Volume 95, Issue 2

A Ḥimyaritic inscription, unfortunately fragmentary, discovered in 2017, reveals several interesting details. Its authors, of whom one is called Joseph, are probably Ḥimyarites converted to Judaism. They invoke the only God whom they give a title that had not been attested previously: « […] the owner of the sky, God of Isra[el] ». The publication of this text, dated to the 5th century CE, is accompanied by a list of the various appellations of God and a study on the uses of the term Israel in the Ḥimyaritic inscriptions.

The present paper addresses itself to the enigmatic phrase snh qaḍāʾ al-muʾminīn that appears in a papyrus sheet from early Muslim Egypt. It takes issue with the earlier interpretations of the phrase, arguing that it is indeed a dating formula that is probably to be read as sanat qaḍāʾ al-muʾminīn , and understood as “the year according to the reckoning of the believers”. Based on the testimony of this phrase, it is further argued that the epoch of the Muslim calendar was, in all likelihood, originally meant to count the years from Muḥammad’s foundation of a new community and polity at Medina, a momentous event that the early Muslims conceived of as the dawn of a new age.

The dominant formal document type of preserved Arabic pre-800 documents shows a characteristic tripartite structure: in between the invocation and the long main part, there is a self-referring title hādhā kitāb min fulān ʾilà fulān , “The following is a writ from so-and-so to so-and-so.” The Suras of the Qurʾān have the same tripartite structure, but instead of the title can have one of six other options: an oath, a hymn, a reference to an eschatological event, an admonishment, a question, or a threat (or curse). We conclude that the Umayyad officials compiling the Qurʾān wrote the Qurʾān down as a collection of autonomous Suras. A close look at the major Qurʾānic terms used for God ( allāh , rabb al-ʿālamīn , and al-raḥmān ) and for Heaven and Hell shows a hegemonic terminology to be found in most Suras, and two minority terminologies – with which the Mysterious Letters are correlated – found in two groups of Suras only. We conclude that prior to the compilation of the Qurʾān, the mostly oral transmission of its texts allowed, if not encouraged, their wording to grow apart.

This paper reconsiders the existing accounts of Qutayba b. Muslim’s campaigns in Bukhārā in the context of the region’s historical topography. It proposes a new yet more coherent reconstruction of the course of events during these campaigns. The resulting new narrative highlights how difficult this first step of the conquest of Mā warāʾ-al-nahr was for the Arab armies.

Several scholars of Islam have paid particular attention to the authorship, date of composition and typology of an abridged but comprehensive commentary on the Qurʾān. This commentary has been attributed to numerous authors throughout the course of history with such titles as Tafsīr al-Kalbī , Tafsīr al-Wāḍiḥ , Tafsīr Ibn ʿAbbās , and Tanwīr al-Miqbās min Tafsīr Ibn ʿAbbās . Evidence suggests that the original title of this tafsīr is al-Wāḍiḥ . However, in the introduction of the manuscript of al-Wāḍiḥ in Leiden the author claims that al-Wāḍiḥ is a summary of Tafsīr al-Kalbī . In this article further evidence for the determination of the author of the work is analysed. In addition it will demonstrate the relationship between al-Wāḍiḥ and Tafsīr al-Kalbī , establishing the reliability of the author’s introduction in the Leiden manuscript. Finally the text of al-Wāḍiḥ will be analysed thoroughly and carefully to ascertain whether there are any indications in the text that can be used for dating.

Die intellektuelle Geschichte Andalusiens im frühen 13. Jahrhundert ist noch nicht völlig aufgeklärt. Auch wenn die Auffassung inzwischen eindeutig widerlegt ist, dass Philosophie und rationale Theologie vollständig unterdrückt und stattdessen nur ein literalistisches Islamverständnis propagiert worden sei, verdienen die Beziehungen zwischen Philosophie, Ašʿarīya, Almohadismus und Mālikīya in jener Zeit mehr Aufmerksamkeit. Dafür wird hier al-Qurṭubī und seine antichristliche Polemik al-Iʿlām bi-mā fī dīn an-naṣārā min al-fasād wa-l-awhām (ca. 1207) herangezogen. Zwar richtet sich dieses Werk vorgeblich gegen Christen, allerdings kann man davon ausgehen, dass der Autor vornehmlich eine muslimische Leserschaft ansprechen wollte und dass es ihm darum ging, sein eigenes Islamverständnis als nicht nur in Konfrontation mit dem Christentum, sondern generell als überlegen dazustellen. Al-Qurṭubī versucht aufzuzeigen, dass der Islam die vernunftgemäße Religion sei. Dabei lassen sich Übereinstimmungen zu Almohadismus wie zur Philosophie Ibn Rušds finden, so dass deutlich wird, dass diese Positionen um 1210 noch vehemente Befürworten fanden.

