Bandits

This chapter deals primarily with two kinds of stories about bandits (in Arabic, anyone of whom it is said kāna yaqṭa‘u al-ṭarīq). In stories of the first kind, bandits explain why they rob travellers. In stories of the second kind, biographers claim that various ʿAbbāsid figures spent some of their lives as highwaymen. I will argue that the two kinds of reports may productively be read together. Admittedly, this material is too limited in quantity and too self-consciously literary to permit a reliable characterisation of rural unrest during the early ʿAbbāsid period. Even so, a close reading of these reports will allow us to offer some tentative proposals about how banditry was imagined and, more generally, how the various genres of Classical Arabic narrative responded to the legal, ethical and moral questions raised by highway robbery.

Sexual Violence in Verse: The Case of Jiʿthin, Al-Farazdaq’s Sister

At some time towards the end of the first/seventh century, a relatively trivial incident took place.1 An Arab of the tribe of Tamīm called Hammām b. Ghālib visited a clan not his own, the Banū Minqar, also belonging to Tamīm. A woman, waking up her daughter called Ẓamyāʾ, found that a snake had crept into her clothes. She cried for help and Hammām, who happened to be nearby, chased the snake away by throwing some dust at it. The snake had probably been attracted by the warmth of the girl’s body; Hammām was attracted to it in turn: he touched the girl and kissed her, but she resisted and he left, making a mocking epigram on her and her clan. When her relatives heard this, they were angry and one of them called ʿAmr (or ʿImrān) b. Murra, who was sent to play a trick upon Hammām’s sister, Jiʿthin. ʿAmr lay in wait for her and approached her unawares when, at night, she left her tent ‘to do her business’. He put his hands on her hip and her leg and dragged her along for some distance. She cried out and when her tribesmen hastened to the scene ʿAmr fled. In another version, there were, in fact, three other men, who together with ʿAmr/ʿImrān dragged Jiʿthin from her tent.

Violence Against Women in Andalusi Historical Sources (Third/Ninth– Seventh/Thirteenth Centuries)

Episodes of violence in historical writings may reflect the use of topoi – an area of study that has considerably advanced our understanding of both Islamic historiography and history.1 For example, the attribution of unusually cruel behaviour to a particular ruler – notwithstanding the possibility that such behaviour may have a historical basis – is used to justify his deposition, especially when it coincides with dynastic change.2 Narratives of violence against women in medieval writings3 – still a much unexplored topic, especially as regards the Islamic world4 – appear, as indicated by Manuela Marín, in contexts dealing with the relationships linking women in a hierarchy of power to their husbands or masters,5 and also in those of social disorder (wars and armed conflicts).

The Sultan and the Defiant Prince in Hunting Competition: Questions of Legitimacy in Hunting Episodes of Tabaristān

The provinces of Northern Iran, the region south of the Caspian Sea, had a particular role in the Arab conquest of Iran. Their geographical isolation, mountainous regions, steamy and often intolerable sub-Mediterranean climate and thick forests caused many difficulties for the early Muslim conquerors in the seventh century ad. The ʿAbbāsid empire could only penetrate into the mountains of Ṭabaristān and the valleys of Māzandarān in the second half of the eighth century. In this chapter, I analyse some legends concerning the early Islamic period of the central provinces of the Caspian regions Ṭabaristān and Māzandarān. On the basis of some of the evidence, it seems that these stories could be linked with the myths of the last pre-Islamic Iranian empire – that of the Sāsānians.

Attitudes to the Use of Fire in Executions in Late Antiquity and Early Islam: The Burning of Heretics and Rebels in Late Umayyad Iraq

Capital punishment can be understood as simultaneously an exercise of actual power – the ending of a human life – and an exertion of symbolic, or ritual, power.1 In this combination of symbolic transformation with real physical change, executions are unusual rituals. But the use of extreme violence against the human body certainly does have ritual characteristics, in that it has established rules (which may, of course, be deliberately challenged or broken) and in that these rules are used to make the drastic transformation in the status of the executed party seem legitimate and proper, to reassert more general ideas about the correct social order and to communicate threats and warnings to others who might seek to upset it. The victim of the execution is quite literally marked out as beyond reintegration into society. Their body becomes a kind of text, which can be read in a multitude of ways: the authorities carrying out the killing usually have one set of messages in mind, but the victim themselves, and those who witness or remember the act, may have very different ideas.

Who Instigated Violence: A Rebelling Devil or a Vengeful God?

The contrast between the attitude towards violence of the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament was already explored by Marcion (d. c. 160 ad) before the advent of Islam and has been rediscovered again and again since.1 Marcion saw the former as the creator of the world and God of the law and the latter as the good God, the God of love.2 The character of the former reflects a community’s need for sanctified social norms, while the character of the latter shows the community’s and the individual’s longing for the hope of salvation.3 The God of the Qurʾān is also one of punishment and pardon. This chapter investigates the former aspect and focuses on: (1) the appearance of evil and violence in the universe as described in the Qurʾān; (2) the philosophical-theological questions revealed by this myth; and (3) its social implications.

The Question of Divine Help in the Jihād

The theme of ‘help’ is ubiquitous in the Qurʾān. In it, composites of the root n-ṣ-r appear approximately 120 times with that meaning. But more explicitly, in the sūras that are traditionally associated with the Medinan period (particularly, sūras 5, 8 and 9), this theme comes to light as the idea of a concrete aid given by God to those who fight for Him: this idea appears twelve times, and in two of these, there is a passage of several verses where the verb naṣara or the substantive naṣr is explicitly stated ten times. This help from God can take on several aspects. The Qurʾān sometimes insists on the contrast between the divine plan and the limited vision of humans: it is then a question of divine inspiration as to the decision to fight, in spite of the reluctance of some people (Q 3:5; 33:11–15), or not to give in to the temptation to flee (Q 9:25).

ʿAbbāsid State Violence and the Execution of Ibn ʿĀʾIsha

In what follows, an otherwise obscure incident in Islamic history – the execution of a leading member of the ʿAbbāsid family by an ʿAbbāsid caliph in the third ah/ninth ad century – is discussed to explicate the bounds of what can be considered ‘legitimate state violence’ at the time. The execution and the manner in which the caliph carried it out were intended to serve as a warning for a recalcitrant wing of his ʿAbbāsid family – the pro-al-Amīn faction. In the long run, however, the episode would have repercussions for Islamic history, and this pro-al-Amīn faction (which included the executed ʿAbbāsid) ultimately won the day after al-Muʿtaṣim was appointed caliph, rather than a son or other progeny of al-Maʾmūn – the caliph in question, who executed the ʿAbbāsid.1 This article first recounts the background and circumstances surrounding the arrest and execution of Ibn ʿĀʾisha – a not very well-known member of the ruling ʿAbbāsid family.2 Following this, I will undertake an analysis of how al-Maʾmūn, the ʿAbbāsid caliph who executed Ibn ʿĀʾisha, conceptualised the institution of the caliphate and the role of its incumbent, the caliph. The narrative ends by relating Ibn ʿĀʾisha’s execution to al-Maʾmūn’s political reasoning, delineating this caliph’s understanding of what constituted legitimate state violence.

Ibn Al-Mubarak’s Kitāb Al-Jihād and Early Renunciant Literature

ʿAbd Allāh b. al‑Mubārak (d. 181/797) was a famous traditionist, born in Marv in 118/736–7 or 119/737.1 He was a client to the Banī Ḥanẓala, and the Kufan traditionist al‑ Aʿmash is said to have declared: ‘I will not relate ḥadīth to a group that includes this Turk.’2 (This story may have come from speculation as to why he related so little of al‑Aʿmash, yet be nonetheless accurate as to his ethnic identity and prejudice against it.) He first visited Iraq in 141/758–9 in his early twenties.3 He collected ḥadīth in Yemen, Syria, Egypt, Basra and Kufa. Several stories of his munificence indicate that he was a wealthy trader.4 Numerous stories indicate an early adherence to Kufan jurisprudence or Abū Ḥanīfa in particular, from which he broke off late in life; for example, half of the biography of al‑ʿIjlī (d. 261/874–5) is taken up by evidence of Ibn al‑Mubārak’s having renounced his early acceptance of nabīdh (date wine) – a notorious Kufan position.5

Introduction

and Keywords to be supplied.