (Abdallah leftAh




statements. Ideology did not require that Imams had to be born in Sala

mya77). Ahmad was really born in Salamya. This fact has consequences for

the chronology of the lifeof'Abdallah the Elder. Since Ahmad was born

before 225/84078), 'Abdallah's flightto Salamya must have taken place be

fore that year. This conclusion is in concordance with the available data

about theman who was lord (sahib) of Salamya when 'Abdallah arrived

there,Muhammad b. 'Abdallah b. Salih79). Muhammmad's grandfather,Salih b. 'All b. 'Abdallah b. al-'Abbas, uncle of the firstAbbasid caliphsal-Saffah and al-Mansur, lived from 92/711 till 152/76980). 'Abdallah b.

Salih, Muhammad's father, was able to receive caliph al-Mahdi in Sala

mya in 163/779-780 and was appointed governor of al-Jazira in the same

year. He will have been born, therefore, between, say, 112/730 and 132/750. He died in Rabf I 186/March-April 80281). Muhammad himself,

then,will have been born between 132/750 and 163/780. Most probably,he was active till a period between 195/810 and 225/84082).

4.3. We may conclude that the data concerning the birth ofAhmad and

those relating to the lords of Salamya point in the same direction. The an

cestor of the Fatimids, 'Abdallah the Elder, settled in Salamya after Rabf

1186/March-April 802, at some time before 225/84083).

waz(!), went to Samarra and ultimately established himself in Salamya (Idris IV 357.2

365.11). As we can see, Idris concocted his story from various sources, the reliability of

which cannot be ascertained or must be deemed slight. I do not deny that there may be

some truth in one of these stories, especially since in a later phase of his life eAbdallah

had a son living in Taleqan, south of the Caspian (below ? 7.4-5). Maybe this son was

called eAlI. As to the birthplace of Ahmad, however, this late and muddled testimony is

outweighed by the unanimous affirmations from early Fatimid and anti-Fatimid sources,

which, in the case of the Istitar, are supported by another element in the narrative, see

our main text.

77) Al-MahdT was himself born in eAskar Mukram, comp. above ? 2.3.

78) Above, ? 2.4.

79) Istitar 94.23 and 95.7.

80) Grohmann-Kennedy, "Salih b.eAll'.

81) TabarT III 500.12-15, Ibnai-AtlrVI 118.9-10.

82) Admittedly, Muhammad can have been born as late as in 186/802 and may have

lived till the end of the 3rd/9th century. This is pure theory, however.

It is intriguing to read that Muhammad wrote a letter ila l-katifati bni eammihT {Istitar

95.3). Both sender and adressee being Abbasids, it is possible that ibn 'ammihT does

mean no more than 'his relative'. Since, however, Muhammad's aunt UmmeAbdallah,

a

full sister of his father, was married in 159/775-776 to caliph al-MahdT (TabarT III 466;

the family ties are incorrectly rendered inEI2 s.v. Salamiyya), it is possible that ibn eam

mihT has to be taken in the stricter sense of 'sun of his uncle' and refers to one of the ca

liphs Musa al-HadT (r. 169-170/785-786) and Harun al-RasId (r. 170-193/786-809),

both sons of al-MahdT, though not from Umm 'Abdallah, but from al-Kayzuran (TabarTIII 569 and 599). The argument is not compelling, however.

83) Below, ? 6.2.2-3.



160Omert J.Schrier

5. The anti-Fatimid sources

5.1. Thus far our conclusions were mainly based on ego-documents and

texts reflecting family traditions written by the Fatimids or their adherents.

For reasons thatwill become clear below, these texts hardly contain infor

mation about the earlier phases of the life of ''Abdallah. From now on,

therefore,we have to relymainly on works written by opponents of the Fa

timids. In this section we will give a survey of these writings, as far as theyare relevant forour purposes.

5.2. The firsthistory of the Ismaili movement known to us in some de

tail was composed by Abu 'Abdallah Muhammad b. cAITb. Rizam fromKufa. Itwas finished between 341/953 and 345/95684). Ibn Rizam has gota reputation as a slanderer of the Ismaili movement, and rightly so.Where

ideological considerations are absent, however, he proves to be a reliable

source. Probably he was in touch with old styleQarmati circles inKufa85).His work has not been preserved, but itwas utilized by later authors, three

among whom are relevant for this paper, al-NadTm, Aku Muhassin and,

presumably, al-BustT86). The following analyses are based on the passages

thatbear

uponthe

periodwe are

discussing, i.e.,the time till

267/881.5.3. Al-NadTm finished his Fihrist in 377/987-988 or shortly later87). In

his introduction to the passage concerned he declares that he will quote a

refutation of the Isma'ilis by Abu 'Abdallah b. Rizam {kitab ... raddafihi'aid l-Isma^Tliyyatiwa-kasafa madahibahum). He adds that he will presentit bi-lafzi AbT rAbdi llah, but cannot vouch for the correctness of his ac

count88). One time at least al-NadTm gives additional information89). Else

where he names some prominent Isma'ilis whom he had visited inMosul

84) Madelung (1959) 59 n. 1, transl. 62 n. 156.

85) Ibn Rizam speaks without reserve of the role played by Hamdan Qarmat in the Is

mafili da'wa; Hamdan had been the chief opponent of al-MahdT during the schism of

286/899, see above, ? 3.2 and below, ? 7; Ibn Rizam's spokesmen had remained loyal to

the tenets held by Hamdan Qarmat (and the original IsmafTliyya), see Madelung (1959)

59 n. 1, transl. 62 n. 156 (Madelung needlessly thinks of a second secession, after the dis

asterof the falseQarmatiMahdl in319/931),Halm (1986) 139,Halm (1996) 6 and 8,and, for the survival of the old Qarmati doctrines in the Sawad of Kufa, Madelung

(1959) 81-82,transl.

49-51,Halm

(1996) 64-65,253-255 and 263. The adherents of the

Fatimids tried to eliminate Hamdan from history, see Poonawala (2003) 356 n.21 and be

low, ? 7.2.

86) See Halm (1996) 425 s.v. Ibn Rizam; for al-Bustl, see below, n. 121.

87)Dodge (1970) xxi-xxii.

88) Fihrist 238.8-9.

89) In Fihrist 239.9-10 al-Nadlm is speaking of events that took place after Ibn Rizam

had published his book, Madelung (1959) 59 n. 1, transl. 62 n. 156.




and Baghdad90). These may have been the source of one or more details in

his narrative.

5.4. The second author who borrowed material from Ibn Rizam was

Abu 1-Husayn Muhammad b. 'AIT b. al-Husayn (d. 398/1008), who wasknown as Aku Muhassin91). Aku Muhassin, himself a sharif,was mainlybent on refuting the genealogical claims of the Fatimids, but he also de

voted many pages to the doctrine allegedly spread by the darwa. His book,finished some time after 372/98392), is lost, but passages that are relevantto our purposes have been preserved by the Egyptian authors Nuwayri,Ibn al-Dawadari and MaqrizT. Of course these authors felt as free tomake

substitutions, abbreviations and transpositions in the texts they quoted as

their colleagues did in antiquity and the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, bycollating their testimonies it ispossible to reconstruct Aku Muhassin's text

inmuch detail.The firstof the relevant textsbears upon the ancestry of the

Fatimids in general and the life of 'Abdallah inparticular (a), the second

one consists of a vivid description of the conversion of Hamdan Qarmat by

al-Husayn al-AhwazT and the activities of both men after that event (p)93).It is especially the first text that testifies toAku Muhassin's aversion to the

movement.

5.5. Our oldest source is theNihdyat al-arab fifunun al-adab of Ahmad

b. 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Nuwayri, a huge encyclopedia completed in 731/1331. It includes text p and parts of a. Nuwayri died in 733/133394).

90) Fihrist 241.4 and 241.10-13, discussed in Stern (1960) 82-83, repr. 204-207.

91) In the secondary literature this author is usually referred to as Aku Muhsin. Maq

rizT, however, wrote mhsn with fatha above the ha' and sadda above the sin in the mu

sawwada of the ItWaz, MS Gotha (below, n.99), fol.6r.3, and, without fatha, in that of

theMuqaffa, MS Paris (below, n.105), fol.211r.25 (noted inYalaoui [1991] 525.17). On

thebasis

of the GothaMS,

Becker(1902)

4 n.2spoke of'Aku Muhassin'. His proposaldid not meet with approval, because Bunz (1909) 11.19 omitted to note the diacritics in

his edition of the Gotha MS, see Casanova (1921) 129 n. 1. The latter also objected that

muhassin can only be applied toGod; he wanted to read, ifnecessary, 'Aku Muhassan',but Muhassin does occur as a personal name, see e.g. DahabI, 468.5-8; I thank Gual

Juynboll for drawing my attention to this work.

Not much is known about the life of Aku Muhassin, see Ferre (1972) 1 n. 1.Although liv

ing in Damascus, he met Ibn Rizam (Ibn al-Dawadari VI 55.7-8) and visited a localityreferred to as Drd\ presumably near the Furat al-kabir (Ibn al-Dawadari VI 51.3-4), the

main branch, I suppose, of the Euphrates, which at that time was flowing past Kufa (Le

Strange [1905]70).92) Madelung (1959) 59 n.l, transl. 62 n.156, and Halm (1996) 423 s.v. Aku Muhsin;

size: MaqrizT, ItWaz 11.18-12.1 ed. Bunz, I 22.4-6 ed. Sayyal; first lines: Ibn al-Dawa

dari VI 17.3-7.

93) See below, ? 6 and ? 7 respectively.

94) For the year of Nuwayrl's death, see Chapoutot-Remadi, 'Nuwayri', 158 and 156;

Halm (1996) 427, erroneously: 'd. 1322 (read: 1332 OJS)/732'. The passages that are di

rectly relevant are: Nuwayri XXV 189-191 (p), paraphrased inDe Sacy (1838) clxvi-clxxi



162Omert J.Schrier

5.6. Extensive quotations from both texts are to be found in book 6 of

theKanz al-durar wa-jami' al-gurar of Abu Bakr b. 'Abd Allah b. Aybak

al-Dawadari, a worldhistory,

the draft version{musawwada)

ofwhich has

been preserved in the handwriting of the author95). The last page of book 6

is dated Sunday 20 Jumada II 734/27 February 133496); thewriting of the

final version {mubayyada) started after the beginning of the year 736/au

tumnl33597).5.7. Collation of Ibn al-Dawadari's textwith that ofNuwayri proves that

these authors, although living in the same time and in the same areas, did

not avail themselves of each other's work. They are independent witnesses

to the textof Aku Muhassin98).

5.8. A century later,Ahmad b.eAIT al-MaqrizT (766-845/1365-1442) incorporated material fromAku Muhassin in the Itti'dz al-hunafa\ theMu

qaffd and theKitat. The Itti'az and theKitat have not only been trans

mitted in copies of the final version {mubayyadd), we also possess large

parts of the draft versions {musawwada) of these works, texts, therefore,thatwere written and annotated by MaqrizT in his own hand. By chance

the latter include the quotations we are interested in.The Muqaffd never

reached the final stage.What has come down to us are copies of themu

and clxxxiv; Nuwayri, XXVIII 70 and 72-73 (a), the former transl. in De Sacy (1838)

ccccxliv-ccccxlv, the latter omitted inDe Sacy (1838) ccccxlviii.

95) Radtke (1982) 1-6. If themanuscript was written by a secretary, as Radtke deems

possible, the man was badly equipped for his task; the text is full of orthographical and

grammatical anomalies. The passages that are directly relevant are Ibn al-Dawadari VI

17-21 (a) and 44-46 (p), the latter partly transl. inHalm (1996) 27-29.

96) Ibn al-Dawadari VI 604.11-12; Munajjid (1961) 11, erroneously: 6 June 1334.

97) Radtke (1982) 5-6; this is the last date we have from Ibn al-Dawadarfs life; Halm

(1996) 424 erroneously dates his death in 1331/732.

98) Ibn al-Dawadari VI 17.4-18.15, for example, is lacking inNuwayri, whereas thelong doctrinal passage preserved inNuwayri XXV 195-216 and 217-27, paraphrased in

De Sacy (1838) lxxv-cxxxvii and cxxxviii-cxlvii, is not to be found in the work of Ibn al

Dawadari.

Nuwayri and Ibn al-Dawadari have an interesting detail in common. The formula qala,used to indicate that a quotation is being continued, occurs in Nuwayri XXV 189.16,

190.1, 10 and 18, 191.6, 7 and 9, Ibn al-Dawadari VI 45.2 and 13. The two instances in

Ibn al-Dawadari correspond with Nuwayri XXV 190.1 and 10 respectively. This suggeststhat we have to do with an element that derives from a common source. Since there is no

indication, tomy knowledge, that both authors quoted Aku Muhassin through a com

mon intermediary, they probably found the formula in the text of Aku Muhassin himself.The latter, then, was quoting here one of his sources (see below, n. 106). Since all in

stances occur in the pages devoted to the conversion of Hamdan Qarmat (text p), this

source may be identified as a STrat Hamdan Qarmat, a text, therefore, that was compar

able to the STrat Ibn Hawsab (above, ? 1.1) and the STrat 'Abdallah al-SfT (Halm [1996]

39 n.85). If this surmise is correct, the differences between the accounts of Ibn Rizam

and Aku Muhassin noted below, ? 7, can be traced back to the sources used by both

authors; see also below, n. 103.




sawwada, and, again, part of the papers MaqrizT has been working on

himself. These sheets contain the passages that have a bearing on our sub

ject.5.8.1. The quotations in the Itti'az involve both texta and text p. In the

passages concerned the textof themubayyada is almost identical to that of

themusawwada"). Collation of these textswith their parellels inNuwayriand Ibn al-Dawadari proves that wherever the musawwada and the mu

bayyada are at variance, the readings of the latterare due to changes made

byMaqrizT himself or a copyist100). For our purposes, therefore, it suffices

to consult the musawwada. In the main textMaqrizT introduced Aku Mu

hassin with respect and spoke of a 'useful book' {kitabmufid), although he

wanted to keep his distance: ana barfun min qawlihf01). In themargin ofthese lines, however, MaqrizT noted: wa-qadgabartu zamanan azunnu an

nahu qa'ilun ma ana hakihi hatta ra'aytuMuhammada bna Ishaqa l-Nadi

ma ft kitabi l-Fihristi dakara hadd l-kaldma bi-nassihi wa-razdhu ila Abi

rAbdi llahi bni Rizama wa-annahu dakarahu ft kitabihi lladi radda fthi 'aid

1-IsmaTliyyati 'I kept thinking some time that he said what I had been say

ing, till I saw thatMuhammad b. Ishaq al-NadTm in his Fihrist told the

story alongside in the same words and ascribed it toAbu 'Abdallah b. Ri

zam, and that the latter had related it in his book inwhich he refuted the

Isma'ilis'102). MaqrizT was right.The texthe had copied fromAku Muhassin strongly resembles the account al-NadTm had borrowed from Ibn Ri

zam. MaqrizT was the first, it seems, to observe that Aku Muhassin de

pended on Ibn Rizam for large parts of his work. Apparently he did not

realize thatAku Muhassin did more than copying his predecessor: he also

corrected him and added information fromother sources103). Incidentally,

") Musawwada: MS Forschungsbibliothek Gotha Orient. A 1652 (I consulted photo

copies), fol.6r

v

(a) and 40v + 42r (P; fol. 41, containing a passage that goes back, throughIbn al-Atlr, Kamil VII 311-312, toTabarT III 2128-2129, was inserted later by MaqrizT),ed. in Bunz (1909) 11-13 (a) and 101-102 + 103 (P); mubayyada: ed. in Sayyal (1967) I

22-26 (a) and 151-153 -I- 155 (p). The omission of qala: Qarmat. tumma between tumma

qala lahu: ma smuka? and qala lahu Qarmat: in the musawwada (MS Gotha fol.42r.9

[102.1 ed. Bunz]) is repeated in the mubayyada (I 152.12-14 ed. Sayyal); the original text

is found inNuwayri XXV 190.11-12, comp. Ibn al-Dawadari VI 45.14-15 and MaqrizT,

Muqaffa III 288.19-21.

10?) Instead of qasid, for example, inMS Gotha, fol.40v.6 (101.10 ed. Bunz), NuwayriXXV 189.13, Ibn al-Dawadari VI 44.1 (and MaqrizT, Muqaffa III 288.2), the mubayyada

has sa'ir: 1151.17 ed. Sayyal;see

below,n. 116.

101)Musawwada: MS Gotha, fol.6r.l-5 (11.17-12.1 + 4 ed. Bunz); mubayyada: I

22.4-7 + 23.1 ed. Sayyal.

102)Musawwada: MS Gotha, fol.6r, inmargine (12.1-4 ed. Bunz, rectified at p. 145);

mubayyada: I 22.7-23.1 ed. Sayyal (in 22.8 read hakihi instead of hakiya). Maqrizfscharacterization of thework of Ibn Rizam is copied from the Fihrist, see above, ? 5.3.

103) For agreements and differences between the accounts of Ibn Rizam and Aku Mu

hassin, see below, ? 5.10, ? 7 and n. 179; Aku Muhassin inserted more material on doc




MaqrizT's observation is of some importance from a chronological point of

view too. The manuscript of the Fihrist that once belonged to him has

partlycome down to

us; MaqrizT'sowner's

entryis dated

824/1421104).The possibility cannot be ruled out, of course, that he consulted theFihrist

before obtaining a copy himself. Absolute certainty is out of reach. Whatwe can say is that,most probably, MaqrizT wrote the note in 824/1421 or

shortly afterwards; themain text of themusawwada of this section of the

Itti'az and the final version of the whole work, inwhich the text of thenote was incorporated in the main text,will have been composed before

and after that year respectively.5.8.2. In theMuqaffd slightly abridged versions of texts a and p are to

be found105). The margin of the introductory lines contains a note byMaqrizT reading: wa-laysa huwa (Aku Muhassin) munsVhu, wa-innama huwa

kalamu AbT rAbdi lldhi bni Rizama ft kitabihTUadT radda Jthi rala l-IsmarT

liyyati,akadahu l-sarifuwa-lam yarzuhu ilayhi, 'hewas not its author, but

it is an account byAbu 'Abdallah b. Rizam inhis book inwhich he refuted

the Isma'ilis; the sharif copied itwithout recognizing his debt to him'106).The gist of this note is identical towhat we read in themargin of themu

sawwada of the IttVaz. With the same reservation we made in the preced

ing subsection we can say that this note toowas written in or shortly after

824/1421, while themain textof the biographies concerned will have been

written before that year107).5.8.3. The Kitat contains only summaries of text a. In themusawwada

MaqrizT somewhat mitigated the libellous tone ofAku Muhassin's report,

trinal issues, see below, nn. 106, 108 and 111, and possibly used an additional historical

source, see above, n. 98.

104)MS Dublin Chester BeattyLibrary3315, fol.T, comp.Arberry 1916) II 31 and

Dodge (1970) I xxiv-xxviii.105) Text a is quoted in the biography of fUbayd Allah al-MahdT (above, n.3), see MS

Paris B.N. Ar. 2144 (I consulted a microfilm), fol.211r-212v, ed. in Yalaoui (1991) IV

525-529, transl. in Fagnan (1910) 38-42. Text p is found, in the tarjamat al-Hasani bni

Ahmada l-Janndbiyyi, inMS Leiden Or. 14.533 (consulted by me in situ), fol. 508r-508v,ed. inYalaoui (1991) III 287-289; erroneously, MaqrizT refers to this text as the tarjamatAhmada bni l-Husayni bni Abl SarTda l-Jannabiyyi, see MS Paris, fol.211v23, ed. inYa

laoui (1991) IV 527.10-11 (both names are incorrect; in reality, the man whom the tarjama is devoted to was called Abu Sa'Id al-Hasan b. Bahram al-Jannabl, see Ibn al-Dawa

dari VI 55.2-7).

106)MS Paris (above, n.105), fol.211r, in margine; MaqrizT, Muqaffa IV 525.19526.1.

MaqrizT may be right; on the other hand, Aku Muhassin does make mention of a conver

sation with Ibn Rizam (above, n.91), and, quoting from a Kitab al-Siyasa, duly names

his source, see Nuwayri XXV 220.7-9 and 225.1-2; see also above, n.98.

107) The passages from Aku Muhassin are embedded in themain text, not starting at

the top of a page. In the main text of passage a MaqrizT refers to passage p (above,

n.105).




in the corresponding passage in themubayyada he went as far as to rewrite

part of the text, lending ita neutral or even positive tone108). Elsewhere in

themubayyada MaqrizT inserted a second, slightly less condensed version

of texta, inwhich he maintained the tendentious character of the original,

pointing out, however, that the passage represented the allegations (yaz

rum) of one of two factions (fanqani), the other ofwhom held that the Fa

timids did descend from rAlTb. AbT Talib109). In all passages the reader is

leftunaware that he has to do with quotations; the name of Aku Muhassin

is not mentioned. The date of composition of these texts cannot be ascer

tained, but, ifwe are right in seeing growing scepticism on the part of

MaqrizT about Aku Muhassin's intentions, we may suppose that theKitat

passages were written after those in the ItWaz and theMuqaffd.5.8.4. The quotations fromAku Muhassin in the musawwadat of the Itti

raz, theMuqaffd and theKitat were not borrowed fromNuwayri110) or

Ibn al-Dawadari111); they are also mutually independent112); we may sup

108)Musawwada : inMS Istanbul, Topkapi Sarayi 1472 (not consulted by me), ed. in

Sayyid (1995) 106-107;mubayyada: ed. Sayyid (2002) II 317-318, transl. nCasanova

(1921) 148-149; in both versions the passage is inserted between two chapters of a doc

trinal nature, also borrowed from Aku Muhassin, see Sayyid (1995) 95-106 and 109-111

and Sayyid (2002) II 308-317 and 318-320 respectively (thesame

texts, without interruption, inNuwayri XXV 195-216 and 217-220.2).

,09)Ed. Sayyid (2002) II 172-173.

no) MaqrizI has more material than Nuwayri (the passage, e.g., Itti'az 12.3-17 ed.

Bunz [123.3-25.5 ed. Sayyal] and itsparallels Muqaffa IV 526.5-527.1), Kitat 106.9-107.5

ed. Sayyid [1995, musawwada], II 317.16-18 and 172.4-10 ed. Sayyid [2002, mubayya

da], present in Ibn al-Dawadari VI 17.7-18.15, is lacking in Nuwayri XXVIII 70) and

does not repeat an error of Nuwayri, see below, n. 156.

111) MaqrizI does not repeat Ibn al-Dawadari's mistaken 'correction' tisfdaewat, VI

18.1, but reads sabr da'wat, Itti'az 12.10 ed. Bunz (I 24.4 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffa IV

526.11,Kitat 106.11 ed.

Sayyid (1995, musawwada;the MS

readingis

correct),11317.18

and 172.7 ed. Sayyid (2002; mubayyada) ;Nuwayri omits the passage. Ibn al-Dawadari

was misled by an inconsistency in the work of Aku Muhassin, who spoke about seven

grades here, following Ibn Rizam (at Fihrist 240.15-18), but elsewhere quoted another

source (at Nuwayri XXV 195-216 and parallels, see above, n. 108), according towhich

the highest initiation was reached in nine steps, see Stern (1983) 57-62.

112) The quotations in the Ittiraz were not copied from theMuqaffa or the Kitat

(above, ? 5.8.1-3); the passage, e.g., in a, Itti'az 12.18-19 ed. Bunz (I 25.5-7 ed. Sayyal),contains details that are absent inMuqaffa IV 527.2-3, Kitat 107.6 ed. Sayyid (1995, mu

sawwada), II 317.19 and 172.10 ed. Sayyid (2002, mubayyada), but present in Ibn al-Da

wadari VI 18.15-19 and

Nuwayri

XXVIII 70.2-4, comp. Ibn Rizam at Fihrist 238.16-17;

for p, comp. 101.10-13 ed. Bunz (I 151.17-152.2 ed. Sayyal), absent inMuqaffa III

288.1-2 and in the Kitat, with Ibn al-Dawadari VI 44.9-13 and Nuwayri XXV 189.12

16.

The Muqaffa quotations were not copied from the Kitat (above, ? 5.8.2-3) or the ItWaz;

Muqaffa IV 528.16-529.9 is unique in having preserved a passage about Aku Muhassin's

brother Ahmad b. fAlI; compare further, for a, e.g., Muqaffa IV 526.13-14 with ItWaz

12.12 ed. Bunz (I 24.5-6 ed. Sayyal), and Kitat 107.2 ed. Sayyid (1995, musawwada), II




pose that they go back to a single source, themanuscript MaqrizT mentions

in the Ittirazlu). In this respect the passages in themubayyada of theKi

tat have to be leftout of account; the possibility cannot be ruled out that

they go back to the Itti'az or, inone case, to theMuqaffd114).5.9. Recapitulating the results reached in ? 5.4-8 we find that inpassage

a our knowledge of the textof Aku Muhassin isbased on five independentwitnesses: Nuwayri, Ibn al-Dawadari and the musawwadat ofMaqrizT's

Itti'az, Muqaffd and Kitat \ the same works minus the Kitat are our

sources for the textof passage P115).

317.18 and 172.8 ed. Sayyid (2002, mubayyada) on the one hand, and Ibn al-Dawadari

VI 18.3-4 on the other (Nuwayri is deficient here); in p, e.g., the passage Ibn al-Dawadari VI 44.9-13, Nuwayri XXV 189.12-16, transposed in the Itti'az from 101.4 to

101.10-13 ed. Bunz (from I 151.4 to 151.16-152.2 ed. Sayyal), is to be found, abridged,inMuqaffd III 288.1-2 in its original context.

The doctrinal quotations in the Kitat (above, n. 108) are not to be found in the Itti'dz or

theMuqaffd. The summary in the musawwada of the Kitat is not based on the quotationsin the lttiedz or theMuqaffd : the passage 107.1-6 ed. Sayyid (1995) contains several ele

ments that are absent in Itti'az 12.10-18 ed. Bunz (I 24.4-25.6 ed. Sayyal), but present in

Muqaffd IV 526.11-527.2; conversely, wa-kabasu ddrahu in 107.6 is found in ItWdz

12.20 ed. Bunz , but omitted inMuqaffd IV 527.3; the phrase fa-aqdma bihd in 107.7,

lacking in both the Itti'dz and theMuqaffd, does derive from Aku Muhassin, comp. lamma aqdma inNuwayri XXVIII 70.8 and Ibn al-Dawadari VI 19.8 (here qdma iswrong

for aqdma).

113)Above, ?5.8.1 andn.92.

114) Some things are clear. 1) The mubayyada passages (II 317-318 and 172-173 ed.

Sayyid [2002]) do not derive from Nuwayri or Ibn al-Dawadari, see above nn. 110 and

111.2) They are mutually independent: the clause fa-sdra lahii mdlun, II 317.19, a mild

rephrasing of Ibn al-Dawadari VI 18.16-17, Itti'az 12.18 ed. Bunz (I 25.5 ed. Sayyal) and

Muqaffd IV 527.2 (Nuwayri is deficient here), has no basis in II 172.10; conversely, the

lines II 172.5-6, e.g., contain material from Aku Muhassin (comp. Ibn al-Dawadari VI

17.7-11[Nuwayri

omits thepassage],

Ittirdz 12.4-6 ed. Bunz[I

23.2-4 ed.Sayyal]

and

Muqaffd IV 526.5-7) that is lacking in II 317.16. 3) They are not borrowed from the mu

sawwada (ed. Sayyid [1995]): the information supplied in II 317.23-24 is not found in

Kitat 107.9-10, and the lines II 172.5-6, e.g., do not occur in Kitat 106.9. 4) In compos

ing II 317-318 MaqrizT did not rely on theMuqaffd : the clause fa-ankara l-ndsu ralayhi

wa-hammu bihi, II 317.19 ed. Sayyid (2002), corresponding with Nuwayri XXVIII 70.3

4, Ibn al-Dawadari VI 18.17-19 and Itti'dz 12.19 ed. Bunz (I 25.6-7 ed. Sayyal), has no

equivalent inMuqaffd IV 527.3.

Other points remain unclear. 1) The possibility cannot be ruled out that the passage II

317-318 goes back to the Itti'dz. 2) The passage II 172-173 may have been copied from

the lttiedz or theMuqaffd.

There is a contra-indication: the clause layarju

tawdban wa-ld

yakafu 'iqdban (II 172.8), is to be found in Itti'az 12.12 ed. Bunz (I 24.5-6 ed. Sayyal)and Muqaffd IV 526.13 (also in Ibn al-Dawadari VI 24.4, Nuwayri is deficient here), but

in the Ittieaz and theMuqaffd yakafu is replaced with yaksd ; it is possible, however,

that yaksd represents the original reading and was replaced with yakafu by Ibn al-Da

wadari and MaqrizT independently from each other. Conclusive evidence may be found

in the material not studied by me.

115) For the texts, see above, nn. 94, 95, 99, 105 and 108. In the inheritance of Samuel




5.10. A comparison between the passages devoted to 'Abdallah the El

der by respectively al-Nadlm and Aku Muhassin (text a) shows that both

authors offered the same information in identical or similar terms, at least

as far as the events are concerned that led to the flight to Salamya. The nar

rative ofAku Muhassin ismore detailed. Presumably al-Nadlm is offeringan extract116). Both authors must have used the same source, the work of

Ibn Rizam. When they come to speak about the last phase of the life of

'Abdallah, however, their accounts show notable differences. The most

conspicuous one concerns 'Abdallah's descendants and successors. In the

version of al-Nadlm, 'Abdallah was succeeded by his son Muhammad;after the death of the latter themovement split up, some people claiming

thatMuhammad was succeeded by his brother Ahmad b. 'Abdallah, whileothers held thathis post was occupied by his son, who was also called Ah

mad and bore the laqab Abu Sala'la'; thereafter Sa'id b. al-Husayn b. 'Ab

dallah was in charge, since al-Husayn had died already117). The tradition

deriving from Aku Muhassin has a different account, inwhich 'Abdallah

had a son called Ahmad; the latter begot two sons, al-Husayn and Mu

hammad, who was known as Abu Sala'la'; al-Husayn became the father

of Sa'id (the later caliph)118). This view conforms with the genealogyfound in the early Fatimid sources119) and is the rightone120). Apparently,

Stern a reconstruction of text p is to be found, based on Nuwayri and the Itticaz ofMaq

rizT, see Stern (1983) xx-xxi. Halm was the first, I think, to realize the importance of the

work of Ibn al-Dawadari; its value should not be overrated, however. In his version,

e.g., of Aku Muhassin's account of the conversion of Hamdan Qarmat (Ibn al-Dawadari

VI 45.11-13, transl. in Halm [1996] 29) the latter had towash himself in a river before he

could be sworn in, but in Nuwayri XXV 190.9-11 and MaqrizT, ItWaz 101.17-19 ed.

Bunz (1152.10-12 ed. Sayyal) and Muqaffa III 288.17-19, no mention ismade of a purification bath, the oath there being taken from him after the preacher and he jalasd {ft

ba'di l-tanqi); the bathscene

provesto be an

embellishment introduced bya

copyistof

Aku Muhassin's text or by Ibn al-Dawadari himself.

116) Compare Fihrist 238.10-11 +16-17 with Nuwayri XXVIII 70.2-3 + 5, Ibn al

Dawadari VI 18.14-16 + 19.2-4, MaqrizT, Itti'az 12.17-18 + 20 ed. Bunz (I 25.4-5 + 7

ed. Sayyal, reading kasaru in 1. 7 instead of kabasu ; for a similar case, see above,

n. 100), Muqaffa IV 527.1 + 3, and Kitat 107.5 + 6 ed. Sayyid (1995). For the name 'Ab

dallah b. Maymun al-Qaddah, used by Ibn Rizam and his followers, see below, ? 8.3-8.

,17) Fihrist 238.22-25.

,18) Ibn al-Dawadari VI 19.11-20.2 + 21.6-11; MaqrizT, Itti'az 13.2-9 + 14.5-8 ed.

Bunz (I 26.2-9 + 28.12-29.2 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffa IV 527.7-528.1 + 528.8-12, Kitat

107.8-14ed.Sayyid (1995); comp. NuwayriXXV

189.8-9 and XXVII 73.1-2.

119) See above, ? 1.2.2 and ?2.

12?) This is not to say that Aku Muhassin presented a correct survey of the leaders of

the movement. In his account we find successively the names ofeAbdallah (b. Maymun

al-Qaddah, see below, ? 8.3), Ahmad b. 'Abdallah, al-Husayn b. Ahmad, Abu Sala'la'

Muhammad b. Ahmad and Sa'Td b. al-Husayn, see above, n. 118. This list is significantin that it includes both Sa'Td's father, al-Husayn b. Ahmad, and his uncle and guardian

Muhammad b. Ahmad. The inclusion of the former is in harmony with a view of Fatimid




Aku Muhassin corrected his predecessor in thismatter121). Other diver

gences will be treated below, ? 7. They prove that the traditional view, ac

cording towhich Aku Muhassin did hardly more than quoting Ibn Ri

zam122), must be refined. It is true for the opening pages of the works of

both authors, which dealt with 'Abdallah's lifeuntil his settlement in Sala

mya. But in his account of later developments, especially in al-'Iraq (text

p), and in genealogical and dogmatic matters Aku Muhassin set out hisown course123).

6. The lifeof 'Abdallah theElder (2)

6.1. Now thatwe have examined the available sources, we can return to

the biography of 'Abdallah the Elder. Here we will discuss, in a retrogradeway, the events that preceded his flight to Salamya (? 6.2). In a separatesection we will treat the chronological implications of the narratives about

the conversion of Hamdan Qarmat (? 7).6.2.1. Before fleeing to Salamya, 'Abdallah lodged some time in Basra

with members of the tribe of Bahila124). He is not said to have owneda

history introduced, presumably, by caliph al-Mufizz (r. 341-365/953-975); Muhammad

b. Ahmad, on the other hand, was respectfully mentioned during the reign of his grandson al-Qa'im (322-334/934-946), in the Sirat al-MahdT, but had lost position and hon

our, in Fatimid memory, by 349/960 (above, ? 1.2.2). Apparently, in this respect Aku

Muhassin fell victim to a view that was spread by Fatimid propaganda during one generation in themiddle of the 4th/10th century.

121) It is possible that al-NadTm made a mistake while summarizing his source. Stern

(1961) 26-28, repr. 311-313, pointed out that in the Kasf al-asrdr al-Bdtiniyya of Abu 1

QasimIsma'Tl b. Ahmad al-BustT

(d. 420/1030)a

groupof Isma'ilis ismentioned whose

opinions were probably identical to those held by one of the groups distinguished in the

Fihrist, see Stern [1961] 33.38-34.1, 34.21-32 + 35.8-12, repr. 319.1-2, 12-18 + 320.3-5.

Al-BustT did quote Ibn Rizam, see Stern (1961) 33.11-13, repr. 318.10-11, and he and al

NadTm may have found thematerial they have in common in the source they had in com

mon, i.e. in Ibn Rizam. The text is ambigous, however, and its interpretation is complicated by a scribal error in the vital lines 34.30-32, repr. 319.17-18. It does not prove,

therefore, that al-NadTm cited his source correctly.

122) So MaqrizT (above, ? 5.8.1), Daftary (1990) 109, Halm (1996) 29 n.59, 47 n.107,

56 n. 140, etc., but comp. Madelung (1961) 55 n.77.

123)This

paper, ?7 and nn.

106,108 and

179,and

comp.n.98.

124) Istitdr 95.17-18; Ibn Rizam at Fihrist 238.17-18; Aku Muhassin at NuwayriXXVIII 70.5-8, Ibn al-Dawadari VI 19.2-9, MaqrizT, Itti'az 12.20-13.1 ed. Bunz (I 25.7

26.2 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffd IV 527.3-6, Kitat 107.6-8 ed. Sayyid (1995). Al-SulT (d. 336/

946) at fArib 52.5-6 specifies that eAbdallah stayed with the clan of the Banu Sahm;

comp. Halm (1996) 13-14 with n.24 and below, ? 8.6-7. Groups of the Banu Bahila lived

in the neighbourhood of Basra from the earliest times of the city, pace Halm (1996) 9,see Caskel, fBahila\




house inBasra, although it is expressly stated he had some in 'Askar Muk

ram and in Salamya. His stay inBasra will not have lasted long.6.2.2. 'Abdallah started preaching in 'Askar Mukram125). He will have

directed himself first to people in his immediate surroundings. Later hewas able to send dais to other areas. These activities must have taken

some years, all ofwhich fell well before 225/840126). The Isma'ili da'wa,

therefore, must have begun not 'in the middle of the ninth century', as

Halm supposed127), but two decades earlier, at the latest circa 220/835128).The mission led to riots and 'Abdallah's expulsion from 'Askar. The originators of the upheaval are said to have been Shi'ites and Mu'tazilites. The

behaviour of the former can easily be understood. 'Abdallah's preaching

in favour of the hidden Imam Muhammad b. Isma'il b. Ja'farmust

havebeen an affront to those who put their trust in the living Imams, at that

timeMuhammad b. 'All b.Musa b. Ja'far (d. 220/835) and/or his son 'AIT

al-Hadl (d. 254/868)129). The rationalistic approach of the Mu'tazilites

found also much to criticize in the tenets held by 'Abdallah, even if theyhad not yet developed into the form inwhich they have become known to

us130). In 218/833 theMu'tazili view was adopted as the official state doc

trineby al-Ma'mun. The latter's institution of the mihna may have encour

aged some inhabitants of 'Askar Mukram to take the law into their own

hands. The facts mentioned in this subsection do not allow us to draw conclusions as to the date of 'Abdallah's stay in 'Askar Mukram. They do

show, however, that the 'early' chronology expounded in ? 4.2 is in tune

with the conditions prevailing in theMuslim world about 220/835.

6.2.3. Since 'Abdallah was active as the instigator of the Isma'ili move

ment in 220/835 or earlier, we may expect him to have been born in 200/

815 at the latest131).

,25)Ibn Rizam at Fihrist

238.16-17;Aku Muhassin at

NuwayriXXVIII

70.2-5,Ibn

al-Dawadari VI 18.15-19.2, MaqrizT, Ittfaz 12.17-20 (I 25.5-7 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffd IV

527.1-3, Kitat 107.5-6 ed. Sayyid (1995); indirect testimonies: al-SulT at 'Arib 52.2-3

(see below, ? 8.7) and Istitdr 93.7.

126) Comp. above, ? 4.2.

127) alm (1996) 20; thesameview inDaftary (1990) 105.

128) Ivanow (1942) 158 n.2, speaking of 'the early years of the third/ninth c[entury]\came near to the truth. Mas'udT (d. 345/956) writes, referring to an earlier work of his

that has been lost, that the da'wa started (uhditat) in Isfahan in 260/874, Tanbih 395. 4

7.We do not know on which arguments his statement was based, but in view of themate

rial discussed in our main text, ? 4.2 and ? 6.2.2, itcannot be right.Possibly,

Masfudl re

lated the beginning of the darwa to the death of the last Twelver Imam (see below, ?

7.1); he may have considered Isfahan the cradle of the movement, because in his view it

was the birth-place of the false Mahdl, whose zuhur in 319/931 disclosed the true nature

of themovement, Tanbih 391.15 ff.

129) Halm (1978) 6-8.

13?) Halm (1996) 16-22 and the secondary literature mentioned there.

131) Below, ?7.11.




7.cAbdallah and the conversion ofHamdan Qarmat

7.1. In the foregoing we concluded that the Isma'ili da'wa started in

about 220/835132). According toHalm, the years 261/875 and 264/878 are

the earliest dates we have for the dafwa. They relate inhis view to the be

ginning of the Isma'ili mission in al-'Iraq, more precisely to the conversion

of Hamdan Qarmat. At that time, Halm writes, 'Abdallah was still

alive133). The two dates mentioned by Halm have been transmitted by al

Nadim and the authors who are quoting Aku Muhassin respectively134).The divergence between them constitutes a real problem135), forwhich

Halm does not offer an explanation, and which is still enhanced by thefact that one of the two sources involved, Aku Muhassin, expressly states

that 'Abdallah was no longer alive at the latterdate. Before discussing this

question, it seems appropriate to underline that the date calculated by us,

220/835, and those mentioned in the sources, 261/875 and 264/878, are

not incongruous. The figures imply that it took forty years of intensive

campaigning before the first community of some size could be founded.

This need not amaze us. The doctrines spread by the da'wa, the semi-dua

listic creationmyth,

the antinomiantendences, and,

most ofall,

the relati

vization of the mission of the Prophet cannot but have awakened distrustin theminds ofmany Muslims136). And why should one expect the return

of a hidden Imam, ifa living Imam from the house of the Prophet embo

died the hope forbetter times? It isonly by chance that 'Abdallah's dacwamet with success. In 260/874 the (Twelver-Shi'ite) Imam al-Hasan al-'As

karl died without leaving offspring. This event plunged his adherents intoa crisis. To whom should one turn for guidance? In these circumstances

the Isma'ili darwa offered new hope. There was an Imam from the Blessed

House. He had concealed himself, but would return in a short time, revealGod's will and bring victory to his people137). Itmay not be too bold a hy

pothesis that, if al-Hasan had had a successor, 'Abdallah's movement

would have remained a tiny sect, hardly worth a footnote in the history of

132)Above, ? 6.2.2.

133) bove, ?4.1,Halm (1996) 14and 26.

134)Al-NadTm at Fihrist 238.22; Aku Muhassin at Nuwayri XXV 191.3, Ibn al-Dawa

dari VI 46.7-8,MaqrizT

Itti'dz 102. 10 ed. Bunz (I 153.4-5 ed.

Sayyal), Muqaffd

III

289.7-8.

135)Madelung (1997) 115 writes that Hamdan was recruited 'between the years 261/

874-5 and 264/877-8*. This compromise does not do justice to any of the texts involved

and leaves the problem mentioned in our main text unresolved; comp. above, n.98.

136)Above, n.l30.

137) See Halm (1996) 32 and the utterances of some of the most prominent converts,

Ibn Hawsab Mansur al-Yaman and Abu eAbdallah al-SI% inHalm (1996) 32 and 166.




Islam. On the other hand, it is only thanks to 'Abdallah's unremitting ef

forts, carried on during fortyyears that,when the occasion occurred, the

Isma'ili dafwa was able to integrate somany homeless Shi'ites into a new

community. At the end of his life, 'Abdallah did see the light of a new

dawn.

7.2. The conversion of Hamdan Qarmat was a stroke of luck. Hamdan

proved to be a very able man, who not only succeeded in building up an

impressive organization in the Sawad ofKufa, but also managed to send

darTs to other regions, Fars and 'al-Bahrayn'138). The end came in 286/

899, when he was confronted with the new doctrine developed in Salamya.

Disillusioned, he broke off with al-MahdT, stopped his own activities and

those of his ddts and disappeared. His brother-in law, 'Abdan,was mur

dered139). Those who held on to the original ideal, the returnof the hidden

Imam Muhammad b. Isma'Tl, continued to designate themselves as Qarmatis, 'followers of Qarmat'. Hamdan's adversaries, the Fatimids and

their adherents, reacted in several ways, sometimes by claiming his

name140) or his personality141), mostly by ignoring him and themen asso

ciated with him. It is for this reason that in this section we have towork al

most exclusively with textswritten by adversaries of the Fatimids, Ibn Ri

138)Halm (1996) 30-31,Madelung (1997) 116.Hamdan did nothold thepostof babal-abwdb (chief ddfi) under al-MahdT, however, pace Madelung (1997) 118. He was di

rected himself from Taleqan by a son of'Abdallah, Fihrist 238.21-22. It is unclear, how

ever, who was in function in 286/899. As Ja'far remembered it, the post had been en

trusted, during the last years ofMuhammad b. Ahmad and in the beginning of the ima

mate of al-MahdT, to Fayruz, Sirat Jajar 122.3-5 and 110.7-8, till the latter's defection

in 292/905, Halm (1996) 90. According to the family tradition of the Fatimids, however,

ithad been the first act of al-MahdT after his accession to give the post toAbu 1-Husaynb. al-Aswad, Istitar 96.7-8, who was murdered in 290/903, Istitar 100.15, comp. Halm

(1996) 78-80. Madelung (1997) 119can

hardly be rightin

assuming that Ja'far, the personal attendant of Sa'Td/al-MahdT, did not know the identity of the highest official in

the da'wa. I suppose that, when Fayruz' defection had made him persona non grata, the

Fatimids posthumously promoted Abu 1-Husayn to bab al-abwdb. Ja'far not always suc

ceeded in adapting his memories to new demands, see above, ? 1.2.2. Fayruz was suc

ceeded by his son-in-law Abu 'AIT (Madelung [1997] 118), the latter, after his death, byhis son Abu 1-Hasan (or: 1-Husayn) Muhammad b. Abl AIT {Sirat Ja Jar 114.16-19, Ma

delung [1997] 122); see below, n. 141.

139) Halm (1996) 62-65, comp. above, ? 1.2 and 3.2.

140)Above, ? 3.2 and 3.6.

141) Accordingto Ibn

Hawqal,Surat al-ard

96.19-20,the ddrT Abu 'AIT had

formerlybeen known as Hamdan Qarmat: Abu 'Atiya al-ddril-ma'rufu kana bi-Hamdana Qarmata. This identification, doubted by Halm (1996) 63 n.23 and 355 n.76, is defended inMa

delung (1997), but cannot be right. It brings Madelung several times in conflict with the

sources, see Madelung (1997) 117-118, 123 n. 16, and above, n. 138. Ibn Hawqal fell vic

tim to, and was instrumental in, Fatimid propaganda. Elsewhere he declares that Ham

dan Qarmat had been jt da'wat al-sultdni {al-Masdlik wa-l-mamdlik 210.21-22): here

Hamdan is posthumously incorporated into the Fatimid daewa.



172 Omert J.Schrier

zam and Aku Muhassin. Fortunately, we can partly check their assertions

by adducing the testimony of TabarT discussed in ? 3.We will discuss both

traditions one by one.

7.3.We begin with al-NadTm's excerpt from Ibn Rizam. In the passageconcerned al-NadTm relates, immediately after the flight to Salamya142),the following events:

- 1. 'Abdallah sent daTs to the Sawad ofKufa;- 2. this led to the conversion ofHamdan Qarmat, a ploughman and ox

driver living inQuss Bahram,- 3. and of'Abdan;- 4. Hamdan moved over toKalwada (south of Baghdad);-

5. 'Abdallah appointed one of his descendants (walad) tomaintain thecommunication with Hamdan fromTaleqan (south of theCaspian Sea);- 6. wa-dalika ft sanati ihdd wa-sittina wa-mi'atayni, 'this happened in

the year 261', i.e. in 874-875;- 7. 'Abdallah died143).7.4. Several elements in the text are corroborated by external evidence.

Hamdan actually lived as a daT inKalwada (4), as is clear from a casual

remark in an independent, perhaps even pro-Fatimid source, Ibn Hawqal,and from the account of the schism of 286/899 in theAku Muhassin tradi

tion144).The latter source also proves that still in thatyear Hamdan was supervised fromTaleqan (5)145).

7.5. Halm writes that in this passage "[t]he beginning of [the Isma'ili]mission in the Sawad of Kufa is dated to the year 875 (261)"146). Apparently, Halm takes the anaphoric dalika (6) to refer to the whole of theevents 1-5. That interpretation is possible, though not very probable. The

decision tomanage the community indirectly, via Taleqan (5), will have

been taken when the daewa proved to be successful and, with the growingnumber of converts147), the risk increased that the 'Abbasid authorities gotwind of the new revolutionary movement. It isunlikely that this point was

reached within some months after the startof themission148). Inmy view,

142)Above, ?4.1.

143)Fihrist 238.18-23, comp. Halm (1996) 29-30. Al-Nadlm continues by saying that

'Abdallah's son Muhammad succeeded his father (kalafahu), see above, ? 5.10.

144) Ibn Hawqal, Surat al-ard 295.3-8 (for Ibn Hawqal's attitude vis-a-vis the Fati

mids, see Halm [1996] 342 and 424); Aku Muhassin at Nuwayri XXV 230.22-231.1 (Isee no reason to trace this tradition back to Ibn

Rizam,as Halm

[1996]62 n.20

does,see

above, ? 5.10).

145) AkG Muhassin at Nuwayri XXV 230.18-22, 232.9, 247.3, Ibn al-Dawadari VI

66.7, 67.15, 69.2, MaqrizT, Itti'az 114.14 ed. Bunz (I 168.6 ed. Sayyal).

146) alm (1996) 26.

147) Comp. above, ? 3.4, though the figure given there must be regarded with some

scepsis.

148) The continuous unrest in the area (above, ? 3.3) and the long- standing danger of




therefore, theFihrist passage does not provide a dating for the beginningof the dafwa in the Sawad of Kufa and the conversion of Hamdan, but

ratherwith a terminus ante quern for these events. In other words, inmyview dalika (6) only refers to the immediately preceding element, the deci

sionmentioned in (5)149).7.6. Independent evidence points in the same direction. The Twelver

Shi'ite theologian al-Kulinl has transmitted a tradition, according towhicha certain faqth wrote to one of the last (Twelver- Shi'ite) Imams aboutsome question but did not get a response, because he (thefaqih) tahawwa

la Qarmatiyyan, 'had become a Qarmati'150). The last Twelver-Shi'ite

Imam died in 260/873-874. According to TusI, moreover, Abu Muham

mad al-Fadl b. Sadan wrote a refutation of the Qarmatis, Kitab al-raddeald l-Batiniyya wa-l-Qaramita. Ibn Sadan, too, died in 260/873-874151).These traditions suggest that by 260/873-874 the name 'Qarmati', 'fol

lower of (Hamdan) Qarmat', was already well established.

7.7. None of the arguments brought forward in ? 7.5-6 is compelling152).Taken together, however, they leave little room fordoubt. Most probably,the conversion of Hamdan took place a considerable time before 260-261/

873-875. This conclusion obtains afortiori for the beginning of the darwa

in the Sawad of Kufa.

7.8.We now turn toAku Muhassin (text P). The passage consists of shortstatements, like those in the Fihrist, and more elaborate narratives (=

elab.). The following events are mentioned, again after the flight to Sala

mya153):- 1. 'Abdallah begot a son called Ahmad,- 2. died, and

the Zanj revolt (above, ? 3.4-8) will have made the central government more vigilantthan ever for developments in the Sawad of Kufa.

149) It is possible that the riskymove toKalwada (4) and the decision to place the dar

wa in al-'Iraq at some distance from the headquarters in Salamya (5) were interrelated

and fell in the same year, 261/874-875. In that case, ddlika refers to both of the elements

4 and 5.

According toMadelung, 'Hamdan Karmat', the move to Kalwada took place after the

schism of 286/899. That view is incompatible with the text of the Fihrist.

,5?) Ivanow (1957) 8 n.8; for author (d. ca. 329/941) and work (al-Kafifi eilm al-din,a compendium of Shi'ite tradition, 'undoubtedly based on much earlier sources'), see

Ivanow(1957)

1 and 9-23.

151) TusT 254.18-19, comp. Ivanow (1957) 8 n.7, Madelung, 'Karmatf, and Daftary

(1990) 117withn.l26.

152)One could imagine that the first tradition mentioned in ? 7.6 was invented, for ex

ample, to teach Twelver- Shi'ite youngsters not to seek the company of Qarmati heretics.

As to Ibn Sadan's al-Radd, Halm (1978) 2 n. 10 rightly observed that it is not mentioned

in the Fihrist (287.9-12) of al-NadTm.

153) Comp. above, ? 7.3.



174OmertJ.Schrier

- 3.was succeeded byAhmad154);- 4. Ahmad sent al-Husayn al-AhwazT to al-'Iraq;- 5. in the Sawad of Kufa al-Husayn met Hamdan Qarmat, an ox- driver

living inQuss Bahram, and won him and the other members of his house

for the Isma'ili cause (elab.);- 6. some day he entered the service of Abu 'Abdallah Muhammad b.

'Umar b. Sihab al-'AdawT, a respected member of Kufan society155), as a

guardian of his harvest; he did his work scrupulously (elab.);- 7. wa-dalika Jt sanati arbarin wa-sittfna wa-mi'atayni, 'this happened

in the year 264', i.e. in 877-878;- 8. people put more and more confidence in him; he trusted Hamdan

increasingly and revealed tohim his secrets; in reality, his display of integrity nd piety was mere deceit;

- 9. when he died, he appointed Hamdan as his successor;- 10. the lattergot a grip on many people in the Sawad ofKufa; among

those who responded to the call were Mihraway b. Zakrawayh156) (othersare also named) and 'Abdan, Hamdan's brother-in law157).

7.9. Aku Muhassin's account of the events contains elements that are

based on historical fact. As we have seen, he was right inholding thatAh

mad was born in Salamya (l)158). Secondly, according to him itwas the

daei al-Husayn al-AhwazI, the same man who had accompanied 'Abdallah

during his wanderings from 'Askar Mukram via Basra to Salamya159),who won over Hamdan Qarmat to the Isma'ili cause (5). Al-Nadlm did not

identify the involved, but Aku Muhassin's statement is confirmed bythe account in TabarT, according to which Hamdan was recruited by 'a

man fromKuzistan', al-Ahwaz being the capital of that province160). The

lines, finally, about al-Husayn's activities in the service of Abu 'Abdallah

(6) remind us of a passage in the report ofTabarT161).

154) Comp. above, ? 5.10.

155) To my knowledge Abu ''Abdallah is not known from other sources.

156) For 'Mihraway b. Zakrawayh', Nuwayri XXV 191.10 has 'Zakruyah b. Mihar

uyah' (= Zakrawayh b. Mihrawayh), an error that is easily made, the latter being far

more famous than his father, see above ? 3.1 (F) and ? 3.2. Ibn al-Dawadari VI 46.13 and

MaqrizT, Itti'az, 103.16 ed. Bunz (I 155.7 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffd III 289.11 have the cor

rect text.

157) Elements 1-4 in text a: Ibn al-Dawadari VI 19.11-14, MaqrizT, Itti'az 13.2-4 ed.

Bunz (I 26.2-4 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffd IV 527.7-10, Kitat 107.8-9 ed. Sayyid (1995); sum

maries inNuwayri

XXV 189.8-11 and XXVIII 73.1-2. Elements 5-10 in text0: Nuwayri

XXV 189.11-191.13, Ibn al-Dawadari VI 44.4-46.17, MaqrizT, Itti'dz 101.3-102.11 +

103.14-18 ed. Bunz (I 151.3-153.6 + 155.5-9 ed. Sayyal; see above, n.115), Muqaffd III

287.14-289.14; English translation of element 5 inHalm (1996) 27-29.

158)Above, ?4.2.

159)Above, ?4.1.

,60) Above, ?3.1 (B-C).

161) Above, ?3.1 (B).




7.10. In other respects we have tobe on our guard. The most problematicelement isAku Muhassin's assertion that itwas Ahmad who sent al-Hu

sayn al-AhwazT to al-rIraq (4). If thiswere correct, Ahmad would have

been theman towhom the darwa owed itsgreatest successes, the conver

sion of Qarmat and the establishment of a community in the Sawad of

Kufa. Ahmad would have been responsible, too, for the organization of

the mission. All this would make him the real founder of themovement

and degrade his father to a mere forerunner, in contravention of the oldest

Fatimid tradition, which treats 'Abdallah as theman towhom the Isma'I

llya owed existence and structure162). In this case we can be certain that

the account of Ibn Rizam, as rendered by al-Nadlm, is factually more cor

rect than the one provided by Aku Muhassin163). Elsewhere Aku Muhassin's narrative is at variance with the report transmitted by TabarT. The lat

terhas it that after the conversion ofQarmat (and the conflict with al-Haytam), the 'man fromKuzistan', al-Husayn al-Ahwazi, 'left in the direction

of Syria'164), i.e. returned to Salamya. Aku Muhassin, however, holds that,some time after the conversion ofQarmat, al-Ahwazi died in the Sawad of

Kufa (9). It can hardly be doubted thatTabarfs account ismore reliable

than the version given by Aku Muhassin165). Tabari's ultimate source, the

brother-in-law of Zakrawayh b. Mihrawayh, had been a contemporary of

162) Istitar 93.1-95.19 and Ibn al-Haytam, Munazarat 36.6-10 (transl. 92); the same

view in the anti-Fatimid tradition, see above, ? 7.4 (5) and ? 7.5.

163)Aku Muhassin's assertion may have been due to the wish to fill an information

gap. The Fatimid sources mentioned above, ? 1, and Ibn Rizam (as rendered by al-Na

dlm) have nothing to say about Ahmad's activities as hujja/imam. Later authors tried to

add some lustre to his life. Ibn al-Dawadari holds, VI 20.1-3 and 21.6-7, in deliberate

opposition to Aku Muhassin, that Ahmad sent Abu 'Abdallah al-SFT and his brother

Abu eAbbas to theMaghrib; in reality, both dd'Ts were sent out by his successor Muham

mad b.Ahmad,

as isimplied by

anold Fatimid tradition (STrat Ja'far 121.14-122.3,125.6-9 and the lost STrat AbT 'Abdallah al-ST'T at Nu'man, Iftitah 30.10-31.3, comp.

Halm [1996] 39 with n.85; see above, ? 2.1) and confirmed by Aku Muhassin atMaqrizT

Itti'dz, 13.8-10 ed. Bunz (I 26.8-10 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffa IV 527.15-528.2, comp. Ibn al

Dawadari VI 21.8 + 11 (in the musawwada of the Kitat and inNuwayri the passage is

omitted); this tradition is themore reliable because it ascribes the responsibility for a ma

jor decision in the history of the da'wa to a man who had lost all credit by 349/960

(above, n. 120 and ? 1.2.2). Another instance is Idris IV 367-394, where Ahmad is said to

be the author of the Rasd'il Ikwan al-Safd\

164) Above, ?3.1 (D).

165)Other differences between TabarT and Aku Muhassin are inconclusive. Ai-Ahwa

zT earned his living according to the latter as a taylor (Nuwayri XXV 190.16-17, Ibn al

Dawadari VI 46.1-2, MaqrizT, Itti'az 102.4-5 ed. Bunz [I 152.18 ed. Sayyal], MuqaffaIII 289.3-4), according to the former by weaving baskets from palm leaves (TabarT III

2124.7). For a man living as a day labourer, these statements are not incompatible. Both

sources agree, moreover, that in harvest time al-AhwazT hired himself out as a guardian,see above, ? 3.1 (B) and ? 7.8 (6). As to the latter activity, another discrepancy consists in

that TabarT tells the story before mention ismade of the conversion of Qarmat, whereas



176Omert J.Schrier

the events he was speaking of and may have been an eyewitness to some of

them166).

7.11. In view of what we have found in ? 7.5-7 and 9-10, it is clear that

the year 264/877-878 mentioned by Aku Muhassin (7) cannot be consid

ered a reliable alternative fordating the beginning of the Isma'ili mission

in al-'Iraq. The da'wa had started already in about 220/835, as we have

seen, and the first community in the Sawad of Kufa was founded well be

fore 261/874167). Aku Muhassin's dating is related to a minor event in the

life of al-Husayn al-Ahwazi, (one of) the time(s) he acted as a guardian of

somebody's harvest, years after the conversion of Hamdan Qarmat. It has

some relevance for the biography of al-Husayn's master 'Abdallah, how

ever. The account in al-NadTm implies that 'Abdallah was still living in261/874-875168). Since al-Nadlm's narrative, apart from ideological and

genealogical matters, proved to be reliable169), there is no reason to doubt

this date. Aku Muhassin's relation implies thatby the time of the date har

vest in 264 (autumn 877) 'Abdallah was no longer alive. In view of the un

certainties inherent in his narrative, one cannot put unqualified confi

dence in the latter statement170). It is not contradicted, however, by anyother testimony, and, as it is, it isquite plausible that aman who was born

before about 200/815 died between 261/874-875 and autumn 264/877171).

7.12. We may conclude that the years 261/874-875 and 264/877-878mentioned in the tradition were not intended to date the beginning of the

Isma'ili movement in the Sawad ofKufa. In that region, al-Husayn al-Ah

wazl was active long before 261/874-875, like other ddTs. They had been

sent from Salamya, as is implied in all sources, by 'Abdallah the Elder.

'Abdallah died after 261/874-875, possibly before autumn 264/877, cer

tainly before the middle of Du 1-qa'da 267/June 881172). He was suc

ceeded by his son Ahmad, who died, as we have seen, in 267/881, before

the middle of Du 1-qa'da/June173). Ahmad's regime, lasting only 3-6

years, must be characterized, it seems, as a period of consolidation174).

in Aku Muhassin it follows the conversion scene. This difference too can easily be ac

counted for.

166) Above, ? 3.4-8.

167) Above, ? 6.2.2 and ? 7.6-7.

168) Above, ?7.3.

169) Above, ? 7.4-7 and ? 7.10.

17?) Above, ?7.10.

171) Above, ? 6.2.3.

172) Above, ? 2.5.

173) Above, ? 2.3.

174) Ahmad may have been responsible for the conversion of Ibn Hawsab, see below,

Appendix.




8. The ancestry of 'Abdallah the Elder

8.1. The pedigree of 'Abdallah the Elder himself is a hotly debated is

sue. A definitive solution is beyond our grasp. Inmy view, however, it is

possible to progress further than scholars have realized thus far, by elimi

nating statements that are patently incorrect or highly improbable and

looking for assertions thatwere shared by adherents of the Fatimids and

their adversaries at an early stage of the controversy. Later authors tend to

iron out difficulties and to elaborate and combine earlier versions. Their

works may contain valuable elements, but I for one see no way to distin

guish these from the products of ideologically motivated imagination. Theearliest texts present us with a wide range of possibilities; Qaddahid, 'Ba

hilite', 'Aqflid and various 'Alid genealogies being offered175). The re

cently published Munazarat of Ibn al-Haytam gives new food for thought.In the following we will discuss these contentions.

8.2. The Fatimids themselves maintained that they descended from Ja'

far al-Sadiq, and so from 'All b. Abl Talib and Fatima, the daughter of the

Prophet. It did not appear to be easy to substantiate this claim. In several

publications,Halm listed no fewer than four

attemptsto connect the

dynasty to Imam Ja'far176). Two of these were published in official docu

ments by reigning caliphs: according to al-Mahdl, his ancestor 'Abdallah

(al-Akbar) was a son of 'Abdallah b. Ja'far, whereas al-'Aziz (r. 365-386/

975-996) declared him to be a son of Muhammad b. Isma'il b. Ja'far177).The mere number of these assertions and the fact that the Fatimids them

175) alm (1986) 133-141 (themost comprehensive tudy f theproblem) and (1996)8-11, 154-159, 377-378; for a survey of the contents of later sources, see Lewis (1940)

54-69,Ivanow

(1940) 60-67, (1942) 22-23, 27-30, 129,153-156 and

(1957) 124-125,140-141.

,76) Above, n.175.

177) From a chronological point of view, the first assertion is untenable.eAbdallah b.

Ja'far died shortly after his father (d. 148/765) and cannot have been the father ofe Ab

dallah al-Akbar (see above, ? 6.2.3). He seems to have been disabled, mentally or physi

cally. At any rate itwas, according to one tradition, his younger brother IsmafTl who de

fended the rights of the family at his father's command in 133/750, see KassT 323.11

324.3 and Ivanow (1957) 121 (not wholly correct) with n.l. IsmafTl, the prospective suc

cessor,died during the lifetimef his father, resumablyafter136/754 (Ivanow [1957]

122, Daftary [1990] 97-98).His son Muhammad b.

IsmafTl,the

originalMahdl of the Is

maili movement, was 26 years old when his grandfather died, according to Idris, el)yunIV 351.6-7, a date that is in harmony with those mentioned above about his father. He

will have been born some time between 121/739 and 123/741 (depending on the count

ingmethod applied, see above, ? 2.3) and seems to have died during the reign of Harun

al-RasId (r. 170-193/786-809), comp. Ivanow (1957) 122-123 and Daftary (1990) 102

103. From a chronological point of view, it is just possible that he fatheredrAbdallah al

Akbar (see above, ? 6.2.3), but see our main text.



178Omert J.Schrier

selves held contradictory views on their own pedigree prove that, from a

factual point of view, these claims were unfounded. Moreover, as Halm

pointed out, in the history of Islam numerous 'Alids saw their aspirationsfrustrated, but their descent was never contested without reason178). Thereal basis of the power of the Fatimids lay in the enthousiasm and hope

they inspired in the hearts ofmany Muslims and in the competence shown

bymany members of the dynasty.8.3. The anti-Fatimid authors Ibn Rizam and Aku Muhassin identify the

founder of the Isma'fliyya and ancestor of the Fatimids as 'Abdallah b.

Maymun al-Qaddah, whom they describe as a swindler with anti-islamic

and anti-Arabic feelings and doctrines179). Ivanow vigorously rejected this

view180).He was

rightin this

respect. Maymun al-Qaddah (b. al-Aswad)and his son 'Abdallah themselves are historical persons. They belonged,as Twelver Shi'ite sources make clear, to the staffofMuhammad al-Baqir

(d. 115/733) and Ga'far al-Sadiq (d. 148/765). Maymun al-Qaddah trans

mitted hadTts from both Imams, 'Abdallah b. Maymun al-Qaddah is

known as a raw! of sayings by al-Sadiq, mainly of a rather homely nature.

It is unlikely that these men ever held the views ascribed to them by Ibn

Rizam and Aku Muhassin. From a chronological point of view, the identi

fication is even impossible. In one story, 'Abdallah is said to have in

formed al-Baqir about the situation inMecca, presumably after he hadmade a journey to the holy city. He will have reached adulthood, there

fore, in 115/733 at the latest. Another son ofMaymun, Aban, is also asso

ciated with al-Baqir. He was able to recite the Coran by heart in his pre

sence181). The historical 'Abdallah b. Maymun al-Qaddah, then,will have

been born before, say, 98-99/717, and his father before 81/700. Thismeans that Ibn al-Qaddah was born about a century before the 'Abdallah

who founded the dynasty of the Fatimids182).In another respect, Ivanow's view needs reconsideration. According to

him, itwas probably Ibn Rizam himself who invented the Qaddahid le

gend183). Samuel Stern already pointed out that this cannot be correct. In

an audience granted some months after 349/960, imam-caliph al-Mu'izz

discussed a letter from the da^T of an eastern province (not the Sind) in

178) alm (1986) 137.

179) Ibn Rizam at Fihrist 238.10-11; Aku Muhassin at Ibn al-Dawadari VI 17.11-13,

MaqrizT, Itti'az 12.6-8 ed. Bunz (I 23.3-24.2 ed. Sayyal), Muqaffa IV 526.7-8, Kitat

106.9-10 ed. Sayyid (1995), comp. Nuwayri XXV 230.18. Aku Muhassin presents May

mun as a son of Daysan, a misunderstanding or distortion of Ibn Rizam's statement in

Fihrist 238.12 thateAbdallah and his father were Bardesanites, i.e. dualists; comp. Iva

now (1957) 75-91 and Halm (1996) 17-18.

18?) eA lie', the very first words of Ivanow (1957).

181) Ivanow (1957) 24-55, discussed in 56-74; see esp. 61-63.

182) Above, ? 6.2.3.

183) vanow (1942) 127, (1957) 2.




which the latter expounded the doctrines held by himself and his commu

nity and asked for the Imam's approbation. Al-Murizz had been surprisedto read that

according

to theseloyal

supporters 'the imamate had

passedfrom one of the Imams toMaymun al-Qaddah, then to some others, peo

ple of unknown origin': anna l-imamata ntaqala ean baedi l-a'immati ila

Maymunin al-Qadddhi wa-ila fulanin wa-ildfulanin li-qawmin ... min afna'i

l-nasilS4). At the same time a similar view was held elsewhere, most prob

ably in the Sind. In a letter to the ddri of that province written in 354/965,al-Mufizz opposed the opinion of those who held that before his death

Muhammad b. IsmaTl had appointed kalifa not one of his sons, butcAb

dallah b. Maymun al-Qaddah, min rurd l-nas, 'one of the common peo

ple'185). Stern rightly stated that the views al-Murizz had to combat amonghis followers186) cannot have originated in a pamphlet written by a de

clared opponent of themovement. He concluded that 'itwas not the Isma

Tlf swho learned from Ibn Rizam aboutrAbdallah b.Maymun al-Qaddah,but itwas Ibn Rizam who learned from the IsmafTlI's- that is to say, from

some Isma'Ilfs'. We can do no better than to subscribe to Stern's view,

adding that the work of Ibn Rizam was only completed between 341/953

and 345/956187).8.4. Two texts that were still unknown at the time Stern's article ap

peared (1955) support his thesis. In his Letter to theYemenite Community,edited in 1958, al-MahdT declares that, out of taqiya, Imam Ja'far al-Sadiqdid not disclose who among his four sons would be his successor. Itwas,al-MahdT reveals, 'Abdallah, but that factwas only known to some confi

dants (al-abwab wa-l-tiqat). fa-lamma arada l-a'immatu min wuldi Jafara

ihya'a da'wati l-haqqi kafu min nifdqi l-ndfiqina,fa-tasammaw- salla llahu

'alayhim- bi-gayri asmd'ihim fa-jaralu asmd'ahum li-l-da'wati Jimaqdmi l

hujaji wa-tasammaw bi-Mubdrakin wa-Maymunin wa-SaTda H-l-faTi l-ha

sanijihddihi

l-asmd'i, '[a]ndwhen the imams from the

progenyof Ja'far

wanted to revive the propaganda of truth, they dreaded the hypocrisy of

the hypocrites. Thus they-God's blessing be upon them- assumed names

which were not their [true] names, and for the purposes of propaganda

they represented their [new] names as being those of hujjas, and called

184) Stern (1955) 31.11-12, repr. 285.23-24; comp. above, ? 1.2.2 with n.23.

185) Idris V 161.7-10, Ivanow (1940) 76 note, line 3-6, Stern (1955) 26.23-25, repr.

280.1-4.

186) Stern held that the heresies combatted by al-Murizzwere

probably identical,see

Stern (1955) 18-22, repr. 269-274. A passage from the newly edited text of the Kitab al

Munazarat of Ibn al-Haytam seems to support his thesis. Inmy view it speaks of an ima

mate of a wasita type (see below, n. 190), to be manned by confidants after the death of

the last Imam of the Blessed House (till his return at the end of times). This concept

tends to nullify the difference between the terms imam and kalifa used by al-Mufizz dur

ing the audience and in his letter respectively, but see below, n. 192.

187) Stern (1957) 21, repr. 273; see above, ? 5.2.



180Omert J.Schrier

themselves Mubarak (blessed), Maymun (fortunate), and Sa'id (happy),on account of the good omen in these names'188). Apparently, al-Mahdlwants to convince his readers that the names ofMubarak, Maymun and

Sa'id were only pseudonyms adopted by some of his forefathers, the hidden Imams. The opinion, consequently, that one of al-Mahdf s ancestorswas called Maymun must have existed already before the death of al-Mahdi in 322/934. We do not know whether itwas advocated by adherents or

opponents of the dynasty, or even by partisans of both sides. It should be

noted that the surname of al-Qaddah is lacking in theLetter.

8.5. Conclusive evidence that the 'Abdallah b.Maymun who laid the ba

sis of the Isma'ili movement was not a phantom that existed only in the

mind of Ibn Rizam is to be found in a text thatwas published only in 2000byMadelung and Walker, theKitab al-Munazarat of Ibn al-Haytam. The

author narrates that, during an audience granted to him on 3Rajab 296/27

March 909 by al-Mahdfs representative Abu 'Abdallah al-Sfr, the latter

invited him to tell freelywhat he knew about the dissensions that arose

within the Shi'a after the death of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq. Coming to the

group that supported the imamate of Isma'Tl b. Ja'far and his sonMuham

mad b. Isma'Tl189), Ibn al-Haytam had distinguished several subgroups.

188) Hamdani (1958) 9.15-10.2 (Ar.); my translation, based on that of Hamdani-de

Blois 176, phrase 10-11. The phrase fa-jaralu asmd'ahum...Jtmaqdmil-hujaji is difficult

to interpret. Hamdani-de Blois translate: 'they (the hidden imams OJS) assigned their

[own]names [topeople] in the rankof l-hujjahs\ pparentlymeaning thatthe hiddenimams assigned their pseudonyms (Mubarak, Maymun, SafId) to their hujjas, whose real

names remain in the dark. We now know, partly thanks to newly discovered texts, that

these 'pseudonyms' were real names, borne by real people. Mubarak (b/AIT al-fAbdT)was the name of the bdb and, according to his followers, the wdsita (for these terms, see

below, n. 190) of IsmafTl b. Jaffar, see Ibn al-Haytam, Mundzardt 35.15-36.4 (Ar.),transl. 91 and Walker

(1998)122 with n.4. This is the

realityal-MahdT

hadto

deal with.The phrase quoted must be interpreted, therefore, in the way we indicated in the main

text. Al-MahdT declares that, out of taqiya, the imams adopted pseudonyms (e.g. Mubar

ak) and passed themselves off as mere hujjas. In this way al-MahdT eliminated, in the

case mentioned, Mubarak b/AlT al-fAbdT from history. Later Isma'ilis actually used the

name of al-Mubarak to refer to Isma'Tl b. Jaffar, see Ivanow (1957) 96-97. In the same

manner al-MahdT and, later, al-Mufizz dealt with Maymun, see our main text, and

above, ? 8.3. As for SafTd, itwas the name given to al-MahdT at his birth; al-MahdT had

even to admit that the darwa had been carried out some time on his behalf under that

name: tasammd Sa'ida bna l-Husaynifa-jurrat-i l-daewatu ilayhi zamdnan bi-ddlika, Let

ter11.7-8, phrase

25. Here and in thepassage quoted

in our main text al-MahdT claims

that Sa'Td had only been a pseudonym, because he wants to represent himself now as

fAlT b. al-Husayn {Letter 11.15, phrase 32), see above, n. 19. It is better, therefore, not to

translate the ambiguous tasammd Sa^ida with 'he was called SaeTd' (Hamdani-de Blois),but with 'he called himself Sa'Td'. The few lines 9.15-10.2 prove to have served several

purposes.

189) Ibn al-Haytam distinguishes four main groups, each related to one of the sons of

Imam Ja'far, eAbdallah, IsmarTl, Musa and Muhammad, resp.Mundzardt 35.5-8, 35.8




The opinions of two of these have a direct bearing on our subject: wa-min

hum man qala: Muhammadu bnu Isma'Tla hayyun wa-'Abdu llahi bnu

May

muni bniMuslimi bnirAqila

babuhu.

wa-<qala gayruhum>:

innaMu~

hammadan mata wa-sarat-i l-imamatu ila rAbdi llahi bniMaymunin min

rAbdi llahi bniJaJdra wa-inna rAbda llahi lamyu'qib fa-sallama l-amra ila

babiht cAbdi llahi bniMaymunin, 'some of them said thatMuhammad b.

Isma'Tl was alive and that 'Abdallah b. Maymun b. Muslim b. 'Aqll was

his bab. [Others held] thatMuhammad had died and that the imamate had

passed toAbdallah b.Maymun fromAbdallah b. Ja'far because Abdallah

did not have offspring and thus surrendered the control of affairs to his

bab Abdallah b. Maymun'190). Abu 'Abdallah did not comment on these

words. The same evening he took the oath from Ibn al-Haytam, acceptinghim into the Isma'ili community191).

The passage quoted raises several questions192). One thing is clear, how

ever. In 334-336/946-947, some ten years before Ibn Rizam published his

pamphlet193), the name of 'Abdallah b. Maymun was used to refer to a

man who, according to some people, had directed themovement duringthe first stage of itsexistence. We cannot be certain that the text exactly re

produces what Ibn al-Haytam had said some forty years earlier, but in

view of what we have found above, in ? 8.3-4, there is no reason to doubt

that the name of a 'Abdallah b. Maymun was circulating already in 296/909 among Isma'ilis. Stern proves to be right. 'Abdallah b. Maymun was

not a product of the malicious imagination of Ibn Rizam. His name and

that of his father ismentioned from the time of al-MahdT, directly or indir

36.10, 36.10-15, 37.1-2 (transl. 90-92; the layout of Madelung-Walker could have been

more helpful).

190) Ibn al-Haytam, Munazarat 36.6-10; qala gayruhum is added by MadelungWalker. The term bab designates the highest official of an Imam as the man who 'per

mitted- or blocked- access' to him (Halm [1996] 58); wasita ('intermediary') was used insome circles to refer to the earthly representative of an Imam who was hidden from view;

apparently, a wasita could be called Imam, because he should be obeyed as ifhe was

Imam, Munazarat 35.15-36.1.

191) Ibn al-Haytam, Munazarat 41.1-2, transl. 95.

192) One question concerns the identity of the two subgroups Ibn al-Haytam distin

guishes. The firstone believed that Muhammad b. Isma'Tl was alive (and would reappearin due time), eAbdallah b. Maymun being his representative. Ifwe may add that after

the death of Ibn Maymun his descendants held the same position, we recognize in this

doctrine the views that were originally held by the whole IsmaeTlTya and were still de

fended after the schism of 286/899 by the Qarmatis (above, ?? 1.2.1 and 3.2). The tenetsheld by the second subgroup remind one of the heresy (or one of the heresies) rejected

by Imam al-Mufizz. What makes one stare is that in Ibn al-Haytam's account the ima

mate passes, after the death ofMuhammad, from Abdallah b. Ja'far to eAbdallah b.

Maymun. I for one see no possibility to restore consistency here. A second question re

lates to the nature of Ibn Maymun's imamate. Do we have to assume that itwas of a wasi

ta type (see above, nn. 190 and 186)?

193)Above, ? 1.1with n.8, and ? 5.2.



182Omert J.Schrier

ectly, both by supporters and opponents of the Fatimids. The Fatimids de

nied his very existence, but they had a distinct interest in doing so.Manyof their followers, and all their opponents, held that he was an ancestor of

al-MahdT194). The factual information the latterprovide about his activitiesand those of his progeny proved tobe reliable195). These considerations al

low but one conclusion, I think. The Fatimids actually descended from a

man called 'Abdallah b. Maymun. This 'Abdallah b. Maymun was not

identical with 'Abdallah b.Maymun al-Qaddah, however, nor did he hold

the un-islamic views the adversaries of the Fatimids attribute to him196). In

the next subsections we will see what can be said about his identity and

how he could be mistaken for Ibn al-Qaddah.8.6.We

noted already that, accordingto

theMundzardt,some

peoplereferred to 'Abdallah b. Maymun as 'Abdallah b. Maymun b. Muslim b.

'AqU (or 'Uqayl)197). The last two names may refer to the real grandfatherand great-grandfather of 'Abdallah b. Maymun. Presumably, however,

Madelung and Walker are right in suggesting that the latter names designate a well-known man from earlier times,Muslim b. 'Aqll b. 'Abi Ta

lib198). Ibn Rizam and Aku Muhassin relate that in Basra 'Abdallah b.

Maymun (in their view: al-Qaddah) nazala bi-BanTBdhilata fala mawdlin

li-dli l-rAqila bni Abi Talibin wa-qala lahum: ana min wuldi rAqfla, 'stayed

in the quarter of the Banu Bahila, with clients of the family 'Aqll b. 'AbiTalib; he told them he was a descendant of 'Aqfl'; later, in Salamya, he

and his progeny continued to press the claim199). None of the authors

mentioned specifies through which links 'Abdallah asserted to be relatedto 'Aqll b. 'Abi Talib. If theMunazarat passage really refers to the latter,we may suppose that 'Abdallah told his acquaintances that itwas throughMuslim that he descended from 'AqTl b. 'Abi Talib. But even so we are

missing several generations. Muslim b. 'AqTl b. 'Abi Talib died in 60/680,'Abdallah b.Maymun (al-Akbar) was born before or in 200/815200).

194) Above, ? 8.4 and ? 5.10 respectively.

195) Above, ?? 6 and 7.

196) Above, ? 8.3. The name ofMaymun was a rather frequent one, see Ivanow (1957)

III n.4; al-Nufman even mentions a eAbdallah b. Maymun among the inhabitants of

Qalama/Guelma (Algeria), ftitah 12.13 (? 193).197) The same view is to be found in Jawbari, Muktar 10.4.

,98) Madelung-Walker (2000) 92.

199) Quote from Aku Muhassin at Ibn al-Dawadari VI 19.5-6; comp. Nuwayri

XXVIII70.6-7, MaqrizI,

Itti'Oz 12.20-21 ed. Bunz(I

25.7-26.1 ed.Sayyal)

andMuqaffaIV 527.4 (in the Kitat the passage is omitted) and Ibn Rizam at Fihrist 238.17-18 and 26;

see also, in the account of the schism of 286/899, Aku Muhassin at Nuwayri XXV 230.12

and 231.5-6 and Ibn al-Dawadari VI 65.16 (MaqrizI omitted the lines concerned). Ac

cording to Sirat Jafar 108.6, al-Mahdl pretended, vis-a-vis theAbbasids who were livingin Salamya, to be a eAhbasi himself. Here the old slave must have made a mistake; the

local Abbasids would never have accepted a stranger in their ranks.

20?) Above, ? 6.2.3. The historical Maymun b. Aswad, the father ofeAbdallah b. May




From a historical point of view, however, any relation between 'Abdal

lah al-Akbar and 'AqTl b. 'AbT Talib must be deemed impossible. Halm's

search forpossible connections between the twomen201) did not yield con

vincing results.As toMuslim b. 'AqTl b. 'AbTTalib, Ibn Hazm and Mus'ab

expressly state in their genealogical works that his line ran out202). The de

cisive argument, however, is adduced by our direct sources. Ja'far, the

loyal servant of generations of Fatimids, and Ibn Rizam and Aku Muhas

sin, their opponents, agree that the 'Aqilid genealogy was only used as a

cover203). There is no reason to doubt their testimony. 'Abdallah's claim

was born out of taqiya. It proved to be very useful, however. It helped'Abdallah to find a shelter in Basra with members of the Bahila. Later, it

enabled him and his descendants to associate with theAbbasid elite of Salamya. Their wealth may have helped to convince those who were not im

mediately impressed. If 'Abdallah opted for the line of Muslim b. 'AqTl, it

was also a happy choice. Muslim died as a martyr for the cause of al-Hu

sayn b. 'AbTTalib204). If'Abdallah claimed to descend from him, itmust

have given him much credit with all Shi'ites. It had nothing to do with his

torical reality, however.

8.7. Before drawing our conclusions, we have to have a look at yet an

other genealogy. Al-Sull (d. 336/946) reports that, according to an expert

in the history of the Shi'a, 'Ubaydu lldhi huwa bnu rAbdi llahi bni Saliminmin ahli 'Askari Mukramin bni Sindana l-Bahiliyyi. Salim, al-SulT adds,was executed for zandaqa, and Sindan had been sahib al-surta to

Ziyad205). According toHalm it is impossible to verify or to refute this gen

ealogy206). Inmy view it is clear thatwe are not confronted with a model

of balanced historiography. 'Ubaydallah is a depreciatory form of'Abdal

lah, the caliphal name of al-MahdT. The father(?) of his ancestor 'Abdallah

is depicted as a convicted zindlq, a more remote forefather is said to have

been an instrument in the hands of the

ill-reputed Ziyad

b. Ablhi207). The

tribe of the Bahila as a whole was the object of ridicule and aversion208).

mun al-Qaddah, was born before 81/700 (above, ? 8.3); being a mawla of the Banu Mak

zum (Ivanow [1957] 60, 70 and 72 n.2), he cannot have been amember of the aristocratic

eAqilid clan.

201) Halm (1986) 140, not repeated inHalm (1996).

202) Ibn Hazm, Jamhara 62.15-17, Mus'ab 84.2-8, comp. Kohlberg, 'Muslim'.

203) See above, n. 199 and our main text respectively.

204) In this paragraph I give my reasons for disagreeing with Halm (1986) 140-141

and(1996)

10-11.

205) Muhammad b. Yahya al-SQli at 'Anb 51.21-52.5; compare al-Mararri (d. 449/

1058), Gufrdn 459.5, tr. 353, where (Abdallah b. Maymun al-Qaddah is described as a

Bahilite.

206)Halm (1986) 140-141 and (1996) 8-9.

207) Ill-reputed, that is, among Abbasid and Shi'ite historians, see Lammers, 'Ziyadb. Ablhi'.

208) Ibn Kallikan IV 90-91, transl. 518-519 (admittedly, a late source; Ibn Kallikan




The whole passage was clearly intended to blacken the regime in Ifrlqiya.

Al-Sull, who lived in court circles inBaghdad and had witnessed the Fati

mid insurrections in Syria and al-'Iraq, the desecration of theHoly City

and the raid on Baghdad, tomention only these horrors, had little reasonto be kind to themen whose tenets, he felt, only resulted in destruction

and death. The insinuations could find credit because they offered an ex

planation why 'Abdallah was received inBasra by some of the Banu Bahi

la209).As historical sources they are worthless.

8.8. The preceding subsections make clear thatmuch that is transmitted

about the descent of theman who founded the Isma'ili movement can be

jettisoned. One thing is beyond doubt. The father of 'Abdallah was called

Maymun.On that

pointIbn Rizam and Aku

Muhassin,the Isma'ili

groupsmentioned in theMunazarat of Ibn al-Haytam, and the heretical followers

of the Fatimids combatted by al-Mu'izz are agreed. Presumably, 'Abdal

lah's grandfather and great-grandfather bore the names ofMuslim and 'A

qil (or 'Uqayl) respectively. In the first half of the 4th/10th century this

'Abdallah b. Maymun was identified with 'Abdallah b. Maymun al-Qad

dah210) by Ismai'li groups who stuck to the notion that their first leader

was called 'Abdallah b. Maymun and looked for some more information

about theman who had declared that Muhammad b. Isma'Tl, the son of

the successor-to-be of Ja'far al-Sadiq, would return to bring a kingdom ofpeace and justice. Itwas only natural that these groups came tomistake

this preacher for the 'Abdallah b. Maymun who was known as a loyal ser

vant and raw! of Imam Ja'far. The opponents of themovement held this

'Abdallah b. Maymun (al-Qaddah) responsible for all the evil done by'his' followers and in consequence depicted him in the darkest possiblecolours. In thisway an innocentman became the object of a hate campaignwhich found credence far into the last century.

There is a second element that calls for attention. All genealogies we

have discussed prove to have arisen from ideological motives. Especiallythe opponents of the Isma'Tliyya will have done theirutmost to find infor

mation about the real descent of the leaders of themovement211). Appar

ently, nothing was found, presumably because there was nothing to be

found. The first hujja of the Isma'ili movement seems to have been of

humble origin. And this supposition in its turn is in agreement with the

opinion held by some dissident followers of the Fatimids that 'Abdallah b.

died in681/1282).The Bahila lived intheswampsnorth fBasra and had fought n the

wrong side in the Zanj war, TabarT III 1746.7-8, 1858.13-15, 1902.17-1903.3.

209) Above, ?6.2.1.

21?) The identification is for the first time attested shortly after 341/953 (above, ? 8.3).21

*) See Aku Muhassin at MaqrizT, Muqaffd 528.16-17, transl. 42, about an inquiry

by his brother into the genealogical registers in Baghdad.




Maymun was a man min afna9 (or: min rurd) al-nas212). However thatmay

be, he was a man of genius, who gave the exegesis of the Qur'an a new

twist and was able to raise new hope in the hearts of tens of thousands. He

certainly earned the name given tohim in the Fatimid tradition: 'Abdallah

al-Akbar, 'the Elder', yes, but also: 'theGreat'.

Appendix: Some notes on theSirat Ibn Hawsab

Being not transmitted directly, the Sira is quoted here from quotations

preserved in al-Nu'man, Iftitah, MaqrizT, Muqaffd, and Idris, rUyun alakbar. The latter are dependent upon the Iftitah. Idris attributes the con

version of Ibn Hawsab to Imam al-Husayn b. Ahmad, which is clearly in

correct, see above, ? 1.2.2.

It isworthwhile to reconsider the chronology of the conversion of Ibn

Hawsab. His vocation is to be dated 'in the time between the gayba of the

12th Imam (260/874) and the year inwhich his later companion 'All b. al

Fadl was initiated (267/880-881)', according toHalm (1981) 110 (for the

year 260/874, see above, ? 7.1). This statement, although correct, can be

specified. Pondering over the consequences of the death of the 12th Imam,Ibn Hawsab's interest in the Isma'ili cause was raised when he was en

gaged into a conversation with a sayk (1st talk; al-Nu'man, Iftitah 5.12 [?

6]; MaqrizT, Muqaffd IV 530.13; Idris IV 397.11). Later itwas revealed to

him anna l-sayka huwa imamu l-zamani (al-Nu'man, Iftitah 8.12 [? 7];

MaqrizT, Muqaffd IV 531.17; Idris IV 399.5-6). He was admitted to the

Imam, who indicated that the future of themovement lay in theYemen

(2nd talk; al-Nu'man, Iftitah 8.13-16 [? 7]; MaqrizT, Muqaffa IV 532.1-3;Idris IV

399.6-9).In a later audience Ibn Hawsab declared himself

prepared to leave his country for the sake of God; the imam said that theyhad towait for a man from the Yemen (isbir ka-anni bi-rajulin qad aqbala

ilayna min-a l-yamani; 3rd talk; al-Nu'man, Iftitah 9.1-4 [? 8]; MaqrizT,

Muqaffa IV 532.4-6; Idris IV 399.9-12). This man proved to be 'AIT b. al

Fadl. Having performed the hajj in 266/July 880, Ibn al-Fadl had traveled

further to the tomb of al-Husayn b. 'AIT inKarbala'. There he had been

won over to the Isma'ili cause. In the company of the da'T involved he had

entered the citywhere the Imam was staying (al-madina allatfjiha l-imam)

and remained there 40 days under observation in a mosque, after whichthe dat presented him to the Imam (awsalahu ila l-imdmi; al-Nu'man, Iftitah 10.12-11.4 [? 10-11]; Idris IV 400.12-19; comp. MaqrizT, MuqaffaIV 532.9-10). Having formed a picture of theman, the Imam said to Ibn

Hawsab: 'This is theman we were waiting for (hadd alladikunna nantazir

212) Above, ?8.3.




uhu)9 what is your view of him?'. Ibn Hawsab said that he would accept

any decision of the Imam. The latter had Ibn al-Fadl called (da'a) and

sent both men to theYemen (4th [and 5th?] talk; al-Nu'man, Iftitah 11.4

14 [?11]; Idris IV 400.20-401.6; comp. MaqrizI, Muqaffa IV 532.10-18);see above, ? 2.1.

Read as parts of a simple narrative, the passages quoted lead to the con

clusion that the Imam who sent the twomen to theYemen is identical with

the sayk who was Ibn Hawsab's first interlocutor. The sayk, then,was Mu

hammad b. Ahmad himself (above, ? 2.1). This interpretation has several

consequences:- the conversion of Ibn Hawsab took place after 1Muharram 267/12

August 880, in the period between the death of al-Husayn and Ahmadb.'Abdallah on the one hand and mid Du al-qa'da 267/June 881 on the

other (above, ? 2.1-3);-

sayk cannot be translated as 'amagnificent old man' (Halm [1996] 32)or 'vieillard' (Fagnan [1910] 43), since Muhammad was in his twenties at

that time (above, ? 2.6; for another man of the same age called sayk, Ya

hya b. Zakrawayh, see TabarT III 2218.6-7 and 2219.16-17).It isnot impossible, however, that Ibn Hawsab used the titleof imam in

his memoirs to refer to the supreme leader of themovement, irrespective

of the identityof theman incharge, as Ja'far did in theSTrat Jafar (above,? 1.2.1 and comp. Ivanow [1942] 41 n. 1). In that case Ibn Hawsab can have

used the title of sayk to refer toMuhammad's father,Ahmad b. 'Abdallah.

In theory, even Muhammad's grandfather 'Abdallah the Elder qualifies.One of thesemen, then,was Ibn Hawsab's interlocutor in the first conver

sation, and possibly in the second and thirdones as well. The final discus

sion was certainly led byMuhammad (above ? 2.1). The 'we' used by the

Imam in the third talk does not contradict this theory. It is vague enoughto imply 'mypredecessor, myself, and you'. If this interpretation is the cor

rect one, the conversion of Ibn Hawsab can only roughly be dated between260/874 and the death of Imam Ahmad in, ultimately, 267/880-881, pre

sumably at the end of this period. At that timeAhmad was about 30-40

years old, and 'Abdallah was inhis sixties (above ?? 2.4, 6.2.3, 7.11), ifhe

was still alive. Both men could reasonably be called 'oldmen'.

Both interpretations can be defended, but some conclusions are valid

anyway:- the final talk took place after 1Muharram 267/12 August 880;-

shortlyafter his accession Muhammad lived some time in

al-'Iraq,presumably inKufa;

- the suggestion inHalm (1996) 35 that Ibn al-Fadl was possibly intro

duced (not to the Imam, but) to Hamdan Qarmat cannot be reconciled

with data in the text;- the opinion that Ibn Hawsab and Ibn al-Fadl were sent to theYemen

by an Imam al-Husayn b. Ahmad (Idris, rUyun IV 396-402, still to be




found in e.g. Dachraoui [1975] 40 n.5), runs counter to data found in the

earliest Fatimid sources (above ? 2.1 with n.28).There is still another element in the story thatmay have chronological

consequences. The sayk is said to have been accompanied by a rajul, whois leftwithout qualification (no doubt Fayruz, see Halm [1981] 110), and a

gulam, whose 'springing gait' (Halm [1996] 32, yamrahu fimisyatihi) Ibn

Hawsab still remembered with a smile after decades (al-Nu'man, Iftitah5.12-6.2 [? 6]; MaqrizT, Muqaffa IV 530.13-14; Idris IV 397.12-14). His

tenderness makes me believe that the gulam he was thinking ofwas not an

ordinary boy, but a youthful member of the house he had devoted his life

to, a son or grandson of the sayk he had been speaking with, i.e.Muham

mad'sson

'All,or

one of the latter's cousins Sa'id (al-Mahdl) and the laterAbu Muhammad. If I am right in this surmise, the conversion of Ibn Haw

sab took place some years after the birth of these boys (above ?? 2.3 and

2.6), i.e. not long before 267/880-881, as thewhole course of the narrative

suggested already.One intriguing question remains, then. Asked whom he was, the boy

said: HusaynT (al-Nu'man, Iftitah 6.4 [? 6]; Idris IV 397.16; MaqrizT, Mu

qaffa IV 530.15). He was no doubt instructed to do so. The answer trig

gered in Ibn Hawsab thememory of themartyred Imam al-Husayn b. 'All

b. AbT Talib, as was intended. But what was themeaning of the expressionHusaynT itself?Halm (1996) 33 translated: 'a descendant of al-Husayn'. If

that is correct, itfollows that already in the very first stage ofMuhammad's

imamate (1st interpretation), or even before his accession (2nd interpretation), the family considered themselves 'Alids. This in its turn implies that

the seed for the schism of 286/899 had already been sown in about 267/

880-881 and leaves unexplained why the conflict did not burst out some

fifteen years earlier. Inmy view, therefore,HusaynT was intended tobe taken as 'a partisan of al-Husayn' (Fagnan [1910] 44 n. 1), i.e. 'a Shi'ite'.

Finally, the STrat IbnHawsab contains, apart from autobiographical in

formation, also ideological motives. This is clear from at least two elements:

- the text constantly refers to the supreme leaders of the Isma'ili move

ment with the title of imam, as I did in itswake in this appendix; in rea

lity, they bore the title of hujja in the period covered here, untill 267/881

(above ?1.2.1);- the poem of the enigmatic al-Fihri (Dachraoui [1975] 40 n.2, Halm

[1981]109 n.

10)was

composed after the events itforetold, as appears fromits too exact prophesy that an orphan would seize power precisely in the

year 296/909 (al-Nu'man, Iftitah 5.1-4 [? 5]; MaqrizT, Muqaffa IV 530.7

10; Idris IV 396.22-25); Ibn Hawsab cannot have known it in 267/880881.



188OmertJ.Schrier

Bibliographical abbreviations

Arberry (1916) - A.J. Arberry, The Chester Beatty Library: A Handlist of the Arabic

Manuscripts (Dublin 1916).eArib -

fArib al-Qurtubi, Sila Tank al-Tabari (Tabari continuatus), ed. M.J. de Goeje

(Leiden 1897).Becker (1902)

-CH. Becker, Beitrage zur Geschichte Agyptens unter dem Islam, I (Stras

bourg 1902).Brett (1994)

-M. Brett, 'The MTm, the eAyn, and theMaking of Isma'flism', BSOAS 57

(1994) 25-39.

Brett (2001)-M. Brett, The Rise of theFatimids: The World of theMediterranean and the

Middle East in the Fourth Century of theHijra, Tenth Century CE. (The Medieval

Mediterranean Peoples, Economies and Cultures 400-1453, vol. 30, Leiden 2001).

Brockelmann (1937)- C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur, Erster Sup

plementband, (Leiden 1937).

Bunz (1909)- see MaqrizT, Itti'az.

Casanova (1921)- P. Casanova, eLa doctrine secrete des Fatimides d'Egypte', BIFAO

18(1920-1921) 121-165.

Caskel,eBahila'-W. Caskel, eBahila\ inEI2.

Chapoutot-Remadi, 'Nuwayri'-M. Chapoutot-Remadi, 'al-Nuwayrf, inEI2.

Dachraoui (1975)- see al-Nueman, Iftitah.

Daftary (1990)

- F.Daftary,

The Isma'ilis: TheirHistory

and Doctrines(Cambridge1990).

Daftary (1993)- F. Daftary, 'A Major Schism in the Early Isma'Tl! Movement', Studia Is

lamica11 (1993) 123-139.

Daftary (1996)- F. Daftary (ed.), Mediaeval Isma'ili Thought (Cambridge 1996).

Daftary (2002)- F. Daftary, Review of Brett (2001) inBSOAS 65 (2002) 152-153.

DahabT - Sams al-DTn Abu 'Abd Allah Muhammad b. Ahmad b. fUtman al-Dahabi,

Mustabih Jtasmd" al-rijal, ed. P. de Jong (Leiden 1881).

de Goeje (1886)-M.J. de Goeje, Memoire sur les Carmathes du Bahrain et les Fatimides

(Memoires d'histoire et de geographie orientales, I, Leiden, 18862).de

Sacy (1838)

- S. deSacy, Expose

de lareligion

des Druzes I(Paris 1838).

Dodge (1970)- B. Dodge, The Fihrist of al-Nadim: A Tenth-Century Survey ofMuslim

Culture (New York-London 1970).

Ef-Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition (Leiden 1954-2004).

Fagnan (1910)- E. Fagnan, 'Nouveaux textes historiques relatifs a l'Afrique du Nord et

a la Sicile, I: Traduction de la biographie d'Obeyd Allah contenue dans le ?Moqaffa?de Makrizi', in E. Besta e.a. (edd.), Centenario... M. Amari II (Palermo 1910) 35-85.

Ferre (1972)- see Ibn Zafir.

Fields (1987)- The History of al-Tabari, XXXVII: The 'Abbasid Recovery, translated by

Ph.M. Fields, annotated by J. Lassner (Albany N.Y. 1987).

Fihrist -

(Ibn) al-Nadlm,Kitab

al-Fihrist,ed. R.

Tajaddud (Tehran 1973);transl. in

Dodge (1970).Grohmann-Kennedy, fSalih b. eAH'

- A. Grohmann and H. Kennedy, fSalih b. eAIT b.

eAbd Allah b. al-fAbbas',' inEf.

Halm (1967)- H. Halm, Die Traditionen iiber den Auf stand 'AH ibnMuhammads, des

"Herrn derZang": Eine quellenkritische Untersuchung (diss. Bonn, Bonn 1967).

Halm (1978)- H. Halm, 'Kosmologie und Heilslehre der fruhen IsmafIlTya: Eine Studie

zur islamische Gnosis' (Abh. f. d. Kunde des Morgenl. 44, 1,Wiesbaden 1978).




Halm (1981)- H. Halm, 'Die Sirat Ibn Hausab: Die ismailitische daewa im Jemen und

die Fatimiden',WdO 12 (1981) 107-135.Halm (1986)

- H. Halm, 'Les Fatimides a Salamya', REI54 (1986) 133-149.

Halm (1988)-

H. Halm, fZwei fatimidische Quellen aus der Zeit des Kalifen al-MahdT(909-934),WdO 19 (1988) 102-117.

Halm (1996)- H. Halm, The Empire of theMahdi: The Rise of the Fatimids (Handbook

of Oriental Studies, The Near and Middle East 26, Leiden 1996; translation by Mi

chel Bonner of Id., Das Reich des Mahdi: Der Aufstieg der Fatimiden (Handbuch der

Orientalistik, I, Der Nahe und Mittlere Osten 26, Munchen 1991).

Halm (1996B)- H. Halm, 'The Isma'ili Oath of Allegiance (rahd) and the "Sessions of

Wisdom" (majdlis al-hikma) in Fatimid Times', inDaftary (1996) 91-115.

Hamdani (1958)-

Husayn F. al-Hamdani, On theGenealogy of Fatimid Caliphs (Cairo

1958).

Hamdani-de Blois (1983) - Abbas Hamdani and F. de Blois, 'A Re-examination of alMahdT's Letter to the Yemenites on the Genealogy of the Fatimid Caliphs', JRAS 3

(1983) 173-207.Ibn al-AtTr, Kdmil

- eAIT b. Muhammad Ibn al-AtTr, al-Kdmilftl-ta'rik (Chronicon quod

perfectissimum inscribitur), ed. C.J. Tornberg (Leiden 1851-1876).

Ibn al-Dawadari-Abu Bakr b.f Abd Allah b. Aybak al-Dawadari, Kanz al-durar wa-jd

mie al-gurar, ed. Salah al-DTn al-Munajjid, vol. 6 (Cairo 1961).

Ibn Hawqal, al-Masdlik wa-l-mamdlik-

Abu 1-Qasim b.fAIT Ibn Hawqal, Kitab al-ma

sdlik wa-l-mamdlik, ed. M.J. de Goeje (BGA II, Leiden 1873).

Ibn Hawqal, Surat al-ard- Abu 1-Qasim b. (AIT Ibn Hawqal, Kitab Surat al-ard (Opus

geographicum auctore Ibn Haukal...), ed. J.H. Kramers (BGA II, sec. ed., Leiden

1938).Ibn al-Haytam, Mundzardt - Abu eAbdallah Jaefar b. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. al-As

wad b. al-Haytam, Kitab al-Mundzardt, ed. and transl. inMadelung-Walker (2000).

Ibn Hazm, Jamhara - Abu Muhammad eAIT b. Ahmad b. Hazm al-AndalusT, Jamharat

ansab al-earab, ed. E. Levi-Provencal (Cairo 1948).

Ibn Kallikan-Ahmad b. Muhammad Ibn Kallikan, Wafaydt al-aeydn, 8 voll. ed. I.(Ab

bas (Beirut 1968-1972), transl. in De Slane.

Ibn Zafir - Jamal al-DTn rAlT Ibn Zafir, Akbdr al-duwal al-munqati'a, ed. (partly) A.

Ferre (Cairo 1972).

Idris - Idris fImad al-DTn, rUyun al-akbdr, ed. M. Ghalib, vol. 4 and 5 (Beyrouth 1973

and 1975).

Istitdr (al-imdm)- Ahmad b. Ibrahim al-Naysaburi, Istitdr al-imdm wa-tafarruq al-durah

fi al-jazd'ir li-talabihi, ed. W. Ivanow inMajallat Kultiyat al-Addb, al-Jdmiea al-Mis

riya (Bulletin of theFaculty ofArts, University ofEgypt) 4 (1936) 93-107, transl. in Iva

now (1942) 157-183.

Ivanow (1940)-W. Ivanow, 'Ismailis and Qarmatians', JBBRAS (1940) 43-85.

Ivanow (1942)-W. Ivanow, Ismaili Tradition concerning theRise of theFatimids (Islamic

Research Association 10, London-Bombay etc., 1942).

Ivanow (1957)-W. Ivanow, Ibn al-Qaddah (The Alleged Founder of Ismailism) (The Is

maili Society Series A 9, Bombay 1957).

Jawbari, Muktdr -cAbd al-Rahman b. rUmar al-Jawbari, al-Muktdrft kasf al-asrdr (ed.

Cairo, ca. 1910).

Kasf- Ja'far b. Mansur al-Yaman, Al-Kasf ed. R. Strothmann (Islamic Research Asso

ciation Series 13, Oxford 1952).

KassT - AburAmr Muhammad b.f Umar b.r Abd al-fAzTz b. al-KassT, Rijdl al-Kassi, ed.

A. al-HusaynT (n.p. [1963]).




Kohlberg,eMuslim'- E. Kohlberg, 'Muslim b. fAqfl b.r All Talib', inEf.

Lammers, 'Ziyad b. AbThi'- H. Lammers, eZiyad b. AbThi', inEf.

Le Strange (1905)-

G. Le Strange, The Lands of the Eastern Caliphate (Cambridge

1905).Letter (to the Yemenite Community)

-eAbdallah al-MahdT, 1Letter to the Yemenite Com

munity*, ed. inHamdani (1958), transl. inHamdani-de Blois (1983).

Lewis (1940)- B. Lewis, The Origins of Ismatlism: A Study of theHistorical Background

of the atimidCaliphate (Cambridge 1940,repr. ew York 1975).al-Mafarri, Gufran

-Abu l-eAla Ahmad b. Abdallah al-Mafarri, Risala al-Gufran, ed.

Bint al-Sati' (Cairo 19502), transl. of the relevant passage by R.A. Nicholson in JRAS

(1902) 337-362.

Madelung (1959)- W. Madelung, 'Fatimiden und Bahrainqarmaten', Der Islam 34

(1959) 34-88; slightly evised nglish transl. nDaftary (1996) 21-73.

Madelung (1961) -W. Madelung, 'Das Imamat in der fruhen ismailitischen Lehre', DerIslam 37 (1961; read: 1962)42-135.

Madelung, 'Hamdan Karmat'-W. Madelung, 'Hamdan Karmat', inEf.

Madelung, rKarmatF-W. Madelung,eKarmat!', inEI2.

Madelung (1997)-W. Madelung, eHamdan Qarmat and the DarI Abu rAlF, inW. Ma

delung, Yu. Petrosyan, H. Waardenburg-Kilpatrick, A. Khalidov and E. Rezvan

(edd.),Proceedingsof the17th ongress of the EAI (St.Petersburg1997) 115-124.

Madelung (2002)-W. Madelung, Review ofBrett 2001) inJIS 13 (2002) 202-204.

Madelung-Walker (2000)-W. Madelung and P.E. Walker, The Advent of the Fatimids:

A Contemporary Shi'i Witness (The Institute of Ismaili Studies, Ismaili Texts and

Translations Series, 1, London - New York 2000).

MaqrizT, Itti'dz -TaqI al-DIn Ahmad b.eAIT b.eAbd al-Qadir al-Maqrizi, Itti'az al-huna

fa' bi-akbar al-a'imma al-Fdtimiyyina al-kulafa, ed. H. Bunz (diss. Tubingen, Tubin

gen [1909];= draft version), ed. J. al-Sayyal, vol. 1 (Cairo 1967;

= final version).

MaqrizI, Kitat -TaqI al-DIn Ahmad b. cAll b. pAbd al-Qadir al-Maqrizi, al-Mawd'iz wa

l- i'tibarfi dikr al-kitat wa-l-dtdr, ed. Sayyid (1995;= draft version), Sayyid (2002;

=

final version); transl. of the final version inCasanova (1921).

MaqrizT, Muqaffa-TaqI al-DIn Ahmad b. eAlT b. fAbd al-Qadir al-Maqrizi, Muqaffa,

ed. M. Yalaoui, voll. 3 and 4 (Beyrouth 1991); transl. of passages from vol. 4 in Fagnan (1910).

Mas'udI - Abu 1-Hasan eAlT b. al-Husayn b. eAlT al-MaseudI, Kitab al-tanbih wa-l-israf

ed. M.J. de Goeje (BGA VIII, Leiden 1894).

Munajjid (1961)-

'Introduction' to Ibn al-Dawadari, vol. 6.

Musfab-

Abu eAbdallah al-Musfab b. 'Abdallah b. al-Musfab al-Zubayri, Kitab nasab

Qurays, ed. E. Levi-Proven$al (Cairo 1953).

al-Nadlm - see Fihrist.

al-Nufman, Iftitah-

al-Nu'man b. Muhammad al-Tamlml al-Qadl, Iftitah al-darwa, ed.

F. Dachraoui (= DasrawT) (Tunis 1975).

Nuwayri-

Ahmad b. eAbd al-Wahhab al-Nuwayri, Nihayat al-arab Ji funun al-adab,

vol. 25, ed. M.J/A. al-HInl and eA. al-Ahwanl (Cairo 1984); vol. 28, ed. M.M. Amln

and M.H.M. Ahmad (Cairo 1992).

Poonawala (2003)- I.K. Poonawala, The Beginning of the Ismaili Da'wa and the Estab

lishment of the Fatimid Dynasty by al-Qadi al-Nueman, in F. Daftary and J.W. Meri

(edd.), Culture and Memory inMedieval Islam: Essays inHonour of Wilfred Madelung

(London-New York 2003) 338-363.

Popovic (1965)- A. Popovic, La revoke des esclaves en Iraq au IIF/IX* siecle (Paris

1976).




Radtke (1982)-

'Einleitung' toAbu Bakr b.cAbd Allah Ibn al-Dawadari, Kanz al-durar

wa-jdmir al-gurar, vol 1, ed. B. Radtke (Cairo 1982).

Rosenthal (1985)- The History ofal-Tabari, XXXXVIII: The Return of theCaliphate to

Baghdad, translated and annotated by Franz Rosenthal (Albany N.Y. 1985).

Saliba (1985)-

The History ofal-Tabari, XXXV: The Crisis of the 'Abbasid Caliphate,translated and annotated by George Saliba (Albany N.Y. 1985).

Sayyal (1967)- see MaqrizT, Itti'az.

Sayyid (1995)- A.F. Sayyid, Le Manuscrit autographe d'al-Mawaeiz wa-al-irtibarftdhikr

al-khitat wa-al-atar de Taqial-Din Ahmad b. rAlib. eAbd al-Qadir al-Maqrizi (London

1995).'

Sayyid (2002)- A.F. Sayyid, al-Mawdriz wa-l-irtibar fi dikr al-Kitat wa-l-atar li-Taqi al

DTn Ahmad b. 'Atib. ''Abd al-Qadir al-MaqrizT, 3 voll. (London 2002).

Sezgin (1967)-

F. Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen SchrifHums bis 430H., I: Qur'anwissenschaften, Hadit, Geschichte, Fiqh, Dogmatik, Mystik (Leiden 1967).

STrat Jafar- Muhammad b. Muhammad al-YamanT, Sirat Jafar al-Hdjib, ed. W. Iva

now inMajallat Kulliyat al-Addb, al-Jamica al-Misriya (Bulletin of theFaculty ofArts,

University ofEgypt) 4 (1936) 107-133, transl. in Ivanow (1942) 184-223.

Stern (1955)- S.M. Stern, 'Heterodox Isma'Tlism at the Time of al-Mu'izz', BSOAS 27

(1955) 10-33, repr. in Stern (1983) 257-288.

Stern (1960)- S.M. Stern, 'The Early IsmafTlTMissionaries inNorth-West Persia and in

Khurasan and Transoxania', BSOAS 23 (1960) 56-90, repr. in Stern (1983) 189-233

Stern (1961)- S.M. Stern, 'Abu'l Qasim al-BustT and His Refutation of IsmafTlism',

JRAS (1961) 14-35, repr. nStern 1983)299-320.

Stern (1983)- S.M. Stern, Studies in early Isma'Tlism (Jerusalem-Leiden 1983).

TabarT - Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari, Ta'rfk al-rusul wa-l-muluk (Annates

quos scripsit Abu Djafar Mohammed ibnDjarir at-Tabari), ed. M.J. de Goeje e.a. (Leiden 1879-1901); English transl. of the relevant parts in Saliba (1985) [III 1501-1712],Waines (1992) [III 1712-1936], Fields (1987) [III 1936-2133], and Rosenthal (1985)[III 2133-2294].

Tajaddud (1973)- see Fihrist.

van Ess (2002)- J. van Ess, review of Madelung-Walker (2000) inWdO 32 (2002) 226

228.

Waines (1992)- The History of al-Tabari, XXXVI: The Revolt of theZanj, translated and

annotated by David Waines (Albany N.Y. 1992).

Walker (1998)- P.E. Walker, 'The Isma'TlT Da'wa and the Fatimid Caliphate', inM.W.

Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, I: CF. Petry (ed.), Islamic Egypt, 640

1517 (Cambridge1998) 120-150.

Yalaoui (1991)- see MaqrizT, Muqafjft.

the prehistory of teh fatimid dynasty

Documents