A seal of Ikhtiyār al-Dīn al-Ḥasan ibn Ghafras, a member of a noble Byzantine family serving at the court of sultan Qilijǧ Arslān, is witness of a brief moment of historical opportunities in the history of the Rūm-Saljūqs. Al-Ḥasan assumed the title of al-sulṭān , indicating that he claimed the sultanate for himself, presumably after the death of Qilij Arslān in 588/1192. No literary source corroborates his usurpation. While the sources on the political turmoil at the end of Qilij Arslān’s reign are few and contradictory, an anonymous chronicle, Tārīkh-i Āl-i Saljūq, opens a possible window onto al-Ḥasan’s ascension to the sultanate. Based on this narrative his only legitimation would have been the ‘law of the Turks’ on regicide, namely that he who kills the ruler, becomes ruler himself. According to the Tārīkh-i Āl-i Saljūq he poisoned Qilij Arslān.

This article investigates the ways in which Aqquyunlu rulers drew on the material remains of bygone dynasties by including ruins in their court ceremonial. Central for the investigation are two inscriptions left by the majlis or artistic assemblee of an Aqquyunlu prince on the ruins of one of the Achaemenid palaces at Persepolis or Takht-i Jamshīd in Iran. These important epigraphic sources are presented here in an improved critical edition and discussed in their social, architectural, and literary context. In musing over past glories, the prince and his retinue appropriated the heritage of bygone prophets and kings, framing their courtly representation as part of a continuous tradition of just rulers over southern Iran.

The three documents published here, a letter request and two petitions, relate the practice of secondary pilgrimages ( ziyārāt ) accomplished in sanctuaries of medieval Syria. They reveal a practice which remained undocumented until now: that of ziyārāt by proxy. Each time it is specified that the invocations pronounced on the spot by various pilgrims had for beneficiary a specifically designated recipient. Unlike the certificates of ḥaǧǧ and ’umra by proxy, guaranteed by deed witnesses, these documents, which express the raise of a local pietist actions, retain an informal aspect suitable for supererogatory practices.

In 1772, the Moravian Protestant Georg Pilder (1716‒1793) finished his work on an Arabic-German-Italian dictionary with the title Arabisches Lexicon . This dictionary, which has so far escaped scholarly attention and survives in a single manuscript copy, represents the earliest comprehensive Arabic-German lexicographic work known to scholarship. Based primarily on Pilder’s experiences as a missionary in Cairo, it includes valuable material on diglossia and everyday language use in 18th-century Cairo. The article discusses Pilder’s biography against the background of Moravian activities in the Middle East, sheds light on when, why and based on which materials he composed his dictionary and studies how Pilder’s authorial intentions are reflected in the work’s content and structure. It moreover addresses the question of the dictionary’s relevancy in the contexts of missionary history, the history of Arabic Studies and contemporary linguistic research.

The “German Fountain” on the Hippodrome in Istanbul, commissioned by the German Emperor Wilhelm II, has been perceived (and sometimes ridiculed) as a marginal by-product of imperialism and historicism. However, the history of its origins, construction and inauguration highlights significant aspects of German-Ottoman relations in the Hamidian period. The fountain is an example of the role that art and architecture played in these relations. The history of its planning indicates in which way the urban history of Istanbul was perceived and how a new monument was inserted, under the particular conditions of patronage by a foreign monarch. For the present article, German archival sources have been utilized to reconstruct the events and to interpret underlying attitudes. These sources elucidate the process of veritable trans-cultural negotiations, in which numerous partners with differing agendas participated. Besides, an art historical glance at the design of the fountain permits conclusions on choices that were made by the patron and the architect, significant for the understanding of the monument by its contemporaries. The particular conditions of the Ottoman Empire struggling for survival vis à vis European powers, and German foreign politics, become visible in the location and style of the fountain as well as in the protocol of its inauguration